View Poll Results: How bad do you want to see the Raptors tank/rebuild/blow it up/build through draft?

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Trade Lowry, Gay, DD at all costs! Getthem off the roster and books, the faster the better!

    3 6.38%
  • Only trade them if you get valuable assets in return.

    44 93.62%
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 253

Thread: A new take on tanking - opponents of this need not click this thread

  1. #21
    Raptors Republic All-Star KazanTheMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    T.O.
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Every thread has little arguments going on.. this is ridiculous.
    "Masai WILL win us a championship"
    - Tim Leiweke

    Ujiri: "One thing I can say for sure is that we will not be stuck in the middle."

    Reporter: "How can you say that?"

    Ujiri: "Because I can say that."

  2. Like mcHAPPY liked this post
  3. #22
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    Given the results so far (9-1 against outright blatant tanking), I think this provides an interesting perspective of the 'pro tank' side.

    As many on that side have said, myself included, I prefer a 're-tooling' to an outright tank job. I've always been much more in favor of the 'Melo trade style re-tooling (several good young assets & draft picks & some cap space), as opposed to full tank (ie: expiring contracts and draft picks). I understand the importance of building through the draft, but good young players (especially if still on rookie contracts) is basically the same approach, just spread across recent and present drafts.

    I'm a 'pro tanker' who has never been supportive of dumping players that we have... but cashing them in while their value is high, well that's just efficient asset management in my books.
    I voted "against" but I'd cash them in while their value is low, which I think it is right now. I just expect more than a Dumars type offer.

    But in the big picture, the Raptors own pick is also an asset. If that pick was top 5, it would be one of the Raptors' best assets, rivaled only by Jonas. So in the end, even the most extreme pro-tanking position advocates efficient asset management, the disagreement is only what is efficient.

  4. #23
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,536
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Xixak wrote: View Post
    http://www.raptorsrepublic.com/forum...l=1#post237943

    CalgaryRapsFan, I hope you're going to tell Matt to "tone it down" as well for telling people to get out of the thread if they disagree:



    Or does that only apply to me?
    Wow, you really do have an axe to grind today, don't you?

    First of all, his comment was clearly made tongue-in-cheek.

    Second of all, he acknowledged the numerous legitimate arguments that have been made in multiple threads by the anti-tank posters. That is the epitome of respecting their opinions.

    Third, he used the OP to be clear that he wasn't discounting the arguments against tanking, but preferred this thread to be an opportunity for pro-tankers to explain their rationale for and degree of support for the vague term 'tanking'.

    Fourth, he wasn't using a new argument to support one side over another. He didn't present new evidence to push a pro-tanking agenda, but was instead trying to avoid yet another thread becoming a debate between the pro and anti tankers.

    Fifth, it's not your job or your place to question the approach taken by admins/mods while trying to keep threads on-topic and respectful. Different tactics are required in different circumstances, which have nothing to do with who creates the thread or posts in it. If you have an issues with the way the admins/mods are acting, please feel free to send a PM to any/all of the admins/mods to voice your displeasure and register your complaint; there's no reason for a public display like this.


    ***

    I apologize for taking this thread off-topic. We now return to your regularly scheduled program.
    Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Wed Oct 23rd, 2013 at 12:36 AM.

  5. Like Axel, mcHAPPY liked this post
  6. #24
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Wow, so I'm the only one here that would prefer the dump them all option huh? I'm a little surprised.

    You guys really feel that if the team is around the 10th or 11th seed at the deadline but Ujiri can't find any deals that bring back solid assets he should still stay the course? Really? Then what, go into next season with the same core and do the same dance all over again, hoping this time to squeak into the playoffs? What's the end-game there?

    I just don't get the logic I guess.

  7. #25
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Lark Benson wrote: View Post
    Wow, so I'm the only one here that would prefer the dump them all option huh? I'm a little surprised.

    You guys really feel that if the team is around the 10th or 11th seed at the deadline but Ujiri can't find any deals that bring back solid assets he should still stay the course? Really? Then what, go into next season with the same core and do the same dance all over again, hoping this time to squeak into the playoffs? What's the end-game there?

    I just don't get the logic I guess.
    To be fair, the poll question was A, dump them at all costs, the faster the better, B, valuable assets. What you describe (trying to get assets until last moment and then dumping them for the best available offer) could be option C. I think it would be situational. It might be hard to get into high lottery at that point. If they dump, they should dump now, imo. But I prefer if they try to get some assets because I expect/hope that one of the mediocre playoff contenders will offer a pick or a few soon enough. It's a gamble and it could backfire.

  8. #26
    Raptors Republic Superstar TRex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Jurassic Park
    Posts
    3,273
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    B. Only trade them if you get VALUABLE assets in return. And i mean, VALUABLE.

    Tanking is for losers. And just like Masai said a couple of days ago: "You dont teach winning by losing"
    Follow me on Twitter - @11_RRyan

  9. #27
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Lark Benson wrote: View Post
    Wow, so I'm the only one here that would prefer the dump them all option huh? I'm a little surprised.

    You guys really feel that if the team is around the 10th or 11th seed at the deadline but Ujiri can't find any deals that bring back solid assets he should still stay the course? Really? Then what, go into next season with the same core and do the same dance all over again, hoping this time to squeak into the playoffs? What's the end-game there?

    I just don't get the logic I guess.
    I would think the Raptors would have the option to let Lowry walk in free agency.

    Gay might opt in (a poor year is hardly likely to help his free agent value) and at that point the Raptors would likely have a little more leverage trading him because the receiving team would know he is there for at least one full season.... although $19.3M - eek.

    DD would still have 3 more years on his contract and should be movable (assuming he doesn't have a piss poor year).

    Casey would undoubtedly not be retained.

    Essentially draft night and the summer might see MU walking around with some TNT.

    ...... or not, I'm really just thinking out loud here.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  10. #28
    Raptors Republic All-Star ezz_bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Kigali, Rwanda
    Posts
    1,746
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I am pro tanker and I don't really see this thread as very useful as initially constructed. I would say that the results in the poll (currently 18-1) reflect that.

    I mean nobody's going to say, "Don't get value" if that's possible.

    As Lark's post alluded to, there are specific situations that could be constructed to gauge tankingness. For instance, in the situation that we are approaching the deadline and are less than a game and a half either in of or out of the playoffs. What would you want Ujiri to do? Take the best offer available regardless of how much value you get, or role with the roster until the end of the season and hope that you get better offers in the off-season.

    My answer for the above hypothetical situation is that I'm happy not to form an opinion. It's really nice not thinking about what a GM should do because you believe that the GM who is actually going to make that decision is competent.

    This may not last forever, but right now I feel that whatever decision(s) Ujiri makes will be better than the decisions I would make.

    However, my general philosophy on basketball is that value is the most important thing. Having the best player in the world, playing at a discounted rate is the best way to win a championship (cough).


    I want value for production at spots 1 through 15. The idea is that by cultivating value you are simultaneously cultivating flexibility, as well as some other positive externalities. So I would hold them, until something better comes along.
    "They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee

    "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

  11. #29
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote ezz_bee wrote: View Post
    I am pro tanker and I don't really see this thread as very useful as initially constructed. I would say that the results in the poll (currently 18-1) reflect that.

    I mean nobody's going to say, "Don't get value" if that's possible.

    As Lark's post alluded to, there are specific situations that could be constructed to gauge tankingness. For instance, in the situation that we are approaching the deadline and are less than a game and a half either in of or out of the playoffs. What would you want Ujiri to do? Take the best offer available regardless of how much value you get, or role with the roster until the end of the season and hope that you get better offers in the off-season.

    My answer for the above hypothetical situation is that I'm happy not to form an opinion. It's really nice not thinking about what a GM should do because you believe that the GM who is actually going to make that decision is competent.

    This may not last forever, but right now I feel that whatever decision(s) Ujiri makes will be better than the decisions I would make.

    However, my general philosophy on basketball is that value is the most important thing. Having the best player in the world, playing at a discounted rate is the best way to win a championship (cough).


    I want value for production at spots 1 through 15. The idea is that by cultivating value you are simultaneously cultivating flexibility, as well as some other positive externalities. So I would hold them, until something better comes along.
    I would say it is quite useful.... but to each his or her own.

    How many threads get side tracked by tanking vs. staying the course? How many of those pro-staying the course continually reference trading guys for nothing? It is pretty clear of those advocating tanking very few are advocating Gay for CV/Stuckey type deals.

    As for the specific situations, absolutely. If somebody wishes to go through and start a poll with each individual scenario, please do! I'm sure it would spark some good discussion.... which was the attempt here. Clearly in some eyes it was a fail... and yet the posts keep coming in. Funny that is.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  12. #30
    Raptors Republic Starter Quirk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    341
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The main problem with this strategy is that I'm not convinced trading DD and Gay will result in losses, because historically, they are not terribly productive players. If you want losses, you need to get the win producers off of the court, so that means players like Amir, JV, Lowry and Fields need to be traded. Trading DD and/or Gay could easily improve the team. The proper way to tank would be to trade productive players for unproductive players on short contracts and boatloads of picks.

    Our best chance at tanking was lost with the Bargnani trade. Bargnani is the player you need if you are tanking. Bargnani's the tanking president.

    I know that you don't want anti-tanking arguments in this thread, and I'm not saying that tanking is a bad strategy in general. However, the strategy works best for a once-good team, that has aging productive players to trade for young players, bad players on bad, but short, contracts and picks galore.

    Our most productive players are young, under rated players, Amir, JV, Fields and Lowry. We've got interesting prospects in Ross, Acy and Stone. We've added another productive your player in Psycho T. All of these assets add Ws and cost us ping pong balls.

    We would simply have to take too many steps backwards to really tank.

    If tanking means trading JV, Fields, Amir and Lowry (and anybody else that helps us win games) instead of (or in addition to) DD and Gay, are you still on board for it?

  13. #31
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Quirk wrote: View Post
    The main problem with this strategy is that I'm not convinced trading DD and Gay will result in losses, because historically, they are not terribly productive players. If you want losses, you need to get the win producers off of the court, so that means players like Amir, JV, Lowry and Fields need to be traded. Trading DD and/or Gay could easily improve the team. The proper way to tank would be to trade productive players for unproductive players on short contracts and boatloads of picks.

    Our best chance at tanking was lost with the Bargnani trade. Bargnani is the player you need if you are tanking. Bargnani's the tanking president.

    I know that you don't want anti-tanking arguments in this thread, and I'm not saying that tanking is a bad strategy in general. However, the strategy works best for a once-good team, that has aging productive players to trade for young players, bad players on bad, but short, contracts and picks galore.

    Our most productive players are young, under rated players, Amir, JV, Fields and Lowry. We've got interesting prospects in Ross, Acy and Stone. We've added another productive your player in Psycho T. All of these assets add Ws and cost us ping pong balls.

    We would simply have to take too many steps backwards to really tank.

    If tanking means trading JV, Fields, Amir and Lowry (and anybody else that helps us win games) instead of (or in addition to) DD and Gay, are you still on board for it?
    Good points... really good points - especially on Bargnani. But getting a first round pick and shedding his salary was incredible so I can live with that.

    The only thing I would factor in is the win producers are middle of the road talent. Amir has been on the team for years and has hardly racked up the wins. The teams with the absolute worst records rarely win the lottery as it is - or sometimes even get in the top 3. If they can get in to the top 6 in this draft, I think they can get someone special.

    Regarding bold, everyone except JV. I think he is still raw enough that he is not going to make a huge difference on his own. JV is also the reason to build tank in the first place.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  14. #32
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Quirk wrote: View Post
    The main problem with this strategy is that I'm not convinced trading DD and Gay will result in losses, because historically, they are not terribly productive players. If you want losses, you need to get the win producers off of the court, so that means players like Amir, JV, Lowry and Fields need to be traded. Trading DD and/or Gay could easily improve the team. The proper way to tank would be to trade productive players for unproductive players on short contracts and boatloads of picks.

    Our best chance at tanking was lost with the Bargnani trade. Bargnani is the player you need if you are tanking. Bargnani's the tanking president.

    I know that you don't want anti-tanking arguments in this thread, and I'm not saying that tanking is a bad strategy in general. However, the strategy works best for a once-good team, that has aging productive players to trade for young players, bad players on bad, but short, contracts and picks galore.

    Our most productive players are young, under rated players, Amir, JV, Fields and Lowry. We've got interesting prospects in Ross, Acy and Stone. We've added another productive your player in Psycho T. All of these assets add Ws and cost us ping pong balls.

    We would simply have to take too many steps backwards to really tank.

    If tanking means trading JV, Fields, Amir and Lowry (and anybody else that helps us win games) instead of (or in addition to) DD and Gay, are you still on board for it?
    I'm not sure thats the entire story. What they are is not productive compared to their $ value, and therefore not productive compared to their opportunity cost.

    When I broke down players points per possession adjusted for usage in the summer, Demar came out as one of the more productive players on the team (mind you it was slightly above average to the league). Gay on the other hand did still come out quite weak offensively, although he comes out as rather productive defensively by most metrics.

    Now someone like Amir will likely cost the team more wins than DD or Gay, but as long as DD or Gay are replaced by unproductive players (or likely to be unproductive in the short term - ie. rookies/youth) the team will be adding losses.

    On top of that it offers additional benifits such as cap space (theoretically anyways, depending on the trade or type of trade ofcourse) and experience (Val, Ross, Acy can see more minutes/touches).

    When its all said and done I do expect that if this team wanted to be as bad as reasonably possible (ie. Jonas stays regardless), assuming they aren't willing to 'David Robinson' Amir, almost the entire starting line up needs to be replaced

    However tanking (atleast to this pro-tanker) isn't just about being the worst team possible anyways. Its about asset accumulation, and that includes future assets.

  15. Like ceez, mcHAPPY liked this post
  16. #33
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craiger wrote: View Post
    I'm not sure thats the entire story. What they are is not productive compared to their $ value, and therefore not productive compared to their opportunity cost.

    When I broke down players points per possession adjusted for usage in the summer, Demar came out as one of the more productive players on the team (mind you it was slightly above average to the league). Gay on the other hand did still come out quite weak offensively, although he comes out as rather productive defensively by most metrics.

    Now someone like Amir will likely cost the team more wins than DD or Gay, but as long as DD or Gay are replaced by unproductive players (or likely to be unproductive in the short term - ie. rookies/youth) the team will be adding losses.

    On top of that it offers additional benifits such as cap space (theoretically anyways, depending on the trade or type of trade ofcourse) and experience (Val, Ross, Acy can see more minutes/touches).

    When its all said and done I do expect that if this team wanted to be as bad as reasonably possible (ie. Jonas stays regardless), assuming they aren't willing to 'David Robinson' Amir, almost the entire starting line up needs to be replaced

    However tanking (atleast to this pro-tanker) isn't just about being the worst team possible anyways. Its about asset accumulation, and that includes future assets.
    money shot
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  17. #34
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I would think the Raptors would have the option to let Lowry walk in free agency.

    Gay might opt in (a poor year is hardly likely to help his free agent value) and at that point the Raptors would likely have a little more leverage trading him because the receiving team would know he is there for at least one full season.... although $19.3M - eek.

    DD would still have 3 more years on his contract and should be movable (assuming he doesn't have a piss poor year).

    Casey would undoubtedly not be retained.

    Essentially draft night and the summer might see MU walking around with some TNT.

    ...... or not, I'm really just thinking out loud here.
    This is what I mean by not understanding why you'd just delay the inevitable another year.

    If Lowry can (and probably will) walk in free agency, why not get ANY asset you can in return while you still can?

    As for Gay, I think people are going to be very disappointed by the return if and when he's actually traded. But does that mean you just wait to see if he opts in and hope you can get something better next year? I certainly wouldn't, especially if your goal is not only to bottom out in terms of wins but to shift his shots to JV/Ross/whatever young players are left in the name of development.

    And yes DD would retain his value, but again, his shots should be going to Ross unless you just want to move him to the 3 where he loses the single most effective weapon he's got: his post-up game.

    I just don't see the point of treading water for another year and just wasting development time. I'd rather get anything I can now and wipe the slate clean than hold out for what would probably not end up being any assets of greater significance down the line. But that's all speculation as to the actual vs perceived value of the Raps' trade chips on my part - maybe Ujiri will surprise me. I certainly hope he will.

  18. #35
    Raptors Republic Superstar Axel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    2,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I have been a supporter of blowing it up for a while now, but I worry that our best chance to make moves was prior to or at the draft. Not sure what the market is right now. The teams that had cap space have used it, so the deals become harder to navigate to match the salaries.

    To me, trading Gay for the Cavs #1 pick was the quickest, easiest way to the ball rolling. Now that that train has sailed, I'm not sure what we could get in return.

  19. #36
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Lark Benson wrote: View Post
    This is what I mean by not understanding why you'd just delay the inevitable another year.

    If Lowry can (and probably will) walk in free agency, why not get ANY asset you can in return while you still can?

    As for Gay, I think people are going to be very disappointed by the return if and when he's actually traded. But does that mean you just wait to see if he opts in and hope you can get something better next year? I certainly wouldn't, especially if your goal is not only to bottom out in terms of wins but to shift his shots to JV/Ross/whatever young players are left in the name of development.

    And yes DD would retain his value, but again, his shots should be going to Ross unless you just want to move him to the 3 where he loses the single most effective weapon he's got: his post-up game.

    I just don't see the point of treading water for another year and just wasting development time. I'd rather get anything I can now and wipe the slate clean than hold out for what would probably not end up being any assets of greater significance down the line. But that's all speculation as to the actual vs perceived value of the Raps' trade chips on my part - maybe Ujiri will surprise me. I certainly hope he will.
    Yeah you raise a lot of good points especially if the Raptors are not taking any salary in to next season.

    If we reach the trade deadline, there is nothing of value to be obtained via trade, and the Raps are sitting outside the playoffs, I am in agreement.

    Between now and then though, I am an optimist that teams like Detroit, Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Charlotte that through ownership and management have publicly stated and made transactions that back up the claim they are going playoffs or bust look at pieces Toronto has as a means of knocking off the bubble competition (like Toronto) and gain an advantage of the other bubble teams (like each other). I could be dead wrong on that. Lets hope I'm not.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  20. #37
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Axel wrote: View Post
    I have been a supporter of blowing it up for a while now, but I worry that our best chance to make moves was prior to or at the draft. Not sure what the market is right now. The teams that had cap space have used it, so the deals become harder to navigate to match the salaries.

    To me, trading Gay for the Cavs #1 pick was the quickest, easiest way to the ball rolling. Now that that train has sailed, I'm not sure what we could get in return.
    Agree completely. But I'd still rather bottom out now than tread water for another 2 years or more. But that's just a matter of fan perspective, and I think if nothing else this poll reflects the fact that Raps supporters would apparently rather see any kind of short term success than be dragged through another 2-3 year rebuild unless the team magically hits lottery gold.

  21. #38
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Axel wrote: View Post
    I have been a supporter of blowing it up for a while now, but I worry that our best chance to make moves was prior to or at the draft. Not sure what the market is right now. The teams that had cap space have used it, so the deals become harder to navigate to match the salaries.

    To me, trading Gay for the Cavs #1 pick was the quickest, easiest way to the ball rolling. Now that that train has sailed, I'm not sure what we could get in return.
    Was that even an option though? I know it was rumoured but I can't see it having had any credibility.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  22. #39
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Yeah you raise a lot of good points especially if the Raptors are not taking any salary in to next season.

    If we reach the trade deadline, there is nothing of value to be obtained via trade, and the Raps are sitting outside the playoffs, I am in agreement.

    Between now and then though, I am an optimist that teams like Detroit, Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Charlotte that through ownership and management have publicly stated and made transactions that back up the claim they are going playoffs or bust look at pieces Toronto has as a means of knocking off the bubble competition (like Toronto) and gain an advantage of the other bubble teams (like each other). I could be dead wrong on that. Lets hope I'm not.
    Completely agree. The reason I chose the 'take what you can get' option in the poll is that between the 2 options it's the lesser of 2 evils to me.

    As a random example, let's say Charlotte is the trading partner Ujiri chooses and he really wants to pry MKG away in addition to the expirings, but Charlotte is balking and offering Biyombo and a 2nd rounder instead. Now we can debate the definition of 'valuable assets' and whether Biyombo qualifies, but if that's the best offer Ujiri can find then I'd rather he take that than hold out for something better in the offseason or at next year's deadline. To me it isn't about getting fair market value, it's about getting anything at all you can flip later or develop now.

  23. Like mcHAPPY liked this post
  24. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    744
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Axel wrote: View Post
    I have been a supporter of blowing it up for a while now, but I worry that our best chance to make moves was prior to or at the draft. Not sure what the market is right now. The teams that had cap space have used it, so the deals become harder to navigate to match the salaries.

    To me, trading Gay for the Cavs #1 pick was the quickest, easiest way to the ball rolling. Now that that train has sailed, I'm not sure what we could get in return.
    How do you even know that was on the table?

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •