Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DC and development of young players: bad players, bad coach or something more?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I promise you, none of us are tyrants... most of the time
    Pfft, speak for yourself.

    Back to work everyone! Nothing to see here. *whip* Keep Posting damnit! *whip*

    Comment


    • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
      The initial post only gave stats about a single game, so it was moved to that game's thread. It's still there, so please feel free to go and comment about it. Nothing has been deleted or censored, so I'm not sure how freedom of speech has been stifled.

      A new thread was started with a broader OP so, despite me joking that it felt more like a conspiracy theory than something factual, the thread was obviously left open for discussion. I never did see a single response that agreed with the conspiracy theory posed by the OP, but an even broader discussion about DC and the development of all young players under him (not just JV) ensued.

      As a result, the multiple threads discussing the same topic have since been merged, rather than having 2 or 3 identical conversations going on. DC's coaching style/decisions and how they relate to the development of young players (including JV) is certainly a worthwhile topic for RR posters to discuss.


      Anytime you disagree with something going on, or don't understand why something was done, please feel free to send a PM to myself or any of my fellow mods/admins. I promise you, none of us are tyrants... most of the time
      FYI the original thread you closed was not about one single game. Repetitive means more than once. The last game stats were the latest example in this regard. You can say it was about one game but that simply is not true. Also you interpreted my post to be a conspiracy theory. That was not what I nor many other posters took from it. Clearly it warranted discussion.

      Comment


      • psrs1 wrote: View Post
        FYI the original thread you closed was not about one single game. Repetitive means more than once. The last game stats were the latest example in this regard. You can say it was about one game but that simply is not true. Also you interpreted my post to be a conspiracy theory. That was not what I nor many other posters took from it. Clearly it warranted discussion.
        Drop it please, I would've done the exact same thing, as the conversation was being had in that specific thread. Doesn't always matter what the thread title is, but more what conversation is being had.

        Comment


        • Green Maple Leaf wrote: View Post
          You sound like an absolute tyrant, wow, shut up. Is this not Canada where we have freedom of speech? I actually wanted to respond to the original post until I seen what you wrote. Are you actually a representative of RR or are you just a guy who posts allot??
          we don't have freedom of speech in Canada. That's the guy under us
          For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

          Comment


          • I'm very tyrannical. That's why Doc hired me. That and he said I had an ass you could bounce a quarter off of....what does that even mean?
            For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

            Comment


            • Thanks green maple leaf for comments. I do not think calgaryrapsfan is a tyrant but perhaps a control oriented person . I suspect it is better to allow threads to continue until no interest from posters. Mods will say trying to keep things cleaner and neater but I suspect they are quicker to shut things down they disagree with.

              Comment


              • if anything psrs1 as we get more off topic...we probably let a lot more shit go then we should in the name of keeping things open.
                For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

                Comment


                • psrs1 wrote: View Post
                  Mods will say trying to keep things cleaner and neater but I suspect they are quicker to shut things down they disagree with.
                  Seriously? You're actually saying that? Lol Ugh.

                  Comment


                  • I can't count how many threads I would shut down solely based on disagreement if that were the case
                    For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

                    Comment


                    • psrs1 wrote: View Post
                      Thanks green maple leaf for comments. I do not think calgaryrapsfan is a tyrant but perhaps a control oriented person . I suspect it is better to allow threads to continue until no interest from posters. Mods will say trying to keep things cleaner and neater but I suspect they are quicker to shut things down they disagree with.
                      The thread wasn't shut down. Your OP was moved into a thread where the same conversation was already happening, with an explanation provided to you in that thread (yes the word "repetitive" was in your post, but the only stats provided and commentary given was about that single game).

                      We try to merge similar threads to make the overall quality of conversation, discussion and debate better, rather than having multiple conversations about the same things going on simultaneously.

                      If each mod/admin shut things down we disagreed with, there'd likely be nothing but game threads, since you can't disagree that a game happened (although often times it has looked like a particular team has failed to show up)!

                      Besides, your second thread with a broader OP was left open, so I'm not sure why you still have such animosity. As Joey said, let it go...

                      Comment


                      • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                        The thread wasn't shut down. Your OP was moved into a thread where the same conversation was already happening, with an explanation provided to you in that thread (yes the word "repetitive" was in your post, but the only stats provided and commentary given was about that single game).

                        We try to merge similar threads to make the overall quality of conversation, discussion and debate better, rather than having multiple conversations about the same things going on simultaneously.

                        If each mod/admin shut things down we disagreed with, there'd likely be nothing but game threads, since you can't disagree that a game happened (although often times it has looked like a particular team has failed to show up)!

                        Besides, your second thread with a broader OP was left open, so I'm not sure why you still have such animosity. As Joey said, let it go...
                        It is clear how things work. I have no animosity toward you---that is your opinion just as your opinion that the thread was a conspiracy theory which from my viewpoint it was not intended as such. In fact I was responding to green leafs comments in my last post and actually defended you to a degree. If I can suggest different posters have different perspectives and you mods may think you have heard and seen it all with regard to topics and types of discussion but some posters see things differently and both groups are entitled to their viewpoints and perspectives. Sometimes merged files can lose the flow.

                        Comment


                        • joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                          Drop it please, I would've done the exact same thing, as the conversation was being had in that specific thread. Doesn't always matter what the thread title is, but more what ccoonversation is being had.
                          Content is important. Who decides what topics and where they can be discussed? Think about it.

                          Comment


                          • psrs1 wrote: View Post
                            Content is important. Who decides what topics and where they can be discussed? Think about it.
                            I've thought about it, and I think I have the answer on who decides: Moderators.

                            Is that it? Am I right?

                            There are moderators for times when things get out of hand -- too many posts on the same subject, an argument that has devolved into personal attacks, etc. If they make a 'mistake' once in a while, it's just that, a mistake. There's no conspiracy here of trying to silence dissension or something. This is a basketball fan forum, it isn't Orwell's 1984.
                            Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                            Comment


                            • psrs1 wrote: View Post
                              It is clear how things work. I have no animosity toward you---that is your opinion just as your opinion that the thread was a conspiracy theory which from my viewpoint it was not intended as such. In fact I was responding to green leafs comments in my last post and actually defended you to a degree. If I can suggest different posters have different perspectives and you mods may think you have heard and seen it all with regard to topics and types of discussion but some posters see things differently and both groups are entitled to their viewpoints and perspectives. Sometimes merged files can lose the flow.
                              Huh? The whole point of merging is to better the flow of repetitive topics. Did you even read CRF's post?
                              Twitter - @thekid_it

                              Comment


                              • psrs1 wrote: View Post
                                Content is important. Who decides what topics and where they can be discussed? Think about it.
                                I've thought about it long and hard. And just as jimmie pointed out, its actually simple ... for the most part, we do. Lol Assuming there are duplicate topics being discussed, of course.

                                And who ever said content isn't important? I completely agree with you that content is important, and thus by merging threads that have similar (read: Exact) conversations going, then it is important to merge those contents so as to provide a more complete picture to participants.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X