The whole x player is the franchise guy threads are annoying.

I have no problem with the lack of creativity part. I have more problem with numbers of threads created for the same purpose. Last season, whenever certain player had a good game or bad game, we had 5 or more threads created for that player in a matter of minutes. It was hard to navigate the forum.

 

I think this has more to do that there are no every day moderators that could lump them all together?!

 

That’s heavy on the Sengunism without being honest about what the league has seen. Some team out there would throw the max at Jalen too in hopes that run he went on last year is the real Jalen. Especially if we’re talking unrestricted. They’re both worth the risk to someone out there.

The Goon offer might come quicker though.

 

I will be curious to see if that happens.

 

Stay on topic. In today's game bigmen need a shot. All the superstar bigs can shoot. Sengun can't. Why would the Rockets max out a big with so many deficiencies? He also can't defend. The Rockets want to play faster but can't do that with Sengun on the court. You're obsession with Jalen won't allow you to evaluate other players

 

No.... they really don't "need it", it's just an added bonus. Shooting 3's isn't a primary responsibility of centers. It's not even a secondary responsibility.

You know what a team really does need though? A SG that can shoot.

Again, it's interesting why you are so hyper critical of literally the best player on the Rockets....i wonder if you are that critical of anyone else on the team.

I mean, there's flat out bad players in the starting lineup.... how do you feel about them?

 

You said, “as of today”… to see what WILL happen rests on the performance and health of our big 2 extension players over the next few months.

I’m just happy Alpi didn’t do his knee in on that injury last season. God that was ugly. Good thing he’s flexible.

 

thinly-disguised matador defense comment. reported.

 

THIS - the problem with the board stem from the fact it's largely unmoderated. Its the reason there are so many similar threads, its the reason people can make a thread unbearable for days and even weeks with individuals going back and forth with personal attacks that have nothing to do with individual threads.

...it's really a handful of thoughtful posters here who make this board bearable and differentiate it from the toxic twitter sphere or the bland Reddit spaces. The problem is you have to weed through this board's own toxic and bland people to get to the good stuff.

 

The notion that the board would be better if there was more censorship is a short sighed theory at best.

The people who cry out for more censorship always imagine either themselves being the person to censor everyone they disagree with or someone else who would do the same..... but what happens if the person who decides what to censor and who to censor is someone you disagree with? What happens if you become the one censored?

Let's imagine a scenario where I'm the pro censorship tyrant you are calling for and I go around banning everyone who doesn't agree with me.... now that would certainly make the board more intelligent, and there would be no disagreement.... because my job would be to ban anyone who didn't agree with me, but would the board be better for it, or would it have lost something of value?

 

I'm not really sure where you are going with this argument. You're saying we shouldn't discuss our opinions on how the front office should operate, because we should trust them to do their job? Does that also extend to coaching? Does it also extend to the players? What are we allowed to talk about, then, and what is this board for?

 

Not all moderation is censorship, though. I'm with you on the "censorship is bad" stance but there are tons of other ways to moderate without censoring people.

 

The difference is largely semantic and based on your perspective. "Moderation" is just censorship that is deemed good by the speaker.

That's why I posed the thought experiment.... would people want it if the power and decision making was controlled by someone they don't agree with?

If the answer is no, it potentially means that they are advocating for the kind of pretty tyrant they'd hate.

That's why I argue that while it's certainly easier.... and occasionally cathartic to ban all of the heretics, it's not exactly the right thing to do.

More relevant, I know a certain Texans site that went from thriving community to complete ghost town over mods who embraced the petty tyrant mentality that the op was suggesting.... and they justified their BS by claiming they were "weeding out toxicity" and yet we saw how it played out.

That's not to say it can't be done successfully, but the person in charge walking that tightrope better not slip or let their personal views cloud their judgement if they are going to take on that role.

That's why imo it's simply superior to take a more permissive stance, sure it'll lead to some annoyance... but it also matters a lot less who is holding the ban hammer.

 

From now on, threads with this sort of content must include the words "Numero Uno" preferably in bold print and all caps. Thanks for your cooperation.

 

Moderation is needed on any and all social media......to keep things grounded, and respectable.

We have failed as a society to put those checks and balances in and it is killing our societies,,,the EU is leading the charge, but the USA being paid for through lobbyists has taken money NOT to moderate.

It is the single biggest fail in years.

DD

 

No, it's definitely not that. An example of non censoring moderation would be something like...if you had a thread "How much should we pay Jabari", and then you made a thread called "We should pay Jabari the max!". A mod should delete that thread, but that's not censorship. You can say your piece, but just do it in the other thread. We already have a thread for that.

Another example is redirecting discussion that is derailing a thread. For example, sometimes I get tired of the Green/Sengun chatter, I don't want to hear it. So I don't click those threads. I think it would be nice if I could click on a Jabari Smith thread and not see people arguing about Green and Sengun, that thread should be (mostly) about Jabari. So that would be another example of moderation without censorship - if people start heavily derailing threads, a moderator could tell them to move their discussion to the proper thread, and any further off topic posts will be deleted. Again, no censoring involved, just keeping the forum tidy.

Those are just two obvious examples off the top of my head. But there are many more, you don't have to shut down free speech or censor people to be an effective moderator. And you don't have to ban people. There's more to moderation than preventing people from sharing their views.

 

It's still the same thing, but you won't find many, if any, who opposes the censorship of spam. It's one of those awesome areas where essentially everyone agrees.... the problem comes when you use the "everyone agrees" justification and you're wrong.

That's why I'm not 100% against ANY censorship, I just advocate for a soft touch because it's REALLY easy to get wrong and everyone has their biases that can lead to bad decisions.

I do think ultimately we agree though, or at a minimum we agree more than we disagree on the issue

 

You've literally never seen that.

When you include lies in an appeal to decency, it kind of kills the message.

Those who choose to lie to push an agenda is arguably the biggest problem here and with society as a whole when it comes to toxicity.

If you want better, you'll need to be better... and that applies to all of us without exception

 

I want to say I agree with you on some level but I think there is truth to what @AroundTheWorld is saying as well. There are two concepts here:
- whether you think Sengun will get a max contract
- whether you think Sengun is the right max contract for us

I agree with you that I'm not necessarily sold on building around Sengun(maybe worth it as a Robin, but I don't see him as our Batman) BUT I think @AroundTheWorld the world is right that Sengun is our best player right now and will get a max contract whether you think he deserves one or not.
While I don't necessarily love building around Sengun, as an asset I think you have to try to get maximize the value he represents as an asset and the way you do that is to sign him to a max deal and keep an eye out for trade partners while we continue to evaluate his long term fit because trading him while on a rookie deal will net minimal assets in return because of his low current contract value and salary matching rules.

Provided there isn't some regression this year for Sengun or lingering injury concerns, I think the logical thing to do is wait until this offseason to offer him a max deal(and have him sign it after all your other FA negotiations given the timing of operating as a 'capped out team' vs not), continue to try to build the best roster around him you can while evaluating his trajectory, and hope one of these guys like Amen, Cam, and Reed(and fingers crossed Jalen although I think that ship has likely sailed) turn into bigger stars and at some point Sengun might be one of the more lucrative pieces along with one of our rookie scale contract guys in a consolidation deal to get a Batman. If we find the right complement to Sengun, we chase that through other pieces on our roster but relative young up and coming all stars on their first max deals while the league is expanding via cap smoothing (so this year's 'max' looks like a bargain compared to subsequent years) are probably the easiest asset to move and Sengun is an asset any way you look at it....and who knows - maybe he adds that range and becomes a little more mobile defensively and start to live up to the Jokic comparisons in reality and not just in promise.