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

NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

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

  • #31
    Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

    I like how this guy completely ignores the fact that David West has been a force.

    Averaging 18.5ppg, 10rpg, 46% FG, 85% FT

    Yeah, because it's clear West doesn't know how to play.

    In conclusion, who cares with this douchenozzle thinks. There'll be plenty of national attention assuming the Pacers get to the second round.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

      so far, it has been an ugly series between two teams that don't look like they belong in the playoffs. the only way for the pacers to get the respect we all feel they deserve is to play better. more play like the start of the game and the 3rd quarter and less like the 2nd quarter. pretty simple. win the series in 5 games and the first game will be seen as a abnormality. take 7 games to win and get laughed at in print.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

        He's a writer for ESPN New York as well as nba.com. And his attitude definitely reflects the New York fan stereotype of no plethora of stars == bad team.

        And you could make the argument that this series isn't thrilling to watch because of 2 teams struggling to score. Though honestly, theres been a lot of good defensive attention. But he's not making that argument. He's saying it's not fun because there's no superstar. There's no easy storyline of 1 guy taking over. That's why Glen Davis is "the best player" and not David West - it makes a better story.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

          Originally posted by pezasied182 View Post
          Uhh Sunday? Or is Bynum not a true center?
          Bynum did it the day after Hibbert almost did it. So, his argument stands. It was a really long time before the game 1.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

            I could tell you that I would not watch this series if I wasn't a Pacers fan, this first two games have been anything but exciting.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              Bynum did it the day after Hibbert almost did it. So, his argument stands. It was a really long time before the game 1.
              Okay. That still doesn't begin to explain how on earth he could think that Bynum is more power forward than center.

              Chris Paul isn't a true point guard. He's more shooting guard. Because I've seen him shoot.

              Kobe Bryant isn't a true wing. He's more of a traditional center type. Because he tries to score out of the post some.

              Seriously, if Bynum isn't the very definition of a true center, there is no such thing.
              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

              -Lance Stephenson

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                I see. And why exactly do we need to care about what he thinks?
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                  Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                  Okay. That still doesn't begin to explain how on earth he could think that Bynum is more power forward than center.
                  I never said that it explained this. Bynum is a true Center in my books. He has no Power Forward skills whatsoever. Frankly, I don't know how he could think this. But it's his opinion and even though I disagree I have to respect it.

                  That said, I was only arguing that he had a point because if Roy made it he would have done it the day before Bynum. And it was a long time before that weekend that a 10/10/10 (with the last 10 being blocks) occurred in the playoffs.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                    This is another recent article by Powell concerning Game 2:

                    INDIANAPOLIS — The Pacers figured the best way to prevent from blowing a close game is by not playing a close game.And so common sense has crept back into the Pacers-Magic series after a brief yet bombastic stretch late in the opener, when the Pacers grabbed their throats and the Magic grabbed a 1-0 lead.Suddenly, after a 93-78 victory, the Pacers are back to being a semi-dangerous title threat when they share the ball and play terrific defense and close out strong, all of which happened on a satisfying night at Bankers Life Fieldhouse. The third quarter was divine for Indiana, clearly their best 12-minute stretch of playoff basketball this season. They outscored Orlando 30-13, outrebounded the Magic 16-4 and forced six turnovers. Ballgame, basically. All they had to do was hold on, and that was no problem against an overmatched Orlando team that finally ran out of effort.If the Pacers can bottle up whatever worked in that third quarter, they would resemble the team that beat all the title threats during the regular season and finished No. 3 in the East. And yet they’ve looked anything but sturdy and confident against an Orlando team playing without Dwight Howard.In addition, the best player on the floor has been Howard’s replacement, Big Baby Davis, who once again looked like a power drill, blowing through the Indiana defense for offensive rebounds and layups. While George Hill, Danny Granger and David West all scored 18 points each, they also all had shaky moments. And collectively, the Pacers didn’t shoot well, only 43 percent.At least they know what’s the problem.“We haven’t played with our usual intensity,” said Hill. “That first game took us by surprise and so we had to increase our effort.”With the series shifting to Orlando, they need to pack that third quarter in their suitcases. Because the Magic clearly aren’t packing it in.

                    I personally don't understand the obsession he has with Big Baby's performance and deeming him the best player in the series. SVG said himself that while Davis had a great first half that he essentially disappeared in the second half going 5 for 16. Yeah, the way he's playing in the absence of Howard is great for Orlando, but I don't think that automatically makes him the best player in this series.
                    I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                      Chill guys. For one I said I consider Bynum a power forward type. Not that he is definitely a power forward, just that he plays like one in my opinion. That's because I think he plays more the banger power forward role, and I really don't believe he is a true 7 footer and he definitely is a good 3 inches smaller than Hibbert and does not have as big of a wing span. It's just my opinion, but "true" centers are always above 7 foot, not just listed that way, and have crazy long wing spans. I think he is 6'10, almost 6'11, and I think Hibbert is probably 7'1. I also think a true center has a balance between finesse and power, where the power forward type center is more all about power. I think Hakeem was a true center and Shaq was more the power forward playing center, even though Shaq was a true 7 footer. He just didn't seem to have athe wingspan as say Hibbert or Hakeem or Smits. Even though both were Hall of Fame centers, and Shaq is the best I ever saw play that position over a career, I still give Hakeem the nod of being the "true center," while Shaq was the power forward/center hybrid that dominated that position in my book.

                      Hibbert=Hakeem lite

                      Bynum=Shaq lite

                      But to be honest I don't watch him play enough to be a fair judge. I just remember Hibbert playing very well against him and Hibbert looked more like a "true" center to me the few times I have seen them play each other. I also won't argue that he was the first center to do it since Hakeem, he was. I'm more upset that Hibbert, after it looked like he would for sure be the first, didn't do it and we lost in the process. Hibbert almost did it a couple of times a few years back but JOB benched him both times. I know he would have pulled it off eventually, but Bynum beat Hibbert to it the very next day after he was the closest he had ever been. He needed two points, 1 block, and maybe a rebound at the beginning of the third. I was sure it was a lock. We can argue semantics all we want but it's just my opinion.
                      Last edited by Midcoasted; 05-02-2012, 12:31 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                        Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                        Chill guys. For one I said I consider Bynum a power forward type. Not that he is definitely a power forward, just that he plays like one in my opinion. That's because I think he plays more the banger power forward role, and I really don't believe he is a true 7 footer and he definitely is a good 3 inches smaller than Hibbert and does not have as big of a wing span. It's just my opinion, but "true" centers are always above 7 foot, not just listed that way, and have crazy long wing spans. I think he is 6'10, almost 6'11, and I think Hibbert is probably 7'1. I also think a true center has a balance between finesse and power, where the power forward type center is more all about power. I think Hakeem was a true center and Shaq was more the power forward playing center, even though Shaq was a true 7 footer. He just didn't seem to have athe wingspan as say Hibbert or Hakeem or Smits. Even though both were Hall of Fame centers, and Shaq is the best I ever saw play that position over a career, I still give Hakeem the nod of being the "true center," while Shaq was the power forward/center hybrid that dominated that position in my book.

                        Hibbert=Hakeem lite

                        Bynum=Shaq lite

                        But to be honest I don't watch him play enough to be a fair judge. I just remember Hibbert playing very well against him and Hibbert looked more like a "true" center to me the few times I have seen them play each other. I also won't argue that he was the first center to do it since Hakeem, he was. I'm more upset that Hibbert, after it looked like he would for sure be the first, didn't do it and we lost in the process. Hibbert almost did it a couple of times a few years back but JOB benched him both times. I know he would have pulled it off eventually, but Bynum beat Hibbert to it the very next day after he was the closest he had ever been. He needed two points, 1 block, and maybe a rebound at the beginning of the third. I was sure it was a lock. We can argue semantics all we want but it's just my opinion.
                        So is Magic Johnson not a PG then, because he's 6'9?!?! I'm sorry, but this is asinine...

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        I see. And why exactly do we need to care about what he thinks?
                        And why exactly do you need to care about us caring? Why do you care what anyone thinks? Why do any of us care what anyone thinks?

                        I'm sorry Nuntius, but your post was pretty asinine too...
                        Last edited by TheDavisBrothers; 05-02-2012, 01:27 AM.
                        Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                          Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                          He's a writer for ESPN New York as well as nba.com. And his attitude definitely reflects the New York fan stereotype of no plethora of stars == bad team.
                          Well, we're just going to have to trade for Amare and punch right through that glass ceiling.
                          You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                            Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
                            And why exactly do you need to care about us caring? Why do you care what anyone thinks? Why do any of us care what anyone thinks?

                            I'm sorry Nuntius, but your post was pretty asinine too...
                            I don't need to care. Which is exactly my point. You have every right to care if you want. I was just saying that not anyone has to care about what a writer says. It's his opinion. Personally, I'll ignore it.

                            Why? Because I disagree with his main point. I don't believe that a basketball game needs superstars to be interesting. This season I watched more Milwaukee, Denver and New Orleans games than I did with Miami, Lakers or Clippers games. It's a matter of preference. It's a matter of choice.

                            Yes, my post was asinine. But that's because I think that his article was asinine as well.

                            He has every right to his opinion. Similarly, I have every right to disagree with him. And that's exactly what my original response conveyed
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                              Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
                              So is Magic Johnson not a PG then, because he's 6'9?!?! I'm sorry, but this is asinine...
                              He was not a TRUE point guard by any means. True point guards are more like John Stockton or Mark Jackson, and less like Magic. Magic was a freak of nature who just so happened to run the point. That does not change the fact he was better at playing that position than Stockton or Jackson, he was. I think of him more as a point forward, or a forward who could run the point. Just like I say Shaq was a power forward who could play the center position better than any "true" centers during his time. It is a way I classify players in my own opinion, and obviously you take issue with it.

                              It won't change my mind no matter how much more you think are right than me. You can't prove my opinion wrong. If you can, please provide some concrete evidence that proves my logic is flawed. Otherwise your just arguing your opinion against mine.

                              Want another example? Paul George is not a true shooting guard, but Jordan was. Regardless of the effectiveness of either at that position, I classify Jordan as a true shooting guard, while Paul George isn't a true shooting guard because a player like him typically seems to play small forward or stretch 4. Troy Murphy is a stretch four, Tyler Hansbrough is a true PF. See how this works?
                              Last edited by Midcoasted; 05-02-2012, 03:31 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: NBA.com Article Dissing Both Orlando and Indiana

                                Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                                And to the individual who said Bynum is more of a power forward....cmon man...arent u the same guy that said George should be replaced by Lance Stephenson in the starting lineup???? I cant tell if u just say these things to get a rise out of people or u actually believe them. Im really hoping the former is true, because otherwise, 'you just be trippin'
                                I actually think Stephenson can be a better two guard than George in the future. My scenario was down 0-2, or even 0-3, because Stephenson showed he has more natural ability to play the two when he played against the best defense in the NBA while they were still playing to win and did really well and has more confidence in his shot. I just am starting to realize George would make a better 3 than a two because of match-ups. Also Stephenson is a great ball handler, where PG just isn't. Collison can also run the point at times allowing Collison or George to play shooting guard and George can't. Moving George to the bench would also increase the defense and scoring coming off the bench, which we desperately need.

                                Again my opinion. How can anyone prove me wrong unless they are the coach and start one every other game at the 2? I could be right, I could be wrong, but it's just my intuition that I am expressing to fellow fans on a message board for entertainment. Obviously people have taken issue with many of my posts over the years. Like when I believed we weren't the least talented team in the NBA last year because of guys like Collison, Hibbert, Hansbrough, George, and Granger. Or that we weren't that far away from being a top 5 team. But over 90 percent of the forum would have said I was nuts. Sure we have added a lot of talent to that core, but that was not the least talented group in the NBA.
                                Last edited by Midcoasted; 05-02-2012, 03:34 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X