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

If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

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

  • If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

    Last night I read Bird saying we might possibly need a roster change and I was in seventh heaven. YA THINK, LARRY?

    SIDENOTE: I wish I hadn't lost the thread I wrote about that very thing. You guys may or may not remember, but I said that our given roster was going to cause serious issues because there was no way to clearly say who deserved PT over anybody else. So when the losses started piling up, everybody was going to feel like they could do a better job than the guy they were behind. I said that spending money to get better third-string players was useless if they weren't going to be much worse than the starters. And people said I was crazy and you could never have too much talent on the team. Anybody remember that thread?

    BACK ON TOPIC: So I was giddy with the idea that Bird might finally get serious about making some roster changes, but this morning I woke up with a depressing thought.

    If the front office said "We need to move this guy because he's a problem," who would they move?

    I'm thinking the player who's the worst fit on the team (Troy Murphy) would be the one they'd want to hold on to the most. Obie loves him, and it seems like I dimly remember Bird echoing that opinion.

    So forget who we think they SHOULD move. If The Pacers Top Brass thinks somebody needs to go, who do you think it is?
    This space for rent.

  • #2
    Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

    I have know idea. It truly is like you said, how can you pick when they are all the same.
    Good is the enemy of Great


    We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
    -- Frank Vogel.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

      Ford and Rush both seem like possibilities, although I'm not sure you really bring much back. I guess it depends, is Bird looking for an impact player, or is he just looking to trim salary? If it isn't the latter, then you are looking at throwing in a draft pick to bring back anything of value.
      "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

        All lip service. No change during the season. High draft pick. O'Brien let go at end of season. Maybe some moves in the summer.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

          I posted this in the "Star: O'Brien's job is secure" thread

          Wow. Just wow...

          No, not just wow.

          So, who are we gonna trade? The players who have had visible attitude problems about O'B and playing time? Those who have suddenly regressed to being totally ineffective in recent games? Rush, Hibbert, Dahntay Jones, Dunleavy, and Ford all come immediately to mind, with anyone not named Granger or Hansbrough a possibility, and Danny might need to be included to move any of the rest of them at this point.

          T.S. Eliot's ending to "The Hollow Men" comes to mind:

          This is the way the world ends
          Not with a bang but a wimper.

          It seems like the future of the franchise rides on any moves made at this point. Bird indicates that the intention is to compete on a nightly basis and that the current play is unacceptable. Well, Bird had better be prepared to take the horrendous flak that he will endure when the remainder of this season implodes unless he makes moves that are easily defensible, or unless things actually improve, which I seriously doubt happens under O'B.

          If I were Danny Granger, I would be approaching Herb about working out a deal with Phoenix or Dallas or Denver somehow in an effort to be close to home in New Mexico.

          It feels as if things are about to either be fixed or destroyed in their entirety, not to be rebuilt. I truly hope that I am wrong.
          A lot of what I posted was probably an over reaction due to my loathing for O'B, but the players I listed -- Rush, Hibbert, Dahntay Jones, Dunleavy, and Ford -- have all had issues. Out of those, Dahntay probably does not fit with O'B because he has too strong a personality to be a role player and the fact that he totally disrupts what little offensive movement that we attempt to have within O'B's offensive offense (yes, I intended "offensive" offense), so there will probably be an atempt made to move him despite his lengthy inadvisable contract. To sweeten this pot, I would guess that Hibbert may well be added because he simply has little hope of developing further under O'B without anyone on our staff being able to teach him the footwork and positioning required to compensate for his lack of speed and quickness within our system on either end of the court.

          Next, my guess is that there will be an attempt to move Rush because of having given up on him. It would probably be for the best at this point due to O'B not having a clue how to handle him early on, and O'B being unable to reach him despite lots of playing time since. Brandon needs fresh coaching to succeed at this point, and O'B needs a player who responds to his negative reinforcement type of motivation, where benching or the threat of it makes a player self motivate to avoid the negative consequences of being benched and increases the level of their play. A little sweetener will be required to move Brandon, but not much. In that AJ Price will clearly not play with O'B as coach, my guess is that he would be used in that capacity, with our banking on a return in the near future of Diener and his ball handling and potential for shooting threes in limited minutes.

          But, who knows. There are obviously some wild undercurrents within the franchise and the team at this point that we are not aware of, and those ultimately will dictate whatever happens. The next several weeks will be a heavy mix of dread and anticipation, hopefully culminating in at least some tangible progress in changing the culture of the team back to more what it was like last year.

          Trade Dahntay and Price to Toronto for Jack and filler, perhaps? That might be the quickest and most palatable fix to our chemistry issues while retoring the balance that we ended the season with last year.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

            Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
            I posted this in the "Star: O'Brien's job is secure" thread



            A lot of what I posted was probably an over reaction due to my loathing for O'B, but the players I listed -- Rush, Hibbert, Dahntay Jones, Dunleavy, and Ford -- have all had issues. Out of those, Dahntay probably does not fit with O'B because he has too strong a personality to be a role player and the fact that he totally disrupts what little offensive movement that we attempt to have within O'B's offensive offense (yes, I intended "offensive" offense), so there will probably be an atempt made to move him despite his lengthy inadvisable contract. To sweeten this pot, I would guess that Hibbert may well be added because he simply has little hope of developing further under O'B without anyone on our staff being able to teach him the footwork and positioning required to compensate for his lack of speed and quickness within our system on either end of the court.

            Next, my guess is that there will be an attempt to move Rush because of having given up on him. It would probably be for the best at this point due to O'B not having a clue how to handle him early on, and O'B being unable to reach him despite lots of playing time since. Brandon needs fresh coaching to succeed at this point, and O'B needs a player who responds to his negative reinforcement type of motivation, where benching or the threat of it makes a player self motivate to avoid the negative consequences of being benched and increases the level of their play. A little sweetener will be required to move Brandon, but not much. In that AJ Price will clearly not play with O'B as coach, my guess is that he would be used in that capacity, with our banking on a return in the near future of Diener and his ball handling and potential for shooting threes in limited minutes.

            But, who knows. There are obviously some wild undercurrents within the franchise and the team at this point that we are not aware of, and those ultimately will dictate whatever happens. The next several weeks will be a heavy mix of dread and anticipation, hopefully culminating in at least some tangible progress in changing the culture of the team back to more what it was like last year.

            Trade Dahntay and Price to Toronto for Jack and filler, perhaps? That might be the quickest and most palatable fix to our chemistry issues while retoring the balance that we ended the season with last year.
            while were at it we can trade granger to the rockets for tmac so that way we wont have an injury prone star anymore.
            "To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice the gift." - Steve Prefontaine

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

              Originally posted by IndyProdigy View Post
              while were at it we can trade granger to the rockets for tmac so that way we wont have an injury prone star anymore.
              After his contract expires at the end of this season you would be absolutely right. Throw in a mix of anybody not named Hansbrough or Murphy to make salaries match (O'B would have not just a cow but an entire herd of cattle if he could not call for a trailing three for Murphy) and our options for this summer increase even more quickly than we thought previously.

              I don't like T-Mac, but it couldn't get worse at this point. I haven't read the T-Mac thread, and I am sure there are many arguments both for and against this. I may go ahead and read it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                Change everything!!
                Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                  I would be interested to see if Dun may be thrown into the mix. I know he and Battier are close friends. Believe Dun and Battier were groomsmen at eachothers respective weddings. They also were roomates at Duke. I know they have great chemistry so maybe that would be something to look into. Dont know if the salaries can add up more than likely would have to bring in 3rd team, but Maybe a Dun, Ford for TMac may be do-able. Dun has 2 years left on his contract and yes he has knee issues but so did TMac and at least Dun will play on the floor without starting any controversy.
                  JOB is a silly man

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                    Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                    I posted this in the "Star: O'Brien's job is secure" thread



                    A lot of what I posted was probably an over reaction due to my loathing for O'B, but the players I listed -- Rush, Hibbert, Dahntay Jones, Dunleavy, and Ford -- have all had issues. Out of those, Dahntay probably does not fit with O'B because he has too strong a personality to be a role player and the fact that he totally disrupts what little offensive movement that we attempt to have within O'B's offensive offense (yes, I intended "offensive" offense), so there will probably be an atempt made to move him despite his lengthy inadvisable contract. To sweeten this pot, I would guess that Hibbert may well be added because he simply has little hope of developing further under O'B without anyone on our staff being able to teach him the footwork and positioning required to compensate for his lack of speed and quickness within our system on either end of the court.

                    Next, my guess is that there will be an attempt to move Rush because of having given up on him. It would probably be for the best at this point due to O'B not having a clue how to handle him early on, and O'B being unable to reach him despite lots of playing time since. Brandon needs fresh coaching to succeed at this point, and O'B needs a player who responds to his negative reinforcement type of motivation, where benching or the threat of it makes a player self motivate to avoid the negative consequences of being benched and increases the level of their play. A little sweetener will be required to move Brandon, but not much. In that AJ Price will clearly not play with O'B as coach, my guess is that he would be used in that capacity, with our banking on a return in the near future of Diener and his ball handling and potential for shooting threes in limited minutes.

                    But, who knows. There are obviously some wild undercurrents within the franchise and the team at this point that we are not aware of, and those ultimately will dictate whatever happens. The next several weeks will be a heavy mix of dread and anticipation, hopefully culminating in at least some tangible progress in changing the culture of the team back to more what it was like last year.

                    Trade Dahntay and Price to Toronto for Jack and filler, perhaps? That might be the quickest and most palatable fix to our chemistry issues while retoring the balance that we ended the season with last year.

                    I'd love to have Jack back, but Bird's stubborness in being wrong wouldn't let him bring back Jack.

                    Do you realize you just are trading Bird's 2 08 "NBA ready" players?

                    After reading some articles put in posts here yesterday, I'm beinging to wonder if Granger is one of the players unhappy with Jimmy's extension. If that's the case, Bird has a MAJOR problem on his hands not to mention backing up his mouth about trading those that were unhappy. He can't afford to trade the face of the franchise, so what next? My guess would be letting Jimmy go after the season is over if Granger is unhappy with coaching.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                      If Washington really wants to get out of Arenas' deal, we could offer them Ford & Murphy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                        If Washington really wants to get out of Arenas' deal, we could offer them Ford & Murphy.
                        ..Do you really want to do that..

                        Tracy would only be a pain in the butt for a year..We'd get stuck with Gilbert for 4.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          ..Do you really want to do that..

                          Tracy would only be a pain in the butt for a year..
                          Arenas has played in all 29 of the Wizards' games this year and is putting up 23/7/4. He had a rough past couple of years due to injuries, but he's back to All-Star form this season. I'm not one who thinks we'll land anything major in free agency (think along the lines of what Detroit landed this past summer), so yes, I'd strongly consider it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                            Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                            Arenas has played in all 29 of the Wizards' games this year and is putting up 23/7/4. He had a rough past couple of years due to injuries, but he's back to All-Star form this season. I'm not one who thinks we'll land anything major in free agency (think along the lines of what Detroit landed this past summer), so yes, I'd strongly consider it.
                            Arenas has the worst contract in the league right now, do we really want to get another one of those? They guy makes an average of 20million per year or soemthing ridiculous over the next 4 years. There are maybe 3 players in the league that would be worth that kind of financial commitment. The TMac idea sounds better just to move the process ahead by 1 year, instead of going through another 1.5 years of Larry's "plan".

                            Really though, in the best free agent market of all time, teams desperate for cap space to sign a superstar free agent, do any of you really think Houston is going to trade the largest expiring deal in the league for our expensive and underperforming players? reality check time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: If Bird's going to "change the players" then who's he going to change?

                              Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                              Arenas has played in all 29 of the Wizards' games this year and is putting up 23/7/4. He had a rough past couple of years due to injuries, but he's back to All-Star form this season. I'm not one who thinks we'll land anything major in free agency (think along the lines of what Detroit landed this past summer), so yes, I'd strongly consider it.
                              He'd hit the floor at the Fieldhouse, step on the Imaginary Banana Peel, and - whoops! - down he goes for 60+ games.

                              Naah.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X