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

Postseason Sleeper Candidates

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

  • Postseason Sleeper Candidates

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...ayoff-runs-nba

    We head into this postseason with five legitimate title contenders -- the Miami Heat and Chicago Bulls in the Eastern Conference, and Oklahoma City Thunder, San Antonio Spurs and Los Angeles Lakers in the West. If any other team reaches the Finals, or even the conference finals, it will be a surprise. So what teams have the best chance of surprising one or more of the elite?

    To get our answer, we turned to two NBA scouts -- guys with years of experience scouting teams around the league. While I would have picked Boston and New York as my prime spoiler candidates, our Eastern scout instead went with Indiana and New York. Out West, our scout agreed with my choices of Memphis and the Clippers as the most likely clubs to knock off a contender.

    Here are the scouts' opinions:

    Eastern Conference


    New York Knicks
    East scout: "They've got a really talented roster. Their record is a head scratcher because I think they have as much talent as Chicago, if not more. Carmelo Anthony has been playing great recently, they've got a 3-point specialist in Steve Novak, and J.R. Smith can either win you a game or lose you a game every time out. If Baron Davis or Mike Bibby can get healthy or play halfway to their old abilities, this is a dangerous team.


    "And the biggest difference in this team the last few weeks is that Mike Woodson is holding them accountable on defense. Tyson Chandler has been huge on defense all season long. I love that guy. He defends, he dives for loose balls, he hustles, he takes charges, he rebounds and he covers up a lot of mistakes.

    "The dynamic between Anthony and Amare Stoudemire is one of the Knicks' biggest problems. I don't think they can play together. Anthony and Stoudemire are very similar in that they've both got sticky fingers. The ball goes to them and they're used to being the focal point; they're used to getting isos. So they spend the next 7-8 seconds sizing up their defender or waiting to see how the defense is playing them.

    "That's not conducive to the other's game. It's a your-turn, my-turn thing, so it's hard to get into the flow. When you've got two guys like that who are healthy and very gifted offensively, you may be able to pull it off -- kind of like LeBron James and Dwyane Wade. But when one's not healthy or what he used to be, like Stoudemire is now, it doesn't work.

    "And the problem isn't just on offense. Stoudemire has been at times the worst defender on the whole team, so you lose something when he's out there. And now he's not rebounding as much as he used to.

    "But the Knicks' saving grace could be all their talent and offensive firepower. Whether they play Chicago or Miami, they're going to be the underdog, but I would say they match up better with Chicago. If the Bulls don't win the game in the 80-point range, they could have trouble because it'll be tough for them to score in the 90s. And the Knicks can go on spurts and catch fire offensively.

    "I'm always the guy who says defense and rebounding wins, but with the injury to Rose, to go in and expect John Lucas and C.J. Watson and even Rip Hamilton to get it done consistently...I just don't see it. It's a lot harder for role players to do it consistently in the playoffs. So I could see the Knicks, because of their ability to go on a run on offense and the fact that they're now playing strong defense under Woodson, giving Chicago some real problems."



    Indiana Pacers
    East scout: "I really like Indiana. The addition of David West was huge for them. He hasn't been a star who's put up flashy, gaudy numbers, but he's been consistent and professional for them. Roy Hibbert has improved tremendously. He's now a post presence, a guy you can throw the ball to and he'll score if you don't double team him.

    "The Pacers are tough, they're gritty and they're long. They're not a sexy pick, but I think they can be a tough out. I give them a shot at upsetting Miami or Chicago because as great as those teams are, they're both flawed.

    "Chicago, in particular, has a problem because of the injury to Derrick Rose. The Bulls are one of the best defensive teams I've seen in many years, plus they rebound, but they just can't score. They go through stretches where they'll put up nine points for a whole quarter.

    "I'd still pick the Bulls to win the series, but they definitely wouldn't be on cruise control if they faced the Pacers. Frank Vogel's got a great staff, their starting five is good, they're deep, they can run, they can score in the halfcourt and they can defend.

    "The one thing they don't have is that one guy you can go to late in games, that star -- unless they change the way they've been doing things and staring going to West late. I think West can be that guy, that guy they feed in the fourth quarter and at the end of games. He's a pick-and-pop guy, he's got post moves, he can stretch you out on the floor and he's got a midrange game. If they milk him, then yes, they could pull an upset. But if they don't go to him and try to go to Danny Granger or Hibbert or Tyler Hansbrough or whoever, I don't like their chances as much.

    "Bottom line, I don't think they're as talented as the top two teams, but I wouldn't be completely shocked and surprised if they made some noise and even upset one of them."


    Western Conference


    Los Angeles Clippers
    West scout: "The two teams I like outside of the top three look like they're going to meet in the first round in the 4-5 matchup -- the Clippers and the Grizzlies. That's a seven-game series, and I think I like the Clippers a little bit more because of Chris Paul. He's the best player on the court in that series and he can carry a team. He's the best point guard in the league and just a terrific player.

    "Then, the Clippers' frontline is so big that they can match up with Memphis. DeAndre Jordan can really guard the basket, so in the halfcourt, the rest of the team should be able to defend because they've got a shot blocker behind them.

    "The Clippers' biggest issue is that they can't shoot free throws and that will hurt them late in games because teams will foul them. Their whole frontline can't shoot free throws -- Blake Griffin, Jordan, Reggie Evans, Kenyon Martin. That's a really big disadvantage for them because in the playoffs, it becomes a halfcourt, grind-it-out game."



    Memphis Grizzlies
    West scout: "I like the Grizzlies' toughness. They are really a tough team, they play hard and they play very good defense. I like the way they approach the game. Lionel Hollins is a very good coach. His team plays like he played as a player -- with a lot of intensity.

    "Bringing Zach Randolph off the bench has given them a different look, because it's always a good thing when a guy can come off the bench and get points for you like that. But if they're going to get to the second round, I don't think that's how they should play; I think they should start Randolph in the playoffs.

    "There are two reasons why. For one, I don't know how you're going to use him as a utility player for a spark in a seven-game series; the guy has been a starter his whole career. And second, it's always an advantage when you can score in the low post, and that's what Randolph can do as well as anyone in the league. A lot of teams in this league can't really score inside. There's a lot of spacing the floor, drive-and-kick, spread-out-and-shoot-it stuff. But when you've got a guy who can score and get to the free-throw line and who may be the best player in the league on the block, that's a big advantage. And Marc Gasol can play up high and score from the high post so he doesn't get in Randolph's way.

    "All of this said, I can't see them upsetting San Antonio this year. I think San Antonio's going to be tough to beat."

  • #2
    Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

    Sounds pretty fair.

    I think Danny has a chance to re-make his name around the NBA this post-season. We've seen Danny be an ice-in-the-veins killer late in games this season, and I'm sure he'll have the opportunity to do it on a grander stage over the next few weeks.

    He won't be the new LeBron or Kobe, but I think he can put a stop to a lot of this "they don't have a go-to guy" crap we've been hearing. Sure, the presence of DWest, Roy, PG24, and GH3 make it a little easier for Danny - but isn't the idea to have the best TEAM anyways?

    Uh oh gang... I think I've gone full Kool Aid drinker just now.

    PACERS ALL THE WAY!!
    It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

      This sounds like a guy who hasn't watched a Pacer game all year and just reads box scores.


      Carmel HS Class of 2011

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

        Man, knowing that tomorrow we're not playing with Granger and it's more of a whatever game for both teams really despite the fact that either side doesn't like the other. I just am ready for the playoffs to get here, and that can't happen soon enough.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

          I really fancy the Grizz to beat the Clippers.
          https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

          Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

            Granger has actually been a pretty darn good closer for years, he was one of the top clutch/ fourth quarter guys his All-Star/Breakout year too, and has been great at it this year as well. He can get off the mid-ranged jumper consistently over defenses, is dangerous coming off of screens and has a post game as well.

            I think alot of these national media types will be pleasantly suprised by our first option this post-season.
            Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

              Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
              I really fancy the Grizz to beat the Clippers.
              Yep.

              You have to stop/slow down CP3, and you're good.

              Blake won't go out and win games for this team, fouls too much etc. Not to mention he's a late game liability with his 40%ish FT shooting.

              The Grizz, much like the Pacers, are truly a "team". Z-Bo can beat you, Mayo can beat you, Gay can beat you, Gasol can beat you. Then they have a solid distributor in Conley, defender in Tony etc...

              I'm with you. Grizz in 6 for me.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
                I really fancy the Grizz to beat the Clippers.
                Yea, at the beginning of the year they where the trendy pick after last year's playoff run, then Randolph got injuried and they where kinda forgotten about, but now that Randolph is back they are back to being a very dangerous team. If Randolph was healthy all year, I think they could have been fighting the 3rd best record in the NBA with Miami and OKC...
                Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                  Originally posted by Derek2k3 View Post
                  I'm with you. Grizz in 6 for me.
                  Same here...

                  I did my own early bracket when I was bored over the weekend...

                  I've also got them upsetting San An for the second year in a row in 7 games...

                  And then I've got them losing in 6 to OKC...
                  Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                    Yeah I see alot of the Grizz in the Pacers.

                    Granger>Gay
                    West=ZBo (This year, Zbo isn't 100 percent yet or not performing like it and West has really upped his game in april)
                    Hibbert=Gasol
                    George> Allen
                    Hill=< Conley
                    Barbosa Collison>Arenas
                    Hansbrough= Jones>Pondexter
                    Lou> Haddadi

                    That method of comparison is imperfect of course, and i'd say the Grizz are a slightly better defensive team, while we're a slightly more dangerous offensive team.

                    But both teams have guys that can realistically give you 20+ any given night (Granger/Hibbert/West/Hill/George and Gasol/Zbo/Gay/Mayo) And others that can easily go 15-20 on any given night (Collison/Hansbrough/Barbosa and Conley/ speights)

                    Pacers are a bit longer, but the Grizzlies are a bit quicker/ more pesky on defense. Both teams have a real shot at knocking out a "contending" team that is supposedly soo much better than they are.
                    Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                      I don't think he gave Granger enough credit but I will admit that he's right about West. West has proven to be pretty clutch, especially during the last 20 games or so.

                      At the very least West should be the 2nd choice if the defense tries to double Danny late in close games.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                        I think Granger's new found post game has totally transformed him offensively. You can tell there are stretches where Danny just can't get by his man or get that separation. What does he do? Post em up, use that strength to get in the paint and pull up for the easy J. Really a different player this year.
                        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                          I think a lot of analysts miss what those truly great superstars bring to their team. It's not closing out. What they really do, as Bill Simmons just nailed in his last column, is they score points when your offense just sputters and dies.

                          That's what Kobe brings to the Lakers for instance. On the other hand, Kobe has for years caused the Lakers to underperform in late game situations, but fortunately for them, normally the Lakers were usually already up late in the game because of Kobe's play earlier in the game.

                          We got a guy that can truly hit clutch shots. Granger can and will all day long. He's proven it. And proven in a completely legit way, not in an entirely made up fantasy like Kobe supposed "clutch" play. (ha!)

                          This is why I want us to get Deron Williams so bad. As that great facilitator he'd make the rest of the team much better, but he'd bring that one aspect, and thats when the Pacers are falling on their faces at a particular time, Deron can take over and create offense for himself, keeping the Pacers in the game. We desperately need that one aspect to make us a true contender. How we'll get it I don't know, but we shall see.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Postseason Sleeper Candidates

                            West has been brilliant in the ALMOST clutch situations, scoring well from 5 minutes to 90 seconds left, but after that we've had several games where they tried to go through him for the winner (like the Houston game in regulation,) and he's missed. It almost seems to be exhaustion by that point after carrying the load for good portion of the minutes just prior to that point.

                            West did have that Toronto clutch shot with 9 seconds left though. edit - the more I look the more I realize he was probably the most clutch guy out there...if they can get him the ball.



                            OTOH when they try to work with Paul he's just way too careless for clutch moments. Roy is too easy to force out of a play with aggressive doubles, and again you are typically having Paul feed him and you're back to TO issues again.

                            Danny seems to have been slightly better than the rest of the group for clutch late scores and that's who I'd still trust. Of course George Hill has come up with some big plays, including the "steal" and layup vs the Warriors.




                            As for the insight, well gee, you name 5 teams which leaves 11, then you pick the highest seeds not already named and you ignore the team with the injured star (Orlando) and who's left out? Boston, Atlanta and massively slumping Philly and slightly slumping Dallas and the teams scrambling to make the playoffs in the West.

                            I just don't get how a 40 win team this year is a freaking sleeper. Memphis and Indy aren't sleepers, they are strong teams that for some (market) reason people want to continue to ignore...until someone flips it up and uses that ignored status to return them to contender status (which a 40 win team is) and label them sleeper.

                            Sheesh.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-24-2012, 04:30 PM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X