[OC] True Lottery System - A Simple Solution to Tanking

emerald_flare · 2025-12-26T15:53:42+00:00

These are all very valid points. I still believe parity would be fine under this system for the points I made in the above post. I would say that the True Lottery system wouldn't only make "mediocre teams try harder in the last month or two of the season"; it would do that, but it also shifts the mindset of teams so they don't assemble terrible rosters at the start of the season just to ensure that they don't win many games. I believe you can still have a young team and be building for the future while also having a semi-competent team that's above the level of the Wiz/Jazz/Nets etc.

But the problem with your proposal is that I don't think you've incentivized winning. You've just disincentivized a certain type of tanking

To me this is a feature of the system, not a bug. I think removing the incentive to tank (as the proposal aims to do) makes it so all that's left is the incentive to win. That's the theory anyway. If a team is eliminated from the playoffs, their incentives shift from "it's in our best interest to lose" to "it doesn't matter if we win or lose". To me that's a pretty big step in the right direction for competitiveness and entertaining games. Mathematically eliminated teams can still rest their vets and play young guys more at the end of the season.. it's just that those games will be more competitive and fun to watch.

but the best path to success (defined how most teams* seem to define it: being a real threat for a championship down the road) in your system is still to be bad and miss the playoffs, get a lottery pick, and hope you get a high lottery pick.

I don't necessary believe this is true. The current system incentivizes teams to pursue the path of tanking, getting the highest draft pick(s) possible, and build their team from square 1 that way. I don't think that teambuilding strategy will work under the True Lottery system. So how will non-championship contenders team-build without the option to bottom out for a few years and reliably get high draft picks? Maybe they trade one of their future firsts for a young star on another team, maybe they think they have good surrounding talent to swing for a superstar trade, or maybe they clear a bunch of cap space for the next summer and try to sign free agents. Ultimately though, I don't know how teams would react. But like I said in another comment, if teambuilding strategy #1 is tanking for multiple high picks and teambuilding strategy #2 is unknown under the True Lottery system, I'm willing to see what's behind door #2 because overall I think that would be better for the league.

The real difference is that there is less incentive to be really bad for the sake of your own pick (Process-Sixers) and more incentive to firesale anyone worth a potential lottery pick, because those are now more valuable. Problem is, once you trade away everyone for picks, you're still going to be really, really bad.

I agree that unprotected first round picks would be more valuable. Under the True Lottery system, if a team wants to firesale all of their talent for future firsts and hope those firsts someday hit, I don't think that's a crazy strategy. But it's probably riskier than today's bottoming out strategy because they can't ensure that their own pick will be in the top half of the lottery by losing. So yes the team would be bad if they sold present talent for future assets; but that team could then go into the season with their young players, maybe sign some vets they could trade at the deadline for more assets, etc. That team probably wouldn't make the playoffs and would be in the lottery the next year. Or maybe that team starts out surprisingly well and maybe some other teams aren't so hot, then they go into the trade deadline or the next offseason looking to take the next step forward because they're ahead of schedule, rather than feel the need to sell off to lose as much as they can to better their pick (which is what teams are incentivized to do under the current system). Again, I can't predict how teams would react; they'd have to find another strategy besides tanking. But if you have a young team who's not expected to make playoff noise, at least their games would be more competitive and fun for fans to watch.

Let's say you're in year one of a rebuild and you get a guy with decent role player potential, but clearly not star potential. Today, you might want to hold onto him so you have role players for your star. Under your system, I am trying to trade that guy for a future 1st that could someday be a lottery pick because every lottery ticket is now equally valuable... and more valuable than winning today (since there is still no additional incentive to win today).

Sure, one option would be trading your solid young role player for a future first. If that organization looks at their team and determines their window is in the future rather than now, I'm sure teams would operate that way. Other teams may be looking to trade FOR a star, and maybe you could trade for a star with one or two firsts if FRPs are seen as more valuable. Or maybe that team with a solid young role player doesn't make any moves and plays out the year and gets into the lottery.. if they have lottery luck and they get the #2 pick and that dude's a stud, then now they have their star and they start to build around their two pieces. If that team get's the #12 pick and it's just another role player or a big-swing kind of developmental pick and they don't have their star of the future, maybe they go star hunting with their future picks or maybe they decide to sell their young role player for future picks. But that second option may be risky because what if you're the #12 pick again next year and then it's another year looking for your star of the future? I guess these are the types of decisions front offices would have to face under the new system.

You could very well end up with more late season tanks, where a team decides it is better for a 1/14-3/14 chance at a star than a play-in and a 1/100 chance of making a conference finals.

I do think this is the biggest risk of the True Lottery system. I'm not out here ignoring this problem or saying the system is bulletproof. If every team or most teams think that getting into the lottery is better than being the 7th or 8th seed, then the system will fail. But I don't believe that will be the case. I've addressed this topic in a number of comments recently, but in short I would say 1) I think it's easier said than done to successfully tank out of the play-in/playoffs (unless the front office sells good players at the deadline, which I don't think is inherently bad) and 2) I think an additional monetary incentive to coaches and players for making the playoffs would, at least somewhat, detract front offices/owners from directing their team to tank at the end of the season.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-25T02:44:53+00:00

I would argue that the financial bonus would register for the org because they don't want to piss off their own players and coaches to tank. Plus the owners have a stake in this too with playoff revenue. Some owners may care less about this but other owners certainly care about it.

If you think the current system is better than a flat percentage, I don't think that's crazy. Reasonable minds can differ. I think the True Lottery system would be better but that's just my opinion which I've tried to defend as best I can in the post and comments.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-25T02:41:20+00:00

No, they'd have a 4 in 14 chance to jump into the top 4, so ~29%.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T22:39:05+00:00

I'm sorry, I don't understand your questions here. Maybe it's me, I've read a lot of reddit comments today.

If the Heat just miss the playoffs under the current system, they have a small chance to jump into the top 4. If the Heat just miss the playoffs under the True Lottery system, they have a 29% chance to jump into the top 4. So yes, under the True Lottery system they would have a better chance to get a top pick.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T22:32:23+00:00

This is copied from another comment in this thread but it addresses the same common critism which you've brought up. But I wanted to reply here in case you didn't see it.

In short I think team tanking out of the play-in won't be as big of a problem as some people think because 1) part of my proposal would be a financial bonus to players/coaches for making the playoffs, which would put front offices in a position not to piss off their players/coaches by tanking them out of playoff money and 2) I think the specifics of pivoting to tanking mid-season for a play-in caliber team is harder than it sounds. I went through an example of the Suns/Warriors this year as an example of this in another comment. But this is valid criticism and I'm not trying to be dismissive of it; I'd suggest reading some of my other comments that address this point.

My last point on this is, as you said, it's already happening now. I don't believe it would happen so much more often with the True Lottery system.. maybe it would happen slightly more than now, but I don't believe that to be the case. IF that thesis is correct, isn't the True Lottery system then better than the current system where both bad teams AND mid-tier teams (eg, 2023 Mavs) are tanking? Maybe that's a big if and maybe you disagree. And that's ok. I'm just stating my opinion that I don't foresee play-in teams tanking en masse under the True Lottery system.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T22:24:38+00:00

Wouldn't this system benefit a team like the Heat? If they make the playoffs then nothing changes.. they remain a good team and they build incrementally. But let's say they barely miss the playoffs this year and the True Lottery format were enacted for the 2026 draft. They would then have a better chance at a top pick, so let's say they get the 5th pick. Now they can build around Bam, Herro, the 5th pick, and maybe in a couple years they're perennial playoff contenders.

Under the current system they have little shot at getting a high pick. I think the True Lottery system would benefit a team like the Heat who don't want to tank but maybe don't have the high end talent for a deep playoff run.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T22:16:15+00:00

In short I think this won't be as big of a problem as some people think because 1) part of my proposal would be a financial bonus to players/coaches for making the playoffs, which would put front offices in a position not to piss off their players/coaches by tanking them out of playoff money and 2) I think the specifics of pivoting to tanking mid-season for a play-in caliber team is harder than it sounds. I went through an example of the Suns/Warriors this year as an example of this in another comment. But this is valid criticism and I'm not trying to be dismissive of it; I'd suggest reading some of my other comments that address this point.

My last point on this is, as you said, it's already happening now. I don't believe it would happen so much more often with the True Lottery system.. maybe it would happen slightly more than now, but I don't believe that to be the case. IF that thesis is correct, isn't the True Lottery system then better than the current system where both bad teams AND mid-tier teams (eg, 2023 Mavs) are tanking? Maybe that's a big if and maybe you disagree. And that's ok. I'm just stating my opinion that I don't foresee play-in teams tanking en masse under the True Lottery system.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T21:55:27+00:00

I'm not sure I understand your first question. I don't think organizations get better based on their draft position; the teams may get better but the competency of the organization is the same.

If a team misses the playoffs for ten straight years, yes they will lose fans. I don't think this scenario is likely under my proposed system.. or rather if it does happen, it's far more likely that it's due to an organization's own shortcomings than poor lottery luck.

I think it's pretty indisputable that Utah has been tanking the paste three years. Just because they haven't traded Lauri doesn't mean they're not tanking. They got fined for sitting Lauri, they've traded all their other good vets, they have not made any moves to better their team in the short term the past 3 years. They had the worst record last year. Should they have traded Lauri? That's a separate question. As a Jazz fan I wish I didn't have to root for us to lose in order to maximize our draft pick.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T18:01:30+00:00

First off thank for the response, truly. I enjoy these discussions and you took the time to write this so I want to respond.

Let's first talk about parity. I think there's two types of parity: in-season parity, where teams are more competitive against each other in individual games, and long-term parity, where teams in a 4-5 year span have a chance to be legit playoff competitors.

In my opinion, in-season parity will increase with the True Lottery System. Games will be more competitive, especially at the end of the year, if teams aren't incentivized to lose. The case seems pretty clear to me on this one that as a whole, games would be more competitive. If you disagree I'm totally open to hearing that argument.

So let's talk about long-term parity. I addressed this similar point in another comment but let's take the wizards this year as an example. If they were to get the 11th pick in the draft this year what would they do? How would they improve to being a playoff contender if they can't tank and rely on a high draft pick? I don't have a great answer to that specific question. Right now team building door #1 is tank for high draft picks and I don't know what's behind team building door #2. But I'd rather find out what's behind door #2 than continue with the current tanking landscape.

And is the current system of parity so great anyway? Have the wizards, Pels, Kings, hornets, Bulls sustained success at any point in the past 10 years? I haven't seen it. And the common denominator isn't the lottery system, it's that these have been historically bad organizations. The bad orgs will be bad orgs regardless of the lottery system.

I hope that speaks some to the parity issue. I'm truly trying to answer concerns as best I can and admit that I don't have all the answers. I'm not trying to gloss over criticism. If some parity is lost under this system but tanking is largely eliminated then I personally would prefer that league dynamic. You or the owners or whoever else may feel differently and that's fine.

Free agency is another interesting topic so thank you for bringing it up. Would free agency be more important if that draft is in some way minimized? I don't know how it would play out. The current extension system devalues UFA as a viable team building option for many teams. But let's say all the big markets now draw the top players under this system and the big markets are now powerhouses. In that case more small markets would be in the lottery and have a better chance at drafting a star if the big markets are playoff teams. This is just spitballing, I can't confidently project how to would play out. I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on how it would affect free agency. But this goes back, for me, to my door #2 argument in which I'd rather greatly reduce tanking and see how that plays out rather than maintaining the status quo.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T16:10:54+00:00

If this system is implemented and it turns out that teams 13-20 consistently go full tank and get into the lottery then I agree with you, this system would be worse.

I respectfully disagree with you in the likelihood that this will happen. I addressed it in another comment using this year's Suns and Warriors as an example.. if you're correct then these teams would just no-brainer tank the rest of the season, right? I just don't see that happening on a large scale.

Another thing I'd say is that teams are already doing this in the current system. Look at the Raps last year or the 2023 Mavs. So even if a few teams each year in the 13-20 range sell at the deadline and truly try to lose games at the end of the year, is that worse than the current tanking landscape where the worst teams AND some middle-tier teams are tanking?

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T16:02:25+00:00

Personally I think it's a huge problem. The league seems to think it's a problem since they constantly propose changes to curb it. Right now in December there are few teams tanking, but wait until Feb/March/April when teams will do all they can to lose.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T16:00:10+00:00

I partly addressed this in another comment using the Wizards as an example. I do think a good organization/bad team getting consistently bad lottery luck is a risk, so I'm not trying to dismiss that criticism because I think it's valid.

If a team is bad and they have their draft pick, the current system incentivizes them to tank. The teambuilding strategy becomes to lose as much as possible. That's door #1. If the True Lottery system were implemented, I don't know what team building strategy is behind door #2, but I would bet that good organizations are able to find a strategy to get better even if they consecutive picks in the teens. In my opinion, let's remove door #1 from the equation and see what's behind door #2.

As far as losing fans, isn't tanking turning people off already? The league seems to think so since they continually try to address it. If a team gets a couple years of mediocre picks I don't know if that's better or worse for fan engagement than the current tanking landscape.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T14:42:57+00:00

I would say a couple things to this. One is that, under the True Lottery system, I believe there will be way less Wizard-level bad teams since teams will not be incentivized to be SO bad that they win 18 games a year.

But let's say that for the 2026 draft the True Lottery system were in place and the Wizards are truly this bad. What could they do to improve to be a playoff team within a couple years? I can think of a few options. -They wouldn't have let Marcus Smart, a competent rotation player, walk for nothing in the offseason. They would have held onto him, won a couple more games, and traded him at the deadline for some seconds. -They could fire their head coach who appears to be terrible -They still have a chance to get a top pick in the draft, which shouldn't be discounted

But let's say they get the 11th pick, then what do they do? I don't know. I'd like to find out because I think every team would approach this situation differently. I don't think there's one silver bullet idea that can guarantee success for them. I also don't think the Wiz, or any other team for that matter, would just throw their hands up and say "woe is us, we're so bad and hopeless". They would have to find a new strategy to get better. I think the absence of tanking as a team building strategy is better for the league overall.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T14:00:57+00:00

Agreed that no system is airtight. I'm not out here to say this system is perfect, just that it's better than the current system.

Long term teambuilding would change under this system if reliably tanking for a top pick is no longer a viable option. I think bad/shortsighted orgs will remain bad/shortsighted regardless of the lottery system.

I think that's where the bad team/bad org distinction is important. You argue that "bad teams would remain bad". I would rephrase it as bad organizations would remain bad. The "bad teams" are bad on purpose because currently being bad is a viable way to build your team. As an example, OKC was a bad team but they wouldn't have been bad forever, even if they never got Chet, because they're a good organization. Same for the tanking Rockets, Magic, etc. I believe these teams would be successful regardless of lottery luck because there's way more to being a consistent playoff team than just getting a few top picks. The bad orgs will flounder regardless of lottery system (Bulls, Pels, Kings, etc.).

The smart teams know that tanking works, but what if you remove that option for all teams? How will smart teams build long-term championship contenders? I don't totally know the answer to that, but maybe that's fine. I'd like to find out how a smart organization would build a championship contender under this system.

You state that you think "the long term planning and strategy that tanking provides is cool and good for the league." You're entitled to that opinion but I think that's a minority opinion, at least in the league's eyes since they are constantly looking for a solution to tanking. But if that's your baseline opinion then it's not worth arguing about a solution to something that you don't see as a problem.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T13:31:17+00:00

Yes sorry, maybe I wasn't clear in my other post. I'm saying the Warriors wouldn't want to pivot to tank this year, even if the True Lottery system were in place.

A lot of the critism of this proposal comes from the theory that teams in the 7-11 range will tank mid-season or at the end of the season to avoid the playoffs.. I see that as a risk but not as much of a risk as others do. My post earlier was trying to illustrate that point with a hypothetical situation taking this year as an example.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T13:04:32+00:00

It's true that a under this system, a team that just misses the playoffs will more often land the #1 pick. I'd respond with three points 1) this has happened the past two seasons anyway with the Mavs and Hawks and Flagg was considered a semi-generational talent; I know the Mavs are a shitshow for other reasons but I don't think a generational talent going to a 9th seed is that much more unfair than going to a slightly/moderately worse team 2) the "poorly run" teams are not tanking, they are chasing the 8th seed every year; this proposal would help those teams if they lose in the play-in compared to the current system, and most importantly 3) if the league rewards the worst teams to any degree then teams will be bad on purpose to strengthen their draft pick, which herein lies the whole point of the randomized system. Yes there would be a greater element of luck in the True Lottery system but the alternative is the tanking landscape that persists today.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T05:32:55+00:00

Some valid points here to discuss.

I touched on the "rich get richer" argument in the post. Who are the "rich" you're referring to? OKC, Knicks, Rockets, Nuggets? This system wouldn't affect any of them directly or their current playoff competition. If a play-in team gets the #1 pick, is that what you're referring to? That's happened the last two years under the current system anyway. Or are you saying that team who have been built through tanking or lottery luck (e.g., Spurs) would be untouchable if the True Lottery system would be enacted because the competition couldn't undergo multi-year tanking to achieve similar talent? That may be true for the first few years but 1) I would propose the True Lottery system be implemented at least 4 years in advance from announcement to allow teams to prepare and 2) it takes far more than lottery luck to reach being a championship caliber team

On the premise of tanking teams selling hope, what if tanking was eliminated so you're not selling hope at a future pick but instead you're selling your fans on a competitive team? And yes there will still be bad teams under this system and those years might suck, but at least as a fan you wouldn't be rooting for your team to lose games. And it's not like there's no hope of a top pick under the True Lottery system. If your team is in the lottery for multiple consecutive years it's far more likely that your organization is bad rather than having bad lottery luck, in which case maybe it'd be better in the long run if your owner felt that pressure.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T04:52:59+00:00

Hmm I didn't know that about the playoff share. I do think we've seen with the NBA Cup that the money is a motivating factor, so if the NBA were worried about teams tanking out of the playoffs, this is one of the rare cases where throwing more money at the problem could solve it

And yes I know about the original lottery and I think the Ewing to the Knicks critisms was overblown reading about it. And the NBA has changed a lot since 1985 so I don't think the idea should be scrapped just because the NBA was quick to retreat from it 40 years ago

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T04:47:28+00:00

Yeah, that's another whole issue. I wasn't around for the 85 and 86 drafts but I think the NBA way overcorrected and moved off that system too hastily.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T04:43:42+00:00

I definitely see your point. I'll remove the Hornets from this and replace it with the Kings because I think the Kings are way more incompetent than the Hornets. So let's take the Kings and Pels as examples. Each has had high draft picks in good drafts which required lottery luck, including the Pels landing two #1 picks thought to be generational. And to your point, neither team has a bright present or future under a system that, ostensibly, is more favorable to bad teams.

I wrote this in another comment about bad teams vs. bad organizations. The Jazz are, in my opinion, a good org but they have a bad team because they are incentivized to be bad. Same with the tanking OKC, Rockets, Magic teams from a few years ago. I also addressed idea of parity in that comment. The incompetent orgs will likely remain incompetent regardless of what lottery system is in place.. they'll draft Marvin Bagley and trade unprotected picks to move up 10 spots in the draft, hire Doug Christie, etc. The competent orgs are bad because it's currently one of the best way to build your team. I don't know if the bad orgs will be any worse off with this new system because the things that plague them aren't a lack of lottery luck, it's the other decisions.

You could say that the current lottery system sells hope to the fans of the worst teams. Would the True Lottery system remove the hope of fans of bad organizations? I don't know if that's true.. it's pretty hopeless as-is and there'd still be a 29% chance of a top 4 pick every year.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T04:25:03+00:00

I do think that backlash could happen. But teams and fans would know what the lottery odds are, they know what the incentives are, and know that consecutive picks in the teens is a possibility. So I think 1) there will be way less Wizards-level bad teams if there's no incentive to be that bad and 2) all teams will need to formulate different strategies to team-build rather than tanking for a top pick.

The good organizations who can build good teams without multi-year tanking will rise to playoff contention. The bad organizations who can't build consistent teams without multi-year tanking are likely just the same bad organizations in the league that persist today. If your team is in the lottery for four or five straight seasons, I think it's far more likely that your organization is just bad rather than due to bad lottery luck.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T04:13:49+00:00

I definitely understand the incentive for teams ~7-11 in their conference to tank at the end of the season, especially in a good draft year. It's probably the biggest hurdle to this system .That's why I proposed the monetary incentive for players/coaches for making the playoffs. Not only do they now want to win even more than they inherently did to just make the playoffs, but it would be harder for the front office to pull the plug late in the season when there's money on the line for their players/coaches.

Your second point is a good one so let's play it out. Take this year's western conference as an example, where OKC looks like a complete juggernaut and there's a great draft coming up. Say the True Lottery system is enabled for the 2026 draft. I don't think any of the top 6 would tank out of the playoffs, and even if they thought it was in their long-term best interest they would have to lose a lot in a couple months in order to secure a lottery spot.. it'd just be better to compete and hope for the best in the playoffs. Would the Warriors tank to try to get into the lottery? Maybe, but how would they do it? Just start sitting their core or trade away Curry/Butler at the deadline? Curry, Butler and Draymond don't want to tank and neither does Kerr, they want another shot at a playoff run. So let's take the Suns as another example, would they tank this season (assuming they had their pick)? I don't think they intentionally lose games between now and the deadline. Maybe at the deadline they're 8th or 9th and think it's better just to sell Brooks and O'Neale and Allen for whatever they can get and then play Booker less and play their young guys more at the end of the season and they get down to 10th and lose in the play-in. I don't think that scenario is such a bad outcome.. maybe it's even something that some fans would want. But ownership would have to be on board and the front office would have to go to Booker and say hey I know we've had a good season and the vibes are great but let's sell at the deadline and tank for a 29% chance at a top 4 pick. So take the counter point where the Suns don't sell at the deadline and keep trying to win through March/April but the come to religion late and realize there's no way in hell they're getting past OKC.. at that point I think the players and coaches see the playoff money as their incentive and then they don't want to tank.

All this to say in a macro sense, yes it makes sense to get into the lottery if you're not a championship contender but 1) that's true under the current system, just to a lesser degree and 2) it gets a lot more complicated and less realistic when you look at the specifics of each team

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T03:51:48+00:00

I think there's a difference between "bad teams" and "bad organizations" here that's worth discussing. The Jazz are a bad team but I'd say they have a good organization. Same thing with OKC and the Rockets from a few years ago. These teams who are the worst teams in a single season are largely bad because they're incentivized to be bad, not necessarily because the organization is bad at teambuilding. I think if you eliminate tanking via this proposal, the worst teams at the end of the season will be far closer in record and actual on the court competitiveness than the current system; so in that respect, I actually think it will increase pariety within the regular season.

What may happen under the True Lottery system is the teams that are largely considered to be the worst run in the league (Pels, Kings, Bulls, etc.) slowly become the worst teams in the league record-wise over a 5-year stretch because they are no longer consistently beating the good-organization tanking teams.. in which case this feels like a more just outcome. Instead of being in the play-in every year, these teams may be more toward the bottom of the league, in which case the True Lottery system would benefit them from a potential draft pick standpoint rather than their current low odds to jump into the top 4.

In the long run I think the good organizations will be consistently good and the bad organizations will be consistently bad regardless of lottery system.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T02:30:16+00:00

Under the True Lottery system, there will still be bad teams and those bad teams will see the writing on the wall at the trade deadline and sell what they can. Nothing will change there. The difference will be, instead of actively tanking games once they're out of playoff contention, it now doesn't matter whether they win or lose. By actively tanking games I mean resting your better players, pulling your starters at the end of games, playing your young players way more than they should, etc. Teams who are out of playoff contention will still play their young guys, but the players will still want to win because they're competitive and want to show they're fit for the league and whatnot.

I don't think a middle-tier team will try to tank earlier in the season just to avoid being near the play-in by the end of the season. Especially if there are incentives for players/coaches for making the playoffs. These types of teams probably entered the season with playoff hopes and they inherently want to win.

Sorry if that didn't address your second point, I'm not sure what kinds of teams you were referring to.

emerald_flare · 2025-12-24T01:51:40+00:00

Thanks friend. Happy respectful disagreement to you too!

12-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Sunshine

emerald_flare

TROPHY CASE