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

Granger - Turner

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

  • #76
    Re: Granger - Turner

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    Pacers won 49 games last year without Granger. Played game 7 in ECF. Went like 20 and 4 without Granger to begin the season. Pacers won without Granger on the court.

    Why is it a valid excuse this team cannot win without Granger in the lockerrom?? when it is proven Pacers can do so on the court.
    Wrong we won 49 games last season WITH Granger in the lockerroom, with Granger on the sidelines, with Granger at the practices, with Granger on the planes, with Granger in the ears of the players AND coaches, with Granger as the veteran leader in the lockerroom that everyone looked up to and respected. You cannot ignore Granger's presence. If you do it shows a lack of understanding of a team, of roles, of leadership, of people, and of sports. When you lose an important piece to your lockerroom and no one steps up to take the place, or the person who tries isn't competent or respected enough to fill the shoes, it can have serious side affects. Problems that could just be little things before, could become big things. A slump that would have only lasted a few games before they popped out of it, now just continues to grow because that presence holding everything together is no longer there.

    Who said it is a valid excuse? A valid excuse suggests that it means that we should expect it and be ok with it. Do you really think anyone here is ok with how the team is playing?
    Last edited by Eleazar; 04-12-2014, 01:57 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Granger - Turner

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      Even when Danny wasn't playing he traveled with the team, everywhere. As Frank said last season he is a part of our culture.

      if travel with the team has that much of an influence then im standing firm on shaws loss having as much of an impact as any other reason for the pacers demise.


      in all seriousness.. Shaw may or may not hve been around when Kobe had off court issues,, but still woulda been a great mentor to have on the bench this season for PG. I really wish we coulda held onto Shaw one more year.


      These guys just need to grow up. Roy may be still 3 years away from hitting his stride. I think his progress may just be really slow. as it already is for most centers anyway. the good news is roy plays like this and we can hopefully get a discount next contract.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Granger - Turner

        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
        if travel with the team has that much of an influence then im standing firm on shaws loss having as much of an impact as any other reason for the pacers demise.


        in all seriousness.. Shaw may or may not hve been around when Kobe had off court issues,, but still woulda been a great mentor to have on the bench this season for PG. I really wish we coulda held onto Shaw one more year.


        These guys just need to grow up. Roy may be still 3 years away from hitting his stride. I think his progress may just be really slow. as it already is for most centers anyway. the good news is roy plays like this and we can hopefully get a discount next contract.
        Except shaw was already gone when the team went 41-13 to start this season...Danny wasnt
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Granger - Turner

          Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
          Yeah feelings may get hurt, but something tells me the Heat wouldn't fold like a cheap lawn chair like the Pacers have done.
          Does it matter if they would or wouldnt?? They have clearly stated that they WOULDNT MAKE ESSENCIALLY THE SAME TRADE WE MADE... I think that there says enough... Miami has proven that they are able to build a championship franchise on two seperate occasions...
          Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Granger - Turner

            Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
            Look, I agree that the Turner acquisition has been bad. There is no denying it. It might be tough to tell from my posts, but I really liked Danny Granger and appreciate everything he did for the franchise. My take is that if his loss caused such a catastrophic problem like some are claiming we didn't have true championship metal to begin with. I mean, would Miami stop being a contender if Pat Riley traded away Udonis? Would the Thunder lose 8 out of their next 11 if they lost Nick Collison? I am just not buying it. The Pacers play had been going south a while before the trade occurred. Did acquiring Turner and losing Granger help the situation? Clearly not. With that being said I could easily envision us in the same spot minus Turner with Granger.
            Ironic that you mention Udonis Haslem.

            http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...udonis-haslem/

            A Miami Heat official pointed to Indiana’s struggles as the reason they chose to keep their longest tenured player as the trade deadline passed.

            Heat players have referred to the risks you run when reshuffling a contender so late in the season.

            As one Heat official recently put it, “Now you see why we didn’t trade U.D.” …

            How would that have gone over?

            “That’s a tough question,” Mario Chalmers said, measuring his words. “U.D., besides Dwyane and Bron and CB, he is the heart and soul of this team. He is one of the captains, one of the leaders on this team. He sets a good example for everybody else. I don’t know. It wouldn’t have been a good thing.”


            Look I don't disagree with you, there are other problems. However this exacerbated all of our other problems and brought them to a head. Even the NBAtv guys were saying tonight that the team really misses Danny Granger.

            Edit: Crap didn't see this was already used above.
            Last edited by Peck; 04-12-2014, 02:00 AM.


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

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Granger - Turner

              Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
              Look, I agree that the Turner acquisition has been bad. There is no denying it. It might be tough to tell from my posts, but I really liked Danny Granger and appreciate everything he did for the franchise. My take is that if his loss caused such a catastrophic problem like some are claiming we didn't have true championship metal to begin with. I mean, would Miami stop being a contender if Pat Riley traded away Udonis? Would the Thunder lose 8 out of their next 11 if they lost Nick Collison? I am just not buying it. The Pacers play had been going south a while before the trade occurred. Did acquiring Turner and losing Granger help the situation? Clearly not. With that being said I could easily envision us in the same spot minus Turner with Granger.
              Udonis Haslem and Nick Collison are in no way comparable to Danny Granger.


              Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
              Yeah feelings may get hurt, but something tells me the Heat wouldn't fold like a cheap lawn chair like the Pacers have done.
              It has nothing to do with feelings being hurt. This is what you aren't getting. You think we are talking about hurt feelings, when we aren't. We are talking about a piece to the puzzle that is missing, and hasn't been replaced. It would be like taking away the weak force from the Universe. Right now everything is all nice and great with the weak force even though you will never actually perceive it in the your lifetime. Take it away though, and suddenly the whole universe instantly turns into chaos, all because you took away this tiny little force that no one can perceive. No feelings were hurt, but you are suddenly missing something that was a key cog of keeping the universe running smoothly. This team isn't set up to be 2 or 3 superstars with a bunch of role players. This team was designed as a group of players who were supposed to be greater than the sum of their parts. Now we are missing the part that may have been capable of keeping this team focused and on track for competing for a championship.

              Obviously nothing is for certain, it is all speculation, but all signs seem to be pointing to Granger being a very important piece to this lockerroom. When you start to have lockerroom problems shortly after losing an important lockerroom piece, it becomes very clear that it is very likely things would be better if he was still on the team.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Granger - Turner

                Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                Does it matter if they would or wouldnt?? They have clearly stated that they WOULDNT MAKE ESSENCIALLY THE SAME TRADE WE MADE... I think that there says enough... Miami has proven that they are able to build a championship franchise on two seperate occasions...
                Yeah, it is real easy for Miami to say they wouldn't have made that trade, they have a championship level roster. Bird obviously felt the Pacers as they were constructed were not championship caliber. I think most fans based on how we were playing would agree. The fact is Bird felt we were close, but not there. He played his hand and it is not working out, but at least he played his hand.

                Lets not forget the Heat let Mike Miller go just because they didn't want to pay him. He was, by all accounts, a good glue guy who contributed to a few championships. Despite this loss the Heat appear poised to gain the #1 seed in the East again.

                Just because Miami (who has won back to back titles) wouldn't trade Udonis does not mean that Bird was wrong for thinking that the Pacers were not a contender and a move needed to be made.

                These of course are just my .02. As always feel free to disagree.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Granger - Turner

                  Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                  Yeah, it is real easy for Miami to say they wouldn't have made that trade, they have a championship level roster. Bird obviously felt the Pacers as they were constructed were not championship caliber. I think most fans based on how we were playing would agree. The fact is Bird felt we were close, but not there. He played his hand and it is not working out, but at least he played his hand.

                  Lets not forget the Heat let Mike Miller go just because they didn't want to pay him. He was, by all accounts, a good glue guy who contributed to a few championships. Despite this loss the Heat appear poised to gain the #1 seed in the East again.

                  Just because Miami (who has won back to back titles) wouldn't trade Udonis does not mean that Bird was wrong for thinking that the Pacers were not a contender and a move needed to be made.

                  These of course are just my .02. As always feel free to disagree.
                  No, it is obvious that Bird thought that this move was what we needed to beat the Heat or he wouldnt have pulled the trigger... I understand the though and the assumption that Bird did not forsee the ramifications... I am simlply arguing that this was the turning point, while others have said that there is no way that it was because Granger never played yada yada... In hindsight, I feel rather confident that Bird would not make that move...

                  I would have thought that we were a championship caliber team, as we had taken the eventual champs to game seven the year before and challenged them the year before that...

                  Miami has won two consecutive titles, but obviously they did not feel that the upgrade in talent was worth the locker room risk... Miller was a financial move, and it was held off as long as possible to ensure that there was as much stability as possible...
                  Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Granger - Turner

                    Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                    Yeah, it is real easy for Miami to say they wouldn't have made that trade, they have a championship level roster. Bird obviously felt the Pacers as they were constructed were not championship caliber. I think most fans based on how we were playing would agree. The fact is Bird felt we were close, but not there. He played his hand and it is not working out, but at least he played his hand.
                    But the players and coach didn't agree. That's the problem.

                    Lets not forget the Heat let Mike Miller go just because they didn't want to pay him. He was, by all accounts, a good glue guy who contributed to a few championships. Despite this loss the Heat appear poised to gain the #1 seed in the East again.
                    Why are the Heat poised to take #1 again? Because we imploded. Can we say the Heat would be in this position had we not imploded? How many times did they try to gift us that #1 seed? We blew it. Bird blew it. And it's hard to compare Mike Miller to Danny Granger...

                    Just because Miami (who has won back to back titles) wouldn't trade Udonis does not mean that Bird was wrong for thinking that the Pacers were not a contender and a move needed to be made.

                    These of course are just my .02. As always feel free to disagree.
                    Bird is judged by the results of a decision he made unilaterally. When you reject the suggestions of your coach and your players, and your decision doesn't pan out, the blame falls at your feet. Did he misjudge the mental fortitude of his players? No, not at all. He just chose to not respect it, consequently undermining it in the process. Does the fact that it was undermined prove that this team wasn't mentally tough? No, even the greats react negatively to being disrespected, and especially, publicly criticized. It just manifests itself in different ways. Some might withdraw, some might act out. Kobe basically ran Shaq out of town because he didn't feel appreciated enough for the team's success. Or how about when Kobe was publicly criticized for taking too many shots and he responded by simply refusing to shoot, in a playoff game nonetheless. These are human beings -- millionaires -- but still human beings. You can call them soft if you want to, but until you find me a human being who isn't affected by being disrespected, marginalized, overlooked, publicly criticized, undermined, etc., I'll just label the team's response "understandable," even "to be expected" when one considers how poor of a fit Turner was to our system and the amount of time we had to integrate him.
                    2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Granger - Turner

                      I know granger was really important to this team.

                      But puhleaaasse indiana pacers starting 5 down to the bench be professional. Stop the drama.
                      Last edited by edc; 04-12-2014, 03:45 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Granger - Turner

                        The Pacers' play had started to drop off a full month before the trade, with the Phoenix game on January 22nd. From that point up to the trade, the Pacers went 8-6. That's when the inconsistency started.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Granger - Turner

                          Pacers started playing bad when Granger returned from injury
                          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Granger - Turner

                            The Miami Heat have Lebron James. UD or not they would still be a contender. The Pacers are not strong mentally and it shows. Losing DG sent them into a tailspin??
                            I do not buy that. There are other issues. I contend they overachieved that past 2 years. They need to shuffle the deck and start over. Keep PG and West and maybe some
                            of the subs. Everyone else is fairgame. The Pacers are also very young. I am concerned about PG's commitment.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Granger - Turner

                              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                              Pacers started playing bad when Granger returned from injury
                              You mean how in his first 15 games back we went 13-2? Yeah I'd call that a real struggle.

                              We went 21-8 over his full stretch with us, which is a 60-win season pace. Oh, and playoff teams we beat before you pull out a lack of competition argument without looking anything up:

                              Houston, Brooklyn(3x), Toronto, Washington, Clippers, Golden State, Atlanta(2x), and Portland.
                              Last edited by aamcguy; 04-12-2014, 11:36 AM.
                              Time for a new sig.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Granger - Turner

                                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                                You mean how in his first 15 games back we went 13-2? Yeah I'd call that a real struggle.

                                We went 21-8 over his full stretch with us, which is a 60-win season pace. Oh, and playoff teams we beat before you pull out a lack of competition argument without looking anything up:

                                Houston, Brooklyn(3x), Toronto, Washington, Clippers, Golden State, Atlanta(2x), and Portland.

                                Thanks to his awesome 36% shooting, right? Correlation must equal causation, am I right? We would've been even worse off holding onto Chucky, having him injure himself again & being forced to give major minutes to Solomon Hill.

                                You guys watch too much Disney. Granger was never much of a leader and he was in steady decline even before he became a rehab regular.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X