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

Nice article found on Roy Hibbert

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nice article found on Roy Hibbert

    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.co...bert-season-2/

    NBA Experts Discuss Roy Hibbert
    by Jared Wade on January 29, 2010 at 12:00 pm


    The development of Roy Hibbert is perhaps the largest issue in Pacers Nation this season. Danny’s regression from last year has been troubling, but I think we are all still confident about what Indy has in Granger: a not-quite-elite-but-damn-close scorer who is (a) one of the best shooters in the league, (b) can more than hold his own on the defensive end, and (c) is signed to a very reasonable, long-term contract.

    What we don’t know exactly yet is whether or not Hibbert can ever become that dependable third player that the Pacers will need alongside Danny and [insert name of marquee free agent acquisition/draft pick here] if they want to get back to Eastern Conference Finals contender status and turn Larry Bird’s “three-year plan” faux-rebuild into anything more than a waste of everyone’s time.

    From all the game recaps and the other mid-year analysis stuff we’ve been doing of late, you should already have a good idea of how we here at 8p9s feel about Roy. But to add to some other perspectives, we figured we would reach out to some of the best NBA writers/bloggers around and see what they thought of the big fella. Here is a sampling of what some of the most intelligent NBA minds I know think about Mr. Hibbert.



    Tom Lewis, Indy Cornrows
    It’s been nice to see Hibbert’s game gradually evolve as his minutes have gradually increased. Envisioning a future with Roy as a third scoring option, with a reliable post game and a 17-foot-driving-opponents-nuts shot is a reality — well, that is if the Pacers can find a legit first and second scoring option.

    Hibbert works hard on his game and seeing the post moves already becoming routine and the 15-footer becoming more of a reality is proof. Whenever I saw his pregame work in his rookie season, he was working on that Smits-special, mid-range shot. It always looked good but he rarely shot it during games. This year, when he’s open, the shot is up. Now he just has to work on finding his rhythm and not rushing the shot.

    Another improvement this year has been Hibbert’s ability to stay on the court. He hasn’t figured out the whole defensive thing, but he seems to have figured out how to avoid the senseless fouls that tethered him to the bench so much last year. So, the physical developments along with the great spirit and effort he brings to the roster make him a popular player and a player worth investing the time in developing, just as long as the expectations remain reasonable.

    Tom Ziller, NBA FanHouse & Sactown Royalty
    That Roy Hibbert can block shots and score a bit in the NBA isn’t surprising: that’s what he did at Georgetown. Given his size and hands, you would’ve hoped he could rebound better than he has. But if you followed his college career, you wouldn’t have held your breath. And that’s really the problem with Hibbert: the Pacers, to be competitive, have to play Roy next to a dirty-work power forward, someone who can soak up the defensive rebounds and defend away from the hoop. But dirty work power forwards don’t tend to score much, and Hibbert probably can’t ever do much better than 15 points a game, so you’re putting oodles of pressure on Danny Granger and the backcourt to score a load of points every night. (This is why Troy Murphy — a rebounding scorer — is actually a good fit next to Hibbert, record be damned.) Certainly, for a mid-first round pick, Hibbert is on track. But if you were hoping for a franchise center, well then you need to keep looking.

    Kevin Arnovitz, TrueHoop & ClipperBlog
    I think a lot of people slept on Hibbert because he was an older player who came to an increasingly perimeter-oriented league with a traditional big man skill set. I caught a little of that game against New Orleans and a couple of things stood out:

    ■Hibbert has very soft hands and is able to catch the ball in traffic then finish. This makes him a valuable pick-and-roll guy, which, in most systems around the league, is 50 percent of a center’s grade.
    ■There were a couple of times when he sealed off Okafor beautifully after Emeka fronted him. Hibbert waited patiently until the ball went to the other side of the floor then spun around Okafor to get the angle for the entry pass and then finished.
    ■Like his up-and-under move. Not much power, though.
    ■Understands where he’s supposed to be on the basketball court moment to moment. Knows when he needs to clear and drag his guy out. Defensively, adopting more of Camby/basket protector game. Haven’t studied him enough defending the pick-and-roll to get a feel for how well he’s doing in that capacity.
    Need to watch more of RH. For obvious reasons, I don’t tune in much to the Pacers (those two games vs. the Clips were enough).


    Rob Mahoney, The Two Man Game & Hardwood Paroxysm

    Roy Hibbert’s game is tasteful. Understated. He’s the rug that really brings the room together. He’s the type of guy that you could walk all over every day without giving him a second’s notice, but if that guy/rug were to be, say, stolen? Well, that’s a whole ‘nother story.

    I get the vibe that Hibbert will end up living out the rest of his career in more or less the same way: he’ll continue to contribute as a dying breed of dinosaur center, and said contributions will be perennially undervalued. Roy’s weaknesses are so well-defined (rebounding, fouling, lateral movement) that they often obscure his strengths. I don’t know if he’s mobile enough to be a game-changer on the defensive end, but how many centers in this league can hit that drop-step hook on a regular basis? It’s well into the single digits, and puts Hibbert in some good company (Yao, Bogut, Gasol & Gasol, Kaman, Jefferson).

    Roy’s no star, but he’s certainly a starting caliber center if he can keep his fouls down. And he’s just 23! I worry about how low his ceiling may be, but look at the per minute comparison between Hibbert, Pau and Marc Gasol, and Chris Kaman at age 23 (or 24 for Marc, because of his late arrival in the NBA). Roy is killing it with the blocks, and is essentially on pace in every other significant statistical category. This guy is going to be good (maybe not Pau Gasol good, but good enough), if the Pacers are willing to be patient.

    John Karalis, Red’s Army
    Right now, Roy Hibbert is both sides of the same coin. Forget game-to-game … he’s at a point right now where you might not know what you’ll get from possession-to-possession. But that’s no shock. Young NBA big men are about as consistent as the Wu Tang Clan nowadays: equal parts stunning and crappy all in the same package. Especially when the surrounding cast is … let’s say … questionable.

    But Hibbert has shown enough to prove he belongs in the League. While he can use more polish on the post, he’s show he’s nimble enough right now to get his shot off. While he could probably stand work on his conditioning, he’s been out there on the break. He’ll grab a few rebounds. He’ll block a few shots. He is, in short, an NBA center.

    And in time he’ll become a better NBA center. He might never become a double-double machine. I’d say he could be a 13-15 ppg/8-9 rpg guy. He’ll ultimately be the kind of center that you won’t have to worry about. And with the right players around him, he might have stretches where he’s better than that.

    Zach Harper, Talk Hoops, Cowbell Kingdom & Hardwood Paroxysm
    This is going to sound like an insult but Roy Hibbert reminds me of Rasho Nesterovic. He needs a big man like Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan next to him thrive. Now clearly, those are once (well, twice) in a lifetime time big men to get paired with. However, Roy Hibbert seems like he’ll grow into the perfect complimentary big man. I see him figuring out how to be a secondary big man the same way Kendrick Perkins does. He’s very solid all the way around. Obviously, the closer he is to the basket, the better he is as most centers tend to be. He’s not a good rebounder, but he’s not really all that bad. He’s a decent defender. He can score the ball competently. With the way the center position has deteriorated over the last decade, he’s easily a starting center in this league. He (or Larry Bird, rather) needs to find him a really good power forward to play off of. When that happens, you’ll see him blossom into a valuable asset.

    Marcel Mutoni, SLAM
    I watched a half of the game. The rape and pillaging was indeed delightful to witness (Ed note: Marcel likes him some Lakers). Below are my hastily assembled notes:

    ■Pacers’ color analyst mentioned that Bynum and Gasol made Roy Hibbert “uncomfortable.” This, from what I could tell, consisted mostly of Andrew and Pau simply putting their arms up.
    ■Though a solid scorer (tonight was his 23rd double-digit scoring game, matching last season’s total) Hibbert is an awful rebounder. For a big man — hell, the tallest dude on the team — his production on the boards is truly abysmal.
    ■Clunky, yet effective moves in the post. Even unleashed a poor man’s Kareem skyhook at one point. Also showed some surprising range on an 18-footer late in 3rd quarter.
    ■Needs to work on assertiveness. Not once did I feel like I was watching a 7-footer.
    ■Hibbert’s future is a bright one: numbers up from last year in every meaningful statistical category. If he can stay healthy (missed 12 games last season), there’s no reason he won’t continue to improve. Just gotta figure out that whole rebounding thing, and he’ll be fine.

    Royce Young, Daily Thunder
    On the surface, Roy Hibbert isn’t all that impressive. He appears to lumber up and down the floor, looks unathletic and his overall demeanor seems a little — what’s the word? — lazy. But when OKC played Indiana a month ago, I was absolutely impressed. Hibbert was dominant in college mainly because he was bigger than everyone else. And I think he had some difficulty adapting to not being able to muscle everyone when he arrived in the NBA.

    But he’s developed some serious skills. His hands are remarkably soft. He’s deceptively athletic (he pulled a pretty up-and-under against the Thunder that was surprisingly pretty). His technique is solid and he does a solid job using his size to find a comfortable spot on the post. His footwork is improved, and he pulled out a nice little drop-step move and a baby hook that were basically undefendable.

    I don’t think Hibbert is going to be the next GREAT Georgetown big man, but he’s a quality player. And he’s the type of guy at least 20 other teams would love to have. He’s a big man that can rebound, score on the block and defend the rim. He got into foul trouble in OKC and Thunder fans were thankful for it, because OKC simply didn’t have an answer.

    Related Topics: John Karalis, Kevin Arnovitz, Marcel Mutoni, Rob Mahoney, Roy Hibbert, Roy Hibbert: Season 2, Royce Young, Tom Lewis, Tom Ziller, Zach Harper

    No Hibbert in Rookie/Sophomore Game
    by Jared Wade on January 28, 2010 at 9:06 am


    With Danny Granger certain to miss this year’s All-Star Game, Roy Hibbert was probably the only person with a shot at representing Indy in Dallas this February. But as we learned yesterday, the big fella didn’t make the cut for the Rookie/Sophomore Game. And looking at all the highly qualified sophomores on the roster, Pacer fans can’t even be too upset.

    Here are the lineups for the Rookie/Sophomore Game.



    Really, the only second-year guy that Hibbert may have even had a shot of displacing from a talent standpoint is Kevin Love, but even though he missed significant time, Love’s numbers ultimately dwarf Roy’s. Honestly, had AJ Price started getting playing time back in November, it’s probably more likely that he could have beat out Jonas Jerebko or Taj Gibson than it is that Roy would have made the team. (Then again, more minutes for AJ could also have exposed him as not ready for prime-time. I like the kid, but the jury is still definitely out. And realizing as I type this that Ty Lawson didn’t even make the squad, the previous sentence I just typed is patently absurd.)

    More important than some silly exhibition game that no one watches, however, is finding out what this team actually has in Roy Hibbert. That’s the larger issue for the team, obviously. So this does provide us with a nice opportunity to look at “Roy Hibbert: Season 2.” Is he the next great offensive big man in this league? Is he a potential All-Star? Is he good enough to build around? Is he a starter? Is he a good big off the bench? Is he a slow, non-rebounding bum who will be an also-ran in three years?

    Who knows?

    To begin delving deeping into “Roy Hibbert: Season 2,” let’s start by comparing him to the rest of his peers statistically. The following are a bunch of numbers to show how Roy stacks up next to all the second-year guys playing in this year’s sophomore game.

    Here are the straight production stats per game, broken up into two charts:



    Interesting. From a points and boards perspective, he’s clearly not lighting the world on fire. But as I’m sure you’ve noticed, Roy gets the fewest minutes of any of these guys, so this probably isn’t the ultimate barometer of how he has fared versus the others, even when we factor in that he’s the oldest of the bunch — a notable distinction.

    So let’s equalize the minutes and look at the number per-36 minutes:

    Things look better here. His rebounding numbers are still not impressive, but we already knew that. His scoring per-36 also doesn’t suggest that he’s out-pacing his peers, but he is right there with heralded young guys like Danilo, OJ, Westbrook, Love and even Indiana’s own Eric Gordon. The blocks are clearly the most promising category here, and he is significantly better than everyone, including Brook Lopez, who has played well enough this year to make some people even talk about him as an All-Star candidate despite that fact that he plays for perhaps the worst team in NBA history.

    Moving on, for those into this type of stuff, here’s how they all stack up according to “advanced stat” metrics:

    Looking at PER, everyone aside from the cream of the crop (Brook, Kevin Love and Derrick Rose) is between 15.5 and 16.9. And Roy is right there at 16.1. Roy’s defensive rebound rate of 16.7 is again troubling for a 7′2″ 23-year-old, particularly when we see that he is being bested here by even Michael Beasley — a much shorter, more perimeter-oriented guy who is routinely criticized for his inability to rebound. Then again, these numbers reinforce the fact that Roy has been the best shot-blocker of any second-year player listed here so far this year. But on another negative note, Hibbert also turns the ball over at a disturbing rate.

    Something else I find interesting that he’s 5th out of these nine guys in usage, which shows that despite many of us in Pacerland’s complaints, he is actually getting just as many touches as many of his peers, yet is still unable to score as well as as guys like Brook, Beasley, Love or Mayo. This suggest that his shooting percentages need to go up if he wants to become a guy who demands a double team.

    So that’s what the numbers say.

    We’ll continue looking at “Roy Hibbert: Season 2″ as the year goes on and we’ll have some better qualitative assessments from some other notable NBA minds before the week is out. Look for that later today or tomorrow.



    Often described as a dinosaur playing in a league of quicker, smaller mammals, Roy Hibbert’s numbers are in some respects comparable to his draft class. But in other ways, we can clearly see why he is still a step below the others.
    Last edited by Hibbert; 02-03-2010, 11:26 PM. Reason: Adding text

  • #2
    Re: Nice article found on Roy Hibbert

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50491


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

    Comment

    Working...
    X