Leaderboard

If you don't like long posts, pretend this is fairly short. Please read it all. What I'm going to address doesn't date back to this summer, but to January 26th, 2005, when I started this site. Most know the story, so I'll keep it simple: OTR was created because I wanted to get away from personal attacks on message board members. I wasn't happy reading sexist remarks, disappointed in racist jokes in AIM chats directed to those I posted with, and those attacks were never against me...but members were looking to me, as a team forum moderator, to do something about it. Well, I did. And now, I'm doing it again. Members are going to get suspended or banned for personal attacks. It has been that way forever, although I've let it go for quite some time, in hopes that it would die down as we grew as a community. Instead, the exact opposite happened, and we were way too comfortable posting here. Don't get me wrong...being comfortable here, as a poster, is what we want. We just don't want it to alter the way you treat everyone else. You can disagree with anyone you want when it comes to basketball discussion. That's your right as a poster. However, when you call someone a "f---ing idiot" if they believe that Steve Nash is an MVP candidate this year (just an example), right or wrong, you are crushing all hopes of an intelligent basketball discussion topic. If you are for or against religion, you don't need to mock others opposing your views. Are you right or left wing? Either way, don't make it a habit throwing jabs at the opposition...not in a demeaning way, or what could be considered inappropriate to our forums. As far as bans and suspensions go...guys, there is a rule: three strikes, and it's a suspension. You double that, and you're done. Our last two banned members have been suspended a combined eight times. In fact, all of this can be found in our rules below. http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules What you won't see in those guidelines (and what you haven't seen since we restarted the board) would be a rule on baiting. But let's dip into that. Since 2005, it has been known that excessive, severe baiting will not be tolerated here. We have had baiting every other day, and it elevates during the playoffs. To date, very few members have been banned for baiting. If you want to know what excessive baiting is, go back to the Yao/Dwight topics before we were hacked. When you register here with the intention of stirring up a certain team's fanbase, or a particular member or two, you're more than likely going to be baiting our members excessively. Also, when half of your posts are directed at a member or a fanbase, you're probably in the same boat. Weeks of the same thing, with that member creating irrelevant topics about how bad a team is, making numerous repetitive posts about players, fans and teams with the intent to shake cages...that's excessive baiting. I'm sure a lot of you understand the bans and suspensions, and I'm sure some don't. That's how it should be. If everyone understood, it means that they were involved in it all the time, and we'd be lacking member activity even more, in that case...so I'm happy for that. Just something to think about, though: many of you don't like when things are being resolved with open invitation to the public. However, you point fingers and don't understand anything when things are resolved. You can't have it both ways. Both irritate you, so that might be something some need to make a decision about, and accept other members' mistakes as their own demise, rather than me just wanting to get rid of them. I have kept many along for the ride for far, far too long, even those who are notorious for baiting Lakers fans (and bangbangbang is the best example of this). And that brings me to my final point...why members are banned, and what others think they know. Members are not staff members...big difference. As a member, you don't have to deal with anything other than your own post content, and debates you find yourself glued to. The admins and mods here know why these members get banned, and we have discussions about them as well. We've talked about keeping them, despite things they've should've been banned for...and we did, two or three times, all for the sake of giving them that opportunity to post along with the rest of the guys they've been around for 4-5 years. When it's all said and done, you can't abuse that right...and there comes a time when there isn't a single person on staff that wants to take up for you anymore. You know, almost five years of this and it seems like we still have a few guys who believe they are old enough, or dedicated enough, to say what they want. Believe it or not, I'm fully aware of what a lot of people say on AIM, because for some reason, it always gets back to me, full pasted conversations. I read them quite often. I'm also aware that people will rat you out if they feel it's for the best, and that has happened a lot recently. I know that the popular thing to do (and something that has been discussed) is to get me angry, have me suspend someone, and see if members will jet because of it. I know about a "posting strike" that was put into effect, also, between a group of members. I realize that members from other sites are being asked to register and start trouble. Most forget that, despite the few that truly want this place to go down in flames, I am respected by a LOT of site owners, and I have access to plenty of databases and IP addresses. It's not hard to find out who is doing what, and get help from those owners in the process (which only hurts you in the long run, on those other sites). Yes, posting has been down. It has been on the decline since July 19th, 2009, where we fell below 500 posts for the first time since going back up (428 to be exact). Aside from what you may have thought, or what some say, the post decline has more to do with the hack than anything. Four days of 1,000 posts since we restarted...that's all...the first four days. After that 16 days before we fell to less than 500. Do the math...had nothing to do with suspensions, bans, or anything of the sort. But through all of this, we'll move on. I'll find a way to bring in new members once I get home next week. I'll start working on the player database, team pages, and everything. I'll go back to the Brandon of old when it comes to doing work, and we'll see how genuine those statements concerning this site's last days really are. The more people to rebel and leave, the more our dedicated guys have to step up, becoming bigger names in the community, maintaining bigger roles as a poster (or even a staff member), and making the contributions we've been looking for in every member that registers here. There are guys that talk about being on my bad side. They forget that there are plenty of members on my good side, and it's those that I trust the most, and those that I want standing with me when it's all said and done. It's going to take much more to bring the site down, probably three times as much to crack me...so we know what needs to be done. I'll get promotion sigs out (finally), get to work on the player profiles and such, try and post more in these gameday topics, put out some front page news and maybe a new podcast sometime in the next couple of weeks, and we'll see how well you guys work in the clutch. Something you've heard me say for almost five years now...thanks for all of the contributions, whatever you do for us (posting, moderating, administrating, promoting, etc). Nothing ever goes unnoticed.

Yes, why don't we bring in Iverson so we can not only continue to suck, but also stunt the growth of our prospects. Kill two birds with one stone. Why do we need him?

Atlanta Hawks: Josh Smith He's the one playing defense, the one you have to watch out for on the fast break, and he's got an improved jumper. While most of the time, MVP's are the best on the team...Smith might be the most valuable, just not a better player than Joe Johnson. Boston Celtics: Paul Pierce He draws the most defensive attention, covers all spots on the court on offense, and is a better defender than Ray Allen. Charlotte Bobcats: Gerald Wallace Wallace is the only legit first option they have, and he's a good defender at two, sometimes three, positions. Chicago Bulls: Joakim Noah Active defensive player, monster on the glass, and now has an improved offensive game. Rose struggled too much for me to give him the MVP of the Bulls. Cleveland Cavaliers: LeBron James Scoring, passing, rebounding, steals...wouldn't be surprised if he led in all of those categories by season's end. You remove Varejao, and he does right now. Dallas Mavericks: Dirk Nowitzki Not the defender he needs to be, but he's the only consistent offensive threat the Mavericks have at this point, and they are a top team out West because of him. Denver Nuggets: Carmelo Anthony Billups is playing bad, and Carmelo draws too much attention not to be the MVP. Detroit Pistons: Ben Gordon It would be Richard Hamilton if he had played more than one game all season. Golden State Warriors: Pneumonia It's keeping Don Nelson off the sidelines. Houston Rockets: Carl Landry Most improved in the league? He's in beast mode. Go look at his stats. Indiana Pacers: Danny Granger He's their first option on offense, primary defensive specialist. LA Clippers: Chris Kaman He has played twice as many games as Eric Gordon, who is the better defender and offensive player...but Kaman gets the nod for that very reason, along with his solid numbers. LA Lakers: Kobe Bryant Primary option, first team defender, facilitates the offense, coaches on and off the court. Memphis Grizzlies: Rudy Gay Coin flip between Rudy and Gasol. Rudy is the better scorer, plays more minutes, technically leads the way. Miami Heat: Dwyane Wade As Charles Barkley put it, Wade is Michael Jackson playing alongside a bunch of Tito Jacksons. Milwaukee Bucks: Brandon Jennings Bogut is up there, but there's a reason defensive strategies are changing when teams play the Bucks in 2009-10. Minnesota Timberwolves: Al Jefferson He's really all the Wolves have right now. Doesn't turn the ball over much, blocks shots, good amount of steals for a big, scores and rebounds. New Jersey Nets: Chris Douglas-Roberts That is, until Harris gets back. I'd say Lopez here, but his defense has been pretty bad this season, and it's been hurting the Nets. New Orleans Hornets: Chris Paul A healthy Peja is pretty valuable, but this team does nothing without Chris Paul. A few wins doesn't tell me the whole story...do it for a full 82 without him before I dismiss his impact on the team. New York Knicks: Al Harrington Nobody plays defense on the Knicks, so I take the best offensive player. Oklahoma City Thunder: Kevin Durant Leads in scoring, rebounds, steals, almost in blocks, shoots better than all starters other than Krstic. Orlando Magic: Dwight Howard Best defensive player, and when the ball goes into him, defenses collapse. Philadelphia 76ers: Louis Williams He doesn't turn the ball over like Iggy, and he's shooting better from the field, finding teammates, and picking off passes. Phoenix Suns: Steve Nash It's his system, simple as that. Portland Trail Blazers: Brandon Roy He's keeping the turnovers down, making plays and doing everything on the floor. Greg Oden is second, though. Sacramento Kings: Kevin Martin's injury bug Because since Martin suffered his injury, Tyreke Evans has played well, and the Kings have gone 5-4. San Antonio Spurs: Tim Duncan No Duncan, and the Spurs crash by January and lose 40 games. Toronto Raptors: Chris Bosh Just like the Knicks, nobody plays defense...so you pick the biggest offensive threat on the floor. Utah Jazz: Deron Williams You could argue he's more important to Utah than Paul is to the Hornets. Washington Wizards: Mike Miller Spreads the floor, limited turnovers, shooting 59% overall and 57% from three for ten points, six boards, three assists, all in just 29 minutes. Play him more, get him healthy, or something.

You're being a hypocrite though. You said Devin Harris is the MVP of the Nets but he's only played 5 games.

Josh Smith actually has a higher efficiency rating than JJ. So, statistically, Josh Smith is playing better than Joe Johnson this year.