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

What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

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

  • What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

    There seems to be a growing unrest concerning the way Jim O'Brien coaches. So I thought I would start a thread where we can put all our complaints into one thread. And since I started it, I only ask that your complaints are specific. So you don't like his offense, - what don't you like about it. OK, so you don't like his defense - what don't you like about it. You don't like his substitution pattern - Ok why don't you like it. You hated the way he coached the game at Phoenix - OK, what specifically didn't you like about it. - All right I think you get what I'm looking for.

    Keep in mind a thread like this could be done any season for every team and every coach. Also, I might later include some of the things I don't like about the way he coaches. (also you can make a list of things you don't like and still think he's a good coach or the right coach for this team)
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-03-2008, 10:10 AM.

  • #2
    Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    There seems to be a growing unrest concerning the way Jim O'Brien coaches. So I thought I would start a thread where we can put all our complaints into one thread. And since I started it, I only ask that your complaints are specific. So you don't like his offense, - what don't you like about it. OK, so you don't like his defnese - what don't you like about it. You don't like his substitution pattern - Ok why don't you like it. You hated the way he coached the game at Phoenix - OK, what specifically didn't you like about it. - All right I think you get what I'm looking for.

    Keep in mind a thread like this could be done any season for every team and every coach. Also, I might later include some of the things I don't like about the way he coaches. (also you can make a list of things you don't like and still think he's a good coach or the right coach for this team)

    Gimmicky, his defense feels gimmicky and his offense feels gimmicky. Maybe its a product of personnel, maybe not.

    Hubie Brown was commenting how on fast breaks that the Pacers all run to the 3 point line instead of trying to finish at the rim. I get sick really sick at 3s taken without one other player going for the offensive rebound if Foster is not in the game. I'm all for 3s, but be smart about it.

    On defense, I was hoping for at least some Mark Jackson serviceable individual D being brought out, not a defensive 3 second call waiting to happen.

    I like his accountability and I like his straightforward approach. I don't like the 1/2 trap defense that lacks accountability from the individual, I don't like the offense that is chuck and done.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

      What I don't like is continuous search of a starting five

      I agree with the fact that you can change your team in order to match the opponent's team. However I believe that you should look at the things you're good at rather than the stuff your opponent is better at... You should follow your competitive advantages and not trying to match it with the other teams...if you take a look at the warriors...They start almost every night with the same team...they have the ability to find each other (in the extend that they pass)...but everybody on the team knows the runninglines of his teammates...the pacers don't have that kinda starting five...we should not create a situation like the lakers have, where you got two separate teams in one... however tha pacers lack of chemistry is in my opinion a consequence of the continuous change in the starting line up...
      I believe that players can perform better if they know exactly what they need to do and when they know without even looking where everybody on the court is situated...

      I do like his attitude as a coach...and his patience... he is exactly what the pacers need at this moment...someone to create the basics

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        Hubie Brown was commenting how on fast breaks that the Pacers all run to the 3 point line instead of trying to finish at the rim. I get sick really sick at 3s taken without one other player going for the offensive rebound if Foster is not in the game. I'm all for 3s, but be smart about it.
        That's the thing I've become concerned about.

        I understand why he went with the offense he did - and, frankly, while JO has been out it has been about the only thing we could have had any hopes of doing. JOB wanted to kick the excitement up a notch and create a team that wasn't boring to watch.

        However, I'm now convinced that we need more balance in the offense. We need to be able to say "the perimeter shots aren't falling, get inside and score or get fouled until you get your rhythm back" rather than "keep shooting, they will fall sooner or later."

        On defense, well, without a defensive stopper it won't do much good to have a defense that makes an individual accountable. We'll still be bad, the fans will just be able to blame it on individual players rather than the team as a whole. Don't know if that's an improvement, really - after all, we know which players have problems and which ones don't.
        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


        • #5
          Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          Gimmicky, his defense feels gimmicky and his offense feels gimmicky. Maybe its a product of personnel, maybe not.

          Hubie Brown was commenting how on fast breaks that the Pacers all run to the 3 point line instead of trying to finish at the rim. I get sick really sick at 3s taken without one other player going for the offensive rebound if Foster is not in the game. I'm all for 3s, but be smart about it.

          On defense, I was hoping for at least some Mark Jackson serviceable individual D being brought out, not a defensive 3 second call waiting to happen.

          I like his accountability and I like his straightforward approach. I don't like the 1/2 trap defense that lacks accountability from the individual, I don't like the offense that is chuck and done.
          As I said in another thread, if I wait, somebody will say what I think. (I think I'm just going to quote other people going forward.)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

            Judging Jim O'Brien by the results he gets with this team is like judging Pat Riley by the Heat.

            As far as I can tell, chucking 3s is the best thing the Pacers do, so they might as well keep doing it. And standing around the arc spreads the floor. I think the Pacers do better when they do that than they do on those occasions when the collapse to the center. The defense isn't working, but I trust that it can work. O'Brien is right for sticking with it. The Pacers weren't going to be competitive this year anyway, and he might as well keep teaching the defense of the future to the few current players who'll still be here in the future.

            I find one fault: O'Brien hasn't instill seriousness, professionalism and desire in the players. A few brought it with them, but none has learned it since putting on the Blue and Gold.
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

              I won't defend O'B's offensive system because I think that it
              ultimately limits how far a team can go (obviously irrelevant
              since the Pacers are miles away from that ceiling). But isn't
              the over-reliance on 3's at this point partly a function of not
              having a PG who can get consitent penetration (Diener) or
              isn't much of a playmaker for others (Murray) ?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                However, I'm now convinced that we need more balance in the offense. We need to be able to say "the perimeter shots aren't falling, get inside and score or get fouled until you get your rhythm back" rather than "keep shooting, they will fall sooner or later."
                I was hoping that it was low percentage outside shots would open up the middle or post, not low percentage outside shots to open up more low percentage outside shots. Murphy got it about a month back and started pump faking and driving to the basket and not settling and it helped his game enormously. It'd be nice if it caught on.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                  My ideal would be the pacers shooting about 55 free throws every game - getting to the free throw line I believe is the most important thing any offense can do. And while every coach wants to shoot a lot of free throws - the only Pacers coach who I believe really emphasized it was Larry Brown. I believed he coached it and made a big deal about it.

                  The Pacers however don't currently have any players who can create their own shot - so it makes it nearly impossible to shoot a lot of free throws. Players like granger, Murphy and Dunleavy need open shots (it is remarkable to watch how much better they shoot when they are open probably 30% better) And without someone to create open shots for those players, the only way to get them open shots is a lot of player and ball movement - and fast breaks.

                  So I do believe the system that OB has installed is probably the best for this current team. And sure Hubie was critical of pull up three, he did say it is remarkable that the Pacers have 6 guys shooting 39% or better from 3-pt range.

                  So I believe in reality O'Brien deserves a lot of credit for getting this team to score as well as it has.

                  I have a lot more to say about the defense and will do that later

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                    My complaints about JOB are the same concerns I had before he even coached a single game here.

                    Chucking up three-pointers takes no coaching at all. Anyone can do that.

                    He harps on defense while implementing a system that doesn't cater to good defense.

                    He's slow in making adjustments (see: 15-0 run by [I forget who; Denver, maybe?] and end of Phoenix game where Tins "took over"].

                    He can't figure out how to implement JO's game effectively w/o killing the tempo (though, to be fair, nobody seems to be able to do that).

                    In short, I can count a few games where his coaching lost us the game. I can't think of a single time where his coaching has actually won us the game.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                      Like many of us, I'm not enthralled with JOB right now.

                      However, there are two factors that mitigate my lack of enthusiasm:

                      1. He just doesn't have that much talent to work with. Let's judge him after we acquire a decent point guard and a low post scorer and/or a creator/end of game go to guy.

                      2. His previous teams have peaked at the end of the year. Our team has the potential to do that (very late). So let's wait till we are mathematically eliminated before passing total judgment.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                        His offensive system is too predicated on shooting three-pointers and standing around spotting up.

                        I'm actually a big fans of threes, but the way his system is run means it will always be inconcsitent and, much worse IMO, it promotes passive play.

                        I mean, it's not like anyone on our current roster was gonna drive and/or get to the line much anyway because they all simply lack the ability, but running a system that allows them to just stand around the perimeter and shoot jumpers and doesn't encourage penetration (aside from PG really) surely isn't helping. IMO, once a player starts playing that way, it's hard to change back to playing aggressive, attack-the-rim basketball.

                        I truly think J'OB's system was a key factor in the death of Antoine Walker's game. Toine always took some questionable shots, but by the end of the J'OB era he had completely forgotton how to punish smaller guys in the post and blow-by big guys off the dribble -- the two skills that had made him one of the most versatile PFs of all time in his first five years in the League.

                        I don't really care about Antoine's demise, of course (though it is a shame that no one remembers when he was a legitimate beast).

                        But I do worry that if J'OB sticks around a few more years, Danny's drible-drivability will never progress. Maybe Danny has the talent to develop the ability to penetrate; maybe he can't.

                        But what if we never even find out simply because the current system allows him to passively still be a big part of the offense just by taking 12-15 jumpers a game? That would be a crying shame, IMO.

                        Also, I specifically don't like Jimmy's squating.
                        Last edited by JayRedd; 04-03-2008, 11:36 AM.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post

                          I truly think J'OB's system was a key factor in the death of Antoine Walker's game. Toine always took some questionable shots, but by the end of the J'OB era he had completely forgotton how to punish smaller guys in the post and blow-by big guys off the dribble -- the two skills that had made him one of the most versatile PFs of all time in his first five years in the League.

                          I don't really care about Antoine's demise, of course (though it is a shame that no one remembers when he was a legitimate beast).
                          Not to dwell on this minor point, but I always thought if it weren't for O'Brien and Paul Pierce, Walker would have been out of the NBA years ago and would be about 25 million dollars poorer. They made his career - Walker was never very good. He was slow, overweight and missed so many layups he made Jeff Foster look like Kareem (and no not Kareem Rush) Walker should leave any money he has left when he dies to the O'Brien family

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                            I'll add that I've seen Danny improve over the season at attacking the basket. Still has a long way to go, but it's been noticeable.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What specifically don't you like about Jim O'Brien

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Not to dwell on this minor point, but I always thought if it weren't for O'Brien and Paul Pierce, Walker would have been out of the NBA years ago and would be about 25 million dollars poorer. They made his career - Walker was never very good. He was slow, overweight and missed so many layups he made Jeff Foster look like Kareem (and no not Kareem Rush) Walker should leave any money he has left when he dies to the O'Brien family
                              Again, not to dwell, but he was averaging 22.5 and 10.2 before Paul Pierce or Jimmy had ever stepped inside the Fleetcenter. But my main point was not that he was anything great.

                              My point is that his game changed once he started playing in Jimmy's system.

                              Antoine was taking 3.5 threes a night pre-JOB. He took 7.4 per the year Jimmy showed up.

                              Danny took 3.5 threes per night pre-JOB. Currently, he's taking 5.1 per.

                              Originally posted by Mal View Post
                              I'll add that I've seen Danny improve over the season at attacking the basket. Still has a long way to go, but it's been noticeable.
                              He has improved this year. He's still not adept, but he is certainly better than previous seasons.

                              IMO, however, this is despite the offense he plays in...not because of it.

                              In traditional offense, I think it's possible that he would have already made the "leap" in his driving ability that guys like Igoudala, Josh Howard and Luol Deng have made. He's younger than them, sure, but he is behind all of them considerably and I'm worried he won't catch up if he continues to play in this jumper-happy offense.

                              If he wasn't taking five threes a night (he's currently 17th highest in the League and higher than Reggie's career per-game average of 4.7 three-point attempts) than he would be forced to create his own offense more out of necessity. As it is, he can take full quarters off from being aggressive at the offensive end and still know he'll get three or four good looks at the hoop.

                              In a way, it's good that J'OB's system can create those looks. But it also promotes laziness and doesn't encourage creativity/ingenuity.

                              That's my only point about Toine, no matter how you feel about the bum (I'm not tryna say I ever thought he was All Word or nothing...far from it).

                              At one point when he was young, his game was creative and he created a lot of offense...Once he was two years into the JOB system he stopped doing that most of the time and became the fat, lazy chucker we all now know.
                              Last edited by JayRedd; 04-03-2008, 12:08 PM.
                              Read my Pacers blog:
                              8points9seconds.com

                              Follow my twitter:

                              @8pts9secs

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X