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

Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

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

  • #46
    Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

    Jalen gets critizised for his defense, or lack thereof. I don't anybody can complain too much about his ability to score, other than he's a bit streaky.

    Actually, it's not so much that Jalen couldn't play defense, he just seemed to choose not to. Much like a certain-player-whose-name-I-shall-not-type refused to play offense.

    The other significant part about the Jalen trade was there was pretty much nobody else on the roster with any trade value. Ya gotta give something to get something. Jalen wasn't traded because he sucked, he was traded because he didn't.

    (I figure if we're revisiting the break-up of the finals team, we might as well revisit Jalen, too. Up next: Which was the better Davis?)
    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

    - Jimmy Buffett

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

      I'd go for Dale everytime. It always seemed to me that AD just tried to imitate DD, for which I can't blame him. But when he couldn't do it he would just be off. I could never get upset because AD did almost everything right he wasn't as good as DD. He'd post, pick, and get the putback, etc. and when that didn't work he would try outside shots or a drive to the bucket, Not bad strategy, but it just seemed he just wasn't there. I know I got no stats or game references but i'll try to look up the game i'm thinking off and get back.

      I'm all for Jalen. At the time I thought he was a loose cannon but that was compared to the Smits, Reggie, and Dale That I knew. And geez after watching a few games with Artest I was really reconsidering the definition of a loose cannon.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

        Originally posted by Peck
        Needless to say I don't agree with Brichard. However we've been down this road many times before.

        Let's just all agree to enjoy Reggie's last few games & the fact that Dale is home.

        Nothing would make me more happy than to see the current lineup win a title right now.

        That means no Ron, no J.O., no Jamaal & no Bender.

        I know it will never happen but to see Reggie & Dale lead the players who fought valiantly after the suspensions to a title would be worth everything I have gone through these past 5 years.

        We can agree on many things.

        1. Dale is back! Hooray!

        2. Go Reggie in your last year!

        3. Wouldn't it be great if the Pacers won the title this year?

        4. Kiss rocks!

        “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
        motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
        Reggie Miller

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

          I'll make a confession here that may get me into trouble. I stopped watching the Pacers during the playoffs just before the finals with the Lakers. I had been an avid fan from 1993 until then.

          The "breakup" of the team got me somewhat interested the next year, but not much. What drove me away from the team was the perimeter game. "Live by the J, die by the J." Reggie, Jax, Jalen, Smits, Mullin, Travis (he would drive some, in fairness), Cro. I was yearning for some offensive movement like we had in the Larry Brown days, but all we got when Bird was coach was, "We didn't put out enough effort." Well, IMO Bird didn't put out enough Xs and Os.

          I didn't like to see DD traded. He wasn't really part of the problem since he wasn't relied on for offense. But, of course, he couldn't solve the problem either.

          JO was still a work in progress. Definitely an improvement from the "live by the J." days, but not quite there yet. Al's fadeaway did not help matters. The day I really got involved again as a Pacer fan was when we picked up Brad and Artest. All the sudden I saw the inside game I was looking for, more posting up, better percentage shots, and, of course, much better defense.

          All that to say, I guess I was quite happy the team got "broken up." It may cast me as not a very loyal fan, but I just had a hard time watching the Larry Bird coached teams after being spoiled with Larry Brown.

          I do like Carlisle, which surprises me since he was the offensive mind under Bird. But i guess that has to do with the players handed to him. Although, didn't Larry Brown have most of the same players?
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

            we blew a 25 pt lead to the jazz...sometimes I worry about this clubs defense. We are sooooooooo bad without ron ron.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

              Originally posted by vapacersfan
              This is WAYYYYYYYY of topic, but Jalen and Best were two of my favorite players, and once I found PD I found out how much some people hated them.

              but hey, to each his own.........

              The synopsis of Travis is that he was a shooting guard in a point guard's body. He could score and play solid defense on the little guys, but he wasn't a strong assist man and was a liability on taller players. The way he pounded the ball in the same spot drew much of the ire of Pacer fans.

              Rose was oft maligned for defense, but I had a bigger problem with him than that. Rose pulled a vanishing act every fourth quarter and particularly with the game on the line. He would miss shots, free throws... everything. If you are going to be paid a max contract and you don't play defense, you had better step up and hit some money shots. My fear with JO when he came to the team was that he had some of those Jalen tendencies. However, I do think JO has matured and gotten better with those situations. Rose just never seemed to get comfortable at crunch time.

              He hates it, but I still think Jalen is one of those guys who is just a better bench player. He can give you instant offense, and without the pressure of starting he plays better. I also remember once in a galaxy far far away... when he actually did defend number 23 of the Bulls pretty respectably. For whatever reason he decided to stop.

              Of the 2 I miss Travis more. He is another one of those guys who seemed to do better in the Pacers system. He just never has gotten on track anywhere else. He hit the big winner at Milwaukee and he took a charge from Shaq... that has to command some respect. However, he was always living in the shadow of Mark Jackson when he was here. Two very different players with different skills to bring to the table.
              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
              Reggie Miller

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                I dunno, I thought Jalen Rose was the best player on that team. In everyone's revisionist/ post-Bird views, he gets discredited around here all the time, but to leave him out of the nucleus discussion altogether is wrong.

                He was re-signed for a max contract.

                The Jalen that played in spring 2000 was an excellent player - very tough on offense and gave a lot of effort and was solid on defense.

                The Jalen Rose that surfaced when Isiah was the coach wasn't worth squat. I've always blamed Isiah for not holding Jalen accountable, including handing him the PG spot after Travis had shown he'd earned it.
                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                  I don't think Travis has been the same since Shaq screwed up his shoulder.
                  You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                  All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                  - Jimmy Buffett

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                    Yeah, IMO, Isiah created the Jalen Rose "scoring monster" that everyone hates, and then he didn't know how to put it back in the box.

                    In fairness to Jalen, we rarely called on him down the stretch; at crunch time it was still Reggie's team because the fans wouldn't accept the transition that was already in place long before the NBA Finals appearance.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                      Yeah, IMO, Isiah created the Jalen Rose "scoring monster" that everyone hates, and then he didn't know how to put it back in the box.

                      In fairness to Jalen, we rarely called on him down the stretch; at crunch time it was still Reggie's team because the fans wouldn't accept the transition that was already in place long before the NBA Finals appearance.
                      I disagree. Jalen had become our leading scorer and with the exception of the playoffs, Reggie was trying to pass the torch to Jalen. Jalen could just not deliver. And, it wasn't just last second shots (of which he missed many,) but he would sometimes vanish for the entire 4th quarter. I really think that is why Walsh ended up pulling the trigger on the trade. It became painfully obvious that Jalen just wasn't going to develop into that type of player.

                      The good news about Rose is that he could score 20 points in one quarter on any given night. But, he could fade away in an instant. A great guy to have on your bench, but not the guy to build your franchise on.
                      “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                      motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                      Reggie Miller

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                        At the same age, Reggie was still deferring to Chuck and Detlef during the fourth quarter.

                        It takes time to move from "bona fide NBA scorer" to clutch performer.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                          At the same age, Reggie was still deferring to Chuck and Detlef during the fourth quarter.

                          It takes time to move from "bona fide NBA scorer" to clutch performer.

                          Really? Maybe Jalen was younger than I thought, or maybe it took longer than I thought for Reggie to start taking clutch shots. Was Reggie signed to a max contract when he was missing shots in the fourth quarter?

                          I was hard on Rose b/c of the money. If you get max dollars you need to give max performance. Perhaps he would have developed into that type of guy over time, but I didn't even see glimpses that it would happen. Not all players have that gift, and not all are classified as superstars. Horry is as clutch as you can get, but not necessarily one of the top 2 guys on a team.

                          Ah, I suppose I'm just re-burning ashes anyway. He's gone and I for one am glad. He is a player I don't hope to see returning in a Blue and Gold uniform.
                          “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                          motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                          Reggie Miller

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                            Reggie played for five or six years and only attempted a couple of clutch shots.

                            When Versace put Reggie on the all-star team for the first time, Reggie was scoring 24 ppg and was averaging something like 17 ppg during the first half.

                            Chuck hit more clutch shots as a rookie than Reggie even attempted for a number of seasons, and after Chuck was traded Detlef was almost always the go-to guy down the stretch.

                            In hindsight, you're right. Jalen proved to be a guy that could score in bunches but not so well at crunch time. Blame his contract, blame Isiah for setting him up to fail, blame his new-found aversion to defense, etc. But at the end of the Bird era, he was the best player on an NBA Finals team, so if Eddie Jones could get a max contract, it was easy to see why Jalen earned one. He didn't live up to it after he earned it, that's indisputable. But he earned it in the first place, and there are numerous guys in the league that never even earned thier max contracts.

                            Oh well, I was always a big Jalen Rose fan, but that's not a safe thing to admit around here. And as I said, I moved up here right after the NBA Finals (well, technically, during Game #4) and in my little world, pre-TiVo, I didn't realize just how unpopular he became.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan
                              ...but all we got when Bird was coach was, "We didn't put out enough effort." Well, IMO Bird didn't put out enough Xs and Os.
                              Exactly.

                              To everyone who says Bird was a great coach, I wish I had some tapes, like against Chicago in '98, NY in '99, and especially Milwaukee in 2000 where I could show them what an intractable ****up he was at times. Carlisle is like Don Nelson at times compared to what Bird would do, or more correctly, not do.
                              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Solid win last night vs. the Jazz

                                Hey Doug you forgot the "I hate Larry Bird as Coach" threads.

                                For those who didn't like Larry Bird as a coach, I think you would find an interest in reading a couple of his books. I don't remember the titles, but I read one by Mark Shaw and the other one Larry wrote with help from a biographer. I think they are both upstairs but I am too lazy to get them.

                                You still may not agree with his philosophy at the end of the day, but you may understand him more. Larry felt like ballgames were won/lost by the players and that coaches tended to muck it up. He carried a staff of 3 coaches while many said he should have many more. He is just a guy that believes in the K.I.S.S. (Keep it simple stupid) principle.

                                In his book he specifically says he brought on Carlisle b/c he thought he was the best "X's and O's guy" in the business. Fans were upset with him for his lack of emotion, hesitation to call timeouts, and his refusal to veer from his set rotations. He would typically play about an 8 man rotation and that was it.

                                As with any coach, some players tend to flourish while others suffer. Croshere and Rose blossomed and Smits didn't do so well. At the end of the day I judge coaches on records more than anything else. It's pretty tough to get better than Larry Brown... he's the best out there. But Larry Bird did a pretty darn good job if you look at their record. Many coaches have done alot worse with less talent than he had. I'll always wonder what he would have done with a lesser team, but we'll probablly never know. All I know is that there is one Pacer coach in NBA to get to the finals and his name is Larry Bird.
                                “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                                motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                                Reggie Miller

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X