Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby LakersN4 on Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:18 pm

I don't see anything wrong with holding onto Pau & Hill considering what we were offered.. The most we could get for Pau was Okafor, who has no value at all once his contract considers. He'll have an uphill battle just to prove he's healthy enough to get the minimum or mini-mle next season, while Pau is still good enough to be sign & traded for a good player that wants out. As for Hill, I thought we should have sold high on him earlier in the season when we were hovering around .500 but the offers we heard about around the deadline didn't make sense.. Not only were we not being offered any assets for him, it appears the Nets actually asked us to throw in a 2nd rounder at the last minute.. Again, he could have value in the offseason in a sign & trade. The only thing we had to gain by trading either of them was cap space, which really shouldn't matter that much to us considering we're unlikely to sniff the luxury tax again for atleast 3 seasons.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2531
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby karacha on Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:50 pm

Weezy wrote:I agree with a lot of the last 2 posts, why give Kobe that deal if we're just waiting to rebuild after he's gone? Eh, I hope Kobe enjoys that money, because even though I had a feeling before, now I'm pretty sure it's compensation for the Lakers not being able to get another championship team around him.


Maybe. Honestly, I think I am starting to believe this as well. It makes absolutely no sense otherwise. And now, although it pains me greatly to say this... I'm not convinced Kobe is going to be Kobe once he returns. The recovery is slow. His knee hurts. He's going to be completely out of shape. I don't think Kobe can - for all his greatness - carry us next season. If he tries, he's going to run himself into the ground (MDA will get the blame though) and then he might even start thinking about early retirement. Sad, but... I don't know. I just have this hunch. Feel free to tell me if I'm crazy to think that. I won't take offense.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37461
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby Weezy on Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:35 pm

I don't think it's crazy at all, Kobe has so much mileage now. I'd never count the guy out yet, but time is undefeated, LeBron is in his prime and will continue to have good teams I have no doubt, and Durant and George are only getting better, Kobe's time is fading. I'd love to see him have 2 more great seasons, but if I'm honest the way he looked after he came back this season, I think the 2012 season might be the last time we ever see Kobe at that amazing level. Shame he carried us that season for nothing, his body gave out, and all the while Dwight didn't seem to give a crap if we won or lost. I can only hope we get the guy help this offseason, that he himself realizes he can't carry us anymore, and we get a real coach who won't run him into the ground. If he isn't winning a title I'd at least like to see him go out on as positive a note as possible, as in walking away by choice not from some career ending injury or limping off beaten and broken.
User avatar
Weezy
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 50881
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Anaheim, CA

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby angrypuppy on Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:12 pm

LakersN4 wrote:I don't see anything wrong with holding onto Pau & Hill considering what we were offered.. The most we could get for Pau was Okafor, who has no value at all once his contract considers. He'll have an uphill battle just to prove he's healthy enough to get the minimum or mini-mle next season, while Pau is still good enough to be sign & traded for a good player that wants out. As for Hill, I thought we should have sold high on him earlier in the season when we were hovering around .500 but the offers we heard about around the deadline didn't make sense.. Not only were we not being offered any assets for him, it appears the Nets actually asked us to throw in a 2nd rounder at the last minute.. Again, he could have value in the offseason in a sign & trade. The only thing we had to gain by trading either of them was cap space, which really shouldn't matter that much to us considering we're unlikely to sniff the luxury tax again for atleast 3 seasons.



The problem is on multiple levels:

1. Financial blundering. The more you save, the more financial reserves you have to fight another day, such as when you need to pay repeater tax to keep a championship contender team intact. Weird, but that seems to be lost on many Lakers fans who are convinced that TWC will bail them out forever (without a clue about performance clauses) or that the Lakers (unlike the 99.999999% of the rest of the business world) don't need financial reserves.

2. The Lakers need to get the best possible lottery pick. In short, the more losses the better, and to get more losses it is best to field a bad team. This is why you don't want Pau, Hill, Kaman, etc. on the Lakers team. Finances aside, it was best for the Lakers to dump these players in order to secure the best possible pick... the other GMs understood this, which is why they didn't offer the Lakers anything better than salary relief. For some inexplicable reason, our own FO doesn't get it, or perhaps more accurately, refuses to get it as they don't have the cojones.

3. The Lakers called their own bluff: Trading Blake for two expiring contract players who, at best, were minimum contract prospect for next year was an obvious salary dump (though some challenged Kool AId drinkers on another web site considered them prospects). It was obvious after the Blake trade that the Lakers wanted salary relief, and yet they insisted to the bitter end that they needed picks for Pau and Hill. That my friend is the epitome of cluelessness. The front office doesn't have a strategy, they they do have an ego.
angrypuppy

 
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:23 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby sister golden hair on Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:41 pm

Angrypuppy,

I got banned from "that other laker" site for being, apparently, too critical of the FO.

There are many people who simply refuse to see the light on that issue.
sister golden hair

 
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby dj vitus on Thu Feb 20, 2014 10:15 pm

OX1947 wrote:Looks like Mitch is going to do what I thought the Lakers were going to do. Barring a surprise, franchise changing trade from a super star who wants to come to LA, I see the Lakers doing this for the next 2 years:

Let's say they end up with Wiggins or Embiid.

Then, this off season will be to fill the roster up with good players and thats it.

Come summer of 2015, wait for Kevin Love to opt out and offer him the max

Than, wait the following year for Kobe's money to come off the books, and wait for Kyrie Irving to opt out and sign him to the max.

Thats what I see. Kobe will not win another title as a Laker unfortunately.


Weezy wrote:I agree with a lot of the last 2 posts, why give Kobe that deal if we're just waiting to rebuild after he's gone? Eh, I hope Kobe enjoys that money, because even though I had a feeling before, now I'm pretty sure it's compensation for the Lakers not being able to get another championship team around him.


These posts seem to be spot on. We threw in the towel for 2014 a long time ago, so we'll try again 2015 (at least I hope so, lol).

Even with Kobe's contract, we can still get under the luxury tax next season. We'll continue with our minimum contracts and meager extensions this off-season while expecting guys like Nick Young, Jodie Meeks, and Jordan Hill to bolt for "greener" pastures.

At most we'll offer Pau a 50% pay cut to stay here, and we'll still have room to fill out the roster with minimum contracts. Farmar might be the only FA getting a semi-decent raise to stay.

THEN in 2015, we can afford to go back over the luxury tax threshold and chase Kevin Love.

:jam2:
"Why are they blocking out all the good stuff? They let Sarah Jessica Parker's face on TV and she looks like a foot!!"
User avatar
dj vitus

 
Posts: 9481
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Location: Walnut, CA by way of Laaaas Vegas!

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby KareemTheGreat33 on Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:51 pm

I would love to hold on to Gasol if we get Embiid for one last run with Kobe.. Get a serious coach to bring em to the finals...

Embiid Sacre
Gasol. Kelly
X. Swaggy
Kobe Meeks
Marshall Farmar
"Allons-y Lakers!"
User avatar
KareemTheGreat33

 
Posts: 7834
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby angrypuppy on Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:21 am

sister golden hair wrote:Angrypuppy,

I got banned from "that other laker" site for being, apparently, too critical of the FO.

There are many people who simply refuse to see the light on that issue.




You were banned?!? I thought you left for the same reason I'm posting here: self-quarantine. This franchise is being led by an idiot, and I have grown weary of the snide attacks for my views over there.

Anyway, you're a damn good fan and I'm glad to see you posting SGH.
angrypuppy

 
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:23 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby Lakerjones on Fri Feb 21, 2014 12:26 am

angrypuppy wrote:

The problem is on multiple levels:

1. Financial blundering. The more you save, the more financial reserves you have to fight another day, such as when you need to pay repeater tax to keep a championship contender team intact. Weird, but that seems to be lost on many Lakers fans who are convinced that TWC will bail them out forever (without a clue about performance clauses) or that the Lakers (unlike the 99.999999% of the rest of the business world) don't need financial reserves.

2. The Lakers need to get the best possible lottery pick. In short, the more losses the better, and to get more losses it is best to field a bad team. This is why you don't want Pau, Hill, Kaman, etc. on the Lakers team. Finances aside, it was best for the Lakers to dump these players in order to secure the best possible pick... the other GMs understood this, which is why they didn't offer the Lakers anything better than salary relief. For some inexplicable reason, our own FO doesn't get it, or perhaps more accurately, refuses to get it as they don't have the cojones.

3. The Lakers called their own bluff: Trading Blake for two expiring contract players who, at best, were minimum contract prospect for next year was an obvious salary dump (though some challenged Kool AId drinkers on another web site considered them prospects). It was obvious after the Blake trade that the Lakers wanted salary relief, and yet they insisted to the bitter end that they needed picks for Pau and Hill. That my friend is the epitome of cluelessness. The front office doesn't have a strategy, they they do have an ego.


^^ Good post, angry puppy.
Lakerjones
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 15234
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 12:37 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby Savory Griddles on Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:55 am

angrypuppy wrote:The problem is on multiple levels:

1. Financial blundering. The more you save, the more financial reserves you have to fight another day, such as when you need to pay repeater tax to keep a championship contender team intact. Weird, but that seems to be lost on many Lakers fans who are convinced that TWC will bail them out forever (without a clue about performance clauses) or that the Lakers (unlike the 99.999999% of the rest of the business world) don't need financial reserves.

2. The Lakers need to get the best possible lottery pick. In short, the more losses the better, and to get more losses it is best to field a bad team. This is why you don't want Pau, Hill, Kaman, etc. on the Lakers team. Finances aside, it was best for the Lakers to dump these players in order to secure the best possible pick... the other GMs understood this, which is why they didn't offer the Lakers anything better than salary relief. For some inexplicable reason, our own FO doesn't get it, or perhaps more accurately, refuses to get it as they don't have the cojones.

3. The Lakers called their own bluff: Trading Blake for two expiring contract players who, at best, were minimum contract prospect for next year was an obvious salary dump (though some challenged Kool AId drinkers on another web site considered them prospects). It was obvious after the Blake trade that the Lakers wanted salary relief, and yet they insisted to the bitter end that they needed picks for Pau and Hill. That my friend is the epitome of cluelessness. The front office doesn't have a strategy, they they do have an ego.


I agree with everything you said. The only hope I cling to is they are hoping to retain Pau's bird rights in order to swing him in a sign and trade for Kevin Love. Maybe Love pushes his way out of Minny this summer and they trade Gasol to Memphis, Z-Bo and our draft pick (whoever we take) go to Minny and we get Love. Sign Stephenson and maybe Lowry and call it a day. Could that team cause people headaches? Sure, but it's not going to compete for a ring until Kobe and his albatross is off our necks and we can replace him with a younger star.
User avatar
Savory Griddles

 
Posts: 9048
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:56 am
Location: AV,CA

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby Rooscooter on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:23 am

KareemTheGreat33 wrote:I would love to hold on to Gasol if we get Embiid for one last run with Kobe.. Get a serious coach to bring em to the finals...

Embiid Sacre
Gasol. Kelly
X. Swaggy
Kobe Meeks
Marshall Farmar


Yikes!…. Gasol isn't signing anywhere for less than 3 years…. That's a non starter IMHO because 3 more years of him at 8-12 Million is just another anchor on starting over.
"If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Winston Churchill

“The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded." Dwight Eisenhower

"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it" Thomas Sowell
User avatar
Rooscooter

 
Posts: 23048
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Chandler AZ and Andalué

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby therealdeal on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:30 am

karacha wrote:
Weezy wrote:I agree with a lot of the last 2 posts, why give Kobe that deal if we're just waiting to rebuild after he's gone? Eh, I hope Kobe enjoys that money, because even though I had a feeling before, now I'm pretty sure it's compensation for the Lakers not being able to get another championship team around him.


Maybe. Honestly, I think I am starting to believe this as well. It makes absolutely no sense otherwise. And now, although it pains me greatly to say this... I'm not convinced Kobe is going to be Kobe once he returns. The recovery is slow. His knee hurts. He's going to be completely out of shape. I don't think Kobe can - for all his greatness - carry us next season. If he tries, he's going to run himself into the ground (MDA will get the blame though) and then he might even start thinking about early retirement. Sad, but... I don't know. I just have this hunch. Feel free to tell me if I'm crazy to think that. I won't take offense.

I stand behind the idea that the driving force for the timing/amount was for the Lakers to show potential Free Agents that they're going to get compensated if they come here and perform. Even if/when they're past their prime. It was an opportunity for the FO to make a statement and they did. Unfortunately it bit them in the butt immediately and it will bite them in the butt this summer too. :man10:

I still don't get how profoundly negative this site is right now though. It's keeping me from wanting to be here. So what we didn't move Gasol at the deadline? We're going nowhere anyway this season. The deadline changed absolutely nothing and yet all of a sudden we've got an influx of new, negative posters and all our current members are depressing too. Why? It doesn't make sense to me.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40357
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby KareemTheGreat33 on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:36 am

Rooscooter wrote:
KareemTheGreat33 wrote:I would love to hold on to Gasol if we get Embiid for one last run with Kobe.. Get a serious coach to bring em to the finals...

Embiid Sacre
Gasol. Kelly
X. Swaggy
Kobe Meeks
Marshall Farmar


Yikes!…. Gasol isn't signing anywhere for less than 3 years…. That's a non starter IMHO because 3 more years of him at 8-12 Million is just another anchor on starting over.


He'll be amenable to a 3rd year team option I would think. One last run with his buddy and guiding the next Laker great center. Wishful thinking but Kobe deserves a shot in his last two years.
"Allons-y Lakers!"
User avatar
KareemTheGreat33

 
Posts: 7834
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:52 am
Location: Philippines

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby TIME on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:40 am

therealdeal wrote:I still don't get how profoundly negative this site is right now though. It's keeping me from wanting to be here.


Perhaps this will help.


I'm lost in the fog of denial!
User avatar
TIME
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9446
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:06 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby therealdeal on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:49 am

:man10:

I'm not saying we should be cheering or anything. I just don't get why the sky is falling NOW of all times. The sky has fallen already. We're the worst team in the West on our way to the worst record in franchise history with our best players in suits and a bunch of D-League talent playing every night.

Isn't that the bottom? I get that the deadline was disappointing, but it's like that every year. Jay-Z said brush your shoulders off people! Let's listen to that guy. (Yes I heard that song on the way to work this morning).
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40357
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby Center Court on Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:34 am

angrypuppy wrote:
LakersN4 wrote:I don't see anything wrong with holding onto Pau & Hill considering what we were offered.. The most we could get for Pau was Okafor, who has no value at all once his contract considers. He'll have an uphill battle just to prove he's healthy enough to get the minimum or mini-mle next season, while Pau is still good enough to be sign & traded for a good player that wants out. As for Hill, I thought we should have sold high on him earlier in the season when we were hovering around .500 but the offers we heard about around the deadline didn't make sense.. Not only were we not being offered any assets for him, it appears the Nets actually asked us to throw in a 2nd rounder at the last minute.. Again, he could have value in the offseason in a sign & trade. The only thing we had to gain by trading either of them was cap space, which really shouldn't matter that much to us considering we're unlikely to sniff the luxury tax again for atleast 3 seasons.



The problem is on multiple levels:

1. Financial blundering. The more you save, the more financial reserves you have to fight another day, such as when you need to pay repeater tax to keep a championship contender team intact. Weird, but that seems to be lost on many Lakers fans who are convinced that TWC will bail them out forever (without a clue about performance clauses) or that the Lakers (unlike the 99.999999% of the rest of the business world) don't need financial reserves.

2. The Lakers need to get the best possible lottery pick. In short, the more losses the better, and to get more losses it is best to field a bad team. This is why you don't want Pau, Hill, Kaman, etc. on the Lakers team. Finances aside, it was best for the Lakers to dump these players in order to secure the best possible pick... the other GMs understood this, which is why they didn't offer the Lakers anything better than salary relief. For some inexplicable reason, our own FO doesn't get it, or perhaps more accurately, refuses to get it as they don't have the cojones.

3. The Lakers called their own bluff: Trading Blake for two expiring contract players who, at best, were minimum contract prospect for next year was an obvious salary dump (though some challenged Kool AId drinkers on another web site considered them prospects). It was obvious after the Blake trade that the Lakers wanted salary relief, and yet they insisted to the bitter end that they needed picks for Pau and Hill. That my friend is the epitome of cluelessness. The front office doesn't have a strategy, they they do have an ego.


Great post but I think some things are being overlooked.

Gasol/Hill/Kaman are not helping us win games. Pau is rarely healthy. Kaman is getting inconsistent mins and Hill is getting fed up. All three along with Kelly and Sacre compose a front court that can compete with most front courts in the NBA but the problem is MDA's system has turned them into empty statistical lemons. If there was a way to extract picks for them then we should have done that but from all reports we were not getting those offers. We kept Hill and Pau's bird rights which will allow for a sign and trade this summer.

Perception. Perception is huge right now. We don't want to look like the 76ers who could care less about winning. We have a worldwide fan base to appease and just dumping 3 of our most valuable players (for now) is not a good look. It screams LOSE which is something Dr. B never did. It's cliche but we are the Lakers and we don't intentionally lose. Purposely trading those guys for nobody of value goes against our core principle to win and entertain.

Besides, let's say we trade Pau for Oakfor and Hill and Kaman for TPE's and then get a second for Hill. We're going to shorten our roster down even further. Who are we left with that is healthy? Sacre, Kelly, Wes, Meeks, Kendall, Farmar, Shawne (who'll be gone in after his 2nd 10 day). Nash is in and out. X is out for 6 more weeks. Kobe isn't coming back this year. We'll see when Swaggy returns. We need players and as the Lakers it'd be pretty pitiful to carry a roster of NBA rejects anymore than we already have.


We always have a plan. Our plan was cap space for 2010 to go after LeBron. I've been on these boards since 04 and remember discussion about Bron, Yao, Dirk, Wade, Amare, etc. That was our plan and then Pau happened. We won 2 titles in 3 final appearances. We then pulled off a trade for CP3 and a TPE that would have gone to Minny for Beasley. There would have been no Nash trade and thus we'd have our picks (maybe). Surely, Dwight would have forced is way to LA for a similar package and we'd be staring at CP3/Kobe/Dwight. Kobe retires in 15 or 16 after getting a another ring or 2 and then we sign Love or Durant so someone of that caliber to go with CP3/Dwight. That plan all failed when 'basketball reasons' happened. Last summer the plan was to sign Dwight and get healthy enough to compete this year. Get rid of all contracts and again for Love or Melo or somebody on that tier. That didn't happen when Dwight bolted.

If there is one critical error we made is was on the execution of that last plan. We should have hired Phil. Yet, here we are.

At the end of the day, we are in a pretty ideal position to rebuild. There are great players available within the next 3 years and it looks like we are going to have a top 4 pick a a very talent top heavy draft, at least in the top 5. The biggest issue we have is a lack of 1st round pick in 2015 but hopefully we can some how get to playoff contention next year so that is somewhat irrelevant. If we can pair this year's pick with K Love in 2015 and then Irving or Durant or ________ in 2016 I think we have a title window from 2016-2021. That's not too shabby. At the very least it's still better than the time periods between Showtime and Kobe/Shaq era.

The lotto will dictate a lot of what our future looks like. If we get lucky and get Embiid, I'm not opposed to resigning Pau until 16, bringing Melo in and hopefully Thibs (if he's available). I think Embiid/Pau/Melo/Kobe can compete for a chip-- with the right coach. Maybe we trade that pick for a Kyrie or Westrbook and pair him with Love in 2015. Maybe we draft Exum who is a future superstar or Parker who is ROY and then add players to that. Or maybe just maybe our #1 option comes true and something brings LeBron to LA along with a high lotto pick. Either route, we are far from the 'doom and gloom' that many suggest us to be. No matter what, patience is in order. We'll be back just as we always are. It's a new plan and I'm excited to see how it plays out.
User avatar
Center Court

 
Posts: 3177
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: @ CL since '04

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby last stand on Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:38 am

I'm behind signing deng or Stephenson to 8 million a year

I'm thinking you draft wiggins, Parker or exum and in 2 years you're looking at

Center
Love
Wiggins/Parker
Stephenson
Marshall

Or

Center
Love
Deng
Exum
Marshall

I like both lineups a lot
everyone has their top 10 lists of women heres mine

1. emma watson
2. Natalie Portman
3. Mila Kunis
4. Emma Stone
5. Megan Fox
6. jessica biel
7. Teresa Palmer
8. Katy Perry
9. jessica alba
10. Olivia Wilde
last stand

 
Posts: 7502
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:43 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion: reports, rumors, ruminations

Postby sister golden hair on Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:11 pm

I don't think the team is in an ideal position to rebuild. I think a few other teams are waaaaay ahead of the lakers on that score and, yes, that includes the Celtics. The lakers are in a very tough position. It doesn't appear that one hand knows what the other is doing. Even over-paying for Kobe (assuming it was a calculated message being sent to other FAs) seems like an after-the-fact realization. The Lakers are enough of a legacy franchise with a proven track record. Has that all gotten lost such that they have to use Kobe's contract to remind everyone? They could have accomplished the sending of that message by being more prudent. Promising to pay kobe 24 mill per for two seasons, when it helps hamstring the cap flexibility, and when Kobe, when he hasn't even recovered from a serious injury seems rash and foolhardy. The message they should be sending is not "we'll take care of you if you sign with us even when you're broken down." The message should be: "Sign with us, get paid and win. Period."
sister golden hair

 
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Previous

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Google [Bot] and 15 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.