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

Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

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

  • #46
    Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

    I think most people that dislike Jeff has nothing to do with Jeff, its our
    coach.

    Rick insist on using putting 2 pf on the floor none of which are true center or
    aggressive by nature in their defense. I don't mean to say Jeff doesn't
    like to defend its more of a dominating the big dog on the other team thing.
    He and JO simply can not play that way.

    I would love Jeff to play the backup pf on the Pacers but not the starting
    Center or the PF on our current team. If JO was 7''0 and played like
    Dwight Howard than sure we could play Jeff as the starting PF but JO
    isn't like that and Jeff does not work with our current roster.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      There are very few players Foster actually matches up with. It just happens that one of those is considered the leagues best PF.

      Everything he does is pure hustle, and that's his dimension. He's not a good "rebounder," because fundamentally he's awful at it. He's too weak to guard post players, and not capable to guard smaller/quicker players.
      See... if I'd ever "shut up" long enough to let others type I'd be able to see just how smart some of the rest of you are.

      Perfect.

      Just to fan the flames a bit more, I don't consider "rebounding" to be its own dimension. Its important, don't get me wrong. But there are only two dimensions, offense and defense, and rebounding falls inside those two.
      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


      • #48
        Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

        way i look at foster he a 8 points 12 rebounds player good and bad in a way..
        IF YOU A PACER FAN DONT BASH TO THE PACERS..!!!!!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

          I'm shocked at how many of you are underestimating the value of energy players and the impact energy players have on a team. It rubs off on the other players. Why are coaches often bemoaning the lack of energy players, Jeff Van Gundy has been *****ing about it for 3 years now as coach of the Rockets.

          To suggest Foster's defense is mediocre?, and that he can't guard smaller and quicker players is absolute blasphemy and really, really off base. Absurd.

          I'll repeat what I have said in the past, IMO Foster is one of the very best one-on-one defenders in the NBA against small and quick centers and the mobile power forwards.

          Criticize Jeff offense if you want, criticize his ability to guard really big strong centers (the NBA currently has about 3 of these) if you want, but to suggest he can't guard smaller and quicker players is just absurd. I can't express how much I disagree with that notion. .

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

            Originally posted by Jay@Section204 View Post
            I don't consider "rebounding" to be its own dimension. Its important, don't get me wrong. But there are only two dimensions, offense and defense, and rebounding falls inside those two.


            Wait a minute. Do you realize what you've done. You've just admitted that about half of the current NBA allstars are one-dimensional. If that is the case, fine with me, Jeff is right in that group than, as a one-dimensional player

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              There are very few players Foster actually matches up with. It just happens that one of those is considered the leagues best PF.
              I knew I should not have gotten involved in this thread, I tried to stay out of it as long as I could.

              OK, I went down the list of the top 30 scorers from last season. First thing I noticed is how few of them are over 6'8". The only guy over 6'8" on the list that I don't want Jeff guarding, the only guy Jeff does not defend well is Shaq.

              In no particular order:

              - A. Walker - Jeff defends very well, very , very well
              - Lamar Odom - Jeff also does very very well on him.
              - Kevin Garnett - I've always thought defends him well, he's a great player. I'd put Jeff on him as does Rick
              - Duncan - Jeff defends him rather well also
              - Dirk - I have no problems putting Jeff on him, Dirk is more of a team thing, but Jeff does well guarding him
              - Gasol - No problem
              - Brand - Average
              - Jamison - He's a strange player with very unorthodox moves. Jeff's done OK on him.

              Let me say this. If I were Pacers coach I'd put Jeff on all of those players, and I wouldn't want JO to guard any of them. Even taking out the fact you don't want JO to get into foul trouble, and taking out the fact that JO is a much better help defender than Jeff, I believe Jeff guards each and everyone of those players better than JO.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204 View Post
                I'd rather go the other direction - name some one-dimensional players that are championship-caliber role players.

                I can only think of one - Ben Wallace. IMO, Rodman was much more versatile but made a conscious effort to focus on just two or three things.

                In other words, if you've got a one-dimensional role player they pretty much need to be the very best in the league at doing what they do (if not one of the very best of all time at doing what they do.)

                Joe Smith, Derrick McKey, Ron Harper, and Danny Manning are great examples of what I want a role player to be. Guys that can do it all but make sacrifices. Even Danny Ferry and Steve Kerr fit that bill, as younger players against less-athletic competition they could 'do it all'.

                Hell, look at Miami's role players this season. Walker - for all his annoying-ness, is very, very versatile. I've thought Posey was a poor-man's Derrick McKey since his days in Denver. He doesn't do any one thing great, and his primary job is toughness and defense, but he can do many other things. Gary Payton was really just a role player at this stage of his career. And the DWade fans would even argue that Shaq was nothing more than a role player at this stage of his career, too. And yes, it took a motivational master like Pat Riley to get them all to accept their roles.

                The difference is, when you take a player like Ron Harper and force him out of his "role", he is not a liability to his team. He could score in bunches if he wanted to, and proved it in Cleveland and LA, but in Chicago he was most famous for his defense.

                As we've seen Detroit do to Foster many teams, he can be 'gameplanned' right out of a playoff series whenever they wanted to. How can you 'gameplan' a role player off the court? Exploit the fact that they are one dimensional.

                If you heard me out, I realize I didn't answer your question. I don't have a list of (current) big-man role players on the top of my head. I'd have to watch some games. But I'm happy to revisit this discussion during the season.
                You'd rather go the other direction because you can't think of any to answer my question. biggrin JK.

                Well I don't consider Wallace or Rodman role players. Both were legit starters on any team while I can't say that Foster is a legit starter on every team. (not saying he isn't a good one though.)

                IMO Foster has 3 skills and that is hustling, rebounding, and defending. You mention Miami's role players but look at who thsoe guys are playing with and playing for. Same goes for Harper. Their jobs were much easier than Foster's. Harper didn't ever have to score because he had MJ and Pippen, he could just focus on defense as you said. But with Jermaine and Stephen Jackson people want Jeff to score.

                I don't think that Smith or Manning would do any better than Foster atleast at those 3 things I mentioned above. Are they more polished offenseively? Yes but i'll take Jeff and what he gives us over those 2 any day. (well when Smith and Manning were scoring 20 per game i'd take em over Jeff but you know what I meant.)

                I understand that you feel that Jeff is one dimensional and can easily be taken out of games....I don't feel that way though. I actually love Jeff because he can be effective without the ball. I love having players like that because i'm a big believer in team balance.

                Again I understand where you are coming from. I just don't think that Jeff is one dimensional and that's where I disagree with you. I think that Jeff can easily be a "championship role player" if he was on a championship team. And if we were winning a championship this question would not have been asked IMO. But Jeff's lack of offenseive skill has not kept this team from winning a championship.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  I knew I should not have gotten involved in this thread, I tried to stay out of it as long as I could.
                  This is why my biggest contribution was a photo of Harrington hailing a cab in front of Conseco.

                  I do see Jay and Since86's points, I just think they are overstating Jeff's defiencies and undervaluing his positives. He actually plays some pretty decent interior movement offense, as shown when he and Pollard both got it going mid-season while healthy.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                    Originally posted by rommie View Post
                    But Jeff's lack of offenseive skill has not kept this team from winning a championship.


                    Sorry, I just can't resist...

                    Jeff's lack of offense causes JO to get constantly double-teamed by two "bigs."

                    JO's double-teams cause (1) a stagnant offense and (2) additional wear and tear and injuries to JO

                    JO's injuries and a stagnant offense keep this team from winning a championship.

                    See, I got there in just three steps. Can anybody get there faster?

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

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204 View Post


                      Sorry, I just can't resist...

                      Jeff's lack of offense causes JO to get constantly double-teamed by two "bigs."

                      JO's double-teams cause (1) a stagnant offense and (2) additional wear and tear and injuries to JO

                      JO's injuries and a stagnant offense keep this team from winning a championship.

                      See, I got there in just three steps. Can anybody get there faster?

                      Jay, Jay, Jay. What are we going to do with you?

                      JO will be paired with Al in the frontcourt, and probably Danny at SF, making it virtually impossible for the opponent to double-team any of them. Each of those guys can hit jumpers out to 18-20 feet on a regular basis.

                      I got there in ONE step. I think I got there faster, don't you? [Even if I didn't address Jeff's lack of offense.]

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

                        I knew I should not have gotten involved in this thread, I tried to stay out of it as long as I could.

                        OK, I went down the list of the top 30 scorers from last season. First thing I noticed is how few of them are over 6'8". The only guy over 6'8" on the list that I don't want Jeff guarding, the only guy Jeff does not defend well is Shaq.

                        In no particular order:

                        - A. Walker - Jeff defends very well, very , very well
                        - Lamar Odom - Jeff also does very very well on him.
                        - Kevin Garnett - I've always thought defends him well, he's a great player. I'd put Jeff on him as does Rick
                        - Duncan - Jeff defends him rather well also
                        - Dirk - I have no problems putting Jeff on him, Dirk is more of a team thing, but Jeff does well guarding him
                        - Gasol - No problem
                        - Brand - Average
                        - Jamison - He's a strange player with very unorthodox moves. Jeff's done OK on him.

                        Let me say this. If I were Pacers coach I'd put Jeff on all of those players, and I wouldn't want JO to guard any of them. Even taking out the fact you don't want JO to get into foul trouble, and taking out the fact that JO is a much better help defender than Jeff, I believe Jeff guards each and everyone of those players better than JO.


                        And, let me just add myself to the growing "Jay is being ridiculous" bandwagon. Our current list of silly statements:
                        A) For a role player to be effective, he has to have skills outside of that role, and then not use them. Basket-weaving counts.
                        B) Jeff Foster is the reason we haven't won a championship.
                        C) There are two, and only two, dimensions to basketball, thus making 90% of NBA players one-dimensional.

                        Stop digging yourself into a ditch, man...
                        2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204 View Post


                          Sorry, I just can't resist...

                          Jeff's lack of offense causes JO to get constantly double-teamed by two "bigs."

                          JO's double-teams cause (1) a stagnant offense and (2) additional wear and tear and injuries to JO

                          JO's injuries and a stagnant offense keep this team from winning a championship.

                          See, I got there in just three steps. Can anybody get there faster?

                          Don't be sorry long arguments are fun haha.

                          But I have just one question to ask you. Do you think that if Jeff could hit a 15 footer, would this team be a championship caliber team?

                          IMO no. There are way more problems than Jeff's lack of offense.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                            Yes, I was clearly being tongue-in-cheek on that one.

                            Although I think if Jeff could hit a fifteen-footer and make the defense "stay honest" this team would have still been a conference-finals caliber team. Obviously a healthy and competent PG that can defend is a much bigger need. Not just for the Pacers, but about 20 other teams, too.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Why Hasn’t Foster Developed Offensive Game? Q.O.D 8-14-06

                              I'm at a loss that people actually think Foster is a good one-on-one defender.......

                              Helpside, he's great. But when he's isolated, he's D-U-N done. He's to weak phsyically, to bang, which is the reason JO is forced to do it. And his lateral quickness isn't very good.

                              Dirk put up 31 and 23, in his two games this season. Foster played almost double the amount in the 31pt game. (The box scores are gone for previous years)
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X