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

Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

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

  • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

    Yeah, I don't think Len will be there either. I don't think he's getting past the Hornets at #6, and he could go much higher than that. The Wolves will probably end up drafting a shooting wing.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

      The Denver Nuggets are checking in with their pick.

      The Nuggets are a complete mess right now with the front office shakeup, losing their longtime coach, and probably their best player to free agency. Therefore it is difficult to figure out what they might do with their only pick of the 2013 draft. There are three avenues that I believe that they could take.

      First is the best player available on the board. I believe that would be Plumlee. He would be a big, athletic rebounder and rim protector who can get up and down the floor. In the Nuggets case, This pick would be too similar to their young big man Faried, so the Nuggets pass on this option. Who would have thought 13 months ago that Mason would be a lower pick than his brother.

      Second option would be to find somebody to be able to grow and replace some of the stuff that Iguodala did. The best for this would be Jamaal Franklin. Obviously he is off the board. After a small run on SG's, the best on the board remains Tim Hardaway. He does not really fill the above stated need.

      The third option would be to get an offensive minded 4 to play behind Faried. There just happens to be one near the top of the Nuggets board, So with the 27th pick in the 2013 NBA Draft, the Denver Nuggets select Tony Mitchell from North Texas. This is a young man that can fill a void on the team as he grows into perhaps a starter level player in a few years. It gives them somebody to stretch the floor a bit when Danillo is on the bench, and it also gives them an athletic option at PF when Faried sits down.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

        Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
        Yeah, I don't think Len will be there either. I don't think he's getting past the Hornets at #6, and he could go much higher than that. The Wolves will probably end up drafting a shooting wing.
        I agree I love Len's skill set. He was one of my favorite freshmen last year when he barley played. He is just one of those guys who should get better with coaching. I read he was a gymnast as a kid and that really shows in his film. He is super raw, but he has the tools to be a great 2 way center. I think if he is a worker he should go top 5 in this class easy. If I am the Bobcats I may just draft him at their pick. I think he takes 4 years to get where he needs to be if all goes well, and by that time if you get Wiggins or another top spect next year, you could very easily be ready to compete then. He could also be lazy and get you fired as the GM very risky guy, but I would lean toward taking him. I liked Myers Leonard in a similar way, I dont think Myers has the upside of Len, but I love Myers work ethic he displayed last year in Portland. He should become a quality starter in the next few years.


        McLemore Len and Oladipo are the guys who I think have the biggest upsides in this draft and I would take them 1-2-3. I think Noel is going to fall the more I hear about his backround(he blew a team off 6 times for a workout, they couldnt get in touch with him) combined that with his weird frame(and injury history) I just don't know about him. Pretty damn risky guy IMO.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

          This draft is slow and boring. Just taking too long between picks.
          First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

            Sorry for the delay, guys. It was my birthday yesterday and I didn't retun home. I'll have the pick ready within the next 3-4 hours
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Sorry for the delay, guys. It was my birthday yesterday and I didn't retun home. I'll have the pick ready within the next 3-4 hours
              Happy belated birthday!
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                The Wolves are back on the clock.



                We picked Maryland's Alex Len with our #9 pick. We are open to trades and we probably have a few offers on the table by now. Len is a young two way center who could've gone much higher in this draft. Our biggest need is a starter at SG, and we should be able to get a good one for Len.
                If we can't do it right away, we will find a short term starter with midlevel.

                With the #26 pick, we were hoping to get a backup shooter at SG or SF who could be ready right away. Unfortunately, all of our main targets were picked off.
                We were left choosing between three seniors that we like as backups for our team (Erick Green, Isaiah Canaan, Mason Plumlee), and a couple of wings that will likely need some time to grow up (Adetokunbo, Ricky Ledo).

                Of seniors, we like Erick Green the most and we were very close to picking him here. We feel he could be a replacement for Luke Ridnour who's clearly declining. Green could be a backup point and play some minutes next to Rubio as well, with Green providing shooting and Rubio defending the tougher assignment.

                However, in a typical Timberwolves fashion, we changed our decision and picked:

                Ricky Ledo, SG, Providence

                whom we have never even seen in a game (Kaaaahn). We did see a pre draft workout video where he apparently can't miss a 3pt shot, and based on reports it seems that there are three things that everyone agrees about him: he's an NBA caliber scorer with massive upside and ability to create for others, a subpar defender with potential to be very good, and he can be a 1st class whiner when things aren't going his way.
                In the end, we like his size and talent at SG spot and it's hard to pass on him here. Also, his first name is Ricky. We feel we can handle a project, we have a mature team with a great coach and multiple experienced proffessionals.

                Hopefully he grows up and becomes a major part of our rotation. If not, whatever, it's low risk at this spot in the draft. We'll stay happy.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                  The Spurs ar standing one win shy of an NBA championship. With a legendary coach, 3 Hall of Famers and an excellent FO we're in a great position for the present and the future. Needless to say, we don't need to change much. But some extra help on a cheap contract is always necessary.

                  Duncan may choose to retire soon. It will be a sad day for us and the NBA when that happens but we have to be ready for it. Tiago Splitter is a good player. He still has room for improvement and he's serviceable. But what's behind Tiago? Bonner, Diaw, Baynes and Blair.

                  Blair is a free agent and he'll likely leave the Spurs after this off-season. Diaw and Bonner are serviceable players but they are not starters. I believe in Baynes. He can be a good player in our rotation. But we're going to need a legit starting PF / C when Duncan retires.

                  So, without further ado the San Antonio Spurs select Mason Plumlee.

                  We are lucky that Mason fell in this draft. He is exactly what we need. He is an NBA ready player that can develop into a valid starter. Without Duncan we're going to face serious rebounding problems. Mason will help to alleviate that. We are confident that we can incorporate him in our system and make him a legit NBA starter.

                  A big man rotation of Mason Plumlee / Tiago Spliiter and Aron Baynes is a good basis.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                    First I'd just like to apologize for missing my first pick. I was away for the weekend and did not realize that the draft would be starting so quickly.

                    Now on to the pick. The Thunder came into the draft with a lot of flexibility, and with the addition of Steven Adams (a pick that I like a lot, and very well could have made myself) the situation has not changed. When a team is as successful as the Thunder it is important to take to the draft, especially later picks, with the intention of focusing on overall rather than positional value. I also think it is very important to continue to draft players who are capable of immediately contributing, as it is dangerous to repeatedly strikeout on high upside players.

                    Although he may not be the sexiest pick, the Thunder select Tim Hardaway Jr.

                    Because we are already contenders it is important to keep the bench stocked with high quality shooters and high effort players, two characteristics that define Tim. His ability to knock down the open shot and even catch fire at any time should keep team's 2nd lines on their toes. Because of his high pedigree and extensive experience in the limelight at Michigan he seems perfectly capable of stepping into the NBA playoff picture, even in his rookie year.

                    Welcome to OKC!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                      Splitter might be a goner. I can't see the Spurs paying him 9m+ a year it is rumored that is what he will get.


                      Plumlee's length scares me, but I love the pick here he improved so much as a senior. I feel his length will limit him as a pro though. He got blocked a lot in college in scenarios a long guy would have no issue. Also on defense it will hurt. If he had a 7'4 wing span we are talking lottery, but with short arms I can't see him going there.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                        Splitter might be a goner. I can't see the Spurs paying him 9m+ a year it is rumored that is what he will get.
                        I've got to assume there is nothing to that rumor but if somebody gives Tiago Splitter $9 million a year, I guarantee they won't be a playoff team.
                        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                        -Lance Stephenson

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                          The site doesn't allow me to edit post #1 anymore, so I'm posting it here. I'll add this post to my signature for quick finding.

                          1 1 Cleveland Cavaliers - Nerlens Noel, C, Kentucky (BRushWithDeath)
                          1 2 Orlando Magic - Trey Burke, PG, Michigan (pacers20)
                          1 3 Washington Wizards - Anthony Bennett, PF, UNLV (cdash)
                          1 4 Charlotte Bobcats - Ben McLemore, SG, Kansas (Smits Happens)
                          1 5 Phoenix Suns - Victor Oladipo, SG, Indiana (BlueCollarColts)
                          1 6 New Orleans Pelicans - Otto Porter, SF, Georgetown (Mackey_Rose)
                          1 7 Sacramento Kings - Cody Zeller, PF, Indiana (BlueCollarColts)
                          1 8 Detroit Pistons - Michael Carter-Williams, PG, Syracuse (btowncolt)
                          1 9 Minnesota Timberwolves - Alex Len, C, Maryland (hackashaq)
                          1 10 Portland Trail Blazers - Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, SG, Georgia (avoidingtheclowns)
                          1 11 Philadelphia 76ers - CJ McCollum, G, Lehigh (LoneGranger33)
                          1 12 Oklahoma City Thunder - Steven Adams, C, Pittsburgh (Doddage)
                          1 13 Dallas Mavericks - Giannis Adetokunbo, SF, Greece (Goyle)
                          1 14 Utah Jazz - Shane Larkin, PG, Miami (Pacer Fan)
                          1 15 Milwaukee Bucks - Rudy Gobert, C, France (pacersgroningen)
                          1 16 Boston Celtics - Dennis Schroeder, PG, Germany (Pacersalltheway10)
                          1 17 Atlanta Hawks - Gorgui Dieng, C, Louisville (Sparhawk)
                          1 18 Atlanta Hawks - Glen Rice Jr, SF/SG, Georgia Tech/Rio Grande Valley (Sparhawk)
                          1 19 Cleveland Cavaliers - Shabazz Muhammed, SG, UCLA (BRushWithDeath)
                          1 20 Chicago Bulls - Allen Crabbe, SG, California (Steagles)
                          1 21 Utah Jazz - Kelly Olynyk, C, Gonzaga (Pacer Fan)
                          1 22 Brooklyn Nets - Sergey Kasarev, SF, Russia (idioteque)
                          1 23 Indiana Pacers - Reggie Bullock, SG, North Carolina (KingGeorge_24)
                          1 24 New York Knicks - Tony Snell, SF, New Mexico (vincognito)
                          1 25 Los Angeles Clippers - Jamaal Franklin, SG, San Diego State (pacer4ever)
                          1 26 Minnesota Timberwolves - Ricky Ledo, SG, Providence (hackashaq)
                          1 27 Denver Nuggets - Tony Mitchell, PF, North Texas (kent beckley)
                          1 28 San Antonio Spurs - Mason Plumlee, C, Duke (Nuntius)
                          1 29 Oklahoma City Thunder - Tim Hardaway Jr, SG, Michigan (Jrod Jones)
                          1 30 Phoenix Suns - Jeff Withey, C Kansas (BlueCollarColts)

                          2 31 Cleveland Cavaliers - Erick Green, G, Virginia Tech (BRushWithDeath)
                          2 32 Oklahoma City Thunder - Livio Jean-Charles, F, France (Jrod Jones)
                          2 33 Cleveland Cavaliers - Lucas Nogueira, C, Brazil (BRushWithDeath)
                          2 34 Houston Rockets - Mike Muscala, C, Bucknell (OakMoses)
                          2 35 Philadelphia 76ers - Isaiah Canaan, G, Murray State (LoneGranger33)
                          2 36 Sacramento Kings - Andre Roberson, SF, Colorado (cdash)
                          2 37 Detroit Pistons - Archie Goodwin, SG, Kentucky (pacersalltheway10)
                          2 38 Washington Wizards - CJ Leslie, SF, North Carolina State (cdash)
                          2 39 Portland Trail Blazers - Jackie Carmichael, PF, Illinois State (avoidingtheclowns)
                          2 40 Portland Trail Blazers - Nate Wolters, PG, South Dakota State (avoidingtheclowns)
                          2 41 Memphis Grizzlies - Deshaun Thomas, F, Ohio State (pacergod2)
                          2 42 Philadelphia 76ers - Grant Jerrett, PF, Arizona (hackashaq)
                          2 43 Milwaukee Bucks - James Ennis, SG, Long Beach State (pacersgroningen)
                          2 44 Dallas Mavericks - Erik Murphy, PF, Florida (Goyle)
                          2 45 Portland Trail Blazers - Ray McCallum, PG, Detroit (avoidingtheclowns)
                          2 46 Utah Jazz - Myck Kabongo, PG, Texas (Pacer Fan)
                          2 47 Atlanta Hawks - Pierre Jackson, PG, Baylor (Sparhawk)
                          2 48 Los Angeles Lakers - Carrick Felix, SG, Arizona State (pacer4ever)
                          2 49 Chicago Bulls - Trevor Mbakwe, PF, Minnesota (Steagles)
                          2 50 Atlanta Hawks - Jamelle Hagins, PF, Delaware (Sparhawk)
                          2 51 Orlando Magic - Phil Pressey, PG, Missouri (Coopdog23)
                          2 52 Minnesota Timberwolves - Alex Abrines, SG, Spain (hackashaq)
                          2 53 Indiana Pacers - Christian Watford, F, Indiana (KingGeorge_24)
                          2 54 Washington Wizards - Seth Curry, SG, Duke (cdash)
                          2 55 Memphis Grizzlies - Peyton Siva, PG, Lousville (pacergod2)

                          2 56 Detroit Pistons (btowncolt)
                          2 57 Phoenix Suns (BlueCollarColts)
                          2 58 San Antonio Spurs (Nuntius)
                          2 59 Minnesota Timberwolves (hackashaq)
                          2 60 Memphis Grizzlies (pacergod2)
                          Last edited by hackashaq; 06-25-2013, 09:59 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                            Sacramento Kings pick (no.36) is available.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                              I'll pick here soon, let me write something up

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                                Splitter might be a goner. I can't see the Spurs paying him 9m+ a year it is rumored that is what he will get.

                                Plumlee's length scares me, but I love the pick here he improved so much as a senior. I feel his length will limit him as a pro though. He got blocked a lot in college in scenarios a long guy would have no issue. Also on defense it will hurt. If he had a 7'4 wing span we are talking lottery, but with short arms I can't see him going there.
                                Plumlee's length scares me as well. Mason is 7'0.5 according to DX and a 6'11 wingspan is very unspectacular. I feel that he can get away with it if he can play as a 4 at the NBA level.

                                I'm not sure that he can make that transition but if the Spurs were to draft him I'd be interested to see a Plumlee - Splitter pairing.

                                Also, I believe that Splitter will stay. They need a partner for Timmy as long as he's there and I don't see them getting a better Center with that money. Legit Centers are expensive as we all know. And Tiago is a legit Center that can play both ends of the court. Not a dominant rebounder but that can be fixed.

                                But if the Spurs feel that they won't be able to pay Tiago, I'd do the following: Throw a bone to the Jazz for the rights to Ante Tomić and convince him to come over. He'd be cheap and he can play.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X