|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nordvader wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: |
I don't think you "result" in a tank (passive).
You actively choose to suck. I don't see that even if we miss on the top FAs. |
By that metric we never chose to suck, and there never was a tank. Basically we got rejected by every big name free agent and embarrassed by Lamarcus Aldridge which resulted in us keeping our pick.
The title of this thread you created is tanking is dead. So did we actively choose to suck while selecting to get embarrassed in free agency or did we tank on purpose and all of this losing was Mitch and Jim's grand scheme that should cost them their jobs if they strike out in free agency. |
Each season has to be treated separately, but the 2013-16 period can be treated as on epoch, albeit 3 separate chapters.
I do believe b/c of the way they set their salary cap position, and subsequent failures during FA (as well as Kobe's obvious decline and injuries), they chose to tank at certain points. However, they also set a plan to amass assets, and punt cap space for the next year. And when that failed, they tanked again.
This offseason is completely different. The point of the Tank was to amass top players, and preserve cap space, all the while letting Kobe play out his contract.
Mission accomplished on all 3 above.
There is no need for a tank, given the likely improbability of getting another top 3 pick. We HAVE all the promising young players we need to either improve them or trade them.
We literally had no trade assets until we got Randle, who then became injured. We now have a ton of marquee trade assets that we can move if necessary. But we also have cap space.
So to answer your question, the Tank is dead.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GonzagaAlum
Star Player
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Posts: 3021
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Genaro wrote: | | I'm not as optimistic about next season as some of you guys. Unless we get 2 really good players at FA, I don't see this team not sucking. Youth doesn't win in the NBA and DLO and Ingram are too raw now. If we strike out again in FA, I expect those guys to win 25 games tops. |
Bingo.
Lakers need two legit star caliber players to have a shot to win in the upper 30s to 40s. While they have stars in the making, they are still in the making. A starting lineup of 20, 24, 19, 21, 24 (Assuming Black here) isn't going to win more than 20-25 in today's NBA - especially out west.
_________________
How can I get a copy of a Laker game played on Sunday, March 11, 2001 Sonics/Lakers? If you know PM me please
I would be willing to pay you for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Pelicans with Anthony Davis missing 20+ games and playing well below his standards won 30 games (and whole team was injured). There is no reason to believe that the Lakers, with modest FAs signed (i.e. the Dengs of FA) can hit that mark.
We won 17 games with that (bleep) show last year. You're saying with better young players (they all improved from this point last year + Ingram), and 60m+ in cap space the ceiling is improving 3-8 more games total?
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
City_Dawg
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 46878
Location: Coming soon and striking at your borders.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | The Pelicans with Anthony Davis missing 20+ games and playing well below his standards won 30 games (and whole team was injured). There is no reason to believe that the Lakers, with modest FAs signed (i.e. the Dengs of FA) can hit that mark.
We won 17 games with that (bleep) show last year. You're saying with better young players (they all improved from this point last year + Ingram), and 60m+ in cap space the ceiling is improving 3-8 more games total? |
I think there are going to be growing pains all around (Luke included). MDA got 27 wins with a (bleep) MASH unit, I think that's our best bet IMO. But I dont really care about wins, like Mitch said, you want to see development and an identity form for this team.
_________________
*sighs*
!...
Last edited by City_Dawg on Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17876
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Last year's team wins at least 25 with Luke instead of Byron, and without Kobe and Hibbert, right? I mean Kobe + Hibbert were in pretty much every one of the teams' worst lineups... and Byron is Byron.
With the improvements from age and adding Ingram (who I think will be replacement level for limited minutes due to his shooting + length), it seems 28-30 wins is a reasonable floor for the team as constructed?
Never mind free agents.
I get the pessimism but we're not going to be winning games in the teens anymore, I think. Not without Scott sabotaging the effectiveness of every player. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29281
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't expect alot of FA success.
Doubt we win 30 games this upcoming season.
Whether that's considered tanking (after-the-fact) will come down to semantics.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kikanga wrote: | I don't expect alot of FA success.
Doubt we win 30 games this upcoming season.
Whether that's considered tanking (after-the-fact) will come down to semantics. |
More than semantics; it's about intentions.
And I think we have a very good chance to win 30+ games (and I've been very pessimistic about win projections for the previous 2 seasons).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stone22
Starting Rotation
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 160
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rebuilds require a certain degree of trust in the process and adjusting along the way from the people in charge of it.
The "Tank" process has taken us to 3 losing seasons and along the way picking up young players in the draft with upside fortunately. Is there a superstar in the midst with the young players we have now??? Time will tell…I think Ingram has a chance to be a really special player.
Moving forward from where we are at now, a lot is riding on who the FA's will be this year and next year…will All Star players come in? Hopefully.
Once we get through free agency and settle in, I suspect we will get at least an All Star level talent in with the money, market and upside of the team.
If that is the case and we do get a viable FA or two, I think as far as "Tanking" next season will be a longer shot, because the team will have improved to the point where we are likely not going to be able to keep a Top 3 protected pick.
I'm cool with losing a pick next season if it means the Lakers are back on the road to our real winning ways that eventually lead to not only the playoffs but to championships, even if they only win 28-35 games next season but show improvement and a couple of the young players emerge as potential future All Star or even hopefully Superstar potential to go along with our FA All Star level player(s). That's how the build takes shape to eventually mold into golden trophy's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Capt.Skyhook
Star Player
Joined: 29 Feb 2004
Posts: 3991
Location: Louisville, Ky.
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think this is a bit premature (we don't know free agency will go yet). What happens if this team starts 1-10? We really didn't want to tank going into last season, until we realized Byron was clueless and Kobe had nothing left.
I'm all for shutting down the tank and actually rooting for wins again, but if things get ugly early I can see LGers looking to rev up that engine again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GonzagaAlum
Star Player
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Posts: 3021
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Parsons is 26
BB is 23 (probably really going on 26  )
DRoz is 26
Barnes is 25
Whiteside is 27.
Seriously... you use the cap to add to the young core.
Cap space will never win a single game in the NBA.
You don't add vets just to add vets. Like there is no reason to persue Pau at 36 (short of Durant and Lebron coming because he would come for cheap). But there are actually some young players this season who could really help the Lakers long term and grow up with this team.
DRoz has worked on his craft enough the guy is an all star.
Barnes has won a title and also failed miserably on the big stage.
Parsons has had played under solid playoff teams and knows what it takes to reach them.
Bismack has performed at a high level in the conference finals.
These guys would help improve the team not just because you're getting something in place of capspace, but they are still young enough to develop with the core, and yet have enough vet know how that they could help solidify a really young locker room.
There will be no draft thread next year for a first rounder, short of an insanely lucky ping pong ball. There is no reward for stinking next season. It's time for the Lakers to add some assets around DLO, Ingram, and Randle.
_________________
How can I get a copy of a Laker game played on Sunday, March 11, 2001 Sonics/Lakers? If you know PM me please
I would be willing to pay you for it.
Last edited by GonzagaAlum on Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:03 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Capt.Skyhook wrote: | I think this is a bit premature (we don't know free agency will go yet). What happens if this team starts 1-10? We really didn't want to tank going into last season, until we realized Byron was clueless and Kobe had nothing left.
I'm all for shutting down the tank and actually rooting for wins again, but if things get ugly early I can see LGers looking to rev up that engine again. |
I just think philosophically the team has moved on from the tank.
If we start off 1-10, armed with plenty of trade assets, I see a trade to improve the team, etc.
I genuinely don't see the Lakers embracing a concerted and planned movement to lose games in the hopes that the lotto balls fall in their favor. We've benefitted enough from the past 3 years from that IMO and that saga is thankfully closed.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Outside of injuries I don't see even a remote chance for this team to be under 25 wins this year.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deathstroke
Star Player
Joined: 10 Dec 2015
Posts: 2131
Location: OC
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | Deathstroke wrote: | | Nordvader wrote: | | RCS926 wrote: |
They've gotten comfortable sitting in that rusty old tank...and probably don't understand the importance of good coaching and player development. |
That's were you're wrong I was never pro-tank, I just don't believe that we will magically improve just because we have Luke and this collection of young "talent". This roster is garbage and without drastic improvements I don't see how we win more than 20 games. |
It's funny because all of us on LG thought we'd win 30-35 games last season after free agency. Then we tanked hard. And now this year without even a final roster this thread is declaring the tank is dead  |
Again, not winning does not equal tanking (i.e. CONFLATION of two disparate concepts).
We tanked to get what became Randle, JC, DLO, Ingram (and the other assets) AND to be in a position to have 60m+ cap space.
We have accomplished what the TANK process set out to achieve. That is why the tank is dead.
Did I or anyone else say that "losing" was dead? of course not. That's where you CONFLATED losing + tanking. |
Again, I get that. But if the team doesn't anyone worth a damn and we start out with a piss poor record like last season, I expect the tank to commence. Sorry but having a good roster that can compete and win games is the only way the tank is dead. Even last year Mitch stated that he wanted to win and make the playoffs but the roster plus Byron proved to be bad and they went forward with a tank job. Same could happen this season. It's way too early to declare the tank dead. Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25078
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cautiously optimistic F.O. can get player(s) this summer
Time to fight for a playoff spot, 40+ win!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deathstroke wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Deathstroke wrote: | | Nordvader wrote: | | RCS926 wrote: |
They've gotten comfortable sitting in that rusty old tank...and probably don't understand the importance of good coaching and player development. |
That's were you're wrong I was never pro-tank, I just don't believe that we will magically improve just because we have Luke and this collection of young "talent". This roster is garbage and without drastic improvements I don't see how we win more than 20 games. |
It's funny because all of us on LG thought we'd win 30-35 games last season after free agency. Then we tanked hard. And now this year without even a final roster this thread is declaring the tank is dead |
I'm declaring it. And you can bookmark this. Receipts too. 
Again, not winning does not equal tanking (i.e. CONFLATION of two disparate concepts).
We tanked to get what became Randle, JC, DLO, Ingram (and the other assets) AND to be in a position to have 60m+ cap space.
We have accomplished what the TANK process set out to achieve. That is why the tank is dead.
Did I or anyone else say that "losing" was dead? of course not. That's where you CONFLATED losing + tanking. |
Again, I get that. But if the team doesn't anyone worth a damn and we start out with a piss poor record like last season, I expect the tank to commence. Sorry but having a good roster that can compete and win games is the only way the tank is dead. Even last year Mitch stated that he wanted to win and make the playoffs but the roster plus Byron proved to be bad and they went forward with a tank job. Same could happen this season. It's way too early to declare the tank dead. Sorry. |
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordvader
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jan 2012
Posts: 1662
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: |
Each season has to be treated separately, but the 2013-16 period can be treated as on epoch, albeit 3 separate chapters.
I do believe b/c of the way they set their salary cap position, and subsequent failures during FA (as well as Kobe's obvious decline and injuries), they chose to tank at certain points. However, they also set a plan to amass assets, and punt cap space for the next year. And when that failed, they tanked again.
This offseason is completely different. The point of the Tank was to amass top players, and preserve cap space, all the while letting Kobe play out his contract.
Mission accomplished on all 3 above.
There is no need for a tank, given the likely improbability of getting another top 3 pick. We HAVE all the promising young players we need to either improve them or trade them.
We literally had no trade assets until we got Randle, who then became injured. We now have a ton of marquee trade assets that we can move if necessary. But we also have cap space.
So to answer your question, the Tank is dead. |
So basically what you're saying is season by season whatever illusion assumption or excuse the front office gives for the failures of these past season, you chose to believe it no matter what way you have to argue it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nordvader wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: |
Each season has to be treated separately, but the 2013-16 period can be treated as on epoch, albeit 3 separate chapters.
I do believe b/c of the way they set their salary cap position, and subsequent failures during FA (as well as Kobe's obvious decline and injuries), they chose to tank at certain points. However, they also set a plan to amass assets, and punt cap space for the next year. And when that failed, they tanked again.
This offseason is completely different. The point of the Tank was to amass top players, and preserve cap space, all the while letting Kobe play out his contract.
Mission accomplished on all 3 above.
There is no need for a tank, given the likely improbability of getting another top 3 pick. We HAVE all the promising young players we need to either improve them or trade them.
We literally had no trade assets until we got Randle, who then became injured. We now have a ton of marquee trade assets that we can move if necessary. But we also have cap space.
So to answer your question, the Tank is dead. |
So basically what you're saying is season by season whatever illusion assumption or excuse the front office gives for the failures of these past season, you chose to believe it no matter what way you have to argue it. |
It means I trust the process.
And it's over.
You can ask for a tank but it ain't coming anymore.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordvader
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jan 2012
Posts: 1662
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Capt.Skyhook wrote: | I think this is a bit premature (we don't know free agency will go yet). What happens if this team starts 1-10? We really didn't want to tank going into last season, until we realized Byron was clueless and Kobe had nothing left.
I'm all for shutting down the tank and actually rooting for wins again, but if things get ugly early I can see LGers looking to rev up that engine again. |
Exactly, this is why I'm cautious about all this excitement. Until I see improvement I'm not buying into this propaganda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nordvader wrote: | | Capt.Skyhook wrote: | I think this is a bit premature (we don't know free agency will go yet). What happens if this team starts 1-10? We really didn't want to tank going into last season, until we realized Byron was clueless and Kobe had nothing left.
I'm all for shutting down the tank and actually rooting for wins again, but if things get ugly early I can see LGers looking to rev up that engine again. |
Exactly, this is why I'm cautious about all this excitement. Until I see improvement I'm not buying into this propaganda. |
Stay salty. It is your right. But you don't have to piss all over everyone else's optimism, especially when things are really looking up now.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordvader
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jan 2012
Posts: 1662
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: |
It means I trust the process.
And it's over.
You can ask for a tank but it ain't coming anymore. |
Show me a post were I actively rooted for the tank and I'll agree with your argument.
I also refuse to get into a back and front with you about whose pissy or salty attack my post not me personally.
Last edited by Nordvader on Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nordvader wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: |
It means I trust the process.
And it's over.
You can ask for a tank but it ain't coming anymore. |
Show me a post were I actively rooted for the tank and I'll agree with your argument. |
So what the hell is your beef here?
I agree there is a chance this team isn't a playoff team, or wins 30 games, etc.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dcarter4kobe
Franchise Player
Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 17674
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RCS926 wrote: | | dcarter4kobe wrote: | | RCS926 wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | Kingpin2010 wrote: | | Pretty sure this is a duplicate of a thread made at this time last year about how we were done tanking, and yet we got worse despite adding 2 high lottery picks. Color me skeptical but until the season starts and we aren't a bottom 3 team I'll have my reservations. |
Well, Byron was still the head coach.
Plus, we also didn't have a great offseason.
Different times. We may not be a playoff team but the tank is dead. RIP, (2013-16). |
Can't forget the Kobe factor either. He took a lot of touches away from our young guys and was basically the most inefficient lead scorer for his team. On top of that, he was incapable of playing defense. I'll always love Kobe, and I'm thrilled that he went out the way we wanted to remember him. However, it's a huge net positive to not have that version of Kobe on this team going forward. |
While I agree with Kingpin, this is true. IMO not having Kobe from last year out there will have a bigger positive impact than having Luke instead of Byron.
I still say we have to wait and see how we will stack out with the rest of the west after free agency. That's how I knew we would be in for another losing year last season when most people was declaring the tank to be over then. Yes we improved on paper but so did every other team in the West. |
I don't think you can separate the 2. Kobe was too set in his ways to run a proper motion offense, but it's not like Byron intelligently implemented an offense that could maximize our roster. At any rate, I think both Kobe and Byron's departures are huge net positives for the Lakers going forward. However, I still think that having a coach who knows what he's doing and establishes a fun and unselfish basketball culture is going to play a bigger factor in the development of our young core. |
The only offense I saw Kobe trying to run for most of the season is let me chuck as many shots as possible.
But I agree. No Byron+Kobe will be big
_________________
"He's a Zen master, so he can speak to you, and he doesn't need a microphone; you can hear him in your head, 'Ron, don't shoot, don't shoot.' Whatever, pow, three. I love the Zen, though." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:34 pm Post subject: Re: The Fruits of 2013-16: I Declare that the Tank is Dead (RIP, 2013-16) |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | 2013-14: 27-55
#7: Julius Randle
#46: Jordan Clarkson
2014-15: 21-64
#2: D'Angelo Russell
#27: Larry Nance, Jr.
#34: Anthony Brown
2015-16: 17-65
#2: Brandon Ingram
#32: Ivica Zubac
LUKE WALTON
More than likely we will not have our pick next year, and that by the next time we pick in the 1st round, we will be a playoff level team. Out of 3 years' worth of picks:
-5 guaranteed rotation players with Brown/Zubac being 2 additional possibilities.
-2 possible perennial all-star level players (Ingram/DLO)
-1 borderline all-star level player (Randle), 1 starter level player (Clarkson)
I'm declaring it now. The tank is hereby dead and over. The Lakers have emerged well from 3 years of futility and pain. We are now poised to make a dramatic come back.
Welcome back Lakers fans. |
I would put it differently: We are finally out of the period of lack of hope.
We have some young players that we can at least be enthusiastic about and hope they turn into something. You are assuming the best-case scenario, but I wouldn't pencil in who is an all-star player yet, and I don't assume who is going to pan out.
So I consider this the starting point after three years of treading water in muck. Some of the guys you mention might end up stars; some might end up busts; some of them might not even become rotation players; some might end up on another team.
But at least we don't have to write all the season before it starts anymore.
Last edited by activeverb on Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kava
Star Player
Joined: 10 Mar 2010
Posts: 2173
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ha! Great Topic OP.
I'm assuming w/o going through every page (which I sometimes do) that some are poking holes in your theory that the Tanking is over. That is fine.
HOWEVER, even IF we completely strike out in FA and sign no one with the piles of cash the Lakers are sittin on - we are still out of the tank-a-thon by virtue of the following reasons:
1) No B Scott running his horrible schemes and taking the joy out of everything because of his own incompetence.
2) No Kobe where players are obligated to defer to an aging legend, the circus his farewell tour was, plus the inconsistency of him on/off roster.
3) Added 'No ceiling' talent Ingram who is a true SF who filled the biggest hole and is possibly the best young talent available.
4) Added Luke, who will at the very least, will get buy in on team movement off ball and ball movement in half court sets.
5) All our young talent are one more yr experienced w/ Clarkson, Randle, and D Russ all playing with something to prove. 5b) Randle will be going full beast mode this season. He will not be contained.
I remain optimistic regardless of who signs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RCS926
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Posts: 16824
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2016 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GonzagaAlum wrote: | | Genaro wrote: | | I'm not as optimistic about next season as some of you guys. Unless we get 2 really good players at FA, I don't see this team not sucking. Youth doesn't win in the NBA and DLO and Ingram are too raw now. If we strike out again in FA, I expect those guys to win 25 games tops. |
Bingo.
Lakers need two legit star caliber players to have a shot to win in the upper 30s to 40s. While they have stars in the making, they are still in the making. A starting lineup of 20, 24, 19, 21, 24 (Assuming Black here) isn't going to win more than 20-25 in today's NBA - especially out west. |
We need two star players to be mediocre? What is your definition of a star player? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
