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

Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

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

  • #61
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

    It's hard not to trash every move... when's the last time we made a really good one? Signing DWest is the only really good move I can come up with in the last 5 years.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

      Yeah, you're right. The team with a top 5 record last year, has only made on good move in the last five years. Pretty remarkable progress with all those bad decisions. We could be looking at 2-3 rings if they just managed to bat 50%.

      Calling you guys Debbie Downers is an insult to Debbie.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #63
        Smh.....well then, by all means I hope the front office ignores their combined years of actual experience and listens to your hunches and your crystal ball. You have no idea what they tried to get done. Maybe they tried to sign others and it couldn't be done.

        All I know is their job depends on making the right moves, so I'm pretty sure they try every avenue. It's laughable when people on here actually believe they know better.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Only few of us(the haters) could see this coming, there is a whole thread full of people ("sunshiners and positive people") trashing us because we didn't agree and still don't agree with their point of view, the same "sunshiners" and "positive people" are still in denial about the off season maybe because they don't want to prove us "hater" right or because of pure blindness.

          The fact is that the Pacers had the potential to have one of the best off seasons ever and they screwed it up by signing a bunch of scrubs, I mean they had everything, cap space, trade assets, picks, they were also under the cap what else do you Fing want?

          They also had a one time opportunity to sign amnesty players without having to give up anything of value because they were under the cap but they decided not to pursuit anybody because "they knew what they were doing", how stupid can a front office be to decide not to sign quality players pretty much for free?

          I've been saying it for while the Pacers signed the equivalent of Solomon Jones, Kareem Rush, Travis Diener and to do it they decided that this time they were going to spend 10mil dollar a year, how stupid is that?

          Just imagine if the Pacers had a competent front office and instead of signing the scrub of Mahinmi(while giving away a trade asset) they have waited for Philly to amnesty Brand, or for Houston to amnesty Scola, imagine if instead of signing the scrub of Green they decided to keep Barbosa for veteran minimum, imagine if instead of DJ we have DC and instead of Young we have DJ.

          If the Pacers had a competent front office they would have made similar moves to the ones I'm describing but instead they decided to make moves that only worse GM's could think about making, hell I don't think I can see another worse GM making the same stupid moves I just can't.

          God forbid the front office try to upgrade our bench with some youth and athleticism. A former bench that simply got abused by the Miami Heat in the postseason (against a Heat team that is not deep at all). It hasn't paid off so far, but I can't fault them for at least trying. The status quo simply wasn't good enough...

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
            God forbid the front office try to upgrade our bench with some youth and athleticism. A former bench that simply got abused by the Miami Heat in the postseason (against a Heat team that is not deep at all). It hasn't paid off so far, but I can't fault them for at least trying. The status quo simply wasn't good enough...
            Exactly! Certain people will complain no matter what moves are made.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

              This isn't how an argument works, you haven't made an argument you've just said, "no you are wrong." In order for me to take you seriously you need to say you are wrong BECAUSE and then provide some examples. Where are these good moves? Which ones were good?

              Top 5 record... how'd that end up for us? Fool's gold right, I mean, 6 playoff wins feels nice, but when you remember they were all against teams missing a player better than any player on our roster is kind of sobers it up a bit, doesn't it?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                God forbid the front office try to upgrade our bench with some youth and athleticism. A former bench that simply got abused by the Miami Heat in the postseason (against a Heat team that is not deep at all). It hasn't paid off so far, but I can't fault them for at least trying. The status quo simply wasn't good enough...
                Of course you can, by the way I wonder how great this bench is going to look against Miami? It's going to be ugly.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                  Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                  I think we could have landed Kaman with a longer contract offer in the same price range and that would have been my first choice.
                  Wait, you think we could have gotten Kaman as a backup at the same price range as who? Mahinmi? Kaman is getting $8M next year alone.

                  Are you saying have Kaman play all PF AND C bench minutes and therefore not get Mahinmi and dump Tyler as well? Then who plays the minutes when BOTH Roy and West are sitting?

                  I don't think this was feasible.


                  Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                  Failing to do that I think the F.O. should have forced the signings of Hibbert and Hill back a week or 2.
                  I don't think they could have moved the signings once they were scheduled, not just because that was essentailly a promise but because it starts to look like cap manipulation that the league could (and probably would have) come down on hard.

                  I agree that the original signing scheduling was shortsighted due to not taking the amnesty period into account. While Scola was a surprise, failing to anticipate that a surprise could happen was a huge failure by the FO, probably the single one I personally am willing to point to as completely avoidable. Definitely a mistake.

                  Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                  Imagine having DC backing up Hill and having the option of starting Barbosa, Jones, or Lance and never seeing Green or DJ on the floor.
                  Yes, DJ turned out to be a fail, but it isn't like DC is burning it up other than for a brief honeymoon period. Keeping DC would have ended up being a major problem for the bench and would likely have led to the FO being castigated heavily for having these weapons available off the bench but utterly failing to get a PG who could get them the ball or defend his way through a pick set by a wet paper bag.

                  And I think people have forgotten just how badly Barbosa was trashed around here after the Miami series. People were throwing him under the bus to the extent that I think there'd have been a revolt if he'd been re-signed.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                    Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
                    I don't get it. I'm so baffled and confused at how bad he's been this year. It's like space jam, someone just stole his abilities and he forgot how to play. I dunno man...maybe he just doesn't wanna be here. Let him go back to the kitties then.
                    I've thought this same thing...which is ridiculous, because he came here as a FA.

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Also, Frank pulled Lance after Lance played decent defense and did get called for a foul, but there was no penalty. Frank subs in Young and Miller immediately jukes him for a wide open 10 footer that he drains. I get that Frank is trying D for O and all that, but Lance had played pretty good defense. Young failed. And all that can affect a player's confidence.
                    Well, Lance did come right back in after that play. Lance came out, talked to the coaches, immediately came back in.

                    Miller had scored 8 straight...definition of insanity and all that. Trying to get on Frank for going to our second best man defender to slow that roll is ridiculous.

                    Finally, regarding the DJ situation, at some point you have to mail it in. $3.5M for this guy to literally be a negative force on the court. Hansbrough isn't a good option, as how much better will he be? It's worth a try, sure, but I believe you have to look for some veteran leadership to put on that unit.

                    There are 3 guys I'd be interested in, based on how they performed the past couple of seasons:

                    Lester Hudson (Real nice run with the Cavs, current FA. 10 day contracts become an option soon, maybe bring him in and see how it goes)
                    Baron Davis (Only reason he wasn't retained by the Cavs to play with Kyrie was his awful contract. FA, maybe he could bring some stability to the second unit)
                    Jordan Farmar (Hate myself for even mentioning it. This one is more a function of how bad DJ has been. But, MAYBE give Farmar some run and see what happens?)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                      Originally posted by 2minutes twoa View Post
                      Smh.....well then, by all means I hope the front office ignores their combined years of actual experience and listens to your hunches and your crystal ball. You have no idea what they tried to get done. Maybe they tried to sign others and it couldn't be done.
                      You don't need a cristal ball to know that Green, Young, Ian and DJ were going to fail, it wasn't that hard to predict and yes we have an idea what they didn't try to get done BECAUSE THEY HAD A CHANCE TO GET AMNESTY PLAYERS BUT THEY DECIDED NOT TO EVEN TRY.

                      All I know is their job depends on making the right moves, so I'm pretty sure they try every avenue. It's laughable when people on here actually believe they know better.
                      It's laughable to see you guys defending this front office even after the horrible results, I wonder what excuses are you guys going to make this next off season? hey at least you are going to have some excuses, like no cap space, no trade assets, no more amnesty players and a bunch of long term contracts, yep it sounds familiar doesn't it?
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                        I wish I could be this bad at my job and have a fan base telling me I'm great at it. No, that's not even true, I have too much personal accountability to be satisfied with a decade of mediocrity at best.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                          Originally posted by Dece View Post
                          I wish I could be this bad at my job and have a fan base telling me I'm great at it. No, that's not even true, I have too much personal accountability to be satisfied with a decade of mediocrity at best.
                          I would love to suck at my job and still have people telling me how great I am while getting pay a huge amount of money that would be nice.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Wait, you think we could have gotten Kaman as a backup at the same price range as who? Mahinmi? Kaman is getting $8M next year alone.
                            Are you saying have Kaman play all PF AND C bench minutes and therefore not get Mahinmi and dump Tyler as well? Then who plays the minutes when BOTH Roy and West are sitting?
                            .
                            Yes, I think we could have landed Kaman with a 4/32 contract or maybe a 3/24 and he's well worth double what Ian is getting. Kaman would have had as many or more minutes playing for the Pacers as the Mavs and money talks. Figuring out the rotation really isn't that hard with Kaman being able to play either the 4 or the 5 it's easy to keep a combination of 2 of the 3 on the floor at almost all times you just always have either West or Hibbert on the floor and sometimes both. It's almost like the rotation we played with Smits and the Davises. I wouldn't suggest completely eliminating Hans but I would suggest just giving him spot minutes.

                            Why did we have to even schedule the signings of Hibbert and Hill so early? Good time management which falls under the job radar of the people managing our F.O. would have opened many many doors, and every year there are bargain players available after the big overspending rush. Bird knew this and that's how he landed West.
                            No offense but it honestly sounds like you're making excuses for incompetent management.
                            Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                            Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                              People are happy and excited that we're hanging around .500. I guess .500 isn't terrible without Granger, until you realize that we have played the third weakest strength of schedule so far. Only Philly and Dallas have played weaker schedules, in the entire NBA. We have what, 2 wins against teams over .500 so far? Our record is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better. But I guess we have to keep saying that when Granger gets back we're ECFinals bound, because that's even remotely likely. (hint: it isn't)

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Blinded by Gold Dust

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Only few of us(the haters) could see this coming, there is a whole thread full of people ("sunshiners and positive people") trashing us because we didn't agree and still don't agree with their point of view, the same "sunshiners" and "positive people" are still in denial about the off season maybe because they don't want to prove us "hater" right or because of pure blindness.

                                The fact is that the Pacers had the potential to have one of the best off seasons ever and they screwed it up by signing a bunch of scrubs, I mean they had everything, cap space, trade assets, picks, they were also under the cap what else do you Fing want?

                                They also had a one time opportunity to sign amnesty players without having to give up anything of value because they were under the cap but they decided not to pursuit anybody because "they knew what they were doing", how stupid can a front office be to decide not to sign quality players pretty much for free?

                                I've been saying it for while the Pacers signed the equivalent of Solomon Jones, Kareem Rush, Travis Diener and to do it they decided that this time they were going to spend 10mil dollar a year, how stupid is that?

                                Just imagine if the Pacers had a competent front office and instead of signing the scrub of Mahinmi(while giving away a trade asset) they have waited for Philly to amnesty Brand, or for Houston to amnesty Scola, imagine if instead of signing the scrub of Green they decided to keep Barbosa for veteran minimum, imagine if instead of DJ we have DC and instead of Young we have DJ.

                                If the Pacers had a competent front office they would have made similar moves to the ones I'm describing but instead they decided to make moves that only worse GM's could think about making, hell I don't think I can see another worse GM making the same stupid moves I just can't.
                                If we had a competent front office we'd be looking at what the Mavs brought in for bargain prices. Cuban made us look like fools.
                                Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                                Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X