Minutes Allocation
by citizen zhiv on Aug 22, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
Email
PrintI thought I would steal a few topics that seem interesting over on the ESPN board, just to give us something to talk about.
Minutes allocation is a bit of a crapshoot, and the general numbers don't make much sense, so you're always talking in rough terms. Total minutes for the season is crucial and more significant than minutes per game, I think, but missing a few games or missing a lot can really change things around. One example: Kaman was at 37.2 mpg last year, but he missed 27 games.
Trying to figure out minutes allocation raises some interesting questions. How durable will Kaman, Camby, and Davis be? How many minutes will Mobley and Tim Thomas get--or, to put it differently, how significantly will there minutes be reduced? Mobley vs. Gordon, and factoring in Ricky Davis, seems to be worthy of its own thread. Will Al Thornton play the most minutes of all of the wing players, and will he pick up a few PF minutes as well? Will Steve Novak play more than he did last year in Houston? Will DeAndre Jordan play at all--it seems as if a number of people think he'll be out there a little bit, which seems surprising to me since he has to get past both Brian Skinner and Paul Davis. What about JWill and JHart and the backup PG minutes?
It would help to have the minutes that guys played last year, but it's a bit of a hassle to look it up on a dozen different teams. Here's a quick pass, just to start a discussion:
PG: BD 35 mpg JWill 8 JHart 5
SG: CM 30 Gordon 15
SF: AT 35 RDavis 19
PF: MC 32 TT 12
C: CK 35 Skinner 14
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting topic
I think you have to put a lot of stakes in the ground to define terms up front in order to have a decent discussion. As you point out, injuries will determine a lot. There’s also the question of beginning of the year versus end of the year, particularly for the rookies. To that end, I’d say you’re being optimistic on Gordon – 15 minutes a game, certainly in the beginning, is just not likely to happen.
If everyone is healthy, early in the season, I think your numbers are pretty good. I disagree on the Jasons – there’s no percentage in including the third point in the regular rotation. So figure if JWill and Baron are healthy, JHart is on the bench.
Unfortunately, I see no way that MDsr reduces Cat and/or Thomas as much as you’re indicating, as much as I would like to see it, and/or as much as I would choose to do it myself.
So bye bye Gordon minutes, and increase correspondingly for Davis, Cat and Thomas in the early going. That’s your 9 man rotation for Nov and Dec and probably longer – no Gordon, no Jordan, no Hart.
Hopefully Gordon begins to take minutes from Cat and Davis, and Jordan takes minutes from Skinner (or if not, he’s playing 35 in Anaheim). I’d like to see Novak get some minutes, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Davis actually enters the season as Kaman’s backup rather than Skinner.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
I would tend to agree
Hart ain’t playin if J Will and BD are healthy.
Mobley and TT will prevent EG from playing too much (which might not be a bad thing since he’s so young and really needs time to develop. I do think that TT will play far more than 12 minutes a game, spelling both of the centers, and that Skinner will play less than 10 mpg. Novak will get some minutes too I think. Forget about P Davis
Hopefully
Camby is getting all the back up 5 minutes with Skinner getting the bulk of the backup 4. Something more like…
4: Camby 17 Skinner 20 TT 11
5: Kaman 35 Camby 13
If Skinner can go for longer, even better. But I want Kaman or Camby on the floor at all times.
I’d also up William’s minutes at the 1 and get BD some time at the 2 to maximize where your depth is. At least until Gordon proves he belongs. Get Buckets minutes at the 2 as well to get him up to like 25mpg. Gordon can smooth that all out if he proves.
Keep it a tight 9 otherwise.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
Good start
Yes, setting stakes is important. I think the best number is mpg for the entire season AND total minutes. Then early season mpg is a third category. And maybe there’s a better, clearer way to do it.
Season mpg is how somebody like JHart gets his minutes up. I think everybody’s right about JWill, but we need to remember that Dunleavy went out of his way to get Hart and burned up a little bit of (Livingston) capspace in the process. He likes Hart’s defense and the fact he’s not a little person like BKnight, and I wonder if he’s going to relegate him to full-fledged 3rd string pine status, or use him in some matchups. It probably depends on how JWill does, and how productive and healthy he is.
I’m pretty sure that Cat and TT will have pretty high early season mpg. TT will presumably play himself towards reduced minutes, especially now that there are viable backups behind him. Skinner could conceivably be the first big off the bench pretty quickly, coming in for Camby and playing PF. TT’s leash should be an interesting thing.
I think that Gordon is going to be impressive, hard to keep completely off the floor, and he’s going to be a lot like Thornton, except that hopefully the Clippers won’t be pathetic for the last 40 games. Even with the short look in summer league, it was easy to see that he has a great “motor,” is extremely athletic and strong, and he’s got a great stroke. It’s just a question of how long Dunleavy wants to go with Mobley, if Mobley comes out super aggressive like he did at the start of last season, and if he can stay healthy. Posed against that will be the frequency of Gordon’s rookie mistakes and whether his shot is falling, and if he seems undersized on defense despite his athleticism. He’s a top lottery pick who’s poised to be a great shooter and scorer in the NBA. He doesn’t need to be overplayed, but he shouldn’t be underplayed either. In some ways he has to go through Ricky Davis to get minutes. After Mobley you go to Thornton-Davis, and Dunleavy will be itching to go from there back to Davis-Mobley, or even John R’s RDavis-BD-JWill lineup, and we’d probably be curious to see Novak out there at SF too.
Gordon
Remember that Thornton only averaged 16 minutes in Nov, and 18 in Dec. And that’s against the backdrop of (1) massive injury issues and (2) a 24 year old rookie versus a 19 year old. I just don’t think he’s going to see a lot of court time early. I hope I’m wrong.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Aug 22, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay, but...
16 mpg in Nov and 18 in Dec would be great numbers for Gordon. I worry that it might be much less. And I’m definitely expecting and hoping that he won’t rack up the kind of extended minutes that Thornton finished up with because that would mean one of two things: he’s either easily the greatest rooking in Clipper history at 19 years old, or the Clips have completely tanked for a variety of reasons and they’re putting him out there in a couple of dozen meaningless games in order to get experience. Unfortunately the second scenario would be much more likely, so let’s just hope that he plays a relatively substantial amount, and that he’s really good.
Yes, Thornton was 24. Gordon does seem extremely strong and athletic, and he’s been playing elite basketball for a while—almost as long as AT—, even though he’s so young. With regards to AT’s Nov/Dec mpg, it wasn’t just the massive injury issues, but some of the attempted solutions to them that kept AT off the floor, starting with Reuben Patterson. Patterson could have worked out, so it was worth a try, and the Clips did a rare good job of ending the experiment quickly. But the big thing in AT’s way was Maggette, and a fair number of his minutes over the course of the season were playing somewhat out of position at PF. It actually turned out to be a pretty good case of vet-rookie transition. AT is old enough and talented to take over the job full-time now, and he has good backups in RDavis, Novak, and TT.
The vet-rookie transition from Mobley to Gordon is going to be more complicated, for all the reasons cited previously. The goal is not to overplay Mobley and underplay Gordon, and vice versa. Should be interesting to watch, and fingers are crossed that it doesn’t become excrutiating.
by citizen zhiv on Aug 23, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Too many assumptions
How do you know EG will make it in this league? THe Clippers have a veteran squad. There’s no reason to push a 19 year old rook who needs to grow.
Agreed
Zhiv, you seem to be the driver of the bandwagon for the underdogs and/or new darlings. There was the Paul Davis infatuation and then Fazekas and now Gordon (and probably some others I don’t remember right now). Misplaced enthusiasm, IMO.
You want Gordon to succeed, so you’re doing whatever you can to plan his path to glory. But it’s unrealstic, and frankly just wrong. Gordon is VERY young, inexperienced, and didn’t show much in SL before his injury (despite what you reported, he simply had poor shot selection and wasn’t making the shots he took). There’s just no way MDSr gives him a lot of minutes barring injuries or mailing in the season.
Player development doesn't happen
by mothballing young players on the bench. EG should be our last lottery selection for a long time so we better help him develop into the star we drafted him to be. If he’s not starting by next year, he should at least become the 1st scoring option off the bench. To be ready for that, he needs to learn by playing in real games this year (at least 10 minutes per and increasing based on his play).
Because the Clippers are a veteran squad, they have even more reason to spread the playing time. The season is a grind, and we need Mobely and RickyD healthy and fresh at the end of the year. In two years, they’ll both likely be gone, and a backcourt of Baron and EG has the potential for greatness. I like most of the Clippers veteran acquisitions, but we won’t win a championship just by signing free agents and gathering other teams castoffs.
I agree with that, and
that’s why I don’t want to watch tired, undermotivated veterans take playing time from hungry, enthusiastic younger players, such as Tim Thomas playing 20+ minutes a game, while Paul Davis rusts on the bench. In EG’s case, he has to start somewhere, and 10 minutes a game seems like a reasonable place to start. He should earn more playing time as the season goes on. If he doesn’t, then he should spend some time in the D-League.
Disagree
There are a couple of dominoes in this part of the rotation that I really don’t like for the Clippers.
If you think that Skinner is going to play very sparingly, who is the backup big man who is taking up all of the minutes? The only logical answer, at least for the start of the season, is Tim Thomas. And for me that is a very ugly domino.
In the first place, John R’s desire, up above, that either Kaman or Camby is on the floor at all times is a nice idea, but it’s just not going to happen. It helps the Clips in a big way if both of them are durable and playing big minutes, but we’re also looking at a season’s worth of playing time at TWO positions. Perhaps this is where season totals in minutes is worth looking at. Coming off a season with 1941 TT minutes (as a starter, admittedly) and 1228 from 13th man Josh Powell, who somehow worked his way up to 19.2 mpg. Patterson was at 16.2 mpg in his 20 games.
I need to run some more numbers, but I expect Skinner to be at 10 mpg at least. I really can’t handle the first alternative, that TT is at 15+ mpg. Obviously that’s only half of his 30.8 mpg last year, but that horrifying number will haunt me for a long time.
Skinner is far from ideal, but he’s a very good complement for Kaman, a much better rebounder/defender than Powell or any of last year’s choices. He’s a solid PF with Kaman next to him. The Camby/Skinner combination isn’t very pretty. This suggests the idea that the better backup lineups are Kaman/Skinner and Camby/Thomas. If you like Kaman/Thomas, then you’re taking Skinner out the equation and asking to see more TT than I can stomach. I’m actually hoping that Novak gets a chance at some of TT’s minutes. Camby/Novak is a little problematic because Camby stays outside, but it still could work, and Kaman/Novak is even better because it’s good inside-outside.
If it’s not Skinner, and it probably won’t be Novak any time soon, then you’re talking about Paul Davis. I’d be happy to see Paul Davis look great in training camp and the preseason. I was a big fan at the beginning of last season. I really like the idea of Kaman and PDavis on the floor together, and Camby/PDavis might be even better than that combo. I really don’t like Davis very much as a backup center. He doesn’t jump or get as many rebounds as he should, and doesn’t have much of a defensive presence. He doesn’t have the inside the paint nose for the basket and knack for finding offensive rebounds that Fazekas has, although he has better strength and athleticism. Before his injury he was able to run the floor a little bit, which could be good with BDavis and the new Clips. If Davis can find his game he might take minutes from Skinner, but I’m not expecting it.
I was shocked that some people at the ESPN board thought that DJordan was going to get 5 or 7mpg, and I would be shocked to see it. He’s got some nice tools, and should slowly turn into that true Center backup who can rebound, block shots, and defend, but I’m virtually positive that Dunleavy is going to work his way very slowly through TT, Skinner, and Davis before playing Jordan even crosses his mind. Nothing would be better than for Jordan to surprise us all, but it’s going to be hard enough for highly-skilled, smoothing shooting Eric Gordon to get minutes, let alone a completely raw and unpolished big man.
by citizen zhiv on Aug 23, 2008 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Skinner
is on the downside of his “career.” He cannot play more than 8 – 10 mins / game unless the team sucks. Tim Thomas is a far more versatile player and MDSr will not hesitate to play him.
John R is right. Either Camby or Kaman need to be on the floor at all times.
I suspect that Kaman and Camby will play side by side less than you might think.
Except
John R has Skinner playing 20mpg (!!!!!). That is outrageous. We are FUBARed if that’s the case. Regardless of who’s sitting (Kaman or Camby), TT is still the better alternative to pair with the other, especially if Thornton can improve his rebounding desire. Don’t forget how much TT is making vs. Skinner, it’s a pointless measuring stick but it tells us what the team thinks of the player’s value. I can’t imagine TT playing much less than 20mpg, and I don’t want to imagine Skinner playing more than 10mpg.
Agree with Supac
TThomas can be effective… and he gives you something different on offense. I think you’ll see him at 20, Skinner at 10.
What about Skinner don't you like?
Skinner is only 31. Last season in PHO he was a fish out of water, but otherwise he shoots 50% from the field. His rebound rate is terrific and has not yet shown signs of decline. For his career he is a 10/10 guy per 36 minutes. He’s the only proven big after Kaman and Camby. If he is your starter your squad is in trouble, but as first PF off the bench you are looking pretty good.
TT will likely end up playing more than Skinner, but it will almost certainly be a mistake.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
I don't dislike Skinner
He’s just not a 20mpg guy for a good team. Skinner is a good defender and defensive rebounder, but that’s the end of it. He replicates (piss poor man’s version) a lot of what Kaman/Camby already do defensively, but is generally worthless on the other end (including poor FT%) and in transition. Think a less valuable version of a big man QRoss (yes that’s the first comparison that popped into my head). There will be nights when we need him for 20mpg (foul trouble for Kaman/Camby, or against certain bigs), but for the season 10mpg sounds about right. Don’t forget that Thornton can slide to the 4 in some lineups against smaller frontlines which should increase the minutes for Buckets (who I happen to like a lot if he can behave himself off the court and restrain himself from selfishness on the court).
I understand everyone’s disdain for TT, and I share a lot of those feelings. But between him and Skinner I don’t think it’s close. TT just fits better in just about every possible configuration. I do agree that if his shot is off or if he’s just dogging it, sit his ass down. But I’ll take a mildly intersted TT over a focused Skinner anyday including Sunday. Besides, it’s just completely unrealistic to expect MDSr to reduce TT’s minutes so dramatically.
Exactly
Skinner is old, a career backup, and plays in the second unit. He’s also very limited offensively.
It is silly to measure his value just by looking at what he would do over 36 mins. Because he could never do that over 36 mins. Play him 5 mins at backup center with both Camby and Kaman out if you must.
TT should play far more than Skinner, paired with Camby or Kaman. This team can only be successful as a running team. Agree with Supac.
“$70 M – take it or leave it – oops”
Dumb
“Because he could never do that over 36 mins.”
Prove it. In fact, if you look at his career, the more he plays, the better he becomes. The year he averaged 28mpg he actually averaged 13 and 10 over 36. Such is the case with most NBA players.
Its probably true though, noone will ask him to play 20 minutes. You will get all the TT you can handle Jax, and we can say that you demanded it.
But again I suppose I shouldn’t waste my fingers on those who insist on living in the dark. Its probably like trying to convince the christians that the world revolves around the sun and not the other way round.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
Someone's off his meds
Apparently John R took my suggestion that career backup Brian Skinner (yes Brian Skinner) shouldn’t be analyzed by what his performance would be if he played 36 mins/game as a personal attack.
John R’s pretty sensitive, apparently. Sorry to hurt his feelings. However, the assertion that “most NBA players” (i.e., backup players) will automatically provide the same productivity over 36 mins that they do in 10 is utterly ludicrous. Trust me, there’s a reason that these players average 10 mins per game.
In addition, where did I suggest that I love TT? The fact is that they have no choice to play him since Kaman and Camby essentially play the same position.
Finally, apparently we now know that John R isn’t a Christian by his slight on the entire religion. Hopefully most here won’t take offense and will see ignorance for what it is. For his edification, however, I suspect that most of “the” christians he references understand that the world revolves around the sun. Nice insult, however.
"$70 M – take it or leave it – oops"
Uh...
I notice most of the Clipsnation regulars step away when you guys go at it, but… I’m not a stat guy and I agree that that whole, “if-you-extend-his-minutes-to-36 stuff” is really a crock. But, Jax, you know John R was indulging in allegory (metaphor?) when he referred to “christians” (noting the lower-case "C") and the sun. Actually, it was really kinda funny. But you also know that JR will probably take the bait and… off we go devolving.
per minute stats
Tom Ziller at SacTown Royalty and BallHype and FanHouse is a big believer in per minute stats. He’s tried to objectively study the question of whether per minute productivity translates to more minutes. I.E. does a low-minute player’s per minute productivity decrease, increase or stay the same as his minutes increase. Lo and behold, his numbers indicate that per minute productivity goes up, not down, as minutes increase. Of course, the guys for whom the minutes go up are the ones that the coach has decided (beyond simple per minute stats) needs more minutes from season to season, so there are other factors at play here. But, statistically speaking, I’ve seen lots of data that suggests that per minute numbers are in fact VERY good predictors of future performance even as minutes increase, and I’ve never seen any data that suggests otherwise. FWIW.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Aug 25, 2008 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions
This might be obvious...
…but a bench player is fresh, often coming in against players who’ve been out there a while. And the bench player generally knows he’s only going to get limited minutes… so he can expend energy without caution.
Along with that, doesn’t empirical evidence tell us that often a player is more effective in his early minutes, or in the minutes after he’s warmed up? Then there’s those times when the coach is often looking for a hot hand or a good match up… and you’ve got improving young players on your bench, you’ve got old vets who are consistent but tire out quickly, and you’ve got Eddie House-like guys who are screaming hot or dead cold. But how can you quantify this stuff and extend it into a “per minute” theory?
The answer is that you can! And it might be a viable stat… but it should be viewed as an indication of good use… that the coach or the player is making the most of his time on the floor… NOT that he deserves more time… or would produce similar numbers given more time! IMO, anyway.
Of course you're right
Otherwise the Brian Skinners of the world would be NBA starters. The notion (stated above) that players can be replaced like widgets based solely on per minute stats is incorrect.
Actually Skinner
has put up fairly consistent numbers whether he was a starter or a reserve. The two seasons he started over 40 games and played more than 20 minutes a game, his numbers Per 36 were pretty close to his career averages Per 36.
Seems to me that consistent minutes should tend to increase a player’s productivity (as CS asserted) by helping the player get into the flow of the game and boosting his confidence level. Paul Davis’s low FG% is a good example. When he has played at least 15 minutes a game, he has shot .541. Under 15 mpg, his FG% drops to .325. Only in the case of out of shape, injured or older players should too many minutes hurt.
Jax, Jax, Jax...
This is how you piss people off.
“The notion (stated above) that players can be replaced like widgets based solely on per minute stats is incorrect.”
See, I made a point, backed by statistical studies that I’ve seen. I even bothered to find the link this time.
You contradict my point based on nothing more than your opinion. “The notion… is incorrect.” Oh, well, great. Glad that’s settled.
And now I’m a little pissed off.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Aug 27, 2008 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions
The link is a good one...
It’s very convincing, insanely geeky, and probably beyond me, but okay… I’m willing to see both sides of the PER coin. (I still can’t stand John Hollinger utterly didactic tone and think he’s full of it.) The point Tom Ziller made is that you can’t assume a player’s numbers will diminish given extended time nor can you assume the opposite. Fine, but Brian Skinner is a career backup… for obvious reasons (he’s not as good as most starters).
Jax is a provocateur. (When the threads get this skinny you know he’s hard at work… provoking.) But that’s his job… isn’t it?
Hmm
From what I understand, Ziller’s argument is that the data is INCONCLUSIVE, and that it only DISPROVES the notion that a player’s PER (or whatever per minute metric) DOES NOT NECESSARILY DECREASE with increased playing time. The debate stemmed from the PERs of then low-mpg players like Chuck Hayes and Paul Millsap, who some thought would suffer productivity (couldn’t maintain the same level) if their minutes were increased. Ziller only proved that their PERs would not automatically decrease if their mpg went up, as some others had posited.
I think this was one of main reasons why everyone here was so intrigued by Fazekas (in addition to his general funkyness). If he could duplicate his WP48 over a greater amount of minutes, or even only decrease slightly – then we would have found ourselves a highly efficient and productive backup. Too bad we won’t be able to find out now, because…
We signed Brian Skinner. But he’s a different breed: an older, established bench player whose upside has all but disappeared. Now I’m willing to bet that he’s exactly the type of player whose PER/productivity WILL DECREASE as his minutes are increased.
Back on point, I do share the same thought as JohnR regarding having either Kaman or Camby on the floor at all times – TT + Skinner = gross. Kaman is young and Camby is a roamer so why not play them more mpg? They’ll be alternating banging down low against the redwoods of the L so the “damage” would be spread out.
4: Camby 34 TT 14
5: Kaman 38 Skinner 10
Realistically I expect TT to take more time away from both Camby and Kaman, which obviously sucks royally.
I am NOT a TT Fan by any means...
Let me repeat that… I am NOT a TT Fan… but I do think we have to be open to the possibility that he will be a better player in a backup role than he was last year.
C’mon, do we really think that MDSr WANTED to start him? Heck no, but when you lose your two starting big men for much of the season, what option did he have (and playing Fazekas more would not have been our salvation, IMHO)? TT was clearly playing out of “position” i.e., way too many minutes and burden, and his stats obviously reflect that. He was an adequate sixth man in Phoenix and and earlier in his Clip career, and I think we have to be open to the possibility that he will return to that form next year. At least, that is my hope.
And swami, I would respectfully suggest that it is nobody’s job on these boards to provoke in a manner that consistently devolves into sarcastic disrespect and putdowns, which seems to be Jax’s specialty. He periodically has solid insight to offer, but so do the rest of us and we shouldn’t have to be dragged into the mud every time someone says something that doesn’t fit into his view of Clipper Nation.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Aug 28, 2008 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions
JHart v. JWill
I think Dunleavy wanted Hart back for his defense. It seems to me you’ll see Hart in some games, Williams in others, rarely both in the same game… but overall, barring injuries, they’ll split minutes. Interesting topic.
I think most of us can agree
that on “paper” it seems logical that J Will & J Hart will platoon as the back-up PG depending on the match-up with the other team’s back court on a given night.
We can also agree that J Will, would seem to be the clear cut # 2 on most nights and it is likely that some nights J Hart won’t play at all.
Never the less, I for one hope that MDsr would be wise enough to leave his rotation open to start camp and reward those who work hard, get in shape, and are prepared to play their role regardless of minutes. We have enough guys at each position to be able to reward those players that are willing to bring maximum effort each night.
by tha MaDD Sientist on Aug 23, 2008 8:40 AM PDT up reply actions
Good point about rewarding effort
But that opens the possibility that MDSr’s doghouse will be crowded with talent. Like Singleton, and even Maggs. It’s a fine line.
MD's Doghouse?
Let’s see, Chris Wilcox, Maggette, Singleton… who’s next? Thomas seems the most likely, but MD brought him in… wait, MD brought in all these guys. It could be a rookie: if Gordon comes out and has a monster game, but guys run by him on defense, in he goes. If DJordan plays hard in games but not in practice, same thing. Who else? It seems like TT would be a prime candidate, but MD has always needed him. Ricky Davis? JWilliams? They gotta be contenders… but those guys are out to prove they’ve still got the goods. Who?
Sort of a side note
I’d actually like to see the minutes for the top 8 (especially the veteran starters) all reduced a wee bit. MDSr has a bad habit of leaving his guys in too long in blowouts, especially losses. Those are opportunities for the youngsters to get some experience and for the end of the bench guys to spell the starters for some rest. It’s a long season and we don’t exactly have an Ironman roster, so take the chance to get some rest for the players that will benefit from it the most. We’ll need it for the playoff push/run that we’re all optimistically rooting for.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
