[Game] Kings @ Trailblazers, 10/20/21, 7pm Pacific, 10pm Eastern
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
He's in Buddy's spot now and I think people are going to realize that's actually a somewhat tough spot to fill. Especially if you're looking for some of the same aggressive nature you get out of Buddy. I hope Walton looks for ways to play that Fox/Buddy/Tyrese/Barnes/Holmes crew more and more. That will take a lot of the pressure off of Tyrese for sure. Same with Davion. Put him with Fox and Buddy as a 2nd ball handler. Both Tyrese and Davion are going to struggle when defenses focus on them. They aren't true lead guards and come from systems where they played with multiple playmakers/shot creators. Great glue guys will shine when they have easy swing pass options around them or plenty of spacing.
If you say so.
Honestly, the rules of this place are so bipolar at times that I don’t understand them.
It’s not ok to personally attack a member. That I understand.
Meanwhile it appears ok to attack and disrespect players and coaches (public figures) by calling them soft or otherwise criticizing anyway someone sees fit.
However it’s not ok to disrespect and/or criticize members of the media, including the announcing team, who are also public figures?
Obviously I don’t make or enforce the rules here. I just see a lot of inconsistency and hypocrisy with regard to what is permitted.
If a thread discussing opinions on the quality of the broadcast, which some found of poor quality, is disrespectful — how is calling players soft or dumb not considered the same? I rarely see those posts edited, removed or locked.
I get it. I don’t have to visit or post here. None of us do. I’d just like to better understand the reasoning. I’m confident a few others here would as well.
Honestly, the rules of this place are so bipolar at times that I don’t understand them.
It’s not ok to personally attack a member. That I understand.
Meanwhile it appears ok to attack and disrespect players and coaches (public figures) by calling them soft or otherwise criticizing anyway someone sees fit.
However it’s not ok to disrespect and/or criticize members of the media, including the announcing team, who are also public figures?
Obviously I don’t make or enforce the rules here. I just see a lot of inconsistency and hypocrisy with regard to what is permitted.
If a thread discussing opinions on the quality of the broadcast, which some found of poor quality, is disrespectful — how is calling players soft or dumb not considered the same? I rarely see those posts edited, removed or locked.
I get it. I don’t have to visit or post here. None of us do. I’d just like to better understand the reasoning. I’m confident a few others here would as well.
Last edited:
You heard correctly. He has altered his mechanics a bit. To get a quicker release.
It’s early yet, but I think that may have been a mistake. Don’t fix what ain’t broken.
A slower release that may get blocked from time to time is better than a quicker release if the revised shot doesn’t go in as frequently.
He made such a high volume of shots last season w/o the release being a major issue that I never would have changed it.
I’m not a shot mechanics expert, I just tend to look at things from a logical and pragmatic POV.
It’s early yet, but I think that may have been a mistake. Don’t fix what ain’t broken.
A slower release that may get blocked from time to time is better than a quicker release if the revised shot doesn’t go in as frequently.
He made such a high volume of shots last season w/o the release being a major issue that I never would have changed it.
I’m not a shot mechanics expert, I just tend to look at things from a logical and pragmatic POV.
Not at all. It's just that this isn't Twitter. We have standards.
Sorry, but there's no mathematical algorithm that we can apply to determine what stays and what goes. It's a judgment call, and there are three of us (usually independently) making those judgment calls. Some are easy, like last night's thread in question. Most are much harder. How does one go about upholding standards to keep the site from becoming a Twitter cesspool of invective without just deleting every post that doesn't exude sunshine and rainbows? How does one decide what criticism is warranted and what criticism is simply gleeful cruelty hidden behind a mask of anonymity (aka trolling)?
Do you have the answers to that? Because I don't. There's no user manual here. Just a couple of people doing the best they can to keep a community together and welcoming while trying not to shut down anybody unnecessarily. It's not as easy as it sounds. And it's impossible to make everybody happy. So it goes.
Sorry, but there's no mathematical algorithm that we can apply to determine what stays and what goes. It's a judgment call, and there are three of us (usually independently) making those judgment calls. Some are easy, like last night's thread in question. Most are much harder. How does one go about upholding standards to keep the site from becoming a Twitter cesspool of invective without just deleting every post that doesn't exude sunshine and rainbows? How does one decide what criticism is warranted and what criticism is simply gleeful cruelty hidden behind a mask of anonymity (aka trolling)?
Do you have the answers to that? Because I don't. There's no user manual here. Just a couple of people doing the best they can to keep a community together and welcoming while trying not to shut down anybody unnecessarily. It's not as easy as it sounds. And it's impossible to make everybody happy. So it goes.
This. It's great that the Kings org has decided to develop local talent. She's still very green as a game broadcaster, and it's a skill that takes time; I have no doubt that Kayte is a dedicated professional and will continue to build on her assets (her knowledge of the game, Sacramento, and the Kings) and address any deficiencies over time.
While I acknowledge and sympathize with all that you said, and further appreciate that you took the time to offer a response when you clearly didn’t have to — I do have a simple answer to one of the examples I gave.
If it’s permissible to attack and be disrespectful toward the players, coaches, management and ownership for their performances/decisions/comments, the same should apply toward the media and announcers that cover them as they are public figures too.
However if you guys are going to protect the media and announcers from such criticism and disrespect, then I’d expect you to do the same for the players, coaches, management and ownership.
I don’t see that happening.
My personal opinion is that all of them should be open to criticism and disrespect, as they are public figures. But I also believe the members of this forum should be accountable too. Dish it out, you should be willing to take It. But I digress.
All I’m suggesting is equal treatment. Either all of it flies, or none of it.
Thanks again for responding. I realize we disagree on a lot, but I do appreciate the willingness to explain and have a dialog.
If it’s permissible to attack and be disrespectful toward the players, coaches, management and ownership for their performances/decisions/comments, the same should apply toward the media and announcers that cover them as they are public figures too.
However if you guys are going to protect the media and announcers from such criticism and disrespect, then I’d expect you to do the same for the players, coaches, management and ownership.
I don’t see that happening.
My personal opinion is that all of them should be open to criticism and disrespect, as they are public figures. But I also believe the members of this forum should be accountable too. Dish it out, you should be willing to take It. But I digress.
All I’m suggesting is equal treatment. Either all of it flies, or none of it.
Thanks again for responding. I realize we disagree on a lot, but I do appreciate the willingness to explain and have a dialog.
Let me counter that by pointing out that starting with Kingster's post this morning I count at least four posts in this thread that are critical of the announcers (and a similar number of posts critical of the moderation), none of which have been deleted. You can also hop on over to the "Off The Court" forum to see criticism of former announcer Grant Napear, who re-entered the news today.
As I hope I've illustrated above, there is no policy or guideline protecting announcers, just like there is no policy or guideline protecting players, etc. (though to be sure, individuals including Bagley, Hield, Walton, and Ranadive have all had criticism deleted when warranted). We do treat attacks on individual posters differently, but I think you understand that. Yes, a thread that was considered unacceptable was deleted yesterday, but the reason it was unacceptable did not have to do with the fact that it was about the announcers but rather the tone of the content itself.
As I hope I've illustrated above, there is no policy or guideline protecting announcers, just like there is no policy or guideline protecting players, etc. (though to be sure, individuals including Bagley, Hield, Walton, and Ranadive have all had criticism deleted when warranted). We do treat attacks on individual posters differently, but I think you understand that. Yes, a thread that was considered unacceptable was deleted yesterday, but the reason it was unacceptable did not have to do with the fact that it was about the announcers but rather the tone of the content itself.
Last 2 minutes report for Kings(124) @ Trail Blazers(121), October 20, 2021. In case anybody cares.
https://official.nba.com/l2m/L2MReport.html?gameId=0022100013
https://official.nba.com/l2m/L2MReport.html?gameId=0022100013
- Status