Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

    Ok, this will be brief as I have to be up in about 4 hours & travel two hours to class.

    We can talk about missing Reggie, Ron, Brad, etc., etc. Tonight I missed one person & one person only.

    Dale Davis.

    Yes I know it's me so I always miss Dale but this game had nothing to do with his rebounding (although that would have helped) or his inside defense (God knows we could have used that). No what I missed more than anything else is that we don't have one player on our team who will lay out that punk @ss B!tch Clifford (Grandpa) Robinson.

    Did you see this @ss kiss his biceps? Dear God.

    All the while I just had to sit there & take it because we don't have a single player on our team that will stop that crap.

    Where is Ron Artests elbows when you need them?

    The fact that we are being pushed around & physically abused inside is about to make me lose my mind.

    Look I think Nena Krystic is a great player but for God's sake we were making him look Nate Thurmond in that game. He was just physically pushing us wherever he wanted to.

    I am not one to blame refs. for our misfortunes but sweet mother of God could they at least pretend to see the shoulder dropping that the N.J. big men are doing to get their guards open?

    Ok, I'll calm down now & try & look at this a little more objectively.

    We go home 1-1 I think if we were all honest with ourselves we would admit that this is about the best any of us hoped for coming into this series so this one game loss is not a huge setback IMO.

    Right up front let me ask a question. What is up with Peja? According to Clark this is an injury from 2 months ago & he is just now not able to play? I think it was Jermainiac in another thread who said it & I have to agree here, unless you've got a bone sticking out of your leg (ok that is hyperbole but you get the opinion) then you really need to make yourself available to the team to play. The coach could keep him on the bench or something but at least he could have been used in situational plays (like say maybe a late 3 or something).

    I'm not quesitoning the injury btw, for those of you that get so offended whenever someone dares question an injury) but I am questioning if it's really so bad that he couldn't have been available.

    Now to Jermaine.

    I totally forgot about Robinson being with the Blazers when J.O. was there. This of course depresses me because J.O. never plays well vs. any of those old Blazers for whatever reason. Whether it's Sheed, Brian Grant or even Grandpa Cliffy.

    One thing you will notice though that all three do when playing him, they play him physical. Do you think they know something?

    I am still happy with J.O. for not getting involved with the refs. for some of the calls he has recieved. However he is allowing Grandpa to take him out of his game.

    On the other hand would Jeff Foster please step up & give Grandpa a hard back pick or something? J.O. won't do it so someone will need to.

    N.J. has the clear out for J.O. well scouted so I think Rick is going to have to go back to the drawing board & come up with a new offensive scheme. However to Rick's credit, I don't know how the hell you design something new when your wing players are in foul trouble & the other one isn't even playing.

    Speaking of Jeff Foster he really is having a hard time with Krystic but that is because Nena can step out 15' & nail the jumper like Rik Smits. Because of J.O.'s foul trouble we are in trouble because we have nobody to patrol the paint that much. God love Foster for trying but he just is not a good weak side defender & since N.J. doesn't really have a big man who goes to the rack then Jeff is a little out of his element.

    He did get up 5 shots during this game so that is a good thing. He's trying & overall I like his play but I will say what I have said since the dawn of time. I do not like him & J.O. on the floor at the same time.

    However when Austin plays like this I don't know what you do. I like Austin so much more when he is crashing the boards & attacking the rim. I know that on occasion that Cro can nail a jumper from the three point line, but when he shoots half of his shots from there & doesn't hit a one of them I know we are in trouble. Also his defense has been abysmal for the most part. He is just to damn short to guard Krystic but because J.O. is in such foul trouble all of the time he has to guard him. I don't know what to do there.

    Jackson just got caught up in the foul parade during this game, nothing more nothing less. I don't feel bad about his game because I don't feel as though he was going off of the farm on offense or anything. Just a rough night from the field for the poor guy.

    Granger was great considering he is a rookie starting in his first playoff game. I would like to see him take it to the rim more than he does but overall I thought he did very well.

    Like every other Pacer I wanted to see him do better on the boards but the guy was in there on almost every rebound he just didn't snag a lot of them. In fact I thought he was fould on at least two occasions but because they seemed to let some contact go on down low he never got the call.

    It is a testimate to his defensive skill that we often left him on Carter in the 4th quarter. Rick must already have supreme confidence in his defensive abilities.

    Fred Jones again was outstanding. That one sequence where he blocked Kidd on a fast break & then literally ran the length of the court to tap out an offensive rebound was breath taking. I just wish we could have done something with it.

    We did not lose this game because of Fred Jones that is for sure.

    In fact I can't say any one person lost us this game & for some reason I don't feel that bad about the loss other than the B.S. extra cirricular crap that Robinson was doing.

    Oh God how that burns me .

    I think next game we have to make more of an effort to get everybody back to rebounding. We may have to sacrifice some open transition baskets to get some offenisve boards.

    Defense will only slow down an opponet, you have to score to win & right now we need more possesions on offense so that we can score.

    Sorry that this is so short & directionless, but like I said I gotta be up shortly. I'll check back tommorrow night.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

    Originally posted by Peck
    Sorry that this is so short
    Compared to what?

    Have a good night, Peck.
    This space for rent.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

      Excellent stuff as always Peck. It's things like this why I like coming here

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

        This one is easy: Everybody sucked. (Except AJ and maybe Fred but even then AJ and Fred had no answers at all defensively against the Nets three-man backcourt of Kidd, Jefferson and Carter.)
        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

        • #5
          Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

          Knocking an opponent on his butt is something that I miss as well.

          That is one remark I made during the first lane with Carter driving to the rim on a number of occassions. We need someone who is willing to go up in the air with Carter attempt to block the shot and flatten him on the landing.

          We've got to match them with physical play, and we may as well try to discourage dribble penetration while we do it.

          I was disappointed in Granger when Carter stole the ball and subsequently converted a 3-point play on a drive to the basket. I felt like Granger had two options. One was to foul Carter out on the floor, giving the Nets the ball out of bounds. The other was to flatten Carter when Granger went up for the block. But Granger is a rookie and just made the wrong choice at the time.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

            If Jermaine went after Robinson he would have been thrown out of the game.

            1.People would have called him a idiot
            2.People would have said he is a thug
            3.Blame the loss on him because he got thrown out

            I'm glad Jermaine didnt hit him.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

              JO would get his @ss handed to him by cliffy. Jermaniac if you want to see what a real super star PF looks like see timmy in the spurs game right now. Hes had a very similar game called against him like jo did, but he has performed better in the fewer minutes hes had than jermaine. I dont hate JO by any means, but I cant see your blind devotion to him when he has game after game like this.

              I actually think JO has more physical skills than TD but his mental game is not even in the same league.
              then: adverb - at that time; at the time in question

              than: conjunction & preposition - introducing the second element in a comparison

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                Remember the regular season game out there - David Harrison was unstoppable and put a monsterous block on RJ.

                Rick can't let David foul out with only two fouls. He's got to be allowed to pick up all six, no matter how quickly (or slowly) it happens.

                He's our only good matchup with Krstic, because he's our only guy to force Krstic to expend energy by playing physical. Kristic gets to loaf on defense against everybody else, since they've got Uncle Cliff and Collins to guard JO.

                Of course, Rick is making it easy for U.C. and Collins, with JO twenty feet out, facing the basket.
                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

                • #9
                  Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                  Im pretty sure rick doesnt instruct JO to lob 17 footers all game.

                  You guys act like the coach has total control over all the players all the time. the reason JO shoots those shots is because he has been too lazy/tired/overconfident to get down in the post where a power forward belongs, not because rick carlisle likes him out there.

                  Rick sees and gets frustrated at the exact same things we do.
                  then: adverb - at that time; at the time in question

                  than: conjunction & preposition - introducing the second element in a comparison

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                    The way the players look over to him for every play, I'd say Rick is in control as much as any NBA coach.

                    Even Bill Rafferty, during one possession tonight said, "The Nets quick ball movement and spacing effectively takes Rick Carlisle out of the game." Meaning, Rick wants to slow it down so that he's in control, not the players.

                    Frank lets his players play the game, and we're getting outcoached. We were bailed out of game #1 by a fortuitious rebound (milking the clock to take a three-pointer in a tie game - shameful) and an, uh, interesting foul call.
                    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

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                      The one thing I remember best from Vince's days in Toronto: If you get physical with him, he backs away.

                      If Vince drove to the rim early and got leveled inside, he would rarely go back. This is just what I remember from his later days in Toronto. Once that happened, the TV guys would usually get upset and brace themselves for the "Allan Houstonesque" Vince Carter for the rest of the game. He has never been one who likes physical play. I think his clouded past full of injuries has something to do with that.

                      By the way, the Clifford Robinson garbage was just dispicable. The no-call and Cliff himself just infuriated me.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                        Remember the regular season game out there - David Harrison was unstoppable and put a monsterous block on RJ.

                        Rick can't let David foul out with only two fouls. He's got to be allowed to pick up all six, no matter how quickly (or slowly) it happens.

                        He's our only good matchup with Krstic, because he's our only guy to force Krstic to expend energy by playing physical. Kristic gets to loaf on defense against everybody else, since they've got Uncle Cliff and Collins to guard JO.

                        Of course, Rick is making it easy for U.C. and Collins, with JO twenty feet out, facing the basket.
                        I agree. David should get more minutes so he at least gets a chance to make a real impact. 10 minutes or more that is.

                        But with RC, I'm afraid that won't happen.
                        Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
                        Bum in Berlin on Myspace

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                          Also, does anybody still think Tinsley has been faking an injury?

                          He's clearly not ready to play, physically. And that sucks. But let's stop vilifying the guy for trying to play; to help his team. He shouldn't come back until he's ready but there's a certain percentage of you that would ***** about that, too. He's in a no-win situation.
                          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

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                            Also, does anybody still think Tinsley has been faking an injury?

                            He's clearly not ready to play, physically. And that sucks. But let's stop vilifying the guy for trying to play; to help his team. He shouldn't come back until he's ready but there's a certain percentage of you that would ***** about that, too. He's in a no-win situation.
                            I villify the coach for suiting him up for anything other than a 'disaster PG' role. Outta game shape/sync.... apparently banged up...

                            If fouls or injuries open a door for him, fine play him. If Sarunas or AJ play so poorly that one can't spell the other, fine play him. But let's quit monkeying with the rotation to bring Tinsley back. Even if he's healthy it's not like we're talking Michael Jordan here. Why screw up whatever little bit of consistency we can muster to bring in a player who appears not 100% and who's an injury (or reinjury) waiting to happen besides that.

                            -
                            Tonight I wondered if the NBA had changed the rules to read:
                            A player shall be disqualified from competition in a game if he accumulates a total of 6 personal fouls within that game... unless his name is David Harrison in which case he will only be allowed 2 fouls.
                            -

                            I stand by my earlier statement of declaring it is time for a new coach.



                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

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

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd thoughts about game 2 vs. Jersey

                              Well, Saras was brutal in Game #1. If you're saying to make Gill the backup PG until Tinsley is ready, then okay.

                              In the playoffs, Tinsley @ 40% > Saras @ 100%.
                              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

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X