DISPLAY SETTING
Toggle Dark Mode
Automatic Theme
BETTING ODDS
Odds Enabled
LOCALE
FR
LOGIN
REGISTER
FORUMS
ARCHIVE ▾
ARCHIVE
Past Cap Payrolls
(Premium)
Articles
2017 Vegas Expansion Draft Simulator
2021 Seattle Expansion Draft Simulator
CBA ▾
CBA
CBA FAQ
Scouting Reports FAQ
Salary Cap History
Maximum Entry-Level Compensation
LTIR FAQ
Buyout FAQ
Offer Sheet FAQ
Waivers FAQ
Reserve List FAQ
Expansion Draft FAQ
ODDS
SCOUTING
CALCULATORS ▾
CALCULATORS
Buyout Calculator
Waivers Calculator
Qualifying Offer Calculator
Arbitration Calculator
Offer Sheet Calculator
Income Tax Calculator
FANTASY-TOOLS ▾
FANTASY HOCKEY TOOLS
Summary Page
Depth Charts
Starting Goalies
Player Status Updates
Injury History
TOOLS ▾
TOOLS
Entry Draft Board
Contract Comparables
Team Affiliates
Professional Tryouts
Reserve List Players
(Premium)
Salary Expense Tracker
(Premium)
Scouting Reports
Arbitration Filings
Coaches
General Managers
COVID Roster Freeze Players
Trade Clauses Commencing
(Premium)
PLAYERS ▾
PLAYERS
Free Agents
Active Players
Inactive Players
35+ Contracts
Entry-Level Contracts
Entry-Level Slides
NTC-NMC
Career Earnings
Contract Comparables
Professional Tryouts
Scouting Reports
Cost Per Point
Cost Per Save
Trades
Signings
Transactions
Injury History
Waivers History
Retained Salary
Buyout History
TEAMS ▾
WESTERN CONFERENCE
PACIFIC
Anaheim Ducks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers
Los Angeles Kings
San Jose Sharks
Seattle Kraken
Vancouver Canucks
Vegas Golden Knights
CENTRAL
Arizona Coyotes
Chicago Blackhawks
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Nashville Predators
St. Louis Blues
Winnipeg Jets
EASTERN CONFERENCE
METROPOLITAN
Carolina Hurricanes
Columbus Blue Jackets
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
Washington Capitals
ATLANTIC
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Detroit Red Wings
Florida Panthers
Montreal Canadiens
Ottawa Senators
Tampa Bay Lightning
Toronto Maple Leafs
INTERACTIVE ▾
INTERACTIVE FEATURES
Armchair-GM (Custom Roster Simulator)
Mock Draft (Entry Draft Simulator)
Trade Machine (Trade Proposal Simulator)
SEARCH
ARMCHAIR-GM
MOCK-DRAFT
TRADE MACHINE
TEAMS ▾
Anaheim Ducks
Arizona Coyotes
Boston Bruins
Buffalo Sabres
Calgary Flames
Carolina Hurricanes
Chicago Blackhawks
Colorado Avalanche
Columbus Blue Jackets
Dallas Stars
Detroit Red Wings
Edmonton Oilers
Florida Panthers
Los Angeles Kings
Minnesota Wild
Montreal Canadiens
Nashville Predators
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders
New York Rangers
Ottawa Senators
Philadelphia Flyers
Pittsburgh Penguins
San Jose Sharks
Seattle Kraken
St. Louis Blues
Tampa Bay Lightning
Toronto Maple Leafs
Vancouver Canucks
Vegas Golden Knights
Washington Capitals
Winnipeg Jets
PLAYERS ▾
Free Agents
Active Players
Inactive Players
35+ Contracts
Entry-Level Contracts
Entry-Level Slides
NTC-NMC
Career Earnings
Scouting Reports
Cost Per Point
Cost Per Save
Trades
Signings
Transactions
Injury History
Waivers History
Retained Salary
Buyout History
Contract Comparables
Professional Tryouts
TOOLS ▾
Entry Draft Board
Contract Comparables
Scouting Reports
Arbitration Filings
Professional Tryouts
Coaches
General Managers
COVID Roster Freeze Players
Reserve List Players
(Premium)
Salary Expense Tracker
(Premium)
Trade Clauses Commencing
(Premium)
Team Affiliates
FANTASY-TOOLS ▾
Summary Page
Depth Charts
Starting Goalies
Player Status Updates
CALCULATORS ▾
Buyout Calculator
Waivers Calculator
Qualifying Offer Calculator
Arbitration Calculator
Offer Sheet Calculator
Income Tax Calculator
SCOUTING REPORTS
ODDS
CBA▾
CBA FAQ
Scouting Reports FAQ
Salary Cap History
Maximum Entry-Level Compensation
Buyout FAQ
LTIR FAQ
Offer Sheet FAQ
Waivers FAQ
Reserve List FAQ
Expansion Draft FAQ
ARCHIVE ▾
Past Cap Payrolls
(Premium)
Articles
2017 Vegas Expansion Draft Simulator
2021 Seattle Expansion Draft Simulator
FORUMS
LOGIN
REGISTER
FR
Toggle Dark Mode
Odds Enabled
Ajp_18
Member Since
Mar. 21, 2018
Favourite Team
Columbus Blue Jackets
2nd Favourite Team
Seattle Kraken
Forum Posts
9851
Posts per Day
4.4
POSTS
THREADS
LIKES
ARMCHAIR-GM TEAMS
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 24 at 5:23 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>It was something implemented early in the scandal to avoid rampant speculation. It's not something we need to maintain, and I leave that to the collective.
I'm still not 100% comfortable with pointing fingers until it's confirmed (press conference is on Feb 5th) and nor am I really interested in a bunch of comments in AGMs or discussion threads along the lines of "X team declines because [player] is a sex offender". Twitter itself has been a cesspool since Dube, Hart, and now the two NJD skaters took their leave of absence from their respective clubs.
I present this only as an honest question and not as an accusation, but is that what we should be fostering here? I personally don't value engagement and clicks over much more focused discussions and the only real discussion of importance the hockey community as a whole should be having surrounding the 2018 WJC team is "what can we do as the hockey community to make sure this doesn't happen again?". Vitriol and anger over the five names in speculation isn't doing anything effective and if anything just opens up more avenues for flaming/trolling.</div></div>
TBH I'm not for blindly giving infractions/deleting posts in regards to the WJC unless it clearly breaks a rule. Simply stating an opinion on it isn't against the rules IMHO. If someone takes to the next level of saying things that are derogatory that don't have any pertinence to what's going on and just meant to shock/flame, etc, than yes.
I think unless Banks/Jarvis suggest otherwise, we should take our opinions out of the equation here altogether. Are they breaking a rule? Yes > Warning/infraction/Delete. If not, you need allow for a certain level of free speech.
As much as I get the reasoning for wanting to calm it, there isn't anything wrong with Rampant speculation. The whole point of the forum is to have a discussion (within the rules) so that everyone feels free to contribute. If users are having a discussion in regards to the speculation, there isn't anything wrong with that. Once again within the CF rules and our judgement will have to come into play obviously.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 24 at 1:32 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<a href="/users/Rooney" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Rooney</a>
<a href="/users/Ajp_18" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Ajp_18</a>
<a href="/users/alwaysnextyear" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@alwaysnextyear</a>
<a href="/users/F50Marco" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@F50Marco</a>
<a href="/users/DoctorBreakfast" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@DoctorBreakfast</a>
<a href="/users/DragonRaptorHybrid" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@DragonRaptorHybrid</a>
<a href="/users/toque" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@toque</a>
<a href="/users/Jarvis" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Jarvis</a>
<a href="/users/Ryan" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Ryan</a>
<a href="/users/Banks" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Banks</a>
With names being released in regards to the 2018 WJC Team Canada scandal, I wanted to poll the room on how we should proceed.
Currently, any speculation as to who was involved or who did what garners an automatic Level 1 infraction. I am anticipating that were going to see some very inappropriate hot-takery once the names are released. How would you guys like to go about managing those users that take this opportunity to troll and be the least-decent versions of themselves?
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 24 at 4:12 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>Rooney
Ajp_18
alwaysnextyear
F50Marco
DoctorBreakfast
DragonRaptorHybrid
toque
Jarvis
Ryan
Banks
With names being released in regards to the 2018 WJC Team Canada scandal, I wanted to poll the room on how we should proceed.
Currently, any speculation as to who was involved or who did what garners an automatic Level 1 infraction. I am anticipating that were going to see some very inappropriate hot-takery once the names are released. How would you guys like to go about managing those users that take this opportunity to troll and be the least-decent versions of themselves?</div></div>
Why are we giving level 1 infractions for that? The names are all out on twitter right now.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 24 at 4:37 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jarvis</b></div><div>Why are we giving level 1 infractions for that? The names are all out on twitter right now.</div></div>
It was something implemented early in the scandal to avoid rampant speculation. It's not something we need to maintain, and I leave that to the collective.
I'm still not 100% comfortable with pointing fingers until it's confirmed (press conference is on Feb 5th) and nor am I really interested in a bunch of comments in AGMs or discussion threads along the lines of "X team declines because [player] is a sex offender". Twitter itself has been a cesspool since Dube, Hart, and now the two NJD skaters took their leave of absence from their respective clubs.
I present this only as an honest question and not as an accusation, but is that what we should be fostering here? I personally don't value engagement and clicks over much more focused discussions and the only real discussion of importance the hockey community as a whole should be having surrounding the 2018 WJC team is "what can we do as the hockey community to make sure this doesn't happen again?". Vitriol and anger over the five names in speculation isn't doing anything effective and if anything just opens up more avenues for flaming/trolling.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 24 at 4:40 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>It was something implemented early in the scandal to avoid rampant speculation. It's not something we need to maintain, and I leave that to the collective.
I'm still not 100% comfortable with pointing fingers until it's confirmed (press conference is on Feb 5th) and nor am I really interested in a bunch of comments in AGMs or discussion threads along the lines of "X team declines because [player] is a sex offender". Twitter itself has been a cesspool since Dube, Hart, and now the two NJD skaters took their leave of absence from their respective clubs.
I present this only as an honest question and not as an accusation, but is that what we should be fostering here? I personally don't value engagement and clicks over much more focused discussions and the only real discussion of importance the hockey community as a whole should be having surrounding the 2018 WJC team is "what can we do as the hockey community to make sure this doesn't happen again?". Vitriol and anger over the five names in speculation isn't doing anything effective and if anything just opens up more avenues for flaming/trolling.</div></div>
My opinion would be to send warnings first and if they continue to post about it, then upgrade to an infraction.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 18 at 1:41 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
User Knuckl3s has been permanently banned as their account had 17 prior infraction points and this user showed no desire to correct their behaviours. Keep an eye out for alternate accounts in the near future.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 13 at 9:55 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>Please keep an eye on <a href="https://premium.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/790072" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">this thread</a>. I have ignored the warning about the roster as I think a few actually-relevant details to the heritages of these players is a neat talking point but if the OP can't/won't abide then the thread will need to be deleted.</div></div>
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ajp_18</b></div><div>I would love to help keep an eye on it, but since it’s in the premium section I’m unable to do so. Good luck!</div></div>
OP told me to delete it, I obliged.
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 12 at 10:21 p.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ajp_18</b></div><div>I would love to help keep an eye on it, but since it’s in the premium section I’m unable to do so. Good luck!</div></div>
Just remove the "premium." From the URL.
Banks also gave us all free premium access too
Forum:
Discussion
Jan. 12 at 9:26 a.m.
Thread:
Supermod town hall meeting - AGM section
Please keep an eye on <a href="https://premium.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/790072" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">this thread</a>. I have ignored the warning about the roster as I think a few actually-relevant details to the heritages of these players is a neat talking point but if the OP can't/won't abide then the thread will need to be deleted.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 16, 2023 at 5:46 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
User Bakasbookos has been permanently banned. This user's go-to replies to any and all criticism was usually some crude "your mom" post and there's no place for their ilk here.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 8, 2023 at 8:03 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
User Mr_Gardoki has been assessed a one-month ban for continuing to flame other users. No more warnings: their next infraction needs to make the message permanent.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 9, 2023 at 9:25 a.m.
Thread:
Significant Uptick in Bot Posts
Good morning all,
Last night we were rushed by a series of spambots: I've cleaned out 14 of them this morning alone, but I've been noticing an upward trend in how many bot posts I'm clearing out when I first log in in the morning. I think I'm up to about 25 this week alone.
<a href="/users/Banks" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Banks</a> whatever steps are being taken to minimize their impact may need to be reviewed. Many of these new posts seem to be AI-generated and the means in which they are getting through points to their increased complexity. Best of luck.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 4, 2023 at 12:18 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div>May just be easier to let users create secondary accounts? Its not like the current process is really deterring anyone. I'm pretty sure there's a Detroit/Tampa fan that is on their 100th account since they started on here. They don't even try to hide it anymore and know if we ban them, they'll just create a new one tomorrow.</div></div>
I'll jump in here quickly.
From my understanding we maintain the practice because of <em>banned users</em> using alternates to get around their bans. It would seem to me at least that opening the door to alternate accounts we would be essentially eliminating the purpose of a permanent ban. This is why I've historically asked for IP bans despite Banks' ability to do so and their limited applicability (they stop the honest ones, the truly petulant will just use a VPN or bypass using alternate means). These punishments need to maintain their severity, not open up new avenues to continue flaming/trolling other users.
I would support some form of monthly sweep. Hopefully it's a process that can be automated. It's futility just comes with the territory, like removing bot posts or moving general discussion topics out of AGM to their respective forums.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 3, 2023 at 10:31 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jarvis</b></div><div>A multi account detection:
Kinger25
SomeonesOffended
JesikaMorris</div></div>
Hey Jarvis, just curious, how does the detection work exactly? Like did you scan these users manually or do you get some sort of alert when a few are detected? Is their a way to upscale detections/ feed all the users accounts through the detectors to see any multi's, etc? Maybe do a once a month purge? :squinty
Also, just on a side note, looping <a href="/users/banks" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@banks</a> as well, is this all even really necessary? I only ask because this kind of feels like a endless endeavor to a certain extent. If a user creates a second account, the multi gets banned but not the original. If the original later gets banned for whatever reason, they just create a new account which won't get flagged for a while (Not to mention the myriad of ways to create a second acct with a different IP to avoid detection, etc) And frankly unless one of the mods on a hunch, suspects the user of being a multi and asks one of you, the only other way of knowing is through the multi detectors which unless we're being notified on the regular, they'll have tons of time to post and comment. Chances are they'd probably just create another account and we'll not even know till months in anyway.
May just be easier to let users create secondary accounts? Its not like the current process is really deterring anyone. I'm pretty sure there's a Detroit/Tampa fan that is on their 100th account since they started on here. They don't even try to hide it anymore and know if we ban them, they'll just create a new one tomorrow.
Forum:
Discussion
Dec. 1, 2023 at 8:54 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<a href="/users/Jarvis" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Jarvis</a> <a href="/users/Banks" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Banks</a>
Can I get an alt check for user KayceeMoonlight? This account has been around since July and does not post anything but has a history of spamming forum reports.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 4:52 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>The 1-month reversion seems counterproductive based on your assessment. If this is a suspected problematic user, has just come off a ban on a previous account for their posting habits, and this was the second time they were caught using alternate accounts, why aren't we enforcing a one month ban? Is it just to prevent the creation of more alternate accounts?</div></div>
The accounts weren't recently created and yes I would guess this user would continue to create additional accounts if we banned him again.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 4:06 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jarvis</b></div><div>I believe he just got off a 1 month ban and these accounts were made a while ago. I'll revert the 1 month ban, and give him a warning, but please keep watch as I believe this is a problematic user.</div></div>
The 1-month reversion seems counterproductive based on your assessment. If this is a suspected problematic user, has just come off a ban on a previous account for their posting habits, and this was the second time they were caught using alternate accounts, why aren't we enforcing a one month ban? Is it just to prevent the creation of more alternate accounts?
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 4:03 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>I have permanently banned the SomeonesOffended and JesikaMorris accounts and assessed a one-month ban to the Kinger25 account. If this user continues to evade these bans with alternate accounts, we will be forced into permanently banning the Kinger25 account and any and all alternates. Please keep an eye out for any alternate accounts over the next week or so!</div></div>
I believe he just got off a 1 month ban and these accounts were made a while ago. I'll revert the 1 month ban, and give him a warning, but please keep watch as I believe this is a problematic user.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 2:36 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
A multi account detection:
Kinger25
SomeonesOffended
JesikaMorris
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 3:37 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jarvis</b></div><div>A multi account detection:
Kinger25
SomeonesOffended
JesikaMorris</div></div>
I have permanently banned the SomeonesOffended and JesikaMorris accounts and assessed a one-month ban to the Kinger25 account. If this user continues to evade these bans with alternate accounts, we will be forced into permanently banning the Kinger25 account and any and all alternates. Please keep an eye out for any alternate accounts over the next week or so!
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 28, 2023 at 11:43 a.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>There was a recent thread with a similar situation: another user was giving Anderson the ol Campbell treatment and he went on a trolling and reporting spree with anyone that disagreed with his takes.
People have the right to be wrong but to be that petulant and infantile about it was ridiculous. They're at a sum total of 15 infraction points and I think it's time we start considering termination.</div></div>
Oh wow didn't even realize he was that bad. Yeah if it continues, a 30 day ban could be a nice stiff warning I think. After that its a paddling for sure.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 27, 2023 at 9:46 a.m.
Thread:
TMLBrian Youtube Video Link - Permission Granted
Hi Moderators - We gave permission to a YouTube commentator (TMLBRIAN) to post a link to his video in the forums. Wanted to provide a heads up so you don't deleted it or infract his account.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 22, 2023 at 11:04 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>I fully intended it as a warning, not a threat, something I've done on multiple occasions to a generally positive reaction: taking the opportunity to actually engage with them instead of just slapping on an infraction or warning has been a productive tool for me historically. Based on that user's posting history, I'm not at all surprised that they jumped at the opportunity to play the victim.
I'd ask you go back and re-read their replies: they were pretty obviously goading me into where that conversation went. Should I have known better than to engage? Yes. Am I comfortable walking it back? Right now, no. The damage is already done. I'll reconsider in the morning when I'm less charged about it.
In the meantime, I take no issue with stopping my practice of warning users via replies.</div></div>
Sorry man, I disagree and have read the entire post. While there's snark there sure at one point, its totally tolerable and within the rules IMHO. No more than some of my replies to be absolutely honest. As much as its annoying as f***, "goading" at least that level isn't infraction worthy if its done within the rules.
I do believe this was more against the rules than anything he did:
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>Are you missing the point where you're adding them to teams that already have relatively complete rosters at half-price? Imagine if you weren't being a FACETIOUS ASS and considered what the Oilers could do with an extra $11M to spend on their team.</div>
And this IMHO looks like a power trip as there was clearly nothing done to cross any lines.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>If you want to keep trolling, go for it. I have no issues with infracting you accordingly.</div>
Listen, i prefer the mods take the onus themselves to correct the situation if there is some sort of dispute against them because 1) If I just delete everything it just looks like we're just trying to cover everything up and 2) if you were given an warning/infraction, they'd never know about it which only leaves them questioning if mods are above the law so to speak.
Honestly, just easier for everyone to get ahead of it and clear the air. Believe me, if I truly felt he was in the wrong here I'd gladly be throwing down some words but I can't in good conscience say he did anything wrong there and if anything, respectfully, you were much more in the wrong than he was.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 27, 2023 at 11:33 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div>Yeah I hear ya bud. We all have to deal with it sometimes. Just got into a little spat on an Anderson for Schmidt AGM that took all my will power not to go nuclear on someone. Lmao :tearsofjoy
As for Campabee, outside of the occasional troll reply of offering his teams worst player for another teams best player to make a point of his displeasure of the trade he's discussing, I haven't seen much against him. Whats up?</div></div>
There was a recent thread with a similar situation: another user was giving Anderson the ol Campbell treatment and he went on a trolling and reporting spree with anyone that disagreed with his takes.
People have the right to be wrong but to be that petulant and infantile about it was ridiculous. They're at a sum total of 15 infraction points and I think it's time we start considering termination.
Forum:
Discussion
Nov. 27, 2023 at 11:12 p.m.
Thread:
Problematic users
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>Finally got around to it. It's been a bad week for me and I think my emotions got ahead of me on this one, even so far as getting in my own way for getting an apology out.
In more focused news, what's the mood of the room for permanently banning user Campabee during his next infraction?</div></div>
Yeah I hear ya bud. We all have to deal with it sometimes. Just got into a little spat on an Anderson for Schmidt AGM that took all my will power not to go nuclear on someone. Lmao :tearsofjoy
As for Campabee, outside of the occasional troll reply of offering his teams worst player for another teams best player to make a point of his displeasure of the trade he's discussing, I haven't seen much against him. Whats up?
1
2
Next
Page 1
SalarySwish
| NBA Salary Caps by CapFriendly
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Forum Rules
About
CBA FAQ
Contact Us
Privacy Manager
Follow @CapFriendly
CapFriendly
CapFriendly
© 2024 CapFriendly.com