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

Evan or Lance?

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

  • Re: Evan or Lance?

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    Decision making and discipline are what keep Lance from being a point. Same with Turner. And add in that Turner isn't a combo guard, but rather a 2/3, you aren't going to go places with him as your starting point guard. Turner played well last night, but I didn't see anything that said he could play point for any sort of an extended period of time. Nor did his time in Philly show that. Last night was a very good offensive showing from Evan, because he's a scorer and thats what we need him to be. But if you saw him in Philly, you saw the bone headed TO's like Lance makes and forced shots like Lance takes. Those are just two things that George Hill doesn't do very often. And thats why he is a great point guard for this team. He doesn't turn the ball over and he doesn't take bad shots.

    And I haven't even brought up defense. Turner is too slow to guard point guards. That was quite evident last night as two's and three's blew right past him.

    We don't need a true point guard means we don't need someone like Chris Paul. But we do need smart and controlled play from the position which handles the ball and gets more touches than any other.
    I didn't say a true point guard, and I don't think you really understand Turners games and his strength, I think he has pretty good decision making, and honestly I don't think he was used correctly in Philly and that is why he had such a hard time making the transition, he was not a 3 and more of a 1/2 but that is not how they used him and he struggled. Not sure if you saw much of him in college and realized why he was so effective, also I understand speed is an issue, but his length really helps with that... I will add that as he gets used to how this team plays and where help will be and won't be his defense should be better against quicker guards. Keep an eye on him this year I think you will be surprised with what you end up seeing.
    Why so SERIOUS

    Comment


    • Re: Evan or Lance?

      Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
      Mike Conley ...
      I don't think Conley is an upgrade.

      Comment


      • Re: Evan or Lance?

        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        I didn't say a true point guard
        yes you did:
        Originally posted by Really? View Post
        as you said he is more of a combo meaning we don't really need a true point
        and I don't think you really understand Turners games and his strength, I think he has pretty good decision making, and honestly I don't think he was used correctly in Philly and that is why he had such a hard time making the transition, he was not a 3 and more of a 1/2 but that is not how they used him and he struggled. Not sure if you saw much of him in college and realized why he was so effective, also I understand speed is an issue, but his length really helps with that... I will add that as he gets used to how this team plays and where help will be and won't be his defense should be better against quicker guards. Keep an eye on him this year I think you will be surprised with what you end up seeing.
        I understand Turner's game just fine. I've seen him plenty at OSU, hell I saw the kid play live. He was great at OSU. But he wasn't a point guard. He played the 2/3. Thats not a bad thing. He's just not a point. Play him where he will succeed.

        And while his length helps, what I've seen of him, he just won't ever be quick enough on his feet to stay in front of 1's. I do expect him to become better on defense from the coaching and culture alone in Indiana vs. Philly. But when you have slow feet defensively, there is only so much you can do. Danny doesn't have quick feet, but technique and length let him defend well. But thats also because we didn't have him guard 1's and 2's. Turner can learn to do the same.

        I think Turner is a good player. I think Larry made a great trade. If we could keep Lance and Turner, I'd be all for it. If Lance gets a ridiculous offer from another team, I'm for keeping Turner. But keeping Turner and making him our point guard? No way. We wouldn't be nearly as good as we are today.

        EDIT: Since I missed the sacrifice part of your previous post I'll answer it here. Hill and West easily could have better numbers if they were more selfish. But they see the big picture, and thats winning a championship. And they know the best chance at that is to play team basketball. Its a sacrifice all of our starters make, but Hill and West make it the most imo. With that being said, Hill does need to be more aggressive as well.
        Last edited by ilive4sports; 02-27-2014, 01:36 AM.

        Comment


        • Re: Evan or Lance?

          Originally posted by Really? View Post
          Also what sacrifice are Hill and West making, I don't really want to assume I know what you mean.
          Not getting the ball enough. Hill, West and Roy have really sacrificed their offensive touches this season and have passed the torch to PG and Lance.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Evan or Lance?

            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
            yes you did:




            I understand Turner's game just fine. I've seen him plenty at OSU, hell I saw the kid play live. He was great at OSU. But he wasn't a point guard. He played the 2/3. Thats not a bad thing. He's just not a point. Play him where he will succeed.

            And while his length helps, what I've seen of him, he just won't ever be quick enough on his feet to stay in front of 1's. I do expect him to become better on defense from the coaching and culture alone in Indiana vs. Philly. But when you have slow feet defensively, there is only so much you can do. Danny doesn't have quick feet, but technique and length let him defend well. But thats also because we didn't have him guard 1's and 2's. Turner can learn to do the same.

            I think Turner is a good player. I think Larry made a great trade. If we could keep Lance and Turner, I'd be all for it. If Lance gets a ridiculous offer from another team, I'm for keeping Turner. But keeping Turner and making him our point guard? No way. We wouldn't be nearly as good as we are today.

            EDIT: Since I missed the sacrifice part of your previous post I'll answer it here. Hill and West easily could have better numbers if they were more selfish. But they see the big picture, and thats winning a championship. And they know the best chance at that is to play team basketball. Its a sacrifice all of our starters make, but Hill and West make it the most imo. With that being said, Hill does need to be more aggressive as well.
            Sorry didn't mean "true point guard" more than that is the person primary position, I saw him play live as well. You are correct that he did not play the point there more of the 2/3 but he had the ball in his hands the majority of the time, starting up plays, getting guys open and controlling the pace of the game. I would argue that Hill isn't a point either really didn't play that actual position til he got to the league.

            I can agree about the defense part, there are going to be some guys that he is really going to have a hard time staying in front of.

            As far as the sacrifice I see what you are saying but really they are getting only about 1-2 less attempts per game(over their time in indy), but since they have good guys to draw defenders away this should allow them to have easier shots. I think team ball is what it is and that is the way to win, but I really don't think it is a huge sacrifice maybe they lose about 2 points per game now than they did before, and West doesn't get to set up on the low post as often.

            Oh and I am with you I would love Hill to be more aggressive at times, that is the part of his game that I thought he would bring from SA but I really did not see it that often.

            Thanks for the response...
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • Re: Evan or Lance?

              I didn't see Hill in IUPUI so I can't comment on that, but since he has gotten into the league, he's been a combo guard and a pretty damn good one. He has some of the skills and qualities in a point that Turner just doesn't. Kobe Bryant also has the ball in his hands the majority of the time, starts plays, controls the pace, gets guys open, but he's not a point guard.

              Points wise, I think Hill sacrifices more than 2 a game. Hell, just look at last year to this year. He's down more than 3ppg. And thats mainly due to Lance and PG taking more shots. Earlier Mike Conley was mentioned as a upgrade to Hill, many will cite his 17ppg as a reason why. But Conley attempts nearly twice as many shots as George Hill. GH can score. The Portland game showed that. But most nights, thats not his role here. Hill could easily average 15ppg and if he got as many attempts as Conley, he would average 17ppg too. So often Hill is looked at as our worst starter. Which is a ridiculous thought because he's a fantastic player.

              This all just comes back to, why mess with the starting five? They have been one of, if not the best line up in the NBA for a couple of seasons now. Only thing I would be ok with changing is if Lance gets some ridiculous offer from another team and we keep Turner instead. Our starting five is why we are one of the best in the league. Don't mess with it.

              Comment


              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                This all just comes back to, why mess with the starting five? They have been one of, if not the best line up in the NBA for a couple of seasons now. Only thing I would be ok with changing is if Lance gets some ridiculous offer from another team and we keep Turner instead. Our starting five is why we are one of the best in the league. Don't mess with it.
                Yup.

                Also, FWIW, advanced stats love George Hill. By some measures, he's been our best offensive player for 3 straight seasons, ever since his trade here. Think about that.

                Comment


                • Re: Evan or Lance?

                  Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                  Yup.

                  Also, FWIW, advanced stats love George Hill. By some measures, he's been our best offensive player for 3 straight seasons, ever since his trade here. Think about that.
                  He's easily our most efficient offensive player. Shoots a great percentage both from the field and from 3, and rarely turns the ball over. As Ilive4sports said, he has already shown that he can put up better scoring numbers if he had more attempts. I absolutely love Hill's game, and the way he fits in with the team.

                  Turner or Lance really make for good, complimentary backcourt partners for Hill. It's just a matter of what type of player you prefer when deciding between Lance and ET.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Evan or Lance?

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    He's easily our most efficient offensive player. Shoots a great percentage both from the field and from 3, and rarely turns the ball over. As Ilive4sports said, he has already shown that he can put up better scoring numbers if he had more attempts. I absolutely love Hill's game, and the way he fits in with the team.

                    Turner or Lance really make for good, complimentary backcourt partners for Hill. It's just a matter of what type of player you prefer when deciding between Lance and ET.
                    I would hate to see what the turnover rate would be without G Hill. I like the fact Turner is taller. GHill point, Turner shooting guard and PG at small forward makes for some
                    length on the perimeter. We shall see how Turner performs over the next few weeks. Is it possible the Pacers are out-bid for Lance and Turner?
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • Re: Evan or Lance?

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      I didn't see Hill in IUPUI so I can't comment on that, but since he has gotten into the league, he's been a combo guard and a pretty damn good one. He has some of the skills and qualities in a point that Turner just doesn't. Kobe Bryant also has the ball in his hands the majority of the time, starts plays, controls the pace, gets guys open, but he's not a point guard.

                      Points wise, I think Hill sacrifices more than 2 a game. Hell, just look at last year to this year. He's down more than 3ppg. And thats mainly due to Lance and PG taking more shots. Earlier Mike Conley was mentioned as a upgrade to Hill, many will cite his 17ppg as a reason why. But Conley attempts nearly twice as many shots as George Hill. GH can score. The Portland game showed that. But most nights, thats not his role here. Hill could easily average 15ppg and if he got as many attempts as Conley, he would average 17ppg too. So often Hill is looked at as our worst starter. Which is a ridiculous thought because he's a fantastic player.

                      This all just comes back to, why mess with the starting five? They have been one of, if not the best line up in the NBA for a couple of seasons now. Only thing I would be ok with changing is if Lance gets some ridiculous offer from another team and we keep Turner instead. Our starting five is why we are one of the best in the league. Don't mess with it.
                      Yeah my point is that neither is a true PG, but in our system since we don't really need a true PG Turner has some skills that would translate, the defense on quicker guards will be a concern for sure. Also yeah I mean he averages about 2 less shots per game, which translates into 6 points at the most if he is making every shot and if he is only taking 3's, but lets say he is taking half 3s and half 2s and hitting about 50 % that puts him right around the range of 3 ppg, again I don't think that is a huge sacrifice seeing that while being here he has never been a volume shooter or someone used for his scoring.

                      And I understand the idea of don't fix something that isn't broke, but I don't think that what Hill does is super unique, seems like there are guys who could play his role. Meaning he may have more ability and potential than he is asked to show with this team, but due to that there are other guys who could do that as well. He is more of a combo guard that is used as a 1, who also is not asked to score like most combo guards, pretty sure if on a different team or different system he would put up way more points.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • Re: Evan or Lance?

                        Originally posted by owl View Post
                        I would hate to see what the turnover rate would be without G Hill. I like the fact Turner is taller. GHill point, Turner shooting guard and PG at small forward makes for some
                        length on the perimeter. We shall see how Turner performs over the next few weeks. Is it possible the Pacers are out-bid for Lance and Turner?
                        I don't think so.

                        I think Turner will be around 8-10 million per year and the fact that no teams where willing to spend a late first on him tells you that he doesn't have a ton of value on the trade market. That's a good sign that the Pacers are going to have the option to keep him IMO.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Evan or Lance?

                          Maybe I am just undervaluing Hill at this point, keep him at the 1, sign back Lance or Turner and lets win a championship, that is all I really care about at the end of the day.
                          Why so SERIOUS

                          Comment


                          • Re: Evan or Lance?

                            Originally posted by owl View Post
                            I would hate to see what the turnover rate would be without G Hill. I like the fact Turner is taller. GHill point, Turner shooting guard and PG at small forward makes for some
                            length on the perimeter. We shall see how Turner performs over the next few weeks. Is it possible the Pacers are out-bid for Lance and Turner?
                            I agree. Plus, Turner is a restricted FA, so we would have some options with that situation. I think he's a max $10mil a yr player, which would bode well for the Pacers financial situation.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Evan or Lance?

                              Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                              I don't think so.

                              I think Turner will be around 8-10 million per year and the fact that no teams where willing to spend a late first on him tells you that he doesn't have a ton of value on the trade market. That's a good sign that the Pacers are going to have the option to keep him IMO.
                              Actually, I think if he works out here it could work against us resigning him. A lot of people discount the season he has had as just putting up numbers on a bad team. If he is a big contributor on a championship team and fits into the locker room, I think it changes the perception of him a bit.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                                Too early to tell for me. I've become attached to Lance and his energy. Sincerely hope we can (afford to) keep him. IF Turner outperforms him the rest of the way then he COULD become option nr. 1, but that would prob. mean he would start playing like he's out of price range all the same. We'll see when the season is over and how each of them performed during both the regular and postseason. I just LOVE the position we are in though .

                                GJ Larry!
                                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X