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

We need a trade

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

  • #61
    Re: We need a trade

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Granger/JO/Tinsley for
    Bynum/Odom/Brown/Farmar.

    It works on trade checker. Would LA do this?
    Come on, are you kidding?

    Bynum is into "For Durant or Horford" range. Struggling vet at max deal paired with struggling prospect and struggling, injury-prone PG with thug rep (fair or not) is miles below that range.

    JO/Tins might get you something like Artest/Bibby at best (salaries don't match).

    I mean if a Detlef for Herb Williams trade doesn't pop up, we're in trouble.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: We need a trade

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      Come on, are you kidding?

      Bynum is into "For Durant or Horford" range. Struggling vet at max deal paired with struggling prospect and struggling, injury-prone PG with thug rep (fair or not) is miles below that range.

      JO/Tins might get you something like Artest/Bibby at best (salaries don't match).

      I mean if a Detlef for Herb Williams trade doesn't pop up, we're in trouble.
      Ah, thanks for reeling me in.

      How about JO for Odom/Farmar/Brown? We could throw in Diener...lol.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: We need a trade

        Originally posted by kester99 View Post
        After Craig Sager's sideline report on TNT, no doubt someone will say "Hey, Damon Jones is available. Who can we trade to get Damon?"
        that would actually be a really great idea...


        ....except

        Damon Jones is not great at basketball anymore
        By Kelly Dwyer
        Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 3:10 pm EST

        Cavs coach Mike Brown has his issues coaching offense; I think we can all agree on that. Somehow he's turned a team featuring the most potent offensive force of his (and, perhaps, any) generation, a center with post-up and perimeter skills to spare, and a shoot-first power forward into one of the drearier offensive lineups in the NBA. Even throwing chuckers like Daniel Gibson and Sasha Pavlovic into the mix hasn't helped, Brown's plays never seem to reveal themselves, and the Cavs are worse off because of it.

        But the man is right in not playing Damon Jones that much, mainly for the reason detailed in the headline above. Damon wants to either play for the Cavs, or be traded to a team that will play him, but something's getting in the way of that: there's little left in Damon's legs that's enough to make up for his horrible defensive shortcomings, in spite of what Jones will tell you.

        Which is a shame, because for years before Damon threw himself into the hearts and minds of NBA fans around the globe as a member of the Miami Heat, we were big fans of his game. A minor league retreated, DJ bounced around with several teams before taking advantage of a long playoff run with the Heat in 2004-05, and grabbing a healthy free agent deal with Cleveland that following summer. The man had skills, he modified his game to fit whatever team was employing him that season, and he was honestly worth more minutes than he got in just about every stop.

        Jones started to get consistent minutes as a Dallas Maverick in 1999-00, after being called up from the CBA. In his first game as a Mav, playing in a jersey without a name on the back of it, Jones hit for 13 points and three assists off the bench in a win over Chicago.

        From there he ended up in Vancouver (proving he could work the point off the bench), Detroit (proving he could work the point off the bench for a team that didn't suck), Sacramento (working as a shoot-first chucker for a team that needed bench scoring), Milwaukee (somehow leading the league in assist ratio: 42 percent of the possessions he used up ended up with an assist for DJ, a mark that matches Steve Nash's percentage this year), the Heat (you saw it), and now the Cavs. Throw in pre-Maverick engagements with the Warriors, Nets, and Celtics, and it's obvious that this man's been around. He deserves to be heard.

        But he doesn't deserve minutes, because he's 31, and can't really play anymore. Damon's three-point shooting mark of 39.5 percent is right in line with his career average, but he's having a harder time getting those shots off, the assists are down while the turnovers are up, and his defense is pretty peg-leggy.

        Cleveland might trade him to another team this February, only to watch as he gives his new team 12 fourth-quarter points in his first game while the TNT crew drones on about how the Cavs could still use him; but he'll be right back on the end of the bench by the time the season ends.

        It's a shame, but he's had a great run. No need to ruin it with an inglorious ending, Damon, though we suspect he's not done talking.


        http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/nba...?urn=nba,59306
        This is the darkest timeline.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: We need a trade

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Ah, thanks for reeling me in.

          How about JO for Odom/Farmar/Brown? We could throw in Diener...lol.
          Honestly I don't think that's on the table anymore either, not with that team winning games.

          Get them headed to .500, get Odom carping about playing with Kobe and get Crittenton making them feel good about letting Farmar go (or ask for Crittenton instead) and then you've got it. That was the summer situation I think, but now that's gone.

          I'm not even sure I'd like that deal, but I've resigned myself to the fact that salary cut is the next stage and playoffs are out of the picture. The thing is it's still early, they could easily be a .500 playoff team yet. It just doesn't appear headed that way now.

          In the summer I didn't like the LA deals because I wasn't ready for them to surrender totally. Looks like they might have gone ahead and done it anyway.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: We need a trade

            I think the more realistic expectations on a JO trade might be more in line with the Cavs sending Snow, Marshall and Damon Jones for him.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: We need a trade

              I think we will need to look at this realistically. How about this:

              JO/Granger (or Swill, Dunleavy) to LA for Odom/Brown/Farmar/LA 1st round pick

              We get cap room next year, a good up and coming PG and a legit position 4 player for uptempo east, and future cap room. Trade makes this year crap, but better future with picks and youth.

              After this, do a sceond trade with anyone willing to take Murphy and Tins for cap fodder. Someone will get googly eyed with an experienced PG or a shooting frontcourt player that may "put them over the top" for a pick or two. Additional cap space in the future and or picks.

              It gives us future opportunity to land big time players to replace a Reggie type player.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: We need a trade

                Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                After this, do a sceond trade with anyone willing to take Murphy and Tins for cap fodder. Someone will get googly eyed with an experienced PG or a shooting frontcourt player that may "put them over the top" for a pick or two. Additional cap space in the future and or picks.
                With the salary cap and luxury tax these days, GMs have to exercise a lot of restraint. Tinsley and Murphy is about what, $17M a year salary combined (and escalating). No matter how googly eyed they get, financial reality will usually bring them back to 20/20 sight.

                Teams can and will look to cheaper alternatives than that.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: We need a trade

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  I think the more realistic expectations on a JO trade might be more in line with the Cavs sending Snow, Marshall and Damon Jones for him.
                  J.O.'s trade value is still significantly more than just expiring. If he were going for just expiring, every non-rebuilding team in the league would be trying to work something out for him. We can get at least a good draft pick and/or a nice young prospect out of a deal. I still think Chicago, Phoenix, or the Lakers makes sense for both sides.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: We need a trade

                    We need some good early picks or to somehow free up a lot of cap space so we have the chance to inject some A grade talent into this team.

                    I'd rather blow up the team to give a chance of contending in 5 years rather than continuing on in the mediocrity of the last few seasons.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: We need a trade

                      trading with teams out of the lottery range is a bad move for rebuilding. With the way we are playing and a move for someone elses lotto pick we could get some good young talent in here, i don't want any part of anything coming out of LA or PHNX anymore, good riddance.
                      Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: We need a trade

                        YAY ... my first thread I have been able to post in since I'm a new poster...



                        I am a huge pacers fan... have been since I was a kid...

                        that being said...

                        I have a few things I wanna say regarding some of our players... I am only gonna talk about 2 right now , more will come later , but I feel these 2 must be talked about and complained about at this time...


                        The first player I wanna talk about is Travis Diener

                        He really is a good player...
                        He is VERY low on Turnovers commited , has a nice 3 , and can shoot well .. if given the floortime..

                        Thing that totally blows my mind .. is that , all I've been reading here is how we should trade Diener , and how he sucks, blah blah blah..

                        Let me ask you... how would YOU play if you hit the floor in only 10% of the games the Pacers have had this year... you only played 1 to 6 minutes (6 being probably the max) .. and the other 90% you didn't even play..???


                        I think it is a CROCK , that J.O.B. does this to Diener..

                        A few games back... Diener goes out and hit 11 points in what was it ? less than a few minutes? and had a perfect fg% on his shots that night...


                        How does J.O.B. reward him?? he benches him the next game.. THEN with Tinsley out ... he starts Andre Owens .... TOTAL slap in the face.. in my opinion... and yet Diener still has yet to get any significant minutes (that is if JOB even plays him at all) ...

                        with owens playing , I would think JOB would let Diener be his backup and play at least 20 to 25 minutes, but NOOOO he dont even play him or only gives him the last few minutes.... total CRAP


                        It's really getting old...
                        I truly believe that Diener could be another Stever Kerr / Jason Kidd .. if given the chance... TD is gonna end up being yet another Pacers player who's talent is squandered on favortism ..IMO


                        2nd

                        Jamaal Tinsley


                        I have tried to like the guy ... I really have... Now granted , I will give him credit where credit is due... he has been trying a bit more this season than in the past...
                        He has played some really good games , but half of them real stinkers.


                        But my problem with him is that he is NOT a good decision maker on the court..
                        He turns the ball over WAY too much , is a ballhog at times , dribbles WAY TOO MUCH .. and shoots too many 3's considering his 3pa isnt very good (I will give him credit for hitting a few when we needed it though)..
                        He doesnt play defense worth a crap .. ya he stalks the lanes , and is good at stealing the ball at times , but his D is horrible.. He tries too hard at times , like he is a superstar , and ends up shooting a horrible percentage , instead of doing his job as a pointguard , by distributing the ball , setting up plays , and only score when necessary , or he has a good shot , and is hot..

                        Honestly I would be happy if he only scored 10 to 15 points a game , but had 10 + assists at the very least ...

                        instead.. we have a shooting machine (with a low shot percentage), who turns the ball over quite a bit , and thinks he is better than he has shown.. (playing 30 to 40 minutes a game i might add)


                        It seems every other time both Tinsley and O'Neal are on the court , their offense seems to revert back to the Tinsley-O'Neal show .. same old ineffective 2 man show ..
                        Something has to give... This team isn't gonna flourish in JOB's uptempo offense as long as it keeps going back to "old faithful"..

                        As long as these 2 are both on the court , I personally don't see us getting much better ..

                        I like O'Neal , but he is starting to wear thin on me ..

                        I think it was Bob Kravitz that said it best , He said ...

                        .... "As long as Tinsley is our pointguard , this team will never win a championship"

                        and honestly must say I agree....
                        Last edited by Kemo; 01-03-2008, 05:19 AM.
                        "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: We need a trade

                          Originally posted by Kemo View Post

                          The first player I wanna talk about is Travis Diener

                          I think it is a CROCK , that J.O.B. does this to Diener..


                          It's really getting old...
                          I truly believe that Diener could be another Stever Kerr / Jason Kidd .. if given the chance... TD is gonna end up being yet another Pacers player who's talent is squandered on favortism ..IMO

                          I had hopes for TD, as well. I woulds say he's disappointed me. I can buy your premise, too. You would think with Tins out he'd see a little court time. But Jason Kidd? Really?
                          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                          -Emiliano Zapata

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: We need a trade

                            Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                            I had hopes for TD, as well. I woulds say he's disappointed me. I can buy your premise, too. You would think with Tins out he'd see a little court time. But Jason Kidd? Really?
                            give him 20 to 25 minutes on the court per game , or start him INSTEAD of Andre Owens.. and I can see him very well turning into an excellent point guard..


                            I , for the life of me cant understand why O'brian , hasnt played the crap out of T.D. at least shared time between him and Owens.. to see what happens... instead.. he plays owens for 40 minutes a game .. its just doeesnt make sense... I dont understand why he also plays the starters.. an extreme amt of minutes... and give DNP-CD's to most of the bench.. i just dont get it....

                            I personally don't like Andre Owens half as much as I like Diener ... to me , Owens is just a small step above Orien Green ..




                            I really wish we hadn't traded Saras .. That guy was/is amazing when he played for Maccabi Tel Aviv...

                            Carlisle screwed that guys head up... barely playing him , and trying to make him a shooting guard.. when clearly.. his specialty was to run a team as point .... in which given the minutes at point... I think we would have been quite happy with him at an uptempo offense...

                            .
                            .
                            .
                            But ya , back on T.D. , I really wish J.O.B would give him a chance .. I'd like to see Shawn Williams play more minutes as well ..
                            Last edited by Kemo; 01-03-2008, 08:41 AM.
                            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: We need a trade

                              I agree with you on Jasikevicius. He would have flourished as a leading PG in this offense, escpecially without JO.

                              Too bad he was included in the trade to get rid of Jackson!
                              Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: We need a trade

                                "I truly believe that Diener could be another Stever Kerr / Jason Kidd .. "


                                Hmm. Steve Kerr divided by Jason Kidd. A great role player divided by a great all around player...well, the greats cancel out of course, so what does role player divided by all around player equal? Bench warmer is what I come up with. Yea, that probably roughly describes Travis Diener's ceiling.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X