PDA

View Full Version : We need to let go of some language



Scoots
08-15-2018, 01:42 PM
We need to let go of "should have" and "would have" when we look at the past. The Warriors "should have" won the title in 2016 ... no they shouldn't have, they choked it away, they lost, all the parameters were what they were and you can't speculate on changing one without it becoming a meaningless discussion! The Rockets "would have" won it all last year if ... no, the reality is that they lost with all of the circumstances around that series and they never played in the finals so all that speculation is just hot air. Always when we look back these "should" and "would" things come out but they just obscure the story with easy solutions to the problem.

We need to not say a player "will". Simmons and Fultz "will" fix their broken shots and the Sixers will be the best team in the East ... what is the point in speculating something like it's a fact in advance? We HOPE Fultz and Simmons will fix their broken shots because theoretically we love the game and want to see it played well, but none of us, including the players involved know what "will" happen. Every year there are 100 such ideas floating around, and 98 of them are wrong. We can report the facts without the wild speculation.

Okay, rant over.

Jamiecballer
08-15-2018, 01:46 PM
Agreed

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

WaDe03
08-15-2018, 02:15 PM
We need to let go of other language as well. People using curse words and calling names trying to hurt others feelings when they aren’t necessary.

For example:

“That’s why your team ****ing lost you damn clown!”

Could just as easily be....

“Your team lost but you’re still an awesome guy and I appreciate you activity, time, and effort to the board. Please continue to post even though your season is over.”

Which would you prefer to hear?

Another example:

“You’re dumb as hell, literally everything you say is stupid you ****ing homer! I bet your family hates you and thinks you’re the biggest mistake they’ve ever made!”

Could just as easily be....

“I disagree with your well thought out opinion but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate your constant activity to the board and I hope you stay for awhile. Thank you for all that you do. I bet your family is so loving and proud of the person you’ve become. If you were in my family it would be that much better because I can tell you’re a good person and I respect you.”

This is the real language that needs to change so I challenge everyone here to start taking this approach when discussing various topics on here.

TheDish87
08-15-2018, 02:21 PM
how should we replace 'my favorite player has more titles then your favorite team' in the middle of a discussion that has nothing to do with it?

ewing
08-15-2018, 02:24 PM
you need to let go bro. seriously Scoots, breath let go of all that tension

WaDe03
08-15-2018, 02:27 PM
how should we replace 'my favorite player has more titles then your favorite team' in the middle of a discussion that has nothing to do with it?

“While my favorite player may have accomplished more than your entire franchises history that doesn’t mean you won’t some day get there. I respect your organization and they are heading in the right direction. My favorite players career will end one day but your franchise could be around forever so the odds are in your favor when it comes to who has more titles. Whether it happens in your lifetime or not, I hope you continue to support your team and the NBA as we need all the fans we can get and great fans such as yourself just make this league that much better. Thank you for all that you do!”

Storch
08-15-2018, 02:31 PM
People are so sensitive around here it’s hilarious 🤣

SfgiantsJD3
08-15-2018, 03:09 PM
We could change language moving forward, not sure if we should; only time will tell if opinion based discussions can continue without an opinion based on a different context and circumstances.

Scoots
08-15-2018, 03:14 PM
We need to let go of other language as well. People using curse words and calling names trying to hurt others feelings when they aren’t necessary.

For example:

“That’s why your team ****ing lost you damn clown!”

Could just as easily be....

“Your team lost but you’re still an awesome guy and I appreciate you activity, time, and effort to the board. Please continue to post even though your season is over.”

Which would you prefer to hear?

Another example:

“You’re dumb as hell, literally everything you say is stupid you ****ing homer! I bet your family hates you and thinks you’re the biggest mistake they’ve ever made!”

Could just as easily be....

“I disagree with your well thought out opinion but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate your constant activity to the board and I hope you stay for awhile. Thank you for all that you do. I bet your family is so loving and proud of the person you’ve become. If you were in my family it would be that much better because I can tell you’re a good person and I respect you.”

This is the real language that needs to change so I challenge everyone here to start taking this approach when discussing various topics on here.

That was some quality trolling :)

Scoots
08-15-2018, 03:15 PM
how should we replace 'my favorite player has more titles then your favorite team' in the middle of a discussion that has nothing to do with it?

#bigdick

Scoots
08-15-2018, 03:15 PM
you need to let go bro. seriously Scoots, breath let go of all that tension

Yeah, maybe. I just let it go when people say it because I'm just not interested in disecting why they are wrong again and again and again and again. :)

Scoots
08-15-2018, 03:16 PM
I'm a staunch supporter of free speech but stupid speech really does bug me sometimes :)

IndyRealist
08-15-2018, 04:47 PM
"rookie X is a great player"

No he is not. He has the POTENTIAL to be a great player, but rookies are rarely ever great. They tend to be well below average. They might not stay below average, but what they did their rookie year was probably not good. Lookin' at you, Donovan Mitchell.

Vee-Rex
08-15-2018, 04:55 PM
I think Scoots and Wade03 make fantastic points in this thread. Nice to see Wade03 taking the high road and showing by example.

IKnowHoops
08-15-2018, 05:00 PM
People are so sensitive around here it’s hilarious 🤣

Iknowsensativity

Jamiecballer
08-15-2018, 05:03 PM
"rookie X is a great player"

No he is not. He has the POTENTIAL to be a great player, but rookies are rarely ever great. They tend to be well below average. They might not stay below average, but what they did their rookie year was probably not good. Lookin' at you, Donovan Mitchell.+1

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

WaDe03
08-15-2018, 05:39 PM
I think Scoots and Wade03 make fantastic points in this thread. Nice to see Wade03 taking the high road and showing by example.

Thank you for such a quality post friend, PSD needs positivity and I’m here to bring it. If I can put a smile on at least 1 posters face a day then I feel like I’m making PSD a better place and also feel I’m influencing lives around the world.

SfgiantsJD3
08-15-2018, 05:51 PM
I'm a staunch supporter of free speech but stupid speech really does bug me sometimes :)

The beauty is you don't have to listen

Scoots
08-15-2018, 07:19 PM
Thank you for such a quality post friend, PSD needs positivity and I’m here to bring it. If I can put a smile on at least 1 posters face a day then I feel like I’m making PSD a better place and also feel I’m influencing lives around the world.

lol

Scoots
08-15-2018, 07:20 PM
The beauty is you don't have to listen

But I'm a moderator so I try to read everything. Just my cross to bear.

aman_13
08-15-2018, 07:54 PM
We need to let go of other language as well. People using curse words and calling names trying to hurt others feelings when they aren’t necessary.

For example:

“That’s why your team ****ing lost you damn clown!”

Could just as easily be....

“Your team lost but you’re still an awesome guy and I appreciate you activity, time, and effort to the board. Please continue to post even though your season is over.”

Which would you prefer to hear?

Another example:

“You’re dumb as hell, literally everything you say is stupid you ****ing homer! I bet your family hates you and thinks you’re the biggest mistake they’ve ever made!”

Could just as easily be....

“I disagree with your well thought out opinion but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate your constant activity to the board and I hope you stay for awhile. Thank you for all that you do. I bet your family is so loving and proud of the person you’ve become. If you were in my family it would be that much better because I can tell you’re a good person and I respect you.”

This is the real language that needs to change so I challenge everyone here to start taking this approach when discussing various topics on here.

lmao

JAZZNC
08-16-2018, 06:16 AM
We need to let go of other language as well. People using curse words and calling names trying to hurt others feelings when they aren’t necessary.

For example:

“That’s why your team ****ing lost you damn clown!”

Could just as easily be....

“Your team lost but you’re still an awesome guy and I appreciate you activity, time, and effort to the board. Please continue to post even though your season is over.”

Which would you prefer to hear?

Another example:

“You’re dumb as hell, literally everything you say is stupid you ****ing homer! I bet your family hates you and thinks you’re the biggest mistake they’ve ever made!”

Could just as easily be....

“I disagree with your well thought out opinion but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate your constant activity to the board and I hope you stay for awhile. Thank you for all that you do. I bet your family is so loving and proud of the person you’ve become. If you were in my family it would be that much better because I can tell you’re a good person and I respect you.”

This is the real language that needs to change so I challenge everyone here to start taking this approach when discussing various topics on here.

The irony of this post....

mightybosstone
08-16-2018, 06:32 AM
Convenient timing of this, Scoots, given how fresh the Rockets loss is. That being said, I don't disagree. A win or loss does not and should not have an asterisk by it. It's sports. **** happens, and it impacts the end results sometimes. But ultimately you still have to win the damn games and nothing "should" have happened.

However, we can't lose the "what if" part of the conversation. We shouldn't act like historical context doesn't belong when we look at a win or loss.

Does Chris Paul's injury make the Warriors title run last season a little less impressive, and should there always be that "what if" conversation attached to that season and that series? Absolutley. In the same way that people will always have that same "what if" about the Draymond suspension. Just because a team won doesn't mean we can't provide historical context to those moments to better understand their place in history or wonder how things might have gone differently with even slightly different circumstances.

warfelg
08-16-2018, 07:47 AM
I think part of the problem with this is you are talking about people's convictions with their opinions. Some people feel the need to be that strong with their convictions.

The other problem is internet debates. Look at these debates you pointed out. They started not that far off from each other. Like take Fultz, because it starts with one side saying "I'm not really going to count much out of him because he sux." So of course Sixer fans will get defensive and say "Well he played well to close the season and it's unlikely that he won't improve." (A rather reasonable statement). And you get the original side pushing back by saying he's a bust already. Trying to stay reasonable doesn't work. And it grows and grows until you get one side saying there's no way he improves, and the other side has to dig in.

And we can say this so many times. Go back and look at the debates and you'll likely always see one side trying to be reasonable at the start and the other side has to push back somehow.

Basically my surmise is we don't need to change language used, attitudes of going to extremes to 'win' debates needs to change.

Vinylman
08-16-2018, 08:39 AM
I think Scoots and Wade03 make fantastic points in this thread. Nice to see Wade03 taking the high road and showing by example.

he must have had his eyes dilated when he posted that …

Vinylman
08-16-2018, 08:40 AM
Convenient timing of this, Scoots, given how fresh the Rockets loss is. That being said, I don't disagree. A win or loss does not and should not have an asterisk by it. It's sports. **** happens, and it impacts the end results sometimes. But ultimately you still have to win the damn games and nothing "should" have happened.

However, we can't lose the "what if" part of the conversation. We shouldn't act like historical context doesn't belong when we look at a win or loss.

Does Chris Paul's injury make the Warriors title run last season a little less impressive, and should there always be that "what if" conversation attached to that season and that series? Absolutley. In the same way that people will always have that same "what if" about the Draymond suspension. Just because a team won doesn't mean we can't provide historical context to those moments to better understand their place in history or wonder how things might have gone differently with even slightly different circumstances.

BAM!!!!!

/thread

Scoots
08-16-2018, 09:34 AM
Convenient timing of this, Scoots, given how fresh the Rockets loss is. That being said, I don't disagree. A win or loss does not and should not have an asterisk by it. It's sports. **** happens, and it impacts the end results sometimes. But ultimately you still have to win the damn games and nothing "should" have happened.

However, we can't lose the "what if" part of the conversation. We shouldn't act like historical context doesn't belong when we look at a win or loss.

Does Chris Paul's injury make the Warriors title run last season a little less impressive, and should there always be that "what if" conversation attached to that season and that series? Absolutley. In the same way that people will always have that same "what if" about the Draymond suspension. Just because a team won doesn't mean we can't provide historical context to those moments to better understand their place in history or wonder how things might have gone differently with even slightly different circumstances.

I'm not saying to do away with "what if", it's the conviction people have when they say stupid stuff like "had Draymond not been suspended the Warriors would have won" and it was never that simple. People like absolutes and think that any of the results are because of a single factor when they are never that simple.

I wasn't trying to make a thread about specifics just used a couple of examples, and used the Warriors loss as an example to illustrate that it was not about some Warriors fan based specific thing.

Scoots
08-16-2018, 09:38 AM
I think part of the problem with this is you are talking about people's convictions with their opinions. Some people feel the need to be that strong with their convictions.

The other problem is internet debates. Look at these debates you pointed out. They started not that far off from each other. Like take Fultz, because it starts with one side saying "I'm not really going to count much out of him because he sux." So of course Sixer fans will get defensive and say "Well he played well to close the season and it's unlikely that he won't improve." (A rather reasonable statement). And you get the original side pushing back by saying he's a bust already. Trying to stay reasonable doesn't work. And it grows and grows until you get one side saying there's no way he improves, and the other side has to dig in.

And we can say this so many times. Go back and look at the debates and you'll likely always see one side trying to be reasonable at the start and the other side has to push back somehow.

Basically my surmise is we don't need to change language used, attitudes of going to extremes to 'win' debates needs to change.

Okay, but the result is the same. It's never as simple as one factor this way or that in the past, and we can't know what will happen in the future.

I know full well that I won't change anything, but I think the debate is healthy. :)

WaDe03
08-16-2018, 09:45 AM
I hope everyone has had a great morning so far that trickles into the rest of their day and makes it one of the best day of their lives, god bless you great guys! I hope we have a lot of well thought posts and great conversation today! Remember to smile today, they are contagious!

Scoots
08-16-2018, 10:27 AM
I hope everyone has had a great morning so far that trickles into the rest of their day and makes it one of the best day of their lives, god bless you great guys! I hope we have a lot of well thought posts and great conversation today! Remember to smile today, they are contagious!

lol, keep it up friend!

Rivera
08-16-2018, 11:02 AM
I think part of the problem with this is you are talking about people's convictions with their opinions. Some people feel the need to be that strong with their convictions.

The other problem is internet debates. Look at these debates you pointed out. They started not that far off from each other. Like take Fultz, because it starts with one side saying "I'm not really going to count much out of him because he sux." So of course Sixer fans will get defensive and say "Well he played well to close the season and it's unlikely that he won't improve." (A rather reasonable statement). And you get the original side pushing back by saying he's a bust already. Trying to stay reasonable doesn't work. And it grows and grows until you get one side saying there's no way he improves, and the other side has to dig in.

And we can say this so many times. Go back and look at the debates and you'll likely always see one side trying to be reasonable at the start and the other side has to push back somehow.

Basically my surmise is we don't need to change language used, attitudes of going to extremes to 'win' debates needs to change.

irony especially when many have said and some have been real polite about "we need to see more from Fultz" you and thedish give "pushback" and then point out how other young teams can improve but the 6ers cant instead of citing examples or your hope/expectation for Fultz this season :rolleyes:

warfelg
08-16-2018, 11:20 AM
Fun that you bring that up and lump me with that. Especially since my stance is it’s realistic to expect more and the feedback is “he’s nothing until he proves it”.

But the real irony here is you doing exactly what I’m saying is happening by claiming one side is polite and the other isn’t.

Because the reality of that situation is that there’s likely to be some kind of improvement. Fultz showed in limited time that he can be effective in the limited time that he’s been on the court. But the more and more people dig in that he’s nothing, and the more and more it’s repeated, the stronger my belief is that he’s going to improve over what he was.

Not only the Philly fans are almost expertly trained in this at this point. Embiid was nothing. Simmons was nothing. Saric was an afterthought. Covington was overrated. Yet if we go back, some of the statements on those guys would seem silly.

Rivera
08-16-2018, 11:44 AM
no one said he wont improve, but no one knows what fultz is to improve off of

we have been realistic with Fultz because we dont know nothing just as you know nothing of what to expect

and not one time have you said, i hope Fultz can be a 10-5-5 guy, we havent either, we just dont know because his situation is so extreme

but apparently, that isnt being realistic either because we all just say Fultz suck (which i havent seen many people say)

warfelg
08-16-2018, 12:28 PM
You realize you are still doing the exact thing I was talking about right?

Rivera
08-16-2018, 01:08 PM
You realize you are still doing the exact thing I was talking about right?

you are talking out of both sides of your mouth, and instead of having a real basketball discussion you side track when someone disagrees with your opinion. Its okay to disagree with opinions, as long as were respectful and say our points. When the season ends we can laugh at how wrong one of us was

but you did the same thing in you said in your post

in one line you go


Especially since my stance is it’s realistic to expect more and the feedback is “he’s nothing until he proves it”.


and the very next line you go
here is you doing exactly what I’m saying is happening by claiming one side is polite and the other isn’t.


saying your right or "more realistic" indicating I havent been realisitc. then your saying one side is polite and one side isnt?

double standard

TheDish87
08-16-2018, 01:23 PM
irony especially when many have said and some have been real polite about "we need to see more from Fultz" you and thedish give "pushback" and then point out how other young teams can improve but the 6ers cant instead of citing examples or your hope/expectation for Fultz this season :rolleyes:

never once used that logic. nice try doe

warfelg
08-16-2018, 01:30 PM
Lets try this the simple way:
You said a few times in the last few days we can’t count on Fultz because we didn’t see him last year. You’ve repeated that a few times.

So when you say that back to me after I say that just having Fultz play more will be improvement, it makes Sixer fans dig in deeper.

To me Fultz’s improvement is going to be availability to be on the court. He helps tremendously with what we lacked, which was athleticism in the depth. That’s going to be improvement over just a few games. He also showed he could play defense, and initiate an offense. He could clean up turnovers, improve recognition too.

But feel free to repeat the same thing of he didn’t play and not ask for clarification.

Rivera
08-16-2018, 01:38 PM
Lets try this the simple way:
You said a few times in the last few days we can’t count on Fultz because we didn’t see him last year. You’ve repeated that a few times.

So when you say that back to me after I say that just having Fultz play more will be improvement, it makes Sixer fans dig in deeper.

To me Fultz’s improvement is going to be availability to be on the court. He helps tremendously with what we lacked, which was athleticism in the depth. That’s going to be improvement over just a few games. He also showed he could play defense, and initiate an offense. He could clean up turnovers, improve recognition too.

But feel free to repeat the same thing of he didn’t play and not ask for clarification.

and i have given the 76ers improvement by 3 wins (i said 55 wins in the other thread), but yet, only the 76ers young guys cant improve according to what you said in the past because of how you felt others have posted

warfelg
08-16-2018, 01:44 PM
You saying a team can improve has little to do with the discussion at hand.

Have fun.

Rivera
08-16-2018, 02:58 PM
To me Fultz’s improvement is going to be availability to be on the court. He helps tremendously with what we lacked, which was athleticism in the depth. That’s going to be improvement over just a few games. He also showed he could play defense, and initiate an offense. He could clean up turnovers, improve recognition too.

But feel free to repeat the same thing of he didn’t play and not ask for clarification.


and i have given the 76ers improvement by 3 wins (i said 55 wins in the other thread), but yet, only the 76ers young guys cant improve according to what you said in the past because of how you felt others have posted

Fultz is a part of the 76ers correct? So he is a member of the team that factored into my improvement correct?


have fun

Jamiecballer
08-16-2018, 06:17 PM
I think we all know inherently that a young guy in Fultz can and should improve. The reason a lot of us arent treating him as some great addition to your roster is pretty straightforward. He was supposed to be able to shoot right? I mean when he was drafted 1st overall?

I think when he returned late last year we all needed to see one thing - is he completely broken as a shooter. He does some other nice things but the one thing we all wanted to see to know he wasnt a write-off he was not able to definitely answer.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

JasonJohnHorn
08-16-2018, 08:32 PM
I think the 'would' 'should' and 'could' are central to sports conversations. We talk about hypoethcials. 'What ifs' and such.

The Knicks 'would' beaten the Bulls in 92 if the officiating was even. McGrady 'should' have stayed with the Raptors. These are fun to discuss.

When you compare guys like Kobe and LeBron and guys bring up 'ring count', it's important to note that LBJ very likely would have won just as many (or perhaps more) had he been draft in a similar situation and faced similar competition. And it's alo fair to note that if Kobe had Drew Gooden and Eric snow, he likely 'would' have struggle to get to the finals.

So yeah... if we took these words out of our conversations, it would be impossible to even have a conversation becaue it would remove context.

Scoots
08-16-2018, 09:36 PM
I think the 'would' 'should' and 'could' are central to sports conversations. We talk about hypoethcials. 'What ifs' and such.

The Knicks 'would' beaten the Bulls in 92 if the officiating was even. McGrady 'should' have stayed with the Raptors. These are fun to discuss.

When you compare guys like Kobe and LeBron and guys bring up 'ring count', it's important to note that LBJ very likely would have won just as many (or perhaps more) had he been draft in a similar situation and faced similar competition. And it's alo fair to note that if Kobe had Drew Gooden and Eric snow, he likely 'would' have struggle to get to the finals.

So yeah... if we took these words out of our conversations, it would be impossible to even have a conversation becaue it would remove context.

The issue is that the would/should is usually followed by a simple "if" like there is one answer. It's almost never nearly that simple.

Allphakenny1
08-18-2018, 01:29 AM
I got two of them:

1. "Soft" It seems like people use soft too often to mean skilled. If a player is a great jump shooter and not trying to dunk on everyone, they are soft. Lets just ignore the fact that they are running through constant traffic off screens, taking constant elbows and body bumps, never getting calls because officials never see fouls off the ball. It just seems like people use "soft" when they want to insult a player who they hate and is ridiculously skilled so they think this is a way to diminish them somehow.

2. "Alpha" & "Beta" Same thing here, it just seems like a way to make up hate on a player that is great, but they do not like. Alpha and beta have everything to do with personality and not talent. There are, and have been, plenty of alpha personalities that have hurt their teams because they did not know when to hold back and have tried to do too much. Conversely, there are, and have been, plenty of beta personalities that have led their teams to championships and even dynasties. Done all the things that do not show up in the stats sheet, help the players around them thrive and lead by example, but may not be vocal leaders.

Basically, both of theses just seem like term to be used to hate a player when there is nothing intelligent to say against them so they must be "soft" or "beta."

JasonJohnHorn
08-18-2018, 08:24 AM
I got two of them:

1. "Soft" It seems like people use soft too often to mean skilled. If a player is a great jump shooter and not trying to dunk on everyone, they are soft. Lets just ignore the fact that they are running through constant traffic off screens, taking constant elbows and body bumps, never getting calls because officials never see fouls off the ball. It just seems like people use "soft" when they want to insult a player who they hate and is ridiculously skilled so they think this is a way to diminish them somehow.

2. "Alpha" & "Beta" Same thing here, it just seems like a way to make up hate on a player that is great, but they do not like. Alpha and beta have everything to do with personality and not talent. There are, and have been, plenty of alpha personalities that have hurt their teams because they did not know when to hold back and have tried to do too much. Conversely, there are, and have been, plenty of beta personalities that have led their teams to championships and even dynasties. Done all the things that do not show up in the stats sheet, help the players around them thrive and lead by example, but may not be vocal leaders.

Basically, both of theses just seem like term to be used to hate a player when there is nothing intelligent to say against them so they must be "soft" or "beta."

I agree. This is lazy talk. Simple binaries. People used to talk about Pau like that. "He's soft." Anybody who thinks that guys is soft hasn't watched him play. Just because you have finess doesn't mean you are soft.

Dirk got that too, but that guy was a killer. There is an expectation that a guy who is 7 feet should be a rim protector, but nobody says Ray Allen is soft just because he's good a shooting threes.

And the 'alpha' 'beta' stuff... I get it, but things are more nuanced than that. A guy like Duncan and a guys like Kobe can both be seen a leaders, but they lead in different ways. Duncan subordnated himself to Pop but not because he was a beta; because he knew that was how to get the other guys to play into a team. Kobe puhed guys and yelled at guys because that's how he led.

Scoots
08-18-2018, 09:59 AM
I agree. This is lazy talk. Simple binaries. People used to talk about Pau like that. "He's soft." Anybody who thinks that guys is soft hasn't watched him play. Just because you have finess doesn't mean you are soft.

Dirk got that too, but that guy was a killer. There is an expectation that a guy who is 7 feet should be a rim protector, but nobody says Ray Allen is soft just because he's good a shooting threes.

And the 'alpha' 'beta' stuff... I get it, but things are more nuanced than that. A guy like Duncan and a guys like Kobe can both be seen a leaders, but they lead in different ways. Duncan subordnated himself to Pop but not because he was a beta; because he knew that was how to get the other guys to play into a team. Kobe puhed guys and yelled at guys because that's how he led.

There is a connotation of "soft" as being mentally weak, but Michael Jordan was certainly mentally fragile (losing at ANYTHING was devastating to him personally, and his insecurity dominated his existence), and was a teammate who was destructive to his teammates, but he's NEVER called soft, he's called the GOAT. In a different sport, Jerry Rice was very similar ... he was panicked most of his career, which drove him to be called GOAT in his career. Larry Bird, same thing. The greatest players who get there just because they love the game is the exception, not the rule.