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

Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

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

  • #76
    Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    I saw Roy's limp, bet let's look at the numbers.

    Roy has hurt his ankle twice this season; once against the Wizards and once against the Suns.

    Here are Roy's stats from various periods:

    42.64% FG, 11.0 pts, 6.77 rb, 1.38 blks, 84.4% FT- 1st ankle injury to Portland game pouting.
    39.39% FG, 8.71 pts, 6.28 rb, 1.00 blks, 81.8% FT- 2nd ankle injury to Portland game pouting.
    32.00% FG, 5.66 pts, 5.00 rb, 0.00 blks, 50.0% FT- Portland game pouting to present
    The thing with the games after the "Portland pouting" is that he has been in extreme foul trouble in 2 of those 3 games and the 3rd game was a blowout. Roy played 21 minutes against the Lakers because the game was a blowout at half time and Frank decided to rest him, he played 16 minutes against the Clippers because he had 4 fouls and Lavoy was playing like a star and he played 24 minutes tonight because he had 5 fouls.

    I believe that along with the numbers you should include MPG and Roy's MPG after that "pouting incident" is 20.3 MPG. Putting that 20.3 MPG next to 5.6 PPG/5 RPG puts a lot more context into the situation. It's not like he's playing 34 minutes out there and not doing anything. He really hasn't gotten the chance to play a full game yet.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

      Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
      It's the same story every year. I'm just amazed people find a different flavor of anesthesia to na-na-na-na-na-na-na their way through it every time.
      It was true in the past and it is true now as well. Do you remember when people were trashing Hibbert at the start of the 12-13 season because of his shooting percentages? Well, the medical team disclosed during the ASB that Roy was indeed playing through an injury (wrist injury, to be precise) just like several PDers (including Naptown_Seth) had suspected. What did an injury-free Roy do in the 12-13 playoffs? We all know the answer to that.

      You can call it "finding a different flavor of anesthesia" as much as you want. I simply call it speaking the truth. And the truth is that Roy is injured and is forced to play through the injury because we cannot afford him to sit. Have some respect for a player who is sacrificing his body and his long-term health for the team that you supposedly love. Other players (Rose, for example) are not willing to do that but Roy is.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

        I will just say this.

        There is a difference between playing with an injury vs. playing while recovering from a healed injury.

        Which does Roy have? I have no idea.

        If it is the former then frankly Vogel, Bird and the Medical staff are all being negligent in their handling of the situation. If he truly is still injured they are risking the long term career of a player who they all claim to be the center piece (no pun intended) of their defense for now and in the future. If we find out that he is truly injured and still playing I will actually be very upset with Frank for doing it unless he is getting pressure from above.

        Now on the other hand if Roy has the latter then honestly it is up to Roy to adjust. I know that sounds somewhat harsh but it's the only truth there is. No other team in the NBA (or any sport for that matter) is going to go easy on you because you have an injury. In fact they are going to try and exploit you, as they should.

        I have said all along that his vertical is certainly off a little, and with Roy a little is a lot because this guy isn't Gerald Green in the jumping department. Now personally I have not noticed the lateral movement but again I haven't focused on that, I will watch again on Tuesday to see if I can get a feel for that.

        But let's also not kid ourselves either. There are some things going on with him right now that has nothing to do with his ankle.

        His ankle is not going to make him lose confidence in his face up jump shot. Did you see him get swatted by Mozgov? The reason for that is because Roy did not think he could hit a 8-10' jumper so he tried to drive and throw up a wild one hander only to be Mosgov'ed (yes I'm changing up being dunked on to this for this game).

        It also has absolutely nothing to do with being able to hold onto a two handed rebound. Twice during this game Roy had what looked to be easy two handed rebounds only to bring it down and have it swatted away.

        It has nothing to do with his hesitation on passing or where to be when setting a screen and tonight he just wasn't good at either.

        So can we at least meet each other in the middle here a little? I'm more than willing to say that Roy is playing with some form of physical issue and that it is having an impact on his game. However can we also not agree that not everything is because of his ankle and that Roy has a history of doing this (not even the distant past either, just late last season to be exact).


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

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

          I'm having a problem wrapping my proverbial head around the fact that someone believes Peck capable of scapegoating when it comes to the Pacers.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            So can we at least meet each other in the middle here a little? I'm more than willing to say that Roy is playing with some form of physical issue and that it is having an impact on his game. However can we also not agree that not everything is because of his ankle and that Roy has a history of doing this (not even the distant past either, just late last season to be exact).
            As long as people cut it out with the "mentally weak" "mental midget" "soft as a tissue" "mentally unstable" "emotionally weak" and any other kind of similar BS then gladly.

            Peck, my main issue is this:

            Every time that Roy has a bad stretch people start attacking his person. They are not attacking Roy Hibbert, the basketball player, they are attacking Roy Hibbert, the person. That's what pisses me off the most. It looks like people cannot criticize Roy's basketball abilities without also trashing him as a person and I find that to be complete and utter BS.

            That said, you are not one of these people. I do believe that you have soured on Hibbert ever since last season's collapse but I also believe that almost everyone in this forum soured on some player (or the team itself) after what happened at the end of last season so I get it. You're trying to make sense of a situation just like everyone else in here.

            Is Roy playing well ever since the Portland incident? Well, let's see what happened in each of these 4 games:

            He had a double-double in the Portland game. He had 10 points, 10 rebounds, 1 assist and 1 block. So, no matter how dejected he looked on the bench he still played quite well.

            He had 10 points and 7 rebounds in the Lakers game. He only played 21 minutes because the game was a blowout. I'd say that 10/7 in 21 minutes is very good production.

            He had 7 points, 3 rebounds and 1 assist in the Clippers game. He only played 16 minutes due to foul trouble and because Lavoy was playing like a star. He came in at the end of the game when we needed him for defensive reasons and he got us a stop. Does that count as a bad game? I'm pretty sure that some people are going to count it as a bad game but I can see why someone would consider it a decent.

            He had 0 points, 5 rebounds and 4 turnovers last night. He played 24 minutes due to foul trouble (once again). Now, that definitely does count as a bad game. It wasn't a horrible game since he still was a positive presence defensively but it certainly wasn't a good game either. So, if you want to call this a bad game go right ahead to do it. I'll agree.

            I have no problem meeting you in the middle. I'm not trying to say that Hibbert is playing like some kind of All-Star after his injury and that you cannot see it. I'm just saying that things aren't as bad as most people seem to believe. This is not a re-do of what happened at the end of last season.

            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
            I'm having a problem wrapping my proverbial head around the fact that someone believes Peck capable of scapegoating when it comes to the Pacers.
            I don't think that anyone believes that. Peck is not that kind of person. I simply think that he's worried because of everything that happened at the end of last season. The wounds are still fresh and that goes for every single one of us.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
              As long as people cut it out with the "mentally weak" "mental midget" "soft as a tissue" "mentally unstable" "emotionally weak" and any other kind of similar BS then gladly.
              Problem is (I didn't quote your whole post, because it's long), in sports, the person/player blurs together when it comes to issues of attitude/focus/confidence/etc.

              When people criticize Hibbert as mentally checking out, that's not criticizing an element of him as a person. That's criticizing a key part of the game for a basketball player...

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                Problem is (I didn't quote your whole post, because it's long), in sports, the person/player blurs together when it comes to issues of attitude/focus/confidence/etc.

                When people criticize Hibbert as mentally checking out, that's not criticizing an element of him as a person. That's criticizing a key part of the game for a basketball player...
                Agreed. I don't think it's right to criticize Hibbert personally. At the same time, 15M/yr is a lot to pay for a C who scores 0 points, 0 blocks, has 4 turnovers and 5 fouls while the opposing scrub C grabs 15 rebounds and blocks 5 shots.

                We talk about Hibbert being an all-star yet he turns in performances like this often. It's not that we don't like Roy the person. It's that he's inconsistent and quite frankly it seems to be getting worse, not better.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                  Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                  Problem is (I didn't quote your whole post, because it's long), in sports, the person/player blurs together when it comes to issues of attitude/focus/confidence/etc.

                  When people criticize Hibbert as mentally checking out, that's not criticizing an element of him as a person. That's criticizing a key part of the game for a basketball player...
                  I really, really don't think that people talk about a player's basketball ability when they're calling them "mentally weak", "mental midgets", "useless POS" and all that stuff. If they are indeed talking about him as a basketball player and not as a person then they should specify it.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    I really, really don't think that people talk about a player's basketball ability when they're calling them "mentally weak", "mental midgets", "useless POS" and all that stuff. If they are indeed talking about him as a basketball player and not as a person then they should specify it.
                    If Roy's game is negatively impacted by mental issues, how would you describe his struggles on the court? Maybe it's best just to leave it alone?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                      I am curious what people thing Roy's next contract will be worth per year? What is his current worth if you could do a do over per year?
                      Will Roy opt into his final year or will he try for a longer term deal with whoever?
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        If Roy's game is negatively impacted by mental issues, how would you describe his struggles on the court? Maybe it's best just to leave it alone?
                        Are things like "maturity," "selfishness," and "aggressiveness" not descriptions of mental states? We use these words all the time to describe many players. Roy's used them himself. Yet with Roy, it's become taboo to talk about his own mental swings to the point where some feel he needs legal representation against slander. Look, I was one of his biggest supporters pre-draft and on draft night I was simply ecstatic because I had followed his progression from the local high schools in my area. But even I've had to readjust my perception of his value to a basketball team. Personally, I don't know how much we can separate talking about a player's mentality when evaluating their overall game. I don't think we should, because it's a large part of who they are and the decisions they make on the court. Now, I also agree with Nuntius that sometimes it gets far too personal, and I've responded in a similar manner when Lance has been on the receiving end. But for the most part, questions about mentality or character should be valid points to bring up as long as they're grounded in truth, related to a discussion about basketball and presented without personal attacks.
                        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                          I don't think you can compare "selfish" with "mental midget" and "useless POS".
                          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


                          • #88
                            Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                            I'm in a parking lot right now but I had to stop and ask if anyone else just heard Mitch Lawrence & nick cuslov just talk about Roy on nba radio? They were just roasting him and talking about how the pacers need to look to move him. Mitch just called him a big slug who can only play in the half court who has to be benched often in the end of games.

                            He just called him a mental wreck. So there it is, a national sportscaster just called Roy Hibbert a mental wreck.


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

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                              If Roy gets more than 10-12 mil on his next contract he will be grossly overpaid. He's a 7'2 slow , plodding center with a terrible sense of balance.

                              In his contract year Roy avg. 12.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 2.0 bpg and shot 49.7% from the field and had improved each of his 4 seasons.

                              Since his new contract
                              2012-13 his avgs. 11.9 ppg , 8.3 rpg, 2.1 bpg and 44.8% shooting
                              2013-14 10.8 ppg 6.6 rpg, 1.8 bpg and 43.9% shooting
                              2014-15 10.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 1.8 bpg and 43.2% shooting

                              His performance has gotten worse each season. Why would any team give him the max when his performance has declined for 3 straight years since his last contract? Roy in todays NBA is a dinosaur a slow, mechanical center in a world of quicker, more athletic centers.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Roy photo's on the bench in the 3rd quarter vs Portland 12/13/14

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                If Roy's game is negatively impacted by mental issues, how would you describe his struggles on the court? Maybe it's best just to leave it alone?
                                I'd say that he was injured. Injury isn't restricted to the physical kind. Mental and psychological injuries exist as well.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X