The Pelicans Have Four Options. Here they Are

[wuggie]

Everybody here has a tendency of suffering from group think. We are all flawed. So even if what you are saying is true(and I don't believe it is) pointing out my "flaws" means nothing for this discussion as I haven't "denounced" any good points as it pertains to Benson likelihood of going into the luxury.

Lol I see what you did there. Omg this is getting worse and worse.

[da ThRONe]

You have yet to provide evidence for your intuition that we won't be able to retain Asik (and further it would be (almost) impossible for you since our roster isn't even set yet).

Provide a list of various roster makeups and demonstrate why most or all imply the retention of Asik as unlikely.

Since you are a fan of logic, underneath each of these possible roster constructions, list and number the premises of a deductive argument whose conclusion is that Asik's retention is unlikely.

Or is it "logical" to merely have a guess about what the entire roster's makeup will be and how that will squeeze out Asik somehow?

Notice how you keep moving the discussion: first it was Benson is unlikely to retain Asik, seemingly ceteris paribus with respect to our roster. Then you said you merely didn't know if Benson would retain him, not that it was unlikely. Now you're claiming that the roster construction on the whole will prevent us from retaining Asik.

In order to support something like the last argument, you need to offer a minimally sufficient set of reasonably probable roster constructions, and demonstrate why the majority of them point to an untenability in keeping Asik.

This would be the logical thing to do, anyway.

I just deal with the fallacy that I'm moving the discussion. You are combining two different topics. Topic a) We aren't likely to bring Asik back. and topic b) Benson isn't likely to go into the luxury tax. The two topics are non related and I only actually said topic a while topic b is merely the result of some misunderstanding(potential one on my part).

As for us not retaining Asik of course the situation is fluid. If we indeed are trading Gordon or it ends up being Anderson then that clearly changes things. However until we have officially trade Gordon, Anderson, or anybody else I am operating under the assumption that we are trying to keep the core Anderson/Davis/Evans/Holiday and adding Asik to it will still being stuck with Gordon's deal.

[RUFshreve]

I dont mind your disagreement, but I find the groupthink argument insulting to others. It is not "groupthink" for people to believe AD will be elite. It is "factthink" or at the very least "extremely likely think"

Being a contrarian is great and is needed. But sometimes the sky is just blue. That is not group think.

Preach.

[da ThRONe]

I mean the two reasons that I could see that Asik wouldn't resign would be:

1) someone throws him a huge contract
2) he isn't happy with his minutes/not finishing the game
But all of that wouldn't matter if we are winning. Bc winning solves everything right

Well add not winning to the list. But your two examples are ones I gave already.

[pelicanchamp]

Y'all it's gonna be awesome. Asik and Davis are gonna be sick. I can't wait till we face the ROCKETS or teams like the THUNDER or CLIPPERS. Let's see how fun things are for Russell Westbrook and Durant. Y'all know that this team is going to be badass. Asik and Davis is a great combo. I love his aggression and his basketball IQ. I'm very pleased with the deal and I trust Loomis, Dell, Benson etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[da ThRONe]

I dont mind your disagreement, but I find the groupthink argument insulting to others. It is not "groupthink" for people to believe AD will be elite. It is "factthink" or at the very least "extremely likely think"

Being a contrarian is great and is needed. But sometimes the sky is just blue. That is not group think.

Oh so his comments to me weren't in insult. If you are going to attempt to play ref play fair.

Also the comment about group think had nothing to do with Davis. This is 100% an assumption on your point. I was talking about poster "ganging up" on people who view a situation differently. This isn't just the case with me. So again if you are going to put someone in their place make sure you know what it is that they are talking about instead assuming you know.

[Coughka]

I just deal with the fallacy that I'm moving the discussion. You are combining two different topics. Topic a) We aren't likely to bring Asik back. and topic b) Benson isn't likely to go into the luxury tax. The two topics are non related and I only actually said topic a while topic b is merely the result of some misunderstanding(potential one on my part).

As for us not retaining Asik of course the situation is fluid. If we indeed are trading Gordon or it ends up being Anderson then that clearly changes things. However until we have officially trade Gordon, Anderson, or anybody else I am operating under the assumption that we are trying to keep the core Anderson/Davis/Evans/Holiday and adding Asik to it will still being stuck with Gordon's deal.

A and B are totally related. One of the main factors that would lead to A is B. They aren't divorced concepts at all.

More to the point, your argument against the trade was that either A or B is likely. I initially addressed B, but when you made the new argument that it was actually a product of roster construction that could force Asik out, I argued against something like A. This is why you need to provide a minimally sufficient list of reasonable roster constructions that force Asik out in order to defend your claim that such a roster construction is likely.

As for the retention of Asik, again this is merely an intuition of yours. What evidence do you have to show us that makes it more likely that this FO knowingly took on Asik as a rental vs having a plan for retaining him? You can't just say "as it stands now" because the trade isn't official yet. And yet you are treating the trade as though it is completed in a vacuum, which is why your pessimism regarding it is totally unfounded (and which has been my point this entire time).

[da ThRONe]

Preach.

An much like individual that suffer from group think you cheer it on not thinking that MM made a huge assumption and couldn't be anymore wrong. But yeah go on make a bunch of misplaced assumptions!

[da ThRONe]

A and B are totally related. One of the main factors that would lead to A is B. They aren't divorced concepts at all.

More to the point, your argument against the trade was that either A or B is likely. I initially addressed B, but when you made the new argument that it was actually a product of roster construction that could force Asik out, I argued against something like A. This is why you need to provide a minimally sufficient list of reasonable roster constructions that force Asik out in order to defend your claim that such a roster construction is likely.

As for the retention of Asik, again this is merely an intuition of yours. What evidence do you have to show us that makes it more likely that this FO knowingly took on Asik as a rental vs having a plan for retaining him? You can't just say "as it stands now" because the trade isn't official yet. And yet you are treating the trade as though it is completed in a vacuum, which is why your pessimism regarding it is totally unfounded (and which has been my point this entire time).

Again making little sense. A and B aren't related. While the potential to be related is there as salaries are involved those two topics aren't mutual exclusive and in this case non related.

As far as my intuition when have I said otherwise? This is why you look illogical. When have I ever said I know for sure because of X, Y, or Z? It has always been stated as my opinion.

[wuggie]

I think I know why you named yourself DaThrone. It's all just opinion, no facts over here though. I won't say it because I don't have the facts to back it up, such as you saying it. But I have a page or two from an internet forum to make a good argument. *whistles* And dude I actually like some of your counter arguements even those that go against what the majority thinks because I try my best to keep an objective point of view whilst discussing sports and I see where you are coming from at times but you seemingly refuse to see things from another point of view because they aren't what you think or see.

[Coughka]

Again making little sense. A and B aren't related. While the potential to be related is there as salaries are involved those two topics aren't mutual exclusive and in this case non related.

As far as my intuition when have I said otherwise? This is why you look illogical. When have I ever said I know for sure because of X, Y, or Z? It has always been stated as my opinion.

My point is that your opinion isn't grounded in reason.

If you're OK with having an opinion founded purely on intuition without any reference to probability, that's fine I guess?

[MichaelMcNamara]

Oh so his comments to me weren't in insult. If you are going to attempt to play ref play fair.

Also the comment about group think had nothing to do with Davis. This is 100% an assumption on your point. I was talking about poster "ganging up" on people who view a situation differently. This isn't just the case with me. So again if you are going to put someone in their place make sure you know what it is that they are talking about instead assuming you know.

I used your exact words and then you turn around like you never typed them. Did I pull "group think" out of thin air or did you use it?

People gang up on you and you assume it is group think. At least that is how you paint it. But you have no evidence it is group think. Humans thinking the sky is blue is not "group think." A bunch of people agreeing on the same thing does not necessitate group think. Sometimes things are just plainly obvious.

Is total agreement group think in some situations? Yes. Every situation? No.

[da ThRONe]

I used your exact words and then you turn around like you never typed them. Did I pull "group think" out of thin air or did you use it?

People gang up on you and you assume it is group think. At least that is how you paint it. But you have no evidence it is group think. Humans thinking the sky is blue is not "group think." A bunch of people agreeing on the same thing does not necessitate group think. Sometimes things are just plainly obvious.

Is total agreement group think in some situations? Yes. Every situation? No.

I used the term "group think" to refer to people having problems with people with differing opinions and you turn it into something about Anthony Davis which was completely besides the point. You made an assumption and you were wrong.

Again I didn't say every topic was an example of group think, but it exist here. I brought it up to make a point that if we want to discredit someone over their flaws then we are all subject to the same treatment.

[da ThRONe]

My point is that your opinion isn't grounded in reason.

If you're OK with having an opinion founded purely on intuition without any reference to probability, that's fine I guess?

You have not made a case my opinion isn't based on reasoning. And of course that is your opinion. But I have given reasons why I don't think Asik will be on this roster past next year. You don't think it's grounded in reason that's your opinion.

[BallSoHard]

Weird and shocking results when I searched the forum.

[Coughka]

You have not made a case my opinion isn't based on reasoning. And of course that is your opinion. But I have given reasons why I don't think Asik will be on this roster past next year. You don't think it's grounded in reason that's your opinion.

My standard of reasoning in this case is evidential.

So that, for example, your claim that it is unlikely that we will retain/have a plan for retaining Asik is one that seems to require support using things like similar past examples, the financial tenability of our roster with a resigned Asik factored in, etc.

You have yet to provide anything like evidence with respect to the examples I listed.

So yes, it is my opinion that your opinion isn't grounded in reason. But it seems like my standard of reason is also a reasonable one.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I used the term "group think" to refer to people having problems with people with differing opinions and you turn it into something about Anthony Davis which was completely besides the point. You made an assumption and you were wrong.

Again I didn't say every topic was an example of group think, but it exist here. I brought it up to make a point that if we want to discredit someone over their flaws then we are all subject to the same treatment.

Can you prove group think exists here?

Link?

(See the irony?)

[RUFshreve]

An much like individual that suffer from group think you cheer it on not thinking that MM made a huge assumption and couldn't be anymore wrong. But yeah go on make a bunch of misplaced assumptions!

You're not a realist, you're a pessimist. I'm not cheering him on, I'm celebrating what he said, because it is true and sums up every debate anyone ever gets in with you. I've never succumb to the temptation of indulging in an argumentative conversation with you, so I won't start now.

[DRDJ1]

Can you prove group think exists here?

Link?

(See the irony?)

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH George Orwell "1984"

[da ThRONe]

Can you prove group think exists here?

Link?

(See the irony?)

Can you prove Davis is a superstar? Since the sky is blue. We can't prove anything opinion based. But it isn't a problem when some here do it.

[jcamp5]

This is like Freshman year philosophy. Xiaung Zsu on the bridge.

[nolaslim213]

Can you prove Davis is a superstar? Since the sky is blue. We can't prove anything opinion based. But it isn't a problem when some here do it.

You are insufferable.

[PELICANSFAN]

Please stay on topic and stop with the personal attacks. Forums are about opinions. There will not always be a right or wrong. Keep it civil. This thread has strayed from rational discussion, so it will be closed.

[Nola3]

Since clearly this discussion is going nowhere...... does anyone know anything about how Asik is as a locker room guy? I know he *****ed and complained all last year because of the Dwight thing but that was understandable to a degree. Before that, does anyone know of any red flags that would be concerning to throw him into our locker room that has had very little time to come together and may be vulnerable to a bad influence (especially since EG is already there).