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

Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

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

  • #31
    Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

    Personally, I'm looking forward to Granger's return. As for those expecting him to produce much less than before, I'm not so sure about that. Why?

    Well, two years ago, it was a pretty common saying that "So goes Granger, so goes the Pacers". I think that statement was used quite often on this board, and I also think it was the belief around the league. So much so that nearly all opponents focused on trying to stop Granger.

    If we throw Granger into our starting lineup, not that his scoring is even required there, who is the opponent going to focus on? Granger? George? West? Hibbert? I think there is one thing we can ALL agree on when comparing our scoring this past season with the scoring from two years ago. West's knee is healed and he is a significantly improved offensive player. George and Hibbert have grown offensively by leaps and bounds.

    Should the opponent key on any one of these four players, at least two of the other three are going to burn them. And, if they key on George specifically, I don't think they will hold him back much while also giving up a substantial number of open looks to Granger. Really, think about it. With Hill's ability to hit open perimeter shots, do you really see an opponent keying on any of our perimeter players when George, Granger and Hill are in the lineup together?

    I think opponents are far more likely to try and take away our interior scoring. And with Scola and Copeland now in the fold, I say good luck with that. Pick your poison, and we have a response. The only other tactic I see them using is to try to slow Hill down in the backcourt, but I think Hill can handle it.

    Defensively, I think we will fair a lot better with Granger in the lineup than most of Granger's detractors give our team credit for. Notice I said "give our team credit for" and not "give Granger credit for". And that is because we have a defensive scheme that seems to do an excellent job of overcoming the deficiencies in any one player when our starters are on the floor. I'm not conceding yet that Granger will be a defensive liability, at least not until I see him play. But if he isn't quite up to par, I do have the confidence that our other starters can help overcome the problems.

    I'm stoked. Let's get this thing started.
    Last edited by beast23; 09-10-2013, 11:53 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      People are living in the past if they think Granger will be better than Lance this year. We will not see the same Danny Granger as we did pre-injury...ever again. Not just because of the knee but because he's moving out of his prime years. He is still a very good shooter. But defensively, folks, he's not going to be as good. ..and he wasn't that good pre-injury.
      If he's healthy I doubt if he's that much worse at 30 then he was at 28. The thing is he doesn't have to be pre-injured Danny Granger to be better then Lance. If Granger has lost a step he'll still be better then Lance. I doubt if Lance ever averages the numbers Granger did even 2 years ago let alone at his peak. But to the original point of the article, the reason Granger starts and finishes isn't just because he should be the better player which I think he will, Granger is the seasoned vet that will play with more consistency and won't make the mistakes that Lance does. A coach that's in win now mode will almost always start the vet and play the vet when the game is on the line. And when it comes to the playoffs, I'd much rather have the combination of Granger and PG guarding Lebron and Wade. You can put Granger on Lebron and let PG try to shut down Wade. You can't put Lance on Lebron.
      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


      • #33
        Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        If he's healthy I doubt if he's that much worse at 30 then he was at 28. The thing is he doesn't have to be pre-injured Danny Granger to be better then Lance. If Granger has lost a step he'll still be better then Lance. I doubt if Lance ever averages the numbers Granger did even 2 years ago let alone at his peak. But to the original point of the article, the reason Granger starts and finishes isn't just because he should be the better player which I think he will, Granger is the seasoned vet that will play with more consistency and won't make the mistakes that Lance does. A coach that's in win now mode will almost always start the vet and play the vet when the game is on the line. And when it comes to the playoffs, I'd much rather have the combination of Granger and PG guarding Lebron and Wade. You can put Granger on Lebron and let PG try to shut down Wade. You can't put Lance on Lebron.
        This is really the crux of the argument behind the attached article. Essentially, Granger would have to have the worst season of his career to fall below what Lance will give you as our 2nd win. In the starting lineup, Lance will be the fifth option. In the starting lineup, there is a very good chance Granger is NOT the fifth option night in and night out.

        If defensively Lance proves to be far and away better than Granger next year then I'm sure Vogel will adjust the rotation to ensure Lance is playing when he needs to be.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

          I'm just going to trust Frank to make the right call and will go with whatever he says is best.

          If it's Lance, great. We have a long upwardly mobile career in front of us to look forward to.

          If it's Danny, great. We have a seasoned all-star veteran who at times can be a prolific scorer.

          Sure beats arguing between Mike Dunleavey & Brandon Rush.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

            I kinda liked the defined pecking order we had with Lance in the starting lineup. I also liked the speed he brought to the position. And I liked the swagger he brought. And obviously it worked well considering the season and playoffs. And it's hard to think he's peaked. So is it really a no-brainer to think Granger is an easy choice over Lance? In fact, I'd argue with Lance in the starting lineup we were able to find out some new things about that group's ability and potential.

            To me, the easy choice is to not 'fix' what is not broken and instead insert Granger into the 2nd unit where things actually were broken. Meanwhile let's see if the starting unit can use last year's experience to grow even stronger and see if we can push them closer to their ceiling/potential. After that, figure out who we can't afford to lose...
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, thatís teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
              I personally think that if Lance plays well enough to make us choose him over Granger, Lance will play the market hard and price himself out of Indiana.
              Easily the most underrated comment in this thread.

              The people voting Lance Stephenson to start must enjoy the idea of only having him one more season. I think it's possible we can afford to re-sign him if he comes off the bench but if he starts, kiss him goodbye imo. He just turned 23, is built like a mini Lebron, does all of the little things and most importantly, he's shown improvement shooting 3's. In college and his first couple of years in the league, dude couldn't hit a 3 to save his life. Teams have seen his improvement and someone will roll the dice on him if he's contributing on a team that's going toe to toe with Miami. Copeland did nothing but shoot 3's in the playoffs and we gave him what, 3 million a year? Surely other teams saw Stephenon's performance against the Knicks and they've seen him continually beat everyone down the floor for easy buckets. Heck, simply increasing his 3 point percentage by .2 or more might put him out of our price range within itself. Teams will see a player that can play inside, outside, run the floor, body up, grab boards, get steals and so on. People love him so much I guess they're excited to see him leave. The fastest way to push him out of Indiana is to start him imo.

              Let's say Stephenson is better than Granger as some people tend to believe. But there isn't a big drop off in production in the starting unit by starting Granger. Wouldn't it be way smarter start Granger and help keep Stephenson's value down as opposed to starting him and guaranteeing you lose him? We won't pay the luxury tax so all someone has to do is offer him a million more than we can and he's gone barring being willing to take a paycut. That or we're going to have to try and dump players off on other teams to open up cap space to give Stephenson more. Maybe we can package more 1st round picks to dump bad contracts like Gerald Green and poor draft picks like Miles Plumlee. If Granger is capable, it's wise to bring Stephenson off the bench if you have any desire to keep him in Indy. That's just my opinion though.
              "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ícause then thereís more room for me on the low road."

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                I am with Peck on this.

                I don't have a strong opinion either way. A strong case can be made for either Danny or Lance starting.

                My only hope is that Danny is healthy

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                  Well Granger is a better starter than Lance we know that. But at the same time, how healthy will DG be come opening night?
                  Smothered Chicken!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                    If Danny is relatively healthy it would take a huge jump for Lance to be a better player next year, a jump that isn't likely in my opinion. That said you don't necessarily always start the better player, especially when you have two players in Granger and George who have many of the same attributes, at least offensively. If you are going solely on who the better player is, if Granger is healthy it is an easy choice. What makes it more difficult is strategy. Is it better to bring in a fresh Granger in the middle of the first to replace George/Lance or is it better to bring in a wildcard type of player in the middle of the first to replace George/Granger?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                      Originally posted by TOP View Post
                      Let's say Stephenson is better than Granger as some people tend to believe. But there isn't a big drop off in production in the starting unit by starting Granger. Wouldn't it be way smarter start Granger and help keep Stephenson's value down as opposed to starting him and guaranteeing you lose him? We won't pay the luxury tax so all someone has to do is offer him a million more than we can and he's gone barring being willing to take a paycut. That or we're going to have to try and dump players off on other teams to open up cap space to give Stephenson more. Maybe we can package more 1st round picks to dump bad contracts like Gerald Green and poor draft picks like Miles Plumlee. If Granger is capable, it's wise to bring Stephenson off the bench if you have any desire to keep him in Indy. That's just my opinion though.
                      I don't understand this. Do what you need to do with the best players and let the whole "if he play's well we'll lose him" thing wait until the offseason. If Lance is that much stronger than Danny, you let Danny go. Period. And I like Danny a lot.

                      I'd rather have all my weapons on the floor in their best position and go for the championship than hide one under a bushel in hopes he'll be unnoticed and we can do it next year.
                      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


                      • #41
                        Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                        While I do think Lance should start, it's really Granger's spot to lose. Only 2 things will likely see Lance the starter. 1. Granger is extremely rusty. 2. They gradually work Granger back into the starting lineup due to limiting his minutes to start the season.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                          Originally posted by TOP View Post
                          The people voting Lance Stephenson to start must enjoy the idea of only having him one more season. I think it's possible we can afford to re-sign him if he comes off the bench but if he starts, kiss him goodbye imo. He just turned 23, is built like a mini Lebron, does all of the little things and most importantly, he's shown improvement shooting 3's. In college and his first couple of years in the league, dude couldn't hit a 3 to save his life. Teams have seen his improvement and someone will roll the dice on him if he's contributing on a team that's going toe to toe with Miami. Copeland did nothing but shoot 3's in the playoffs and we gave him what, 3 million a year? Surely other teams saw Stephenon's performance against the Knicks and they've seen him continually beat everyone down the floor for easy buckets. Heck, simply increasing his 3 point percentage by .2 or more might put him out of our price range within itself. Teams will see a player that can play inside, outside, run the floor, body up, grab boards, get steals and so on. People love him so much I guess they're excited to see him leave. The fastest way to push him out of Indiana is to start him imo.
                          I get what you're saying, but when you're in "Win Now" mode, I don't think you can make decisions based on that type of thinking. You've got to do what's best for the team THIS YEAR. I'd hate to blow a chance at a championship this season because we were worried about possible future salary cap implications. If starting Lance is best for the team this year, that's what you do. If starting Danny is best for the team this year, that's what you do. End of story.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                            How about starting both Lance AND Danny (povided he is healthy)
                            then have PG come off the bench for either one of them??


                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                              I just thought of another reason they might opt to start Granger instead of Lance. Coming off a knee injury, it's sometimes better to have a player start the 1st and 3rd quarters because they are warmed up and the muscles and joints are more loose. Having Danny sit after warming up doesn't seem like a good idea.

                              Either way, I have confidence that Frank Vogel will make the right decisions regarding starting or sitting Danny Granger. He showed that he will bring him off the bench or DNP-CD him if he's not completely ready to play last year so I trust him to make the right decision again this year.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                                I don't get this Granger hate. Do people forget he's the only reason we made the playoffs during 10-11 and 11-12? He should start because he's the much better all-around player, and if he isn't healthy and Lance proves he can play better then Lance should start. People here fall inlove with young potential and forget what a vet like Granger could bring to the table.

                                Yeah, Granger won't be as quick as Lance and won't handle the ball like Lance does. But Granger makes our lineup bigger, physically stronger and can space the floor for George, David and Hibbert. When Lance goes for 20 once in every 10 games people think "Wow, look at that young player, he could be a star". Granger used to average 20 on every given night, and yeah he's gotten older and injured but he's probably still the much better scorer.

                                So, by default Granger should start, and if Lance wants to start then he'd better prove he's the better choice.
                                Originally posted by Piston Prince
                                Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                                "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X