May 9th - New Orleans Pelicans @ Charlotte Hornets - 30-37

Or he wanted to be a Knick from the start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

Griffin has done a lot of good and some bad too

DeAndre for Jax and NAW looks good now. As does the AD trade and the Jrue trade

He does come across a bit slimey, but I don't think he's a pure snake oil salesman. It could have been worse

---

I don't know, man..

If we traded Jrue and AD day one.. Committed to getting talent.

NAW, Hayes. KIRA, AND ETC seems nice.

Instead for Hunter or Garland, The Actual Good Ball or Patrick Williams , and possibly get Mobley or Green in this year draft.

I'm sorry, but Griffin royally botched this rebuild and really having a hard time arguing it. We was 6-26 last year and Griffin refused to pull the plug. These aren't even hindsight moves. It's just pure arrogance on David's part and his evaluation of this team.

I’m going to give it it’s on thread since Mac seems to be right here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

Or he wanted to be a Knick from the start.

---

or not

Not being sarcastic here - genuinely curious: Lets say there was somebody who genuinely new things and some/many of the things they knew wouldnt be enjoyable for you to hear. Like, I know some of you dont trust a word I say and a few of you know my sources so you know they are legit. Whatever. But take someone you trust, whether its Lopez or Kush or Clark, whoever. Lets say they knew these things from multiple camps and knew where they were heading: How would you want them to tell you? Or would you not want them to tell you so you could live in bliss? And/or if they told you, and you are being honest, would you be a selective listener and say things like, "Well, Lopez isnt always right - remember the time he said X and Y happened?"

Genuinely curious, because I am a firm believer that bias makes the rational, irrational. Or do you think I am wrong and you would be open and would believe the negative if it jsut came in a different manner and/or source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

Cheers for the insight. Surely the minutes restriction came as a directive from Aaron Nelson?

---

I always understood that to be the case and that this kind of input was a big reason why they brought Nelson over from Phoenix. Zion was also coming off his second knee injury in a year. Seemed reasonable precautions. Others have noted that perhaps Zion was just generally unhappy and frustrated with how his career started off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Genuinely curious, because I am a firm believer that bias makes the rational, irrational. Or do you think I am wrong and you would be open and would believe the negative if it jsut came in a different manner and/or source?

---

Of course it's selective listening and bias.

AS AN EXAMPLE

It's just like what's happening at the southern border right now. Suppose Biden is your man and he tells you everything is going well down there. No matter how much audio, print, and video evidence to the contrary is offered to you from FOX or other right-leaning news source, you'll dismiss it because you don't like the messenger and it goes against your belief in your guy. **


**This should not be construed as a political statement. It's only an example of how bias plays a role when a narrative doesn't agree with one's personal bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Not being sarcastic here - genuinely curious: Lets say there was somebody who genuinely new things and some/many of the things they knew wouldnt be enjoyable for you to hear. Like, I know some of you dont trust a word I say and a few of you know my sources so you know they are legit. Whatever. But take someone you trust, whether its Lopez or Kush or Clark, whoever. Lets say they knew these things from multiple camps and knew where they were heading: How would you want them to tell you? Or would you not want them to tell you so you could live in bliss? And/or if they told you, and you are being honest, would you be a selective listener and say things like, "Well, Lopez isnt always right - remember the time he said X and Y happened?"

Genuinely curious, because I am a firm believer that bias makes the rational, irrational. Or do you think I am wrong and you would be open and would believe the negative if it jsut came in a different manner and/or source?

---

Sapere Aude!

Kidding, for my part I always want to know, good, bad or otherwise. I think whenever you pick up things, you have to weigh out how real or significant they are. One example from our discussions here. A few years ago an old friend was representing a Pels player (not a big name guy) in a lawsuit. For a like a year he was telling me how this player was unhappy and wasn't going to stay with the Pels when his contract was up. I never posted about it because it seemed at least somewhat sensitive at the time. Well, you know the rest. The guy ended up re-signing with the Pels! Asked my friend about it. Said the guy just changed his mind. So did I really know anything? I'm sure my buddy was being straight with me, it just turned out not to be that significant. Things changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

FWIW, the version I heard was that Zion and his folks were genuinely frosted by the whole minutes restriction thing his rookie year into the bubble, kind of feeling like the team was holding him back, dimming his star and maybe even patronizing some in his camp. In short they found Griff's act a bit overbearing. I also heard things were better after the bubble and the family appreciated the organization's discretion when Z was out of action on that private matter (never heard what it was for sure). That was all a while back and haven't heard anything new about it one way or another since before this season started. Keep in mind this came from people connected to Pels management (though not Griffin).

---

I certainly got the impression that Zion was frustrated with it. Of course if they brought Zion back in without minutes restrictions and he got reinjured his people would probably have been even more pissed at the Pels. It was kind of a no win situation. If they had a coach that had any sense of load management maybe Griffin wouldn't have been as involved. But Alvin had been ridiculing the whole concept of load management even after Cousin's injury. My guess is the medical staff was really concerned with Zion's weight and overplaying him too much.

This forum is absolutely insane. It's like 9th grade high school or a porch full of old hens gossiping

Nobody asks for proof of anything. Just roll with the insanity. Anybody who calls it what it really is...just a "non-objective fan". ******* insane.

Hey I heard the organization found out Zion is really an alien hell bent on harvesting all of us for food, so they won't extend him anyway.

So don't worry about it.


At least on Saintsreport, if you keep doing this and never show any kind of proof, you get banned. Good for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

This forum is absolutely insane. It's like 9th grade high school or a porch full of old hens gossiping

Nobody asks for proof of anything. Just roll with the insanity. Anybody who calls it what it really is...just a "non-objective fan". ******* insane.

Hey I heard the organization found out Zion is really an alien hell bent on harvesting all of us for food, so they won't extend him anyway.

So don't worry about it.


At least on Saintsreport, if you keep doing this and never show any kind of proof, you get banned. Good for them.

---

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This

What kind of proof are you looking for? Like a sworn affidavit?

Spy cam footage preferably

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

Spy cam footage preferably

---

LOL. I'll see what I can rig up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

This forum is absolutely insane. It's like 9th grade high school or a porch full of old hens gossiping

Nobody asks for proof of anything. Just roll with the insanity. Anybody who calls it what it really is...just a "non-objective fan". ******* insane.

Hey I heard the organization found out Zion is really an alien hell bent on harvesting all of us for food, so they won't extend him anyway.

So don't worry about it.


At least on Saintsreport, if you keep doing this and never show any kind of proof, you get banned. Good for them.

---

Not was SR.com does at all. What proof do you want from someone who says they heard something from someone? Up to you to choose whether to believe what someone says on an anonymous message board or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Not was SR.com does at all. What proof do you want from someone who says they heard something from someone? Up to you to choose whether to believe what someone says on an anonymous message board or not.

---

Exactly. For my part I don't make any claims that I've called--hypothetically--Greg Bensel, to confirm he said something to someone. I just know my source knows Greg Bensel because I've met Greg Bensel at their house. Hypothetically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

What kind of proof are you looking for? Like a sworn affidavit?

---

Exactly. If that was the criteria, no info should be shared anywhere. No insider has "proof" - the legit and non legit ones. The funny thing with fans, though is that when its something they dont want to hear, they want/need all the proof. Some whispers that they are love to hear, and the bar is much, much lower for said proof

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Not was SR.com does at all. What proof do you want from someone who says they heard something from someone? Up to you to choose whether to believe what someone says on an anonymous message board or not.

---

They don't? So that whole "Coach Pete" saga I'm just making up out of thin air?

As far as proof I want..how about anything at all? Did anyone learn in school to cite your sources?

And if you're free to just come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever, then I'm also free to call it the bull that it is.

You can do whatever you want. Dont bother me. I just love how you think you should be the one to dictate what is viable or not. Like i said, if you wanna check on it, go ahead and DM your favorite writer or blogger and ask them. But you wont because you dont want the right information. You just want the things you want to be true to be true. And then try to chastize those who dont spout your desired realities

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

Of course it's selective listening and bias.

AS AN EXAMPLE

It's just like what's happening at the southern border right now. Suppose Biden is your man and he tells you everything is going well down there. No matter how much audio, print, and video evidence to the contrary is offered to you from FOX or other right-leaning news source, you'll dismiss it because you don't like the messenger and it goes against your belief in your guy. **


**This should not be construed as a political statement. It's only an example of how bias plays a role when a narrative doesn't agree with one's personal bias.

---

Kinda like how Covid went away after the election. Right? :hihi:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

They don't? So that whole "Coach Pete" saga I'm just making up out of thin air?

As far as proof I want..how about anything at all? Did anyone learn in school to cite your sources?

And if you're free to just come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever, then I'm also free to call it the bull that it is.

---

Why is that? You have no specific knowledge that it's made up. That's just an assumption on your part. You have no specific knowledge that there is no source. That's another assumption. And you have no specific knowledge the information is "bull." That's just another assertion.

I don't feel free at all to come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever. And you have no reason to assert that I do. Like, none. It's just your assertion. Why would anyone bother to do that? What would be the point?

It seems like what you're trying to say is if you don't know the source of the information, you just assume it's untrue and concocted. That's an odd position to take on an internet message board, which is not a hard news site or the paper of record. Publishing hard news is a different operation with different standards, as it should be. Even there just because you can' t confirm information or get independent verification doesn't mean the information is not true or made up. It means it just doesn't meet the standards for publication. I promise you reporters swap unverified information all the time that often leads to hard news. If you want, just consider this board information swapping, which is pretty much all it is.

If someone is posting all kinds of outlandish allegations or claiming super-exclusive inside information--like the Coach Pete guy did (I recall, for example, that "coach pete" claimed to know--for a fact--that the refs were paid to fix the Saints NFC championship game with the Rams), then, yes, question their sources. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. But when people are just passing on second-hand info from someone they know with access, why accuse them of fabrication? That's kind of crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

They don't? So that whole "Coach Pete" saga I'm just making up out of thin air?

As far as proof I want..how about anything at all? Did anyone learn in school to cite your sources?

And if you're free to just come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever, then I'm also free to call it the bull that it is.

---

Like a book report?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

This forum is absolutely insane. It's like 9th grade high school or a porch full of old hens gossiping

Nobody asks for proof of anything. Just roll with the insanity. Anybody who calls it what it really is...just a "non-objective fan". ******* insane.

Hey I heard the organization found out Zion is really an alien hell bent on harvesting all of us for food, so they won't extend him anyway.

So don't worry about it.


At least on Saintsreport, if you keep doing this and never show any kind of proof, you get banned. Good for them.

---

But why are you worried about it?

Well if one of our players really was a man eating alien hellbent on harvesting all of us that would be a little worrying, wouldn't it ?

Y'all choose the weirdest things to get mad about man. If you don't believe it, then just move along. Rather folks believe it or not I appreciate new city champ, MM, and the legendary Rekehavoc insights, which is way more entertaining when a possible scoop can be had. If you want to believe in or not it's your choice, but let everyone cook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Why is that? You have no specific knowledge that it's made up. That's just an assumption on your part. You have no specific knowledge that there is no source. That's another assumption. And you have no specific knowledge the information is "bull." That's just another assertion.

I don't feel free at all to come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever. And you have no reason to assert that I do. Like, none. It's just your assertion. Why would anyone bother to do that? What would be the point?

It seems like what you're trying to say is if you don't know the source of the information, you just assume it's untrue and concocted. That's an odd position to take on an internet message board, which is not a hard news site or the paper of record. Publishing hard news is a different operation with different standards, as it should be. Even there just because you can' t confirm information or get independent verification doesn't mean the information is not true or made up. It means it just doesn't meet the standards for publication. I promise you reporters swap unverified information all the time that often leads to hard news. If you want, just consider this board information swapping, which is pretty much all it is.

If someone is posting all kinds of outlandish allegations or claiming super-exclusive inside information--like the Coach Pete guy did (I recall, for example, that "coach pete" claimed to know--for a fact--that the refs were paid to fix the Saints NFC championship game with the Rams), then, yes, question their sources. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. But when people are just passing on second-hand info from someone they know with access, why accuse them of fabrication? That's kind of crazy.

---

Please continue to post man. We appreciate all posters and perspectives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

They don't? So that whole "Coach Pete" saga I'm just making up out of thin air?

As far as proof I want..how about anything at all? Did anyone learn in school to cite your sources?

And if you're free to just come here and make stuff up about anything with no source whatsoever, then I'm also free to call it the bull that it is.

---

First of all, the Coach Pete thing had absolutely nothing to do with not disclosing sources or citing proof. That went on for years. It became an issue when it became a fighting/personal issue between some posters and some very detailed personal jabs taken.

How many reporters cite their "sources?" Almost none ever say who the source is. Take it for what it is worth and choose what to believe or not believe.

It's times like this I wish I took my sports journalism phase way more seriously back in college and when I picked my radio internship. I'd kill to get insider info. Have to be selective about what I can disseminate and never give up my sources.

And then I remember that Oh right. My articles post games would be "Jesus. Zion moves like two neutron stars colliding. Space itself folds and then the ball goes into the basket. And Ingram was there already spaghettified. Except that's just how he always looks."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

It's times like this I wish I took my sports journalism phase way more seriously back in college and when I picked my radio internship. I'd kill to get insider info. Have to be selective about what I can disseminate and never give up my sources.

And then I remember that Oh right. My articles post games would be "Jesus. Zion moves like two neutron stars colliding. Space itself folds and then the ball goes into the basket. And Ingram was there already spaghettified. Except that's just how he always looks."

---

It might be one of the 5 worst jobs on the planet, all things considered. On top of that, once you knew the guys and it became a job, you would be much less of a fan and simply wouldnt care who they liked and hoped fell to 35th in the draft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

It might be one of the 5 worst jobs on the planet, all things considered. On top of that, once you knew the guys and it became a job, you would be much less of a fan and simply wouldnt care who they liked and hoped fell to 35th in the draft.

---

Fake news?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eman5805

It's times like this I wish I took my sports journalism phase way more seriously back in college and when I picked my radio internship. I'd kill to get insider info. Have to be selective about what I can disseminate and never give up my sources.

And then I remember that Oh right. My articles post games would be "Jesus. Zion moves like two neutron stars colliding. Space itself folds and then the ball goes into the basket. And Ingram was there already spaghettified. Except that's just how he always looks."

---

https://www.macleans.ca/wp-content/u...016/09/woo.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Why is that? You have no specific knowledge that it's made up. That's just an assumption on your part. You have no specific knowledge that there is no source. That's another assumption. And you have no specific knowledge the information is "bull." That's just another assertion.

---

This is pretty specious logic.

If you don't provide a source when you first say these things, then can't provide a source when someone doubts it's veracity, then it's just a basic math problem at that point.

It's like saying someone just "assumes" 1+1=2.

This isn't that hard. If you make some claim about a player, their family, the team, or the front office. Bring your source or it's pretty safe to assume you have none.

If you can't state your source, then that's your problem. Not mine. I'm free to call it "bull" all day long and will be completely logical to do so. Maybe some of you are still in high school but I'm not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

First of all, the Coach Pete thing had absolutely nothing to do with not disclosing sources or citing proof. That went on for years. It became an issue when it became a fighting/personal issue between some posters and some very detailed personal jabs taken.

How many reporters cite their "sources?" Almost none ever say who the source is. Take it for what it is worth and choose what to believe or not believe.

---

It has everything to do with those threads being deleted and the "source" of those threads having to take a vacation from posting there.

Okay, it has officially changed. From now on, all posters please attach a sources page, MLA format preferred, or your post will be removed. Happy now "luckyman"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

This is pretty specious logic.

If you don't provide a source when you first say these things, then can't provide a source when someone doubts it's veracity, then it's just a basic math problem at that point.

It's like saying someone just "assumes" 1+1=2.

This isn't that hard. If you make some claim about a player, their family, the team, or the front office. Bring your source or it's pretty safe to assume you have none.

If you can't state your source, then that's your problem. Not mine. I'm free to call it "bull" all day long and will be completely logical to do so. Maybe some of you are still in high school but I'm not.

---

I'm using specious logic? You are employing one of the most basic logical fallacies there is: The False Dilemma. Either "X" is true or "Y" is true. One or the other. Here you claim that either I name my source or there is no source like those are the only two possibilities, a mathematical certainty (!). But of course any rational person would concede there are multiple other possibilities, including the correct one in this case, that there is a source and I choose not to publicly name that source. Trying to box someone's argument by framing it as an "either/or" proposition is really high school...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

I'm using specious logic? You are employing one of the most basic logical fallacies there is: The False Dilemma. Either "X" is true or "Y" is true. One or the other. Here you claim that either I name my source or there is no source like those are the only two possibilities, a mathematical certainty (!). But of course any rational person would concede there are multiple other possibilities, including the correct one in this case, that there is a source and I choose not to publicly name that source. Trying to box someone's argument by framing it as an "either/or" proposition is really high school...

---

It is so clear when you have an intelligent poster debating a petulant kid. Wish there were more like you on message boards, New City

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

It is so clear when you have an intelligent poster debating a petulant kid. Wish there were more like you on message boards, New City

---

Amen

Thanks much, gents. But I think at this point we all know how this ends: with me (and maybe you) being very sorry to have been lured into an endless, pointless, time-sucking debate on an entirely inconsequential matter. You'd think I'd know better by now...

Its hard to say nothing when somebody attacks you - regardless of how poor that persons argument or IQ is. I totally get it and sympathize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Its hard to say nothing when somebody attacks you - regardless of how poor that persons argument or IQ is. I totally get it and sympathize.

---

M.M. Keep on doing what you do even if I disagree with you. You keep the forum interesting. Good work with the Zion info.

Maybe we should ask JJ Reddick for his opinion on Griffin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

Maybe we should ask JJ Reddick for his opinion on Griffin?

---

Why bother when we have you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

Why bother when we have you?

---

Keep Griff. Move Stanley

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

First of all, the Coach Pete thing had absolutely nothing to do with not disclosing sources or citing proof. That went on for years. It became an issue when it became a fighting/personal issue between some posters and some very detailed personal jabs taken.

How many reporters cite their "sources?" Almost none ever say who the source is. Take it for what it is worth and choose what to believe or not believe.

---

And just to back up what I said about Saintsreport and what went on there with an actual...source. This is a post from the SR website owner, Andrus, about why they made the "Coach Pete" poster take a ban vacation when they kept posting obviously false rumors. It had everything to do with the constant rumorville posts...as I stated.

Then again, that site is properly moderated. This one isn't...which is highly unfortunate.

Quote:

---

I am not one to post rumors. I have received information over the years because I keep it to myself. I said that to say this... It isn't easy reading Swimmer's rumor posts when I know there is little, if any truth to them. When they were harmless, we let them go for the entertainment that his following seemed to get from them. When they pushed the envelope we checked him on them. This one isn't at all harmless. I knew this one was nonsense as soon as I read it, even before I contacted my source. Yet, I wanted to be certain.

I know some of you are fed up with him... some of the staff has been fed up with Swimmer for the longest time. I have finally had my fill... and then some.

---

Post #91

https://saintsreport.com/threads/upd...6#post-8200448

Minn really big stupid to only top 3 protect their pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

And just to back up what I said about Saintsreport and what went on there with an actual...source. This is a post from the SR website owner, Andrus, about why they made the "Coach Pete" poster take a ban vacation when they kept posting obviously false rumors. It had everything to do with the constant rumorville posts...as I stated.

Then again, that site is properly moderated. This one isn't...which is highly unfortunate.



Post #91

https://saintsreport.com/threads/upd...6#post-8200448

---

I knew it would be a Swimmer thread lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

And just to back up what I said about Saintsreport and what went on there with an actual...source. This is a post from the SR website owner, Andrus, about why they made the "Coach Pete" poster take a ban vacation when they kept posting obviously false rumors. It had everything to do with the constant rumorville posts...as I stated.

Then again, that site is properly moderated. This one isn't...which is highly unfortunate.



Post #91

https://saintsreport.com/threads/upd...6#post-8200448

---

The decision was based on info Andrus had that he was very confident in. It became a personal issue with the fighting that was going on which is what eventually led to the removal. There have been several rumors that were thought to be false over the many years but they did not cause the issues that thread did. Andrus does not routinely remove rumor discussions. Again, if you do not chose to believe a "rumor" that is your prerogative. No one is going to post sources or give you proof to ensure you chose to believe. This is a discussion board, not a fact checker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

The decision was based on info Andrus had that he was very confident in. It became a personal issue with the fighting that was going on which is what eventually led to the removal. There have been several rumors that were thought to be false over the many years but they did not cause the issues that thread did. Andrus does not routinely remove rumor discussions. Again, if you do not chose to believe a "rumor" that is your prerogative. No one is going to post sources or give you proof to ensure you chose to believe. This is a discussion board, not a fact checker.

---

I gave you the specific quote direct from the horse's mouth that they have been dealing with this guy due to the constant rumors he was spreading. He specifically said they've had to check him on THAT issue. They didn't ban him because of the infighting. They did it because it was one too many rumors and enough was enough. The exact quote explaining the entire true context is right there. He said that.

This whole thing here started because someone said we've GOT to make the playoffs next year or Zion is gone. Then village idiot basketball sage of d-bags chimed in and another person that had nothing to do with the original conversation had to piggy back. They are now spreading rumors that Zion's parents are not getting along with Griff because of the way he handled Zion's minutes and injury LAST year? Which makes NO SENSE. What parents would get angry because some adult was extremely careful with their son's injury? Who does that? If that's not the issue, then what is it and where are you getting this from?

Zion addressed this in multiple interviews. Are we to believe he's just being duplicitous? These dumb rumors are just an attack on these people's character at this point. From nameless, faceless, random people on the internet who have established no credibility whatsoever.

A discussion board is indeed a fact checker. That's what happens in discussions. And no, you do not have to give even the most miniscule sources of your rumor mill. But that also means these "sauces" are fair game to be called the BS that it is. What are you getting mad at that for?

Dude - you have the right to not believe people or even call them liars if you choose, and others have the right to pass on the things they have heard. I dont know why you cant grasp this very simple concept. Nobody is saying that what is said here has to be believed as gospel, but your point seems to be that if someone cant prove something with multiple verified sources then they should say nothing and we should take players or coaches or GMs word for things - BECAUSE THEY NEVER LIE!!!

Your argument is in a word...terrible. It draws upon numerous fallacies and is backed as an absolute good based on this one experience you keep whining about. Dude - if that is your bar for accepting things, then good for you. But your idea that the board will follow you on this is beyond naive. Notice how literally nobody is agreeing with your poor arguments and/or desired burden of proof?

Also, have you bothered to reach out to the reporters that you do trust to fact check? You are so determined to only know and say truth, right??

Because they all know this stuff too.