Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

    Looks like the Warriors are going to fill up their last roster spot with Rodney Carney...

    http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archiv...e_to_contract/

    Comment


    • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

      I got to thinking about the timing of the Amundson rumor & the announcment of Rush's suspension.

      I'm wondering if the Pacers & Suns had a deal in the works involving Rush in a sign & trade for Amundson. Once the offer got to the league office they were kind of put between & rock & a hard place. Already knowing the scoop on Rush, could they let the deal go thru without telling the Suns?

      Suddenly the "sometime this week" signing of Amundson goes another week without any new info. Something is up, no question. Its just odd that the Rush problem popped up around the same time.

      Comment


      • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

        Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
        I got to thinking about the timing of the Amundson rumor & the announcment of Rush's suspension.

        I'm wondering if the Pacers & Suns had a deal in the works involving Rush in a sign & trade for Amundson. Once the offer got to the league office they were kind of put between & rock & a hard place. Already knowing the scoop on Rush, could they let the deal go thru without telling the Suns?

        Suddenly the "sometime this week" signing of Amundson goes another week without any new info. Something is up, no question. Its just odd that the Rush problem popped up around the same time.
        Trading our starting SG for a role player/energy big/deep bench guy would seem like a bad move.

        Comment


        • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

          as much as I love his game, methinks we do not need another bench big. we already have 3 (4 counting Jeff).

          Comment


          • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

            Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
            I got to thinking about the timing of the Amundson rumor & the announcment of Rush's suspension.

            I'm wondering if the Pacers & Suns had a deal in the works involving Rush in a sign & trade for Amundson. Once the offer got to the league office they were kind of put between & rock & a hard place. Already knowing the scoop on Rush, could they let the deal go thru without telling the Suns?

            Suddenly the "sometime this week" signing of Amundson goes another week without any new info. Something is up, no question. Its just odd that the Rush problem popped up around the same time.
            I don't think the Suns want anymore wing players. Much like us.

            Comment


            • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

              Amundson looks like just another version of what we already have in spades. A healthy Jeff Foster is just as good. McBob is 4 years younger than Amundson and may already be as good or better. Tyler is 3 years younger and I am pretty sure he is better if healthy. Magnum is an interesting young player who I think has a really good shot at being a better player. Granger will be playing some 4 shifting over to give Paul or Dun some time...and you know he's a lot better. Solo is not as good, but there is not some kind of huge gap that would make a difference. That's 6 half way decent options. When you combine this with the fact Dahntay Jones and Mike Dunleavy will get minutes at PF, you have to wonder why we would acquire yet another one.

              At the end of the day, at 28, Amundson can only take minutes away from younger players who may develop into better players. Only if I were pretty sure Tyler and Jeff would be unavailable or ineffective would I acquire him. If one of those guys is healthy, we simply have no use for Amundson.

              Comment


              • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

                Here is the latest. Mainly just some comments from his agent

                http://www.csnbayarea.com/09/07/10/S...37&feedID=5875


                CSNBayArea.com STEINMETZ ARCHIVE

                Matt Steinmetz:

                With training camp just three weeks away, Warriors general manager Larry Riley still has some work to do.

                He’s got an open spot or two on the roster to fill, and he’s still got to hire a couple of assistant coaches.

                “I think in another week we’ll have some ideas on those things,” Riley said on Tuesday. “I’ve got some ideas and I know Nellie (Warriors coach Don Nelson) has some ideas. But we haven’t moved on anything.”

                According to a source, the Warriors still believe they’ve got a shot at signing free agent center Louis Amundson, who was an effective energy player off the bench last season for the Suns.

                The source said he thinks the Warriors and New Orleans Hornets, among maybe another team or two, are in the mix for Amundson, and the hope is a decision will be made this week.

                The Warriors have $2.4 million remaining of their mid-level exception, so they could start Amundson’s salary at that number or $2.1 million – the bi-annual exception.

                The Warriors also would seem to have a spot for a backup point guard, but it’s looking like a longshot that Jannero Pargo will be signed. A few weeks back, the Warriors were considering signing Pargo, but ink never found paper.

                Pargo underwent knee surgery this offseason, and as Warriors fans are well aware, the team had an awful time with injuries in 2009-10. It certainly makes sense that the Warriors would proceed cautiously when it comes to acquiring a player who was recently banged-up.

                As for the assistant coaches, the Warriors are in the market for at least two of them. Scott Roth, Russ Turner and Rico Hines all have left the staff.

                Roth took an assistant coaching job with the Toronto Raptors; Turner took the head coaching job at UC-Irvine; and Hines became an assistant coach at St. John’s.

                ELLIS UPDATE: Riley said that he believes Monta Ellis will be back in town in the next week or so. If Ellis does make it back to the Bay Area within that time frame, it would have to be the earliest return of Ellis’ career.

                Ellis, who has spent much of this summer in Memphis, usually doesn’t like to allow a lot of lag time between returning from the offseason and the start of training camp.

                Riley said he talks to Ellis periodically and that Ellis is “ready to get started.”

                Comment


                • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

                  here is another article

                  http://www.nba.com/2010/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1

                  Art Garcia

                  Free-agent sparkplug Amundson still looking for home

                  Posted Sep 7 2010 11:06PM

                  The guys who revel in the dirty work often go unnoticed and unrewarded. Just ask Louis Amundson.

                  One of the lynchpins off the wildly popular and game-changing Suns bench remains unsigned with about three weeks left before training camps open. Amundson, 27, isn't going back to Phoenix after the Suns revamped their frontline this offseason and remains unsure of his next stop.

                  But as long as the summer has been, Amundson's agent isn't worried about permanent NBA unemployment.

                  "He's going to wind up fine here at the end of the day," Mark Bartelstein said. "I think there are going to be some teams out there that are going to regret not going after him. He is a coach's dream. The hardest thing in this league to find is bigs that play with great energy every night, and just change the tenor and dynamics of the game."

                  Golden State is earnestly pursuing Amundson, viewing the 6-foot-9 sparkplug as a potential piece to round out its frontcourt rotation. New Orleans, Indiana, Toronto and Charlotte are among the other teams that have reportedly shown interest in the UNLV grad.

                  Amundson doesn't fill up the box score -- his 4.7 points, 4.4 rebounds and 14.8 minutes were career highs last season -- but his worth goes beyond simple numbers. The Suns' second team was instrumental in the team's surprising run to the Western Conference finals and Amundson was its grind-it-out pest, willing to mix it up against more athletic power forwards and bigger centers.

                  "Energy every night," former Suns general manager Steve Kerr said. "He changed the game as soon as he entered the lineup -- blocked shots and got us extra possessions."

                  He also received little fanfare outside the Valley of the Suns. While definitely a fan favorite, and equally popular with his teammates and the coaching staff, Amundson has generated little buzz on the open market. He's slipped through the cracks of free agency while role-playing big men such as Tony Battie, Kwame Brown, Brian Cook, Juwan Howard and Johan Petro switched teams. Amundson may be the most attractive low-post option left unsigned.

                  The Suns didn't seriously consider bringing Amundson back after losing Amar'e Stoudemire to New York, electing instead to plug the holes up front with Hedo Turkoglu and Hakim Warrick. Amundson wanted to return to Phoenix after carving out an impactful niche the last two years.

                  "Teams talk all the time about how they want guys that play hard, that have a great motor," Bartelstein said. "It's not until after they lose him that they realize they miss the guy that knocks balls loose to grab offensive rebounds and kick it out for open 3-pointers.

                  "Those guys are so valuable for winning basketball. Because he's not the most skilled guy in the world, teams can take that for granted. Players like Louis Amundson win you a lot of games. His numbers don't justify what he does. If you're not watching him play every night, you don't appreciate how good he is. If all you do is look up his stats, you have no idea the difference he makes in game."

                  Kerr is surprised Amundson is still without a contact. Kerr, currently a TNT analyst, inked the little-known Amundson two years ago after a pair of nondescript seasons in Utah and Philadelphia.

                  "I really like him," Kerr said. "Guys like him are hard to find."

                  Especially if teams aren't looking. Bartelstein said several situations need to shake out before Amundson settles on his next team. The waiting game could go up to the eve of camp. Such is the subjective and fickle world of free agency.

                  "Louis and I would like to have something done yesterday," Bartelstein said. "At this point it's gone on for quite awhile and he wants to make sure he doesn't make a decision just to make a decision. There are a couple variables that have to play out that we think give us a clearer picture of what we think is the right spot. As soon as that becomes clearer, he'll want to make a decision right away."

                  Art Garcia has covered the NBA since 1999. You can e-mail him here and follow him on twitter.

                  Comment


                  • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

                    looks like Amundson to the Hornets

                    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/rumors/p...urn=nba-268101

                    Amundson headed to Hornets
                    By Mark J. Miller

                    Free agent forward Lou Amundson had three teams coming after him this offseason: the Golden State Warriors, New Orleans Hornets, and Indiana Pacers. According to New York Newsday, the 6-9, 238-pound forward will end up with the Hornets, his fourth team in five seasons.

                    Amundson averaged 4.7 point, 4.4 rebounds, and 0.4 assists per game last season for the Phoenix Suns.

                    The word from Newsday is that once Amundson says what he's going to do, the Pacers and Warriors will start squabbling over Earl Barron(notes), the seven-footer who isn't expected to be brought back by the New York Knicks. Barron averaged 11.7 points, 11 rebounds, and .6 blocks per game last year.
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-08-2010, 09:52 AM.
                    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                    Comment


                    • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt

                      Ok, who is Earl Barron and why do we want him. How did he average 11.7 pts and 11 rebs per game. What did he only play 4 games??

                      edit: no he only played 7 games. Oh, he played 3 prior seasons in Miami

                      http://www.nba.com/playerfile/earl_barron/
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-08-2010, 09:59 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

                        Well, I'm not sure who Earl Barron is but he appears to at least be a capable rebounder. I'd be okay with bringing him in if we cut Solo if for no other reason than to help with the loss of Murph's rebounding.
                        Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                        Comment


                        • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

                          He sounds like a back up Center, at least in size (7' 250 lbs). That is a need for this team, since I don't see anyone but Jeff able to fill that position.

                          You can play Solo there, which I don't think he's in favor....or good. McBob can play there some depending on match ups, I guess.

                          It really just comes down to a numbers thing though, where is there any room. I DO NOT want a 29 year old journeyman to take Magnum's spot.

                          Really just sounds like the writer's speculation anyway. Just because the Pacers wanted an proven energy guy at PF in Lou, doesn't mean they want a 7 game wonder journeyman at Center.

                          Lastly, if you could get him in camp for a non guaranteed try out and he kills it, then there is no harm there.
                          Last edited by Speed; 09-08-2010, 10:50 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

                            Well, I'm intrigued. (More so than with Amundson.) This from Newsday:

                            "The Knicks are not expected to bring back Earl Barron as a fourth center on the roster, which I expect will result in great dismay from you Barronites out there. He played all of seven games last season -- hey, that equaled Eddy Curry -- but he left a strong enough impression on fans to conjure regular requests from Fixer Nation for me to look into his status with the 2010-11 roster.

                            With Curry, Ronny Turiaf and Russian rookie Timofey Mozgov on the depth chart at center, the Knicks aren't in the market for yet another big man. The discovery (and signing) of Mozgov effectively ended Barron's chances of a return, even after rookie Jerome Jordan opted to go to Serbia rather than come to camp this year.

                            The Knicks initially tried to sign Barron at the end of the 09-10 season, when he averaged 11.7 points and 11 rebounds in 33.1 minutes per game in the final two weeks of the season. He was offered a non-guaranteed contract for 10-11 and turned it down, mainly because he was hoping to get something more secure - perhaps even from the Knicks - during the offseason.

                            At this point, you still have to expect someone will give the 29-year-old journeyman, who has a nice touch around the rim, can rebound and block shots, at least the veteran's minimum. Once Lou Amundson makes a decision on his future -- the New Orleans Hornets appear to be the front-runner -- teams such as the Warriors and Pacers could turn their attention to Barron.

                            'We are having discussions with several teams regarding Earl,' Barron's agent, Mark Termini, said when we spoke today.

                            Personally, I think Barron would be a better fit on veteran teams and teams that like to run pick-and-roll. The Chicago Bulls, for one, could use him behind Joakim Noah. And I know the Miami Heat invested in Joel Anthony and brought in Zydrunas Ilgauskas, but Barron would fit well there, too.

                            Of course the Knicks could use him for insurance, considering that:

                            a. Turiaf is coming off an injury-shortened season and has never been a full-time starter,

                            b. Mozgov is a rookie and, despite his impressive athleticism and length, could struggle through foul issues early on because of his aggressive style,

                            c. Curry is, well, you know . . . (It's September 7, do you know where your big man is? I know where he's not: at the MSG Training Center with a growing group of his teammates).

                            But there is already a logjam in the frontcourt, when you consider Amar'e Stoudemire and Anthony Randolph are also candidates to play minutes at the five. With a more compelling issue to address in the backcourt (mainly the SG spot), the Knicks at this point are not expected to reach out to Barron even for a camp invite.

                            The roster at 15 players -- Patrick Ewing Jr. signed a partially guaranteed deal, but from what I understand, he is expected to make the team -- the Knicks might invite one or two more players just to have extra bodies at camp. But there will only be a five-day camp this year because of the trip to Europe and Mike D'Antoni will want to get down to numbers fairly quickly."


                            http://mobile.newsday.com/inf/infomo...205&nopaging=1


                            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                            Comment


                            • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

                              Signing a backup center would let us play Jeff more at 4, where he is more effective and he could easily make up Troy's rebounding.

                              Comment


                              • Re: ESPN: Warriors, Hornets, Pacers in Amundson hunt. Update post #159 - looks like he is going to the Hornets

                                We're not going after Earl Barron any more than we went after Louis Amundson.

                                Neither is better than what we already have.
                                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                                -Lance Stephenson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X