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

Lance Stephenson to Indiana

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

  • #16
    Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

    Originally posted by Grimp View Post
    I really need to watch him play if you think he's the guy. I'd even trade for Josh Smith before Vonleh. We need someone established, who we know what they can and can't do. If he was so good, he'd be getting some run in Charlotte considering they suck so bad right now. I'd rather see if we can get Draymond Green or trade for Smith before we lower our expectations to someone most of our fans have never heard of before. I know many hate Josh but Josh needs to be back to PF where he was best at. Playing him at SF gives him extra license to jack up shots, instead of play in the post like he should.
    I'm not sure if he's the guy--I just know he is a young, potential stretch four power forward who is an animal on the boards. I'm going to ignore that Josh Smith comment.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

      Bump! Yeah, yeah, it's already being discussed on the main forum. But just to forestall someone making a new thread.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

        Ignoring the possibly locker room concerns....if I were to just go Grimpin' and Bird was intent on bringing Lance back, the only scenarios that I would consider trading for Lance is:

        Option 1 ) Scola + Copeland for Lance + Pargo + 2015 1st
        Option 2 ) West + Copeland + 2015 2nd for Lance + Vonleh + 2015 1st

        Why for Option 1? The cost is minimal while getting back a 1st round pick.
        Why for Option 2? It moves West and Copeland ( which opens up minutes at the Wing rotation for Lance and gets back a likely future replacement for West at the Starting PF spot ) while getting back a 1st round pick ( a much needed asset ).

        If it was just a straight up Scola+Copeland deal for Lance without getting back a 1st round pick asset....then there's no point to do the trade. Either way, IMHO....if there is any possibility of Bird entertaining the idea of Lance returning...the Pacers are in a position of strength to get back some much needed assets for the future.
        Last edited by CableKC; 12-15-2014, 04:18 PM.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Ignoring the possibly locker room concerns....if I were to just go Grimpin' and Bird was intent on bringing Lance back, the only scenarios that I would consider trading for Lance is:

          Option 1 ) Scola + Copeland for Lance + Pargo + 2015 1st
          Option 2 ) West + Copeland + 2015 2nd for Lance + Vonleh + 2015 1st

          Why for Option 1? The cost is minimal while getting back a 1st round pick.
          Why for Option 2? It moves West and Copeland ( which opens up minutes at the Wing rotation for Lance and gets back a likely future replacement for West at the Starting PF spot ) while getting back a 1st round pick ( a much needed asset ).

          If it was just a straight up Scola+Copeland deal for Lance without getting back a 1st round pick asset....then there's no point to do the trade. Either way, IMHO....if there is any possibility of Bird entertaining the idea of Lance returning...the Pacers are in a position of strength to get back some much needed assets for the future.


          I'm all about your first scenario. I like Cope but am willing to part with him for that 2015 pick. Larry seems to want 2 future firsts. TWO.... that's a bit greedy. Second one is good also but I'd rather keep West to deal to OKC for RJ.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
            I'm all about your first scenario. I like Cope but am willing to part with him for that 2015 pick. Larry seems to want 2 future firsts. TWO.... that's a bit greedy. Second one is good also but I'd rather keep West to deal to OKC for RJ.
            I know that you want RJ....but if the Pacers can net 2 assets in exchange for West...specifically a 1st and Vonleh...or even just Vonleh along with Lance....than it's better than getting RJ.

            I know that you want new Starting PG ASAP.....but I think that Bird can then wait it out with GH at the Starting PG spot until the 2016-2017 offseason and then make a run at a Starting quality PG via Free Agency.

            EDIT - I guess if Copeland+Scola for Lance+1st and a West+Stuckey for RJ+Perkins is an option....I can live with that as well. I just prefer getting a Prospect like Vonleh as our future PF since I have no problem with GH running the point for the next 2 seasons.
            Last edited by CableKC; 12-15-2014, 05:28 PM.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              I know that you want RJ....but if the Pacers can net 2 assets in exchange for West...specifically a 1st and Vonleh...or even just Vonleh along with Lance....than it's better than getting RJ.

              I know that you want new Starting PG ASAP.....but I think that Bird can then wait it out with GH at the Starting PG spot until the 2016-2017 offseason and then make a run at a Starting quality PG via Free Agency.

              EDIT - I guess if Copeland+Scola for Lance+1st and a West+Stuckey for RJ+Perkins is an option....I can live with that as well. I just prefer getting a Prospect like Vonleh as our future PF since I have no problem with GH running the point for the next 2 seasons.
              I think the only way Hill will ever be valuable to us if he's back up 2 guard. That way, he is back to just shooting the ball and he plays less minutes. Which means less fatigue and chance of injury.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                I think the only way Hill will ever be valuable to us if he's back up 2 guard. That way, he is back to just shooting the ball and he plays less minutes. Which means less fatigue and chance of injury.
                LOL....you think that GH will only be valuable as a backup 2 Guard? Yes.....please continue to undervalue GH

                I understand the argument that GH isn't best suited to be the Starting PG....but he's not even good enough to be the Pacers Starting SG? I get that he doesn't fit your preference to have super-athletic Players at every position that can score from anywhere, but geez.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                  Trading Scola & Copeland for Lance would pretty much mean (barring other trades for expiring contracts) bye-bye to f ex Lavoy.

                  Adding another high 1st-rounder to next summer makes it even worse financially. Luxury tax is calling!!!

                  With Lance we would hit 72,5M mark. Add two likely top-10 picks (right now, both us & Charlotte are amongst the bottom 9 in standings) is another 5M. That means that there would be just 11 players (including 2 rookies) under contract and some 3,5 million left under luxury tax. Minimum contracts all the way to fill it in. And most likely the ONLY maybe resignable ones would be Sloan & Whittington.

                  So we would have aged version of the line-up which already ultimately failed last season with an empty bench (Solo, Miles, Mahinmi, Rudez, 2 draft picks & some minimum contract fillers). No thanks.

                  BTW, If we would miraculously have the ping-pong balls going for "us" and get f ex 1st & 3rd pick, we wouldn't even be able to afford keeping them both under the luxury tax. That would be an epic LOL for whole rest of the league...
                  Last edited by PetPaima; 12-16-2014, 05:49 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                    Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                    BTW, If we would miraculously have the ping-pong balls going for "us" and get f ex 1st & 3rd pick, we wouldn't even be able to afford keeping them both under the luxury tax. That would be an epic LOL for whole rest of the league...
                    Now that's just silly. Obviously we'd unload the salary that we don't want, like Mahinmi and Miles, to make room for high lottery picks. If it becomes too expensive to unload them, there's also the stretch option.

                    It's like that story about fitting stones in a jar. Put the large pieces in first, then squeeze in the smaller ones to fit into the gaps. In this case, the starters, and potentially Lance and/or lottery picks, are the large pieces. One shouldn't let smaller pieces like replaceable bench guys get in the way.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                      Now that's just silly. Obviously we'd unload the salary that we don't want, like Mahinmi and Miles, to make room for high lottery picks. If it becomes too expensive to unload them, there's also the stretch option.

                      It's like that story about fitting stones in a jar. Put the large pieces in first, then squeeze in the smaller ones to fit into the gaps. In this case, the starters, and potentially Lance and/or lottery picks, are the large pieces. One shouldn't let smaller pieces like replaceable bench guys get in the way.
                      Of course, but when your trade partners know that you HAVE TO off-load those contracts, they they have all the cards. Golden State pretty much traded their draft future to get rid of Jefferson & Biedrins. They are doing fine now and would CERTAINLY be happy if they win even ONE title out of that trade, but nevertheless - it is expensive to ship out contracts when you have no alternative...

                      But trading down in draft in such a situation : say 3rd pick for 7th and extra pick in upcoming years would be a serious alternative too...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                        Not really a good example, because Jefferson and Biedrins were making more than 2x of either Mahinmi and Miles when they were traded, plus neither were really useful as players. Mahinimi OTOH, as a $4m decent backup center, definitely has value, and maybe enough value to convince someone to take Miles for free. Plus once Miles is out of his shooting slump, he'll look a lot better. $4m+ for a shooting specialist isn't that bad.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                          Carried over from the Lance Thread on the main forum:

                          Originally posted by solid View Post
                          How about:
                          http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ouxon6r

                          Scola/Miles/Cope for
                          Lance/Vonleh/Taylor.

                          Hibbert Ian Allen
                          West Allen Vonley
                          PG Solo Rudy
                          Lance GHill Stucky
                          GHill Watson Sloan).

                          I'd then try my best to move any combination of anyone we have who thinks they're a point guard for a better point guard.
                          If that can be accomplished through the draft or free agency, then that's cool too.


                          over all I want to turn this list of 10 assets:
                          West
                          GHill
                          Stucky
                          Miles
                          Cope
                          Scola
                          Watson
                          Sloan
                          our 1st pick
                          free agent pick up?

                          into these 5 needs:
                          A top 15 shooting guard.
                          A real good 4 prospect
                          A top 15 caliber point guard.
                          A pair of back up guards.

                          I hadn't thought it was real likely but if a deal like this could be worked out with Charlotte, we'd be sittin' strong.

                          I'd be willing to trade almost any active player or set for that pair.
                          I'd especially be pleased if we'd move Scola (duplicated, and in LA's way) and or Miles.
                          I'd be willing to even let West or GH go. They'll both be overpaid next year.
                          Ideally I'd like to Keep West to mentor Noah.

                          Then trade up in the draft or better yet trade our pick with Watson and or Stucky/sloan for a better point.

                          Something like this looks good for next year and beyond.

                          5.Hibbert Ian Allen
                          4.West Allen Vonley
                          3.PG Solo Rudy
                          2.Lance GHill or Stucky
                          1.Conley or Dragic etc GHill or Watson or Sloan.
                          Originally posted by solid View Post
                          No plans for JT. But makes salaries work and keeps them from having to take 3 for 2.
                          If he works out as a emergency 3 that's cool. If he doesn't nbd. He's a cheap expiring.
                          In the end we have traded a few guys that are redundant for us for two possibly very important pieces moving forward.

                          Do that trade and then find a starting point and we should be strong for years.
                          I think West mentoring Vonleh for a while would be fantastic.
                          We are very unlikely to find a stronger candidate for West's replacement with what we have to offer.
                          I don't like to give up on West.....but one of the few trade options that I would consider is moving West for a Future Starting PF like Vonleh.

                          If we can get Lance in return for him....NP. At worst...i'd even consider the 2015 1st round pick as a consolation or even Zeller.....but if Vonleh is an option ( which I doubt...but can hope for ) I'd be fine with taking back Lance in that scenario.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            Carried over from the Lance Thread on the main forum:




                            I don't like to give up on West.....but one of the few trade options that I would consider is moving West for a Future Starting PF like Vonleh.

                            If we can get Lance in return for him....NP. At worst...i'd even consider the 2015 1st round pick as a consolation or even Zeller.....but if Vonleh is an option ( which I doubt...but can hope for ) I'd be fine with taking back Lance in that scenario.

                            I'm not that enamored with Zeller. Lance and a 2015 1st would be a deal I'd be fine with. I wouldn't take any other pieces from Charlotte. Vonleh I guess has hometown appeal to Indy people? I actually think the other Zeller in Boston is better than the Zeller in Charlotte.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                              Vonleh will very likely be better than anyone we could get with the Hornet's pick.

                              I'd take any of the pieces under discussion as a BONUS for getting back a guy who has proven to work in our system.
                              A guy who would immediately start for us and at a price most of us felt was pretty fair.
                              With a good mentoring system I expect both lance and Noah to be solid contributors for years to come.
                              Two likely starters. Maybe an all star or two even....for a collection of guys that we wouldn't even have to bother replacing.

                              This deal is too good to be true.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Lance Stephenson to Indiana

                                Originally posted by solid View Post
                                Vonleh will very likely be better than anyone we could get with the Hornet's pick.

                                I'd take any of the pieces under discussion as a BONUS for getting back a guy who has proven to work in our system.
                                A guy who would immediately start for us and at a price most of us felt was pretty fair.
                                With a good mentoring system I expect both lance and Noah to be solid contributors for years to come.
                                I almost hope Vonleh does get traded here so we can see if he's as good as some people think he is. Personally, I think to contend next season against the Cavs and Raptors, we cannot hinge our bets on a 19 year old who doesn't get any playing time with a 6 and 17 basketball team.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X