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

JO trade scenarios.

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

  • #76
    Re: JO trade scenarios.

    Originally posted by rommie
    Was it Dirk becoming an elite player, or did the Mavs just become an elite team?

    I think that the Pacers need to focus on getting JO some good players. We need to get 2-3 more good players on this team. Not only do we need good players, we need the pieces to fit. I don't care to much if we get defenseive players or offenseive players, as long as the team has chemistry.
    I think both points in this argument have validity. IOW, this development of elite team and elite player is always to a greater extent a symbiotic relationship.

    As far as the Mavs are concerned, they have improved on a team level with solid personnel acquisitions, a great coaching hire, and Dirk's ascent to elite status the last couple seasons IMO. Could any of the above in isolation have gotten them to the finals? I think probably not.

    The jury is still out on the Pacers IMO in all these areas. Can JO approach the level Dirk currently inhabits? Can we get in the calibur of player that meshes chemistry-wise? Is RC the right coach? To this point the answers are all no.

    Could it still happen? Possibly, but I'm not too confident. Our cap situation has us handcuffed. For those who say 2-3 more good players to get the team/JO where it needs to be, are any of those 2-3 guys currently on our roster? Peja and DG would be 2 guys? If not, who and how do we obtain them?
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: JO trade scenarios.

      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
      Has JO really regressed that much? (Answer: No.)

      I don't think my list is stuck in the past. Rather, I think I'm being less-myopic that many of these lists.

      C'mon, he's in the "Elite, but Limited or Have Question Marks" category.

      Looking at your 10-20:

      Pierce - great stats on a losing team (something that has plagued Brand every year but one. Brand is benefitting, while JO suffers, from the What have you done lately? category.
      Bosh - I'm not sold on him yet, let's see what he can do in the playoffs before we declare him to be better than JO
      Shaq - I continue to disagree with the exaggerations of his demise
      Parker - better than JO? No.
      Ginoboli - I think he's top-ten, replacing Pierce from JayRedd's list
      Yao - better than JO? No.
      Amare - I think he's top-ten, replacing McGrady from JayRedd's list
      Marion - better than JO? No.
      Gasol - Would Memphis homers even argue that he's better than JO? Debatable.
      Redd - No.
      Allen - No.

      I find it bewildering just how much Pacers' fans do not appreciate JO.

      Its not that the SG that replaces Reggie in the Pacers' lineup has a hard act to follow, but it seems to me that the fans are not ready to embrace the Franchise Player that replaces Reggie.

      And that's a shame, because a lot of you are ready to toss away a great, great NBA player for reasons that are not really his fault (questionable coaching/ gameplans, a mis-matched team/ utterly bad lockerroom chemistry and relationships between players & coaches, coaches & management, players & management, and possibly even within management.

      Frankly, I'd hate to think of how bad this team would've been this season WITHOUT JO's efforts to hold it together.
      Very, very, good! Sometimes you nail it!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: JO trade scenarios.

        Let me ask those who say Manu is better than JO. You do realize Manu is a year older than JO? You do realize that Manu had a pretty big let down season? You do realize that Manu's value is highly overrated due to the NBA finals he had against Detroit a year ago? So basically all I can say is saying Manu>JO is one of the dumbest arguments I have ever heard. Manu is good, but he is not better than JO. I mean really would you trade JO straight up for Manu? Not unless you wanted to be in the lottery for th next 3 or 4 years.


        Comment


        • #79
          Re: JO trade scenarios.

          Originally posted by indy0731
          Let me ask those who say Manu is better than JO. You do realize Manu is a year older than JO? You do realize that Manu had a pretty big let down season? You do realize that Manu's value is highly overrated due to the NBA finals he had against Detroit a year ago? So basically all I can say is saying Manu>JO is one of the dumbest arguments I have ever heard. Manu is good, but he is not better than JO. I mean really would you trade JO straight up for Manu? Not unless you wanted to be in the lottery for th next 3 or 4 years.
          I agre with indy0731 here. Manu is good, he is an all star type talent. But he is not as good as JO.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: JO trade scenarios.

            I don't think anyone is having a hard time accepting JO as a franchise player. Just the contrary, I think many people were quick to assume JO would become the next "leader" just because he said the right things and because Reggie said he was passing him the torch. We all know Reggie was leader till the day he retired, and for good reason.

            Do I think JO is a good player? For sho. even a great player? No doubt! But he can not carry a team by himself

            He and Artest led this team to that 61 win season and the ECF's, and those two would have worked out great gad Artest not turned into a Mo-Ron.

            JO can not lead this team by himself, and that is not a knock on him.

            If we continue to stand pat (I hope to god we don't have to worry about this and it becomes a moot point) and just play "throw the ball to JO and let him create" we are going to continue to be dissappointed.

            Now I have said since 11/19 that I thought JO would have a stigma attached to him because of the brawl, but I guarentee you that if he is able to get the team back to the "elite" status and even back to the ECFAnd hopefully the NBA finals then all would be forgotten and he would be accepted as the "face" of the franchise.

            That isn't going to happen, however, ifall he leads us to is .500 season and first round exits

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: JO trade scenarios.

              Look at this team on paper and tell me it's much better than a .500 team. Brad Miller, Al Harrington, Reggie Miller, and Ron Artest are gone. Peja didn't play in 67% of the playoffs. We are currently JO, Peja, and the scrub squad (Danny is coming along, but isn't there yet). Just on paper, NJ should have swept us.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: JO trade scenarios.

                Manu's an NBA and World Champ. I understand Duncan's great, but Manu was the primary option down the stretch for both of those teams. He is one of the great players in the NBA. Until JO wins something, it's not even a comparison.

                Gasol puts up similar stats on a team with less talent, plays many, many more games, and gets a better record. Hmm...

                Marion is much more valuable than JO. Everything except the scoring...

                I also forgot Kirilenko, who belongs in the Top 10-15.

                If you saw Yao play when he was healthy, he was as dominant as JO at his peak, with literally nothing around him. Almost as much scoring, and a greater impact on D and the boards.

                JO's a great player, an All-Star, not arguing that, but he's not an elite superstar. To win a title, we need another player of All-Star caliber. If managment determines they can't aquire one, we should get rid of JO, as we can field .500 teams without paying one guy $18 mil.
                2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: JO trade scenarios.

                  Originally posted by bulldog
                  Manu's an NBA and World Champ. I understand Duncan's great, but Manu was the primary option down the stretch for both of those teams. He is one of the great players in the NBA. Until JO wins something, it's not even a comparison.
                  Agree - of course I've got both Manu and JO in my top-ten.

                  Gasol puts up similar stats on a team with less talent, plays many, many more games, and gets a better record. Hmm...
                  The Grizzlies have less talent than the Pacers (minus JO)?? Nah, I don't buy that. As for the last two comments, that's an interesting correlation. JO has to get past the injuries that have plagued him the past two seasons that have resulted from him gaining the weight/ bulk necessary to play C. I'll admit that didn't work out too well; I was a leading advocate that JO's development as a "C" was a key variable in allowing Brad Miller to leave. My hunch is that, once JO loses the excess bulk, we are not talking about the injury-plagued JO anymore.

                  Marion is much more valuable than JO. Everything except the scoring...
                  So the Suns have three players more valuable than JO? Why aren't they defending their championship this week?

                  I also forgot Kirilenko, who belongs in the Top 10-15.
                  That's too high. 15-20 maybe.

                  If you saw Yao play when he was healthy, he was as dominant as JO at his peak, with literally nothing around him. Almost as much scoring, and a greater impact on D and the boards.
                  Better D? Really? Yao Ming vs. Jermaine O'Neal?

                  JO's a great player, an All-Star, not arguing that, but he's not an elite superstar. To win a title, we need another player of All-Star caliber. If managment determines they can't aquire one, we should get rid of JO, as we can field .500 teams without paying one guy $18 mil.
                  JO needs a better surrounding cast, without a doubt.

                  Since when did everyone decide that to be a "superstar" you had to be able to take a bunch of mis-matched stiffs (by NBA standards) and single-handedly lead them to a title?

                  Other than Wilt a couple of times who has done that? That's an absurd criticism of JO.

                  I hate sounding like a damn rah-rah cheerleader, but the underserved negativity toward JO *as a player* is mystifying. I can understand criticism of his attitude at times, and if there's one thing he doesn't do well it is to pass out of the post to a bunch of teammates that have quit moving (although if you asked Bill Walton in his prime to pass out of the post to bunch of guys with their feet anchored in concret, he'd fail too.)
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: JO trade scenarios.

                    Originally posted by Shade
                    Look at this team on paper and tell me it's much better than a .500 team. Brad Miller, Al Harrington, Reggie Miller, and Ron Artest are gone. Peja didn't play in 67% of the playoffs. We are currently JO, Peja, and the scrub squad (Danny is coming along, but isn't there yet). Just on paper, NJ should have swept us.
                    Sorry if I am assuming, but this post was right after mine, but in case that was directed at me I never said otherwise.

                    I am honestly surprised it wasnt a 4 game sweep.

                    Sorry Jay, I have been in and out of this thread and I know my logic is a little off with me going backwards instead of forward.

                    KG - I'm not convinced KG alone would make the rest of the Pacers any better. That's an interesting debate, though
                    I realize KG has had some rough seasons these past few years, but honestly that is the one thing that seperates JO from the "elite".

                    I think the "elite" guys are able to take a team and bring out the full potential in there teammates. We have not seen that out of JO.

                    Once again, not a insult. Just more of an observation. I think we are quick to label guys "superstars" and "elite" now a days.

                    Just my .92

                    Originally posted by Robertmto
                    I am so happy to see you guys givin Arenas his respect. He was the fourth leading scorer this year and its just amazing what he can do when the games on the line.
                    Gil is a very good player, and a fun one to watch. He certainilly has his flaws, but I think he gets respect from most people. Esp. after the Wizards last couple of runs.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: JO trade scenarios.

                      Originally posted by vapacersfan
                      Gil is a very good player, and a fun one to watch. He certainilly has his flaws, but I think he gets respect from most people.
                      Hey! "Gill" is spelled with TWO l's!

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: JO trade scenarios.

                        Originally posted by indy0731
                        You do realize that Manu had a pretty big let down season?
                        I agree that JO is better than Manu, but Ginobli was pretty much hurt all season.

                        And this isn't directed at you Indy07, but it's a little frustrating to hear all this talk in the media about players drastically improving or getting worse from year to year when they're in their late 20s or older. This really is just "flavor of the month" talk. Perception says that JO is worse than he was in his MVP year. Perception is that Manu isn't as good as he was two years ago. Perception is that KG is now not as good as he was when the TWolves went to the WCFs.

                        Now, I'm not saying that people can't improve their jump shooting, ball-handling or just get a little better with maturity, but the notion that Manu's or KG's talent for this game somehow got any worse than it has been their whole life is pretty short-sighted. Basketball's a very, very simple game. You don't get worse. You may get old, or you be put in an environment where you can't succeed as well as you could in another one, but you don't get worse.

                        That's all I have to say about that.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: JO trade scenarios.

                          Paul Pierce would like Jermaine or Kevin Garnett in Boston.

                          http://www.boston.com/sports/basketb..._ left_elbow/

                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          I don't know too much about this draft, about the talent. I don't know if there's going to be anybody that will be much of an impact player in their first year at the seventh pick. What would I do? I'd find a way to use that seventh pick to get a guy like a Kevin Garnett, a Jermaine O'Neal, somebody. At least explore it.
                          ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: JO trade scenarios.

                            Originally posted by rommie
                            Paul Pierce would like Jermaine or Kevin Garnett in Boston.

                            http://www.boston.com/sports/basketb..._ left_elbow/

                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            I don't know too much about this draft, about the talent. I don't know if there's going to be anybody that will be much of an impact player in their first year at the seventh pick. What would I do? I'd find a way to use that seventh pick to get a guy like a Kevin Garnett, a Jermaine O'Neal, somebody. At least explore it.
                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            OK, how about a JO for Pierece and Jefferson.

                            Oh, you mean he'd like JO to JOIN him in Boston?
                            "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                            -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: JO trade scenarios.

                              Originally posted by blanket
                              OK, how about a JO for Pierece and Jefferson.

                              Oh, you mean he'd like JO to JOIN him in Boston?
                              You mean so that we can miss the playoffs like the Celtics?
                              Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                              http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: JO trade scenarios.

                                JO + Pierce would be a good combo. The celtics are stuck, however, as WallyWorld and Lafrentz's contract make it difficult to rebuild, meaning they need to stick with Pierce till the end.
                                2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X