# How Would You Fix the Pacers?



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Can the Pacers ever compete with the various _Big 3_'s popping up all over the league when their best player is Danny Granger?

It appears as if Indy will be matching Portland's max contract offer to Roy Hibbert. Do you agree with that decision?

How do you feel about the job Frank Vogel has done with this team?

Do you see the Miles Plumlee selection as at least defensible? Why or why not?

Did you agree with locking up George Hill for 5 years?

Would you consider putting in an amnesty waiver claim on Elton Brand before matching Hibbert?

Should the Pacers bring back Barbosa? If so, how much would you pay him?

Would you consider trading Danny Granger at this time? If so, what would you be trying to get back for him?

How do you feel about pursuing OJ Mayo? What role would you see him having on this roster?

Do you think 2nd round pick Orlando Johnson will make this team?

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana.htm


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

RollWithEm said:


> Can the Pacers ever compete with the various _Big 3_'s popping up all over the league when their best player is Danny Granger?


We could have beaten Miami had we had enough role players.



> It appears as if Indy will be matching Portland's max contract offer to Roy Hibbert. Do you agree with that decision?


Yes.



> How do you feel about the job Frank Vogel has done with this team?


Not a big fan of his egg timer rotations. Regardless of how many potential scorers and options we have on the floor, we still need to have a clear direction. Sometimes it feels like they play hot potato.



> Do you see the Miles Plumlee selection as at least defensible? Why or why not?


No. Replacing Jeff Foster should not have been our biggest priority in the draft.



> Did you agree with locking up George Hill for 5 years?


Seems like a lot for a 6th-7th man on most teams. Just shows that we're committed to not getting a true point guard.



> Would you consider putting in an amnesty waiver claim on Elton Brand before matching Hibbert?


I'd take Elton Brand over Tyler Hansbrough in a heartbeat.



> Should the Pacers bring back Barbosa? If so, how much would you pay him?


No, and if we do, the vet minimum. Too much dribbling in the Playoffs, and missed free throws. He hurt more than he helped.



> Would you consider trading Danny Granger at this time? If so, what would you be trying to get back for him?


Sure, Granger is always on the block. I think he'd probably have a better career out of Indiana anyway. A point guard/replacement. Maybe a shooting guard and move Paul George to the 3 spot. Or for a point guard, start Hill at 2, and George at 3.



> How do you feel about pursuing OJ Mayo? What role would you see him having on this roster?


I'd like to have Mayo, he'd probably be first off the bench, kind of like his role is right now in Memphis. I just don't think that Paul George has enough energy to be a good 6th man.



> Do you think 2nd round pick Orlando Johnson will make this team?


If he keeps playing like he did last night during the summer league, he should. I've heard he'll pan out better for us than Plumlee, so we'll see.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

With a disgruntled Eric Gordon about to be retained by New Orleans, it may be worth Indiana's time to see what the Hornets would want for him. You're obviously not trading Hibbert for him, and I doubt that the team wants to unload Granger in a win-now move, but Foster could do one last good thing for the Pacers by agreeing to a sign-and-trade making just as much money as is required to move some of the young guys for him.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

RollWithEm said:


> Can the Pacers ever compete with the various _Big 3_'s popping up all over the league when their best player is Danny Granger?
> 
> *Yes. With a solid backup big man and a quality pass first PG, they're good enough to fight with anyone. Not favorites obviously, but a team that stands a chance.*
> 
> ...



*Bolded*


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

I would have no issue trading Granger. I personally think Paul George would be more effective at SF, so i wouldn't have any problem trading Granger for a legit fairly young PF, SG or pass first PG. I like Granger i really do, but he doesn't have that killer instinct and he disappears at times. For example, if we could get equal talent at position of need and then shift George to the three I'm all for it. If we could move Granger for Paul Millsap and sign Mayo that would be ideal. I like west also, but he's not a long term solution. Millsap isn't a super star, but he's productive and fairly young and we need a long term solution at the 4 and they need a long term solution at the 3. I know its too late now but moving Granger and Collison for Millsap and Harris would have been good for both teams. I wouldn't have draft plumlee either. In that spot i'd have taken Moultrie. Kaman would be a nice pick up too. I know its a pipe dream. But the line-up below would have been awesome.

5- Hibbert, Kaman
4- Millsap, Hansbrough
3- George, Moultrie
2- Mayo,Hill
1- Harris,Hill,Mayo

And as far as user's name... I'm pissed i couldn't be Van Gundy's Mustache. Has some seriously already taken that.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Where is David West?


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Devin Harris is on the Hawks now.

After all the troubles we had scoring during the season and in the playoffs, I can't believe people are still up for trading Danny Granger. He keeps working to diversify his offensive game, even if he is still only a shooter, and he's emerged as a secondary leader behind David West on this team. 

I don't think we can do much to improve the team now that we've missed out on signing another scorer. Signing Mayo might help, but I don't know if he'll be any more useful than Barbosa was this past season. After the season we had, this is the year we stay still and let our young players develop. If we don't make progress, then it'll be time for a major move like firing Vogel or trading Paul George. At this point, the only guys on the roster that I'd be fine with trading are Collison, Hansbrough, and Plumlee.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Devin Harris is on the Hawks now.
> 
> After all the troubles we had scoring during the season and in the playoffs, I can't believe people are still up for trading Danny Granger. He keeps working to diversify his offensive game, even if he is still only a shooter, and he's emerged as a secondary leader behind David West on this team.
> 
> I don't think we can do much to improve the team now that we've missed out on signing another scorer. Signing Mayo might help, but I don't know if he'll be any more useful than Barbosa was this past season. After the season we had, this is the year we stay still and let our young players develop. If we don't make progress, then it'll be time for a major move like firing Vogel or trading Paul George. At this point, the only guys on the roster that I'd be fine with trading are Collison, Hansbrough, and Plumlee.


Don't be so quick to give up on Collison. I don't think Hill has shown hes clearly the better player, and Collison is one of the better 2nd string point guards in the league right now.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Don't be so quick to give up on Collison. I don't think Hill has shown hes clearly the better player, and Collison is one of the better 2nd string point guards in the league right now.


Sure, but his value might still be higher than that. Still, though, if I have to tolerate having a tiny PG on the floor for 20 minutes, he better at least have one discernable NBA skill. Collison has no court vision, a terrible handle for a guy his size, tiny hands, is a timid shooter, and a horrendous defender. He can get to the mid range and sometimes the basket, but he's one of the smallest players in the NBA and he struggles to make plays at all.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

R-Star said:


> Where is David West?


Sorry its been a long day, and I guess I was thinking long term when i typed that.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Sure, but his value might still be higher than that. Still, though, if I have to tolerate having a tiny PG on the floor for 20 minutes, he better at least have one discernable NBA skill. Collison has no court vision, a terrible handle for a guy his size, tiny hands, is a timid shooter, and a horrendous defender. He can get to the mid range and sometimes the basket, but he's one of the smallest players in the NBA and he struggles to make plays at all.


What? You just described him as the worst player in the NBA.


Hes a very good defender on average sized PG's. His defensive worth only goes down when he faces big PG's who muscle him out. His vision is no worse than Hills. Neither are good pass first PG's. And as far as a timid shooter, I don't agree at all. He looked great in a lot of stretches in the playoffs.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

Pacers Fan said:


> Devin Harris is on the Hawks now.
> 
> After all the troubles we had scoring during the season and in the playoffs, I can't believe people are still up for trading Danny Granger. He keeps working to diversify his offensive game, even if he is still only a shooter, and he's emerged as a secondary leader behind David West on this team.
> 
> I don't think we can do much to improve the team now that we've missed out on signing another scorer. Signing Mayo might help, but I don't know if he'll be any more useful than Barbosa was this past season. After the season we had, this is the year we stay still and let our young players develop. If we don't make progress, then it'll be time for a major move like firing Vogel or trading Paul George. At this point, the only guys on the roster that I'd be fine with trading are Collison, Hansbrough, and Plumlee.


I know Devin Harris was traded already. thats why said "i know its too late now" and "would have been". My point was that he was clearly available and they gave him up cheap. And i'm not trying to rip on Danny, but he'll always be a Robin and not a Batman. He's good but he's not a legit number one option. And if your not going to be able to have a legit number 1, you better maximize what you do have. 

And honestly i'm not thinking about things in a vacuum here. Some of my thoughts are contingent on other moves. I would love to have Mayo as a two guard, and its unlikely but not impossible that he'd come here. I also think George is bit out of position at the 2. "IF" we could land a solid two guard, I'd be all for moving George to the 3, it would probably help him step up his game. Then move danny for equal talent at a position of need. Either a PF or PG. For the time being West has PF taken care of, but he's old with two bad knees. He's a great to have, but he's not a long term answer.

Another random thought here... Why do PGs forget how to pass when they come here? In college collison looked like a great play maker. He had one of the best Ast to To ratio in the draft that year. And Ford was previously a guy good for 7 or 8 APG, but he comes here and that just disappears.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

Pacers Fan said:


> After all the troubles we had scoring during the season and in the playoffs, I can't believe people are still up for trading Danny Granger. He keeps working to diversify his offensive game, even if he is still only a shooter, and he's emerged as a secondary leader behind David West on this team.


Granger was pretty nonexistent in the Miami series, I don't care if he's guarding Lebron, he's still our #1 option on offense and he didn't do much more than 10 pts a game.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Can the Pacers ever compete with the various _Big 3_'s popping up all over the league when their best player is Danny Granger?
*It's going to be really tough to be honest. I love our current team but we are still missing some pieces before I'd feel confident saying we can beat any team in a 7 game series.*

It appears as if Indy will be matching Portland's max contract offer to Roy Hibbert. Do you agree with that decision?
*It's a lot of money but all star centers are rare these days. Good move.*

How do you feel about the job Frank Vogel has done with this team?
*Good and bad. The players seem to love him and the team has performed much better under him then they did with O'Brien but as R-Star and Gonzo said, his eggtimer rotations are a piss off. *

Do you see the Miles Plumlee selection as at least defensible? Why or why not?
*It's hard to say. When I heard the pick I was ****ing furious but he's an athletic 7 footer so I'm sure he can contribute. If Perry Jones wasn't still on the board then I wouldn't of been as upset. *

Did you agree with locking up George Hill for 5 years?
*That's a long ass time but Hill was one of my favorite players this year. I think we can upgrade at point guard but we can definitely win with George Hill.*

Would you consider putting in an amnesty waiver claim on Elton Brand before matching Hibbert?
*I would welcome Elton Brand to the team. Anything that would take minutes away from Hansbrough and Amundson would be a positive.*

Should the Pacers bring back Barbosa? If so, how much would you pay him?
*I was pumped when we got him but after seeing how he played against Miami, I honestly don't give a **** if he's back. If we can get him for veteran minimum or close to it then I'd be welcome to having him here but I'd rather us spend that money on OJ Mayo.*

Would you consider trading Danny Granger at this time? If so, what would you be trying to get back for him?
*I don't get why Danny Granger gets shit on so often. Sure he's not a superstar but I don't think we could really get anything for him that would make us any better. I'm a big fan of Granger and liked the passion he showed in the playoffs. With that said though, I still hope Paul George can eventually turn into that legit #1 option on this team.*


How do you feel about pursuing OJ Mayo? What role would you see him having on this roster?
*Mayo needs a new start and I'd love him to start over here. 6th man or start at SG would work for me.*

Do you think 2nd round pick Orlando Johnson will make this team?
*I'll have to watch some more summer league games before I really form an opinion but I'm sure he will. I wouldn't be surprised if he had a better career than Plumlee.*


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

R-Star said:


> What? You just described him as the worst player in the NBA.


That's how he looks sometimes.



> Hes a very good defender on average sized PG's. His defensive worth only goes down when he faces big PG's who muscle him out.


No, he's not. If anything, he's better against bigger PG's because they don't outquick him. Collison's a fast guy, but dude moves his feet about as well as Jason Kidd.



> His vision is no worse than Hills. Neither are good pass first PG's. And as far as a timid shooter, I don't agree at all. He looked great in a lot of stretches in the playoffs.


His vision is better than Hill's, but at least Hill plays great defense, can attack the basket, and shoot.

The problem I have with Collison is that he needs to shoot a little more than he does. He's a career 36% shooter from downtown, yet only shot 1 1/2 threes per game last year. He only shoots very open 3's. He's afraid to shoot when a defender is within 5 feet of him. Hence, he's timid.



> And i'm not trying to rip on Danny, but he'll always be a Robin and not a Batman. He's good but he's not a legit number one option. And if your not going to be able to have a legit number 1, you better maximize what you do have.


That's terrible logic. If you don't have a #1 option, you may as well have all role players? Because that's what we'd have if we traded Granger. We'd be Philadelphia with worse defense. Every player averaging 12-14 ppg isn't going to work when you have to face superteams.



> Granger was pretty nonexistent in the Miami series, I don't care if he's guarding Lebron, he's still our #1 option on offense and he didn't do much more than 10 pts a game.


That's the thing, though. He wasn't our #1 option because he guarded LeBron. Playing defense on the best player in the world will take some of your offensive game away from you. I'm almost certain that was Vogel's strategy since no one else on our team had the size to guard LeBron. At least put our best defensive option on him (Granger showed he can actually play D when he wants to) as opposed to having scrawny Paul George guard him (and leaving some poor soul on Wade). That way we don't have Granger and LeBron duelling it out like Bird-'Nique (except it wouldn't have been that close). It's strategy. It didn't work, and maybe Vogel will try something different next year, but it worked decently well this time around.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

Pacers Fan said:


> That's terrible logic. If you don't have a #1 option, you may as well have all role players? Because that's what we'd have if we traded Granger. We'd be Philadelphia with worse defense. Every player averaging 12-14 ppg isn't going to work when you have to face superteams.


First, i never said we should have all roleplayers. I said maximize your talent. And I said Trade for EQUAL value at a position of need. Equal value means trading one Robin #2 type for another Robin #2 type. Depending on what position you consider some of guys who are kind of "tweeners" we have serious holes at several spots. 

1. We really need a PG who can pass the ball.
2. PF is only fixed for the short term.
3. I think George is really out of position at two guard. And that may be why his game hasn't improved the way we'd have hoped.
4. Hill is probably a better two guard than a PG. I love it when Hill looks to score, but I don't think he's much of a playmaker at all.

So if you could get a EQUAL talent for Granger at PF or PG I think we're a better team, because we'll have better production from Paul George and George Hill. My point was if you don't have a Mega Star or three you better at least not be "wasting" your talent utilizing it the wrong way.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

Or the other option would be to trade George. Before i mentioned trading Granger for Millsap, but what about Paul George for Millsap. I think in the Granger scenario, they'd be the bigger winner in that deal, but if it was George instead i think we're the bigger winner. Either way though George for Millsap is win-win for everyone in my opinion. So here's a What if scenario for you-

1- George for Millsap
2- Sign Ramon Sessions. The Mavs probably aren't anymore since they have collison now.
3- Trade for Courtney Lee. He's an excellent defender and long range bomber, he's got good size, and he's an indy guy.
4- Then shift Hill to more of a combo position. Say about 18-20 mintues at the two and only 10 minutes at the point a game.

We'd have a long term answer at PF, still have granger, and have PG who can get at 6.5 apg when given starter minutes. And have Hill doing what he does best, scoring not playmaking.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

If you trade for Millsap, why not trade DWest as well?


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

The thing is, all these "equal talent" #2 guys who have similar value to Granger don't score as much as he does. Even if they do, they won't help our team as much. Do you really think guys like Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, or Tyreke Evans would help Indiana at all? The only player I can think of that would is Rudy Gay, but of course Memphis wouldn't do that. Point being, we have no reason to make lateral moves. Even in the case of Paul Millsap, that would make him our focal point on offense. Do you think Paul Millsap as our focal point on offense brings us any closer to a championship than Granger? Plus trading for him would eliminate David West, who was very productive last season.

Now, Paul George for Millsap I'd be more interested in, but I don't know why Utah would do that other than maybe they'd like to stockpile wing players instead of big men. And even still, that leaves us paying 10 million this season to a backup 4-man and essentially telling Tyler Hansbrough he should try a different sport.

We had a team last season that completely surprised people by being one of the top teams in the East. We took the eventual champions to 6 games. There's no reason at all to make major moves when we can already hang with Boston, Chicago, Brooklyn, and New York. No one's going to beat the Heat anytime soon and trading Danny Granger for the sake of trading Danny Granger isn't going to bring us any closer.

Trading Darren Collison was about as major as I was willing to get for this off season. But yes, we do need a PG off the bench who can see the floor. We were towards the bottom of the league last year in assists, and I don't think that will get any better considering the best passer on the team is a toss-up between Lance Stephenson and Roy Hibbert.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

Pacers Fan said:


> The thing is, all these "equal talent" #2 guys who have similar value to Granger don't score as much as he does. Even if they do, they won't help our team as much. Do you really think guys like Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, or Tyreke Evans would help Indiana at all? The only player I can think of that would is Rudy Gay, but of course Memphis wouldn't do that. Point being, we have no reason to make lateral moves. Even in the case of Paul Millsap, that would make him our focal point on offense. Do you think Paul Millsap as our focal point on offense brings us any closer to a championship than Granger? Plus trading for him would eliminate David West, who was very productive last season.
> 
> Now, Paul George for Millsap I'd be more interested in, but I don't know why Utah would do that other than maybe they'd like to stockpile wing players instead of big men. And even still, that leaves us paying 10 million this season to a backup 4-man and essentially telling Tyler Hansbrough he should try a different sport.
> 
> ...


Lots of little points to make here.

1- I'm not talking about a trade for trades sake. I'm talking about getting the most out of every player we have.

2- I have no idea what your talking about with Utah's wings. They all suck. The kid from butler hasn't shown much, but still has promise. The guy from the hawks is a career bust. George or granger would immediately be the starting SF. The only talent Utah has is a log jam of bigs.

3- I disagree with your last paragraph. I don't like the idea of trading Collison. And i don't like the idea of George Hill as a starting PG. I like hill and it think he's good enough to be a valuable player on a championship team, but he's primarily a scorer with zero court vision and playmaking. I want a legit passing STARTING PG. I want Hill get "starters minutes" but not actually as the starting PG.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Hatrik said:


> 1- I'm not talking about a trade for trades sake. I'm talking about getting the most out of every player we have.


Sometimes chemistry >>> value.



> 2- I have no idea what your talking about with Utah's wings. They all suck. The kid from butler hasn't shown much, but still has promise. The guy from the hawks is a career bust. George or granger would immediately be the starting SF. The only talent Utah has is a log jam of bigs.


You're forgetting Alec Burks. I can't imagine a team taking wing players in the lottery in back-to-back drafts only to trade for another young wing to usurp one or both of them as they're entering their 2nd and 3rd seasons. However, they do have less of a jam because Williams is a Forward, and they likely won't bring back Bell, Howard, or Miles. If they do bring back Miles, though, it'd make the scenario even more absurd.



> 3- I disagree with your last paragraph. I don't like the idea of trading Collison. And i don't like the idea of George Hill as a starting PG. I like hill and it think he's good enough to be a valuable player on a championship team, but he's primarily a scorer with zero court vision and playmaking. I want a legit passing STARTING PG. I want Hill get "starters minutes" but not actually as the starting PG.


Please do make suggestions as to who our starting PG should be, then, because I don't see anyone. Collison was a timid, undersized scoring PG with next-to-zero court vision because of his height. The era of John Stockton-like PG's is over. If it weren't, guys like Jared Jordan would be in the NBA. Look through the list of NBA PG's. Aside from the ten or so teams that have ball-dominant PG's, no one relies on their 1 to do much more than bring the ball up the court, get the team into their offense, and hit open shots. Do you really think we'd be better off starting Jose Calderon, Andre Miller, Ramon Sessions, Mike Conley, or Devin Harris? Because we're not getting Tony Parker, Derrick Rose, John Wall, Ricky Rubio, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Rajon Rondo, or Chris Paul.

George Hill's a smart basketball player. He might miss a teammate under the basket sometimes, but if we're running our offense through Hibbert, West, and Granger, he won't be relied upon to do much passing besides hit Granger off a screen, feed the post (which is tricky but can be learned), and hit cutters. Hill's ability to hit cutters is really my only concern.

Honestly, Augustin was the best were going to find, actually far better than I expected, but you can't expect him to take George Hill's starting role.


----------



## Hatrik (Jul 11, 2012)

Pacers Fan;6910050
Do you really think we'd be better off starting Jose Calderon said:


> I'm ecstatic with the Augustin deal. And I do think he could be our starting PG. He's going to surprise people here. I think he never lived up to his potential in Charlotte simply because the players around him sucked. He's capable of significantly better assist numbers than he showed in Charlotte. If we had a back-up of 2 guard with some size and defense (Courntey Lee?) i would prefer those three guys all getting starters minutes, but with Hill only playing about 10 or so at PG. I'm turning into a broken record, but i just want hill to score points. Simply because that's what he's best at, and thats also what we could really use more of.
> 
> and to answer your question, I DO think we'd be a better team with most of those you listed running the offense.
> 
> Now here's a question for you. Are you happy with our future at PF? West is a month away from 32 and he has two bad knees. I'm happy to have him here, and was/is a huge part of our turn around, but he is a short term fix. We should be planning ahead.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Hatrik said:


> I'm ecstatic with the Augustin deal. And I do think he could be our starting PG. He's going to surprise people here. I think he never lived up to his potential in Charlotte simply because the players around him sucked. He's capable of significantly better assist numbers than he showed in Charlotte. If we had a back-up of 2 guard with some size and defense (Courntey Lee?) i would prefer those three guys all getting starters minutes, but with Hill only playing about 10 or so at PG. I'm turning into a broken record, but i just want hill to score points. Simply because that's what he's best at, and thats also what we could really use more of.
> 
> and to answer your question, I DO think we'd be a better team with most of those you listed running the offense.
> 
> Now here's a question for you. Are you happy with our future at PF? West is a month away from 32 and he has two bad knees. I'm happy to have him here, and was/is a huge part of our turn around, but he is a short term fix. We should be planning ahead.


I could really see Hill and DJ splitting minutes at the 1 just like Hill and Collison did last year. If they both play 24 minutes at PG and then Hill covers 8-10 minutes at SG, then that's only about a quarter of basketball off from what you want. Keep in mind the possibility that Lance Stephenson might be a decent basketball player this year. He's our best passer and ball handler, although he's not the most savvy of PG options. Say he gets 10 mpg and either knocks some of Hill's minutes at PG down or Green's minutes at SG down. That's even closer to what you want. Point being, we have the option to mess with rotations enough to the point where Hill might be only manning the one for over a quarter of basketball (if you count Lance as a PG; otherwise, he's just a 2 in there to help). I honestly don't see things in our backcourt being too different from last season, Hill starting or not, with the exception of an improved Hill and a more aggressive Paul George.

Also, the PG's I listed probably wouldn't start, either. They'd do the exact same thing Augustin will do which is see over 20 minutes off the bench. Conley might start, but the rest of them are pretty much bench material at this stage in their careers.

I'm decently happy with PF, but I also think it's an issue we should look at this upcoming off season when David West is a free agent. West is getting old, sure, but I don't see why he could not keep knocking down 14 footers and outmuscling people in the post for another 3-4 seasons. Defense might be a concern, but we already have him and Roy not stepping out to hedge picks, so I don't think it will be too much of an issue.

As far as Hansbrough goes, I still have some hope for him. If that jump shot's falling, he'll have more room to face up and drive to the basket. He can still be an effective player in the NBA, but probably not a starter. I just hope at some point he learns to use his left hand and learns to keep his head up when he gets the ball.

After that, I don't know. But we have assets and I'm sure we'll address the issue when it needs to be addressed.


----------



## TheGlove_20 (Dec 12, 2011)

Get 'Dre Miller and throw pendergraph's minutes on with Miller


----------

