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

Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

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

  • #91
    Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    When they say that Roy sucks offensively, I have no reason to disagree.

    But when they are saying that he didn't deserve the max contract then I just have to emphasize on his defense. If he was a bad defender (a la Jefferson) then his contract couldn't be justified when he's in a shooting slump. But he's a beast on D and that's what justifies his contract at the moment.
    It justifies the biggest part part of his contract but not all of it.
    Never forget

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

      Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
      you cant pay 4 guys or thereabouts the max...
      Memphis does.

      They're paying Conley $33.52M for the next 4 years on a contract that scales upwards. We're paying Hill $32M in the next 4 years on a flat contract.

      They gave Marcl Gasol what we gave Roy Hibbert.

      They're paying Zach Randolph $50M in the next 3 years. We're paying David West $10M this year and we're hoping to retain him at the 8-10 range for the next 2 years or more.

      They're paying Rudy Gay $53.67M over the next 3 years. We're paying Danny Granger $27M over the next 2.

      And we also have to pay Paul George.

      Our financial situation may be similar to the Grizzlies in 3-4 years. And that would be really sad. But at the moment we're in a much better position than them.

      My point is that some teams are indeed paying 4 guys around the max. You can do it. You can afford a really good starting 5. You just have to not seriously overpay a guy of that starting 5. That's what Memphis did with Rudy Gay. That's why they need to unload him now. But they didn't overpay Marc Gasol. And we didn't overpay Roy Hibbert. Because their contracts are not that big to put a team in a financial dent.

      If we round out our bench with smart investments (take a look in the international market, see what the Spurs are doing) then we can afford our starting 5.

      There's no need to be under the salary cap anymore. You just have to avoid the luxury tax.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        I think you're overestimating Granger and West. They'll both be closer to 10 mil then 15. Market value is whatever another team is willing to offer and no team is going to offer West or Granger 15 mil. Every team has to have min. contract players and rookies. You can fill the roster with that 10 mil difference. It may be hard to keep Lance but as of now I don't think he'd get an offer of more then 2 mil. If he develops further next year you either trade him or let him walk. He isn't crucial to our success.
        Thats wishful thinking...and not gonna happen...only way that happens is if Granger never recovers from injury...West is making 10 million right now...he signed a reduced contract coming off his major knee surgery...hes proven his worth and theres just no real way hes gonna continue to be ok with 10 million....now he might consider a shorter contract...maybe 3 years instead of 5...but to think hes gonna take what he took after his knee surgery just is not logical....hes the heart, soul and leader of this team to boot...and i can just hear you trying to tell Wests agent he needs to take 10...after he tells u youre paying HIbbert 15 and you want my guy to take 10????? same for Grangers agent....and that would require Danny take a significant paycut as he will be making 14 million next year...and both those guys max contracts are 35% of the cap since they will both be 10year vets...or around 20 million...

        10 million ???? dreaming.....
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

          Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
          It justifies the biggest part part of his contract but not all of it.
          I can see that point of view.

          But let me ask something. If Roy started hitting 2 more baskets each game, would he justify his contract?
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
            Memphis does.

            They're paying Conley $33.52M for the next 4 years on a contract that scales upwards. We're paying Hill $32M in the next 4 years on a flat contract.

            They gave Marcl Gasol what we gave Roy Hibbert.

            They're paying Zach Randolph $50M in the next 3 years. We're paying David West $10M this year and we're hoping to retain him at the 8-10 range for the next 2 years or more.

            They're paying Rudy Gay $53.67M over the next 3 years. We're paying Danny Granger $27M over the next 2.

            And we also have to pay Paul George.

            Our financial situation may be similar to the Grizzlies in 3-4 years. And that would be really sad. But at the moment we're in a much better position than them.

            My point is that some teams are indeed paying 4 guys around the max. You can do it. You can afford a really good starting 5. You just have to not seriously overpay a guy of that starting 5. That's what Memphis did with Rudy Gay. That's why they need to unload him now. But they didn't overpay Marc Gasol. And we didn't overpay Roy Hibbert. Because their contracts are not that big to put a team in a financial dent.

            If we round out our bench with smart investments (take a look in the international market, see what the Spurs are doing) then we can afford our starting 5.

            There's no need to be under the salary cap anymore. You just have to avoid the luxury tax.
            Again...forget the Grizzlies....though what are they doing right now????? looking at getting rid of gay and or randolph....why???? because the LT is about to get a lot more severe....

            Look....do the math....if the LT is around 72-75 million in 2014-15....which seems to be somewhat likely....if you pay 4 guys -George, West, Granger and Hibbert 15 million each...thats 60 million....Hill is 8...thats 68.....Mahinmi is 4...thats 72 million....and 6 players....

            Hello.......you cant spend the LT threshold on 6 guys...and that doesnt address Lance...or anyone else and assuming they can dump Green....
            The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              I can see that point of view.

              But let me ask something. If Roy started hitting 2 more baskets each game, would he justify his contract?
              Of course not.
              Never forget

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                I can see that point of view.

                But let me ask something. If Roy started hitting 2 more baskets each game, would he justify his contract?
                No....not even if he made 50% of his shots.....the guy can only realistically play 25-30 minutes a game...due to health reasons....and hes a great guy, but hes never gonna be the leader that u need...and his confidence is fragile at best as we all know....too high maintenance...too few minutes....a great great addition to have to the team...a vital cog....but hes the guy that needs to be making the 10 million versus west, paul or granger...and that 5 million is basically another rotation player...thats basically your 6th or 7th man
                Last edited by cinotimz; 01-12-2013, 03:10 PM.
                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                  Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                  Bottom line is this...not next season...but the season thereafter...which is basically D-day....Roy will be making 15 million.....WEst and granger are vital, No? seems unlikely either one of them will be making much less than 15...and that would require them to re-sign for less than max contracts...sooooo...u have Paul that will likely get the max which will be around 15 mill at that time....so basically u will likely have 4 guys making somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 million...then u have Hill at 8...thats 68....plus Mahinmi...another 4....thats 72....which puts u awfully close to the luxury tax....and u havent done anything with Lance...youve only got 6 guys...and youre basically at the LT....

                  see the problem???????
                  http://hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm

                  Here are our contracts for the 14-15 season.

                  Roy Hibbert: 15 million

                  George Hill: 8 million

                  Ian Mahinmi: 4 million

                  Gerald Green: 3.5 million

                  Plumlee + OJ: 2 million (team options)

                  I'll agree that PG will get the max. That will be the first season of the max so I'm not sure that it will be at 15 M yet. My guess is that it will start at 14M.

                  So, let's do the math so far.

                  15 + 14 + 8 + 4 + 3.5 + 2 = 46.5 Million

                  We will look to resign West at the 8-10 Million range. We may resign him at 12 (something like $36M over 3 years or $48M over 4 years). There's no way we're resigning him at $14M. My best guess is that we will offer a $40M/4 year contract.

                  Danny's contract will depend on how he plays after he returns this year. If he is in good form I can see us offering him a $12M per year deal for the next 4 years.

                  So, 46.5 + 10 + 12 = 68.5 Million

                  68.5 Million are below the LT.

                  Of course, we haven't addressed Lance yet. My guess is that we will offer Lance a $4M per year deal. A contract similar to what Green gets. So, we will either unload Green to offer Lance his deal. Or if Green proves to be crucial to our bench we could retain him and not pick up the options of OJ and Miles.

                  In any case, we can fit in Lance without going into LT area.

                  As far as the rest of our bench is concerned. There are options. We just have to utilize them. We could fill out the bench with rookie contracts. We could scour the international market for cheap talent. It's always available. Just look at what the Spurs are doing with their bench.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                    I'm sorry, this has turned into a weird thread. Whether Roy deserved his almost MAX contract is now water under the bridge. IMO, we should do nothing with our core team at the deadline. Bring Danny back, see how he plays and take a long look at the off season. Tyler and Lance have qualifying offers at the team's option, iirc. Lance for 930,000. Tyler at 4 million and change and Ben at 873,000. When/if we let Tyler, Ben, DJ and Pendergraph walk, we clear up 10 million. That gives us enough to resign Roy if we are willing to do so. The following year is the real problem, when PG, Lance and DG come up for new contracts. Is this about right?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                      Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                      Yes....Ive always thought that...and I think its pretty obvious that hes not a max player...It was absolutely certain the Pacers could not let Hibbert walk for nothing...to do so would have been insane from an asset management standpoint...and Paul Allen- in his attempt to stick it to KP-offered the max knowing full well the Pacers would have to match and thereby overpay...

                      Which they did...which now gets us a very nice, but very overpaid, center....and thats even if he returns to his offensive production of last year...Roy should be better than he is offensively...and hes not as elite as some would have u believe defensively...hes very good at some things defensively....but he struggles mightily versus the pick and roll...so saying hes elite is just not accurate...in our normal starting lineup Roy would most likely be considered the 4th best player in the lineup behind Granger, George and West...and probably would be considered close to Hill....that guy cant be a max guy...he just cant...if he were making hill money or granger money...ok...but max money? no...its gonna continue to grow to be a problem...
                      Here is the problem with calling it max. Not all max salaries are equal. Hell Hibbert isn't even making his max. He is only making the max that another team could offer, which is less than what the Pacers could offer. Hell he is making Granger money this year, his salary and Granger's salary are not all the different. So can we please stop calling it max, and call it what it is $13.6 million.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                        Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                        Again...forget the Grizzlies....though what are they doing right now????? looking at getting rid of gay and or randolph....why???? because the LT is about to get a lot more severe....

                        Look....do the math....if the LT is around 72-75 million in 2014-15....which seems to be somewhat likely....if you pay 4 guys -George, West, Granger and Hibbert 15 million each...thats 60 million....Hill is 8...thats 68.....Mahinmi is 4...thats 72 million....and 6 players....

                        Hello.......you cant spend the LT threshold on 6 guys...and that doesnt address Lance...or anyone else and assuming they can dump Green....
                        Because Rudy Gay is overpaid. That's why they want to move him. Luckily, Danny Granger is not overpaid. That's why we're in a good position to keep our starting 5 intact.

                        I did the math in my above post. There's no way West or Granger will be making 15 million each.

                        In fact, I addressed all the issues in my above post. So, I'll just answer your answer to that post.
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          Here is the problem with calling it max. Not all max salaries are equal. Hell Hibbert isn't even making his max. He is only making the max that another team could offer, which is less than what the Pacers could offer. Hell he is making Granger money this year, his salary and Granger's salary are not all the different. So can we please stop calling it max, and call it what it is $13.6 million.
                          Calling it a max is just much more catchy
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            Calling it a max is just much more catchy
                            And wrong......

                            Comment


                            • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                              Here is the problem with calling it max. Not all max salaries are equal. Hell Hibbert isn't even making his max. He is only making the max that another team could offer, which is less than what the Pacers could offer. Hell he is making Granger money this year, his salary and Granger's salary are not all the different. So can we please stop calling it max, and call it what it is $13.6 million.
                              Huh?????

                              No...just no...Hibbert is making the absolute max this year that he could make...period...25% of the cap...thats the most Portland could offer and its the most the Pacers could offer....the MAX
                              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                              Comment


                              • Re: Thoughts on the appeal of Roy Hibbert to other teams?

                                Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                                Of course not.
                                Really? If Roy made 2 more baskets each game he'd average 6 Field Goal Makes on 10.1 Field Goal Attempts. That's almost 60% shooting. Also, his PPG would go up from 9.5 PPG to 13.5 PPG.

                                Are you going to say that a player that averages 13.5 PPG on 60% shooting and continues to play the defense that Roy plays isn't worth of his contract?

                                Because that's exactly the problem with Roy at the moment. He's missing tip ins that he should make. If he was able to hit those then his contract would look great.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X