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

Coaching or the Players???

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

  • Coaching or the Players???

    I have not started a thread on here in a long time, but when preparing to respond to a post on anther thread I really thought targeting this specific question is fairly important.

    This response was focused on the topic of us having the least amount of talent on offense in the playoffs.

    My thinking is that we have a lot of potential for offensive talent, but for some reason it is not being met.

    So question is Frank not getting the most out of his players, or are the players just really that oblivious and not listening to his instruction?


    Sidenote: what has been the role of Nate McMillan this year, wasn't he supposed to be that veteran assistant coach to help Frank out?
    Why so SERIOUS

  • #2
    Re: Coaching or the Players???

    Considering the players are missing open shots and FTs, I give most of the nod to the players.

    That being said, one of the reasons for an offensive system is to create easier shots. I think ours fails to do that. Therefore, the coaches don't get of scot-free.

    On the gripping hand, if the players are refusing the options given by the offensive scheme in favor of taking long and/or contested jumpers, coaching isn't the problem.
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Coaching or the Players???

      There are at least two issues here.

      Quite simply here are the two issues.

      1) The players have tuned out the coach/coaching staff and that makes our offense look really bad. We went from average in the whole NBA to one of the worst since March 1st.

      If you don't believe they have tuned the coaches out, OK, but I think everyone can admit the chemistry that was so good between the players and coaches for over three years has fallen apart. Might not be the coaches fault at all. Might be the three year tune out factor. Or maybe player chemistry problems has caused such a problem everything is impacted.

      2) Talent: We probably do have the least offensive talent in the playoffs. We probably have more than the Bulls have right now without Rose and after the Deng trade. We are even IMo with the Grizzlies. But I'd argue we have less than the other 14 teams.\

      I asked this in another thread:
      Can someone else name another playoff team (exept maybe the Bulls) that has less or more inconsistant playmaking at the guard or small forward positions
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 05-01-2014, 02:38 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Coaching or the Players???

        Whatever the reason for the players being selfish, "lazy", losing confidence, not being able to throw the ball in the ocean, fumbling passes, standing on offense, and being slow on defense it is the coaches responsibility to catch it and stop it immediately. Frank was unable (unwilling) to stop this slide and so it is on him and his assistants.
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Coaching or the Players???

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          There are at least two issues here.

          Quite simply here are the two issues.

          The players have tuned out the coach/coaching staff and that makes our offense look really bad. We went from average in the whole NBA to one of the worst since march 1st.

          We probably do have the least offensive talent in the playoffs. Bulls, Grizzlies: we might have more than those teams, but I'd argue we have less than the other 14 teams.
          I'm one of those crazy people that think coaching matters... Therefore, just how bad our players are offensively is a perspective that is skewed by coaching. A different coach would make the players look 'different' on offense. Now, all kinds of factors come into play at that point and whether different is better is another conversation. Plus, 'different' might change the balance of offense and defense to where offense improves at the sake of the defense. ...Which could be a net gain, a wash, or a net loss overall. But then that is why coaching matters. As does the FO. You need to mix and match the pieces for net gain.

          But I don't think our players are as bad as they appear currently on offense. I think it's a combination of the system and a loss of faith in each other and the system that has caused the slippage. IOW, bring in any hot shooting, get to the rim, offensive guy you want and ultimately we'd be wondering where his offense went before too long. The next coach, while not forgetting defense, will need to find a more efficient and effective offense that gets our players better shots all the way around. Then they need to hit them. But if he gets the first part right then the second part will follow. Will they jump to the top of the league in offensive stats? No... probably not... But they will improve. How much will they improve? I don't know... but I know coaching matters as to what that answer will be.
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Coaching or the Players???

            Unless they can get in a coach that wants to yell "pass" everytime the ball stops in a players hands, it really doesn't matter what system you put in place. System changes isn't going to change player's unbelieveably low basketball IQ. I thought it was hilarious listening to the crowd start to collectively grumble when the ball stopped last Monday night. You could just hear the smatterings of people getting pissed off for them just holding the ball so long. Crowds basketball IQ >>>>> Players basketball IQ = big trouble.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Coaching or the Players???

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Unless they can get in a coach that wants to yell "pass" everytime the ball stops in a players hands, it really doesn't matter what system you put in place. System changes isn't going to change player's unbelieveably low basketball IQ. I thought it was hilarious listening to the crowd start to collectively grumble when the ball stopped last Monday night. You could just hear the smatterings of people getting pissed off for them just holding the ball so long. Crowds basketball IQ >>>>> Players basketball IQ = big trouble.
              Chicken or the egg?
              Does the ball stop because of low IQ and selfishness alone... or does it stop because players can't bring themselves to trust the system, their teammates, or coaching any longer?

              I think when Hibbert slumped it created a vacuum with first PG and then Lance that wasn't addressed by coaching. And the wheels came off all the way around.
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Coaching or the Players???

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                There are at least two issues here.

                Quite simply here are the two issues.

                1) The players have tuned out the coach/coaching staff and that makes our offense look really bad. We went from average in the whole NBA to one of the worst since March 1st.

                If you don't believe they have tuned the coaches out, OK, but I think everyone can admit the chemistry that was so good between the players and coaches for over three years has fallen apart. Might not be the coaches fault at all. Might be the three year tune out factor. Or maybe player chemistry problems has caused such a problem everything is impacted.

                2) Talent: We probably do have the least offensive talent in the playoffs. We probably have more than the Bulls have right now without Rose and after the Deng trade. We are even IMo with the Grizzlies. But I'd argue we have less than the other 14 teams.\

                I asked this in another thread:
                Can someone else name another playoff team (exept maybe the Bulls) that haa less or more inconsistant playmaking at the guard or small forward positions
                Yeah just trying to wrap my head around it, we are the hardest team to understand right now, it is pretty crazy. I think the Nets Guard and Forward positions can be fairly inconsistent at times. I think for us a lot of this is due to us not knowing how to play off each other. It is pretty sad.

                I agree with our offensive talent being bad, but this is why I stress the importance of defense for our team that is what we are built around, and if we can not get that back, no matter how much our offense improves we are still barely over a .500 team.
                Why so SERIOUS

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Coaching or the Players???

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  There are at least two issues here.

                  Quite simply here are the two issues.

                  1) The players have tuned out the coach/coaching staff and that makes our offense look really bad. We went from average in the whole NBA to one of the worst since March 1st.

                  If you don't believe they have tuned the coaches out, OK, but I think everyone can admit the chemistry that was so good between the players and coaches for over three years has fallen apart. Might not be the coaches fault at all. Might be the three year tune out factor. Or maybe player chemistry problems has caused such a problem everything is impacted.

                  2) Talent: We probably do have the least offensive talent in the playoffs. We probably have more than the Bulls have right now without Rose and after the Deng trade. We are even IMo with the Grizzlies. But I'd argue we have less than the other 14 teams.\

                  I asked this in another thread:
                  Can someone else name another playoff team (exept maybe the Bulls) that haa less or more inconsistant playmaking at the guard or small forward positions
                  If you ask me everyone in our starting lineup is an above average scorer, aside from Roy Hibbert. At least when playing well. David West and Lance Stephenson are primarily scorers. George Hill is a capable scorer. Paul George averages 22 pts a game. Off the bench Scola, Turner, and Watson are primarily scorers.

                  Gerald Green didn't score much when he was here either because our offensive system is horrible. We don't really even have one. George Hill dribble the ball up the court and stand there 4-5 seconds struggling to even find an open player with no effort on weakside screening. There might be a pick and roll/pick and pop but that's about as advanced as it gets. Usually pass the ball around on the perimeter until someone finds a decent jump shot or go for a pick and pop with West/Scola. That's seriously what happens 80% of the time. I feel 4 out of our 5 starters would be great scorers with better coaches. Seriously, our offense is patheic I don't even get it. It's Mind Boggling.
                  Last edited by pacers_heath; 05-01-2014, 02:43 PM.
                  Lifelong pacers fan

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Coaching or the Players???

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    Considering the players are missing open shots and FTs, I give most of the nod to the players.

                    That being said, one of the reasons for an offensive system is to create easier shots. I think ours fails to do that. Therefore, the coaches don't get of scot-free.

                    On the gripping hand, if the players are refusing the options given by the offensive scheme in favor of taking long and/or contested jumpers, coaching isn't the problem.
                    Yeah I think our system sucks, but for your last point I wonder is it the coaches job to make sure players listen to him, is it his job to make sure he does not lose the team?
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Coaching or the Players???

                      People had been complaining about the style of Pacers basketball, long before Hibbert's slump.

                      Why would the Pacers lose faith in a system that just carried them into the national spotlight just 5 months prior? That's why I've been laughing at everyone who think's Vogel's offensive system sucks. They might be right, but there's no way you can tell, because the players clearly aren't running the system.

                      We've been told the coaches/players have hand one-on-one meetings where they've went over each play and talked about what should happen, etc. At a certain point in time, you've got start blaming the guy who's holding the ball rather than the coach screaming at him to pass.

                      We kept hearing we wanted a system that allowed the two best players (Paul and Lance) more freedom, and we've seen them take it upon themselves, and bury the ship in a sandbar.
                      Last edited by Since86; 05-01-2014, 02:42 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Coaching or the Players???

                        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                        Whatever the reason for the players being selfish, "lazy", losing confidence, not being able to throw the ball in the ocean, fumbling passes, standing on offense, and being slow on defense it is the coaches responsibility to catch it and stop it immediately. Frank was unable (unwilling) to stop this slide and so it is on him and his assistants.
                        This is partially along the lines that I am thinking, players are weapons, but it is up to the coach to figure out the best arsenal and how to use them, if the weapons become bad he needs to fix them, or replace them. Still giving credit to what he has done in the past, but if he can not fix what is going on then I think he might be gone.

                        But yeah I am thinking it falls more on the coaches than the players at this point.
                        Why so SERIOUS

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Coaching or the Players???

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          People had been complaining about the style of Pacers basketball, long before Hibbert's slump.

                          Why would the Pacers lose faith in a system that just carried them into the national spotlight just 5 months prior? That's why I've been laughing at everyone who think's Vogel's offensive system sucks. They might be right, but there's no way you can tell, because the players clearly aren't running the system.

                          We've been told the coaches/players have hand one-on-one meetings where they've went over each play and talked about what should happen, etc. At a certain point in time, you've got start blaming the guy who's holding the ball rather than the coach screaming at him to pass.

                          We kept hearing we wanted a system that allowed the two best players (Paul and Lance) more freedom, and we've seen them take it upon themselves, and bury the ship in a sandbar.
                          The system was weak before but effective enough to win with. With Hibbert turning to a net negative it sunk the system and exposed the flaws and allowed for freelancing (and forcing) to become the norm.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Coaching or the Players???

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            People had been complaining about the style of Pacers basketball, long before Hibbert's slump.

                            Why would the Pacers lose faith in a system that just carried them into the national spotlight just 5 months prior? That's why I've been laughing at everyone who think's Vogel's offensive system sucks. They might be right, but there's no way you can tell, because the players clearly aren't running the system.

                            We've been told the coaches/players have hand one-on-one meetings where they've went over each play and talked about what should happen, etc. At a certain point in time, you've got start blaming the guy who's holding the ball rather than the coach screaming at him to pass.

                            We kept hearing we wanted a system that allowed the two best players (Paul and Lance) more freedom, and we've seen them take it upon themselves, and bury the ship in a sandbar.
                            BTW... You're not seriously thinking Vogel won't be fired are you? Are you just arguing he shouldn't be fired or do you really, honestly, think he won't be?
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Coaching or the Players???

                              Both sides are somewhat responsible... But I give the edge to the players always... The coaches can't play the game for them... Our offensive system would work just fine if guys could hit open shots, keep their turnovers down, and not over dribble...

                              I've always thought players make a much bigger impact on the final product than coaches do... A player is much more likely to replicate success on another team than a coach is...
                              Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X