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

The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

    http://www.foxsports.com/nba/gallery...ry-rumors-news

    The Indiana Pacers fought like hell to make the 2017 postseason — to give themselves a chance to win a title.

    After Sunday, that seemed like a lot of work for nothing.

    The Pacers were eliminated in four hard-fought, relatively close, and at times comically sloppy games by the Cleveland Cavaliers Sunday afternoon, ending their up-and-down season at its lowest point.

    Despite the games being close — the average margin of victory for the Cavs was four points — the sweep was an embarrassment to the Pacers, who not that long ago were viewed as possible title contenders.

    But that era is past now, and even after some bold moves this past offseason, the Pacers are still also-rans in the Eastern Conference.

    This summer is a critical one to the Pacers' franchise — Indiana will effectively have to decide if they're going to effort to keep All-Star forward Paul George in Indianapolis.

    And after the four-game defeat in this postseason, the answer should be obvious to Larry Bird and the rest of the Pacers' basketball operations crew: Move him.

    Now.

    George is an exceptional player — there was a time when he was considered one of the best players in the league and a perennial MVP candidate.

    Perhaps George could get back to those levels soon, but it's unlikely that he'll make All-NBA this year, so clearly he's fallen off that standard.

    In the Cavs' four-game sweep, George averaged a career-best 28, 8 and 7, but he never rivaled LeBron James (a tall task, but one George should be able to undertake at times) and was not unquestionably the second-best player on the court in the series — though that might be recency bias from Game 4 and the memory of that horrific miss crossing over.

    Nonetheless, George played as well as any reasonable person could expect. This is a player who is 0-for-15 in potential go-ahead or game-winning baskets with 20 seconds or less left, after all — 28, 8 and 7 is a great line.

    And that is the crux of the Pacers' issue. George is a great player, but he's not a transcendent one — not like James, or Stephen Curry, or Kevin Durant, or Kawhi Leonard.

    George sits firmly near the top of the second tier of superstar, but there doesn't seem to be much room for his game to grow. The Paul George the Pacers had this year is the Paul George they can likely expect for the next few years, and while that's excellent, it's not good enough.

    The Pacers need to move George this summer, while they can sell high and capitalize on a marketplace that is likely to have two excellent suitors.

    George is clearly the best player on a team that is stuck in the middle, and so long as he's in Indiana, the Pacers will live in that limbo.

    If George was a transcendent star, this wouldn't be an issue — he would be able to take the Pacers to the next level, true title contention. But right now, George is the best player on a team with two really good players, the second of which, center Myles Turner, is nowhere near fully developed.

    If the Pacers were to add a third All-Star caliber player alongside him and Turner, Indiana might have something going, but they don't have that player right now and they'll be hard-pressed to find him.

    The Pacers tried to find that third star by moving George Hill for Jeff Teague — thinking (astutely) that a true point guard and not an off-ball wizard like Hill would help improve the pace and explosiveness of the Pacers' offense. It was a good idea, but Teague just isn't anything more than an average starting point guard in the league — he's definitely not the third star the Pacers need to keep pace in the East.

    The Pacers were so desperate for a viable, developed secondary (or tertiary) option that they signed Lance Stephenson to a deal just before the playoffs started — that's the act of a desperate team. It, of course, didn't work out.

    The Pacers can't sign a third star in free agency — Indianapolis isn't a destination, they're unlikely to be able to trade for one, and so long as they keep contending for the postseason, they're unlikely to be in a position to draft one either.

    So they have George, soon to be 27, and Turner, soon to be 22 — players whose peaks are unlikely to ever coincide — and a good-but-not-great roster that's unlikely to make any leaps in the coming years.

    That's a perfect recipe to be a 7 seed for the next decade, and I can't imagine that's something that interests Larry Bird.

    Seeing as George is a longshot to make All-NBA this year, he's also unlikely to be eligible for the league's designated player extension in Indiana.

    Should George miss out on All-NBA, the Pacers will still likely be able to offer him a six-year deal once his current deal (likely) ends at the end of the 2018 season, but without the All-NBA nod, the Pacers won't be able to pay him the max of 35 percent of the salary cap. They'd be more or less in the same pool as every other team when it came to offering George in free agency.

    The Pacers viewed the new designated player contract rules as a coup — had George made All-NBA (and should he still be a Pacer and make the team next year, the same truth applies), no one would have been able to offer George more money than Indiana. That goes a long way in keeping your superstar.

    But without that bargaining chip in play a year ahead of time, the Pacers would be entering the final year of George's contract (he's a lock to opt out of his player option for 2018-19) without knowing if they'd be able to offer him more money annually than the competition.

    That would put too much on the line for a team that isn't in a position to quickly turn around mistakes. The Pacers can't afford to let George leave for nothing.

    That's why the Pacers need to trade George this summer. And Larry Bird's first call should be to his old nemesis — Magic Johnson.

    The Pacers aren't going to compete for a title in the next three years — which would take George to age 30. Not while LeBron is in the Eastern Conference and not while the Pacers lack a third star player. Seeing as neither of those things are likely to change — LeBron spends a million dollars a year to keep himself young and invincible — it's incumbent on the Pacers to get ahead of the curve for the next era of play.

    There's no value in being a fringe playoff team in the Eastern Conference for years on end — this is about championships. If Indiana bites the bullet now, they can put themselves in a position to win in 2020 and beyond.

    The Lakers have picked in the top 2 for the last two years, top 10 for the last three, and have a 47 percent chance of landing a top 3 pick in this year's loaded draft. They have collateral to move, particularly if the ping-pong balls bounce their way in May.

    But ask yourself this question: as of right now, which team has a better chance of winning the 2020 title, the Lakers or Pacers?

    Despite having George and already being a playoff team, it's probably the Lakers — though they stink now, they have a much higher upside. We know what the Pacers are capable of doing.

    The Pacers can flip that formula, though.

    The Lakers' new president, Magic Johnson, has all but outright said that he wants George on the Lakers — the teams engaged in trade talks surrounding George around the deadline (nothing came of it, obviously), and the Lakers are fully expected to go after George in free agency in 2018.

    The Pacers would be able to command a lot from the Lakers in exchange for George — as you'd expect — but there might not be a price too high for the Lakers, who can't be poor for much longer. The fans are getting restless.

    Brandon Ingram and D'Angelo Russell would almost certainly be on the table in a trade, and the top 3 pick — should the Lakers get it and avoid having to give their first-round selection to the Sixers — would have to be in any deal.

    The Pacers could command two or even three recent top picks in exchange for George — and while that might not be enough to equal the value of the All-Star forward in the present, it does give Indiana a chance to have a more complete team and one whose star players should simultaneously peak at the end of the decade.

    The other possible trade suitor for the Pacers would be the Celtics. Boston opted to stand pat at the trade deadline this year, either because they drastically overvalued their role players or because they don't believe they can beat LeBron in the next few years, so they decided to not burn assets to go on a quixotic title quest.

    If the former reasoning was the case, then a playoff failure (see: defeated by anyone but the Cavs) could recalibrate Boston's thinking. And armed with the Nets first-round picks for the next two years and those role players, Boston could strike a deal for any available star this summer.

    Having two big-market teams with strong assets to push in exchange for a star player is a dream — Indiana can play them off each other to help drive up the price.

    Then again, if you're not going to move George for two extremely high (if not No. 1) picks and Jaylen Brown, then George isn't going anywhere.

    Winslow Townson USA TODAY Sports

    George's best years in Indiana are behind him.

    Yes, he might make that All-NBA team yet, but the Pacers aren't going to be the No. 1 seed next season, and they're unlikely to be title contenders should George sign a big contract to remain in Indiana.

    There's no value in mediocrity in the NBA, and while George is anything but a mediocre player, he's not the kind of player who can change a team's middle-ground fate alone.

    In 2013 the Knicks were a 53-win playoff team. A year later, Carmelo Anthony signed a five-year, $124 million deal.

    We know what happened to that team from there.

    Melo, like George, is a star, but not one that can take a team to the next level without significant help. And while New York's failures are much deeper than Indiana's, the handicap the Pacers have in free agency shouldn't be overlooked.

    Indiana will have at least two detours to the path they're heading down right now. If one winds up being paved, they should take it.

    Bill Streicher Bill Streicher-USA TODAY Sports
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

    good friend of Magic no doubt, oh and no qualms about lying either , waste of space this drab
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

      I wouldn't mind trading PG to Lakers for Ingram, Randle and 2 1st picks (assuming that this year's pick would be top 3). I love PG but it may be time to cash out and start the rebuild around Turner. I've never really been a fan of Russell (especially after what he did to his teammate, Young).
      "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

        Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
        I wouldn't mind trading PG to Lakers for Ingram, Randle and 2 1st picks (assuming that this year's pick would be top 3). I love PG but it may be time to cash out and start the rebuild around Turner. I've never really been a fan of Russell (especially after what he did to his teammate, Young).
        I'd personally rather take Russell over Ingram. I think he's developing into A solid player. Ingram screams untapped potential to me.

        Sent from my HTC 2PS6200 using Tapatalk

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

          I think this article is missing some important facts, mainly that our coach was downright terrible this year and we still played the Cavs pretty close. We do need to move Jefferson and Ellis that's freaking 20 million in salaries. I think Mason Plumlee could be had in that range and he would give us the rebounding we need.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

            Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
            I think this article is missing some important facts, mainly that our coach was downright terrible this year and we still played the Cavs pretty close. We do need to move Jefferson and Ellis that's freaking 20 million in salaries. I think Mason Plumlee could be had in that range and he would give us the rebounding we need.
            Yes that is a valid point but who is going to take those players? Lucky for us we could waive Ellis (like we did to Stuckey)
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment

            • #7
              Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

              I don't think trading Paul is the answer. If we can bring in a star player, not only will we be better, we will be in a position if Paul does walk next year, we will still have a star on our team to build around...not to mention Myles.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                I think this article is missing some important facts, mainly that our coach was downright terrible this year and we still played the Cavs pretty close. We do need to move Jefferson and Ellis that's freaking 20 million in salaries. I think Mason Plumlee could be had in that range and he would give us the rebounding we need.
                We have to stretch Jefferson this summer. That will free up about $7 million in salary next year...although it will cost us $2.6 million the 4 years after that. But I still think it is worth doing.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                  Originally posted by sav View Post
                  I don't think trading Paul is the answer. If we can bring in a star player, not only will we be better, we will be in a position if Paul does walk next year, we will still have a star on our team to build around...not to mention Myles.
                  Yeah that would be nice, but who is going to come to this mess? Especially without knowing if PG will extend or not.

                  Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                    A pretty good thought provoking article, done over and over again. Bird is probably not going to give Magic a sweetheart trade deal and Magic is not going to give Bird a franchise changing trade for one player. These guys may still be close friends, but they aren't stupid.
                    My opinion, while changing almost daily, is to build the team through the draft. Bird has proven to be a pretty good judge of talent in drafting players. They are not STAR players, except for PG, but they are for the most part solid, usable talent to move the team closer to where they want to be. The problem is that good but not great talent won't get the Pacer fans the title shot they want.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                      Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
                      Yeah that would be nice, but who is going to come to this mess? Especially without knowing if PG will extend or not.

                      Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
                      We struggle signing average to slightly above average Free Agents. We will have to make a trade to bring in a star player.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                        Originally posted by able View Post
                        good friend of Magic no doubt, oh and no qualms about lying either , waste of space this drab
                        So, what was he lying about?

                        Also, it was no more a waste of space than your reply was.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                          Originally posted by sav View Post
                          We struggle signing average to slightly above average Free Agents. We will have to make a trade to bring in a star player.
                          WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO TRADE!!! Sheesh, why do people keep saying trade for another star knowing full well that we have nothing (other than Turner who we aren't trading) that anyone would want.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                            Originally posted by sav View Post
                            I don't think trading Paul is the answer. If we can bring in a star player, not only will we be better, we will be in a position if Paul does walk next year, we will still have a star on our team to build around...not to mention Myles.
                            This. We need to go hard after someone like Gordon Hayward or Jimmy Butler.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: The Pacers’ big Paul George question has an easy answer

                              Originally posted by MUpaceSIC View Post
                              WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO TRADE!!! Sheesh, why do people keep saying trade for another star knowing full well that we have nothing (other than Turner who we aren't trading) that anyone would want.
                              Not only that but they want an star but don't want to trade Turner because he might be an star some day.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X