Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
58,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
"Here's a prediction, and I know I am not exactly out very far on the limb here. But Paul Silas might be coaching the Raptors before the end of this season. I can't imagine Sam Mitchell and beleaguered general manager Rob Babcock could survive the season. If they do, it would be further testament to how little the Raptors matter in the grand scheme of the Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment enterprise. During a game at the Air Canada Centre last week, a fan was taunting Babcock with a sign that showed Babcock with devil's horns and the words "Raptor Killer." The fan yelled at Babcock throughout the game, until he was escorted out by security. On the court against the 76ers, Raptors fans were treated to a 26-point effort from Andre Iguodala, whom Babcock passed up in order to draft the great Brazilian Rafael Araujo. In the same game, Jalen Rose, whom the Raptors are paying $15 million, played seven minutes and didn't score -- ending his 551-game streak of scoring at last a point."

-Detroit News
Don't you love out of state papers covering other teams?

-Petey
 

·
Fear The Red
Joined
·
8,910 Posts
i serously doubt that sam will be fired, if he does then babs is going also. they are on the same page
 

·
duke of new york, a#1
Joined
·
16,132 Posts
Why Silas, tough? The article mentions him in passing and doesn't even attempt to explain why Silas is the most logical choice for the team.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,337 Posts
this should be it- this should be it. if people want to see what's "wrong" with our journalism landscape, just give them a copy of this.

it's like we don't have any real people reporting for real people (although i don't know we ever did). i mean, the guys in these positions seem to take the most uninformed opinion and search desperately for ways to have it justified. it's like they seriously don't deserve an opinion- how do you deserve an opinion when you don't even do the research to know how you feel on the subject?

some could call it communism, and maybe it is in some ways, but it's also common sense. people should not be offering their opinion if they don't have one yet. if you're willing to share your thoughts with others, make sure you've done the work to actually have thoughts to share. reading this stuff, like the article above, just depresses me. why does he want his readership to hear his empty "news" editorials? it's uninformed. keep that to yourself, pal- and that's assuming he'd want it for himself. i think the chances are greater that he wouldn't, that he doesn't even value his own work (at least work of this colour).

and really, somewhat off-topic here, but i'm starting to find that readers are becoming ignorant of these irresponsible journalists. sure, you still find the cheap fan jumping to steven a smith's side at draft-time (or even peter vecsey's) and echoing his opinion until he/she realizes how worthless it was in the first place, but i'm finding most fans are beginning to just tune out. most fans are starting to assume that the news/opinions broadcast from media outlets are indeed uninformed and/or misinformed and, if i had to guess, i'd probably think that 1 of 2 things would inevitably happen:

1) the writers will eventually take responsibility for their own thoughts- they will begin taking them seriously and won't have such a strong tendency to pass tabloids. i think that the resultant culture could produce some great minds in the new era, people who would understand that the target audience for their work would be like-minded "real people"... not superficial characters from a movie screen;

or/and

2) the people, the readers, will turn away completely. they'll find new ways to get their information, or meaningful viewpoints, from people they can trust and understand.

either way, i don't think it's going to remain in the state in which it sits currently. i don't know of many people who even read newspapers in the modern age, and something's got to give. i think the new generation will probably be more ambitious to use newspapers for their communication potential, and not for their tabloid fantasies and/or entertainment food. i think the human mind wants to grow and become stronger, collectively, and i think the people will eventually pursue that outcome.

the length of time we still have for articles like the abovementioned is more than just limited: i think it's nearly dead.

peace
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,201 Posts
ballocks said:
this should be it- this should be it. if people want to see what's "wrong" with our journalism landscape, just give them a copy of this.

it's like we don't have any real people reporting for real people (although i don't know we ever did). i mean, the guys in these positions seem to take the most uninformed opinion and search desperately for ways to have it justified. it's like they seriously don't deserve an opinion- how do you deserve an opinion when you don't even do the research to know how you feel on the subject?

some could call it communism, and maybe it is in some ways, but it's also common sense. people should not be offering their opinion if they don't have one yet. if you're willing to share your thoughts with others, make sure you've done the work to actually have thoughts to share. reading this stuff, like the article above, just depresses me. why does he want his readership to hear his empty "news" editorials? it's uninformed. keep that to yourself, pal- and that's assuming he'd want it for himself. i think the chances are greater that he wouldn't, that he doesn't even value his own work (at least work of this colour).

and really, somewhat off-topic here, but i'm starting to find that readers are becoming ignorant of these irresponsible journalists. sure, you still find the cheap fan jumping to steven a smith's side at draft-time (or even peter vecsey's) and echoing his opinion until he/she realizes how worthless it was in the first place, but i'm finding most fans are beginning to just tune out. most fans are starting to assume that the news/opinions broadcast from media outlets are indeed uninformed and/or misinformed and, if i had to guess, i'd probably think that 1 of 2 things would inevitably happen:

1) the writers will eventually take responsibility for their own thoughts- they will begin taking them seriously and won't have such a strong tendency to pass tabloids. i think that the resultant culture could produce some great minds in the new era, people who would understand that the target audience for their work would be like-minded "real people"... not superficial characters from a movie screen;

or/and

2) the people, the readers, will turn away completely. they'll find new ways to get their information, or meaningful viewpoints, from people they can trust and understand.

either way, i don't think it's going to remain in the state in which it sits currently. i don't know of many people who even read newspapers in the modern age, and something's got to give. i think the new generation will probably be more ambitious to use newspapers for their communication potential, and not for their tabloid fantasies and/or entertainment food. i think the human mind wants to grow and become stronger, collectively, and i think the people will eventually pursue that outcome.

the length of time we still have for articles like the abovementioned is more than just limited: i think it's nearly dead.

peace
you are totally out to lunch, you have no idea what journalism is, and I would suggest you doing some research before you bash a industry you know nothing about.
-peace
 

·
duke of new york, a#1
Joined
·
16,132 Posts
shookem said:
you are totally out to lunch, you have no idea what journalism is, and I would suggest you doing some research before you bash a industry you know nothing about.
-peace
That's a little harsh, shookem.

You've defended these guys quite a bit. I'm assuming that you're an aspiring journalist because otherwise I don't know where you get off telling ballocks he's off base.

Just because you want to be a journalist doesn't mean you can't be better than these hacks. And I do mean hacks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,636 Posts
Petey said:
Don't you love out of state papers covering other teams?

-Petey
More like out of country papers... It's quite funny reading what all these uninformed journalists talk about. It's all entertainment.

I don't know why they are even mentionning Jalen Rose's contract in that article. Babcock never acquired him, Grunwald did.
 

·
Chillin'
Joined
·
20,141 Posts
speedythief said:
That's a little harsh, shookem.

You've defended these guys quite a bit. I'm assuming that you're an aspiring journalist because otherwise I don't know where you get off telling ballocks he's off base.

Just because you want to be a journalist doesn't mean you can't be better than these hacks. And I do mean hacks.
Exactly. By respecting the "work" these guys do, we're just adding fuel to their fire. Hey, I'm an aspiring musician, but I don't respect a dude like 50 Cent... just because I'd like to hold the same professional title as him, doesn't mean I have to like what he does.

There are good journalists out there... but that number is dwarfed by the amount of bad ones. Not all journalism is good journalism, and frankly, in today's sports media, most journalism is bad journalism. Take the good, throw away the bad... don't stick up for all of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,201 Posts
speedythief said:
That's a little harsh, shookem.

You've defended these guys quite a bit. I'm assuming that you're an aspiring journalist because otherwise I don't know where you get off telling ballocks he's off base.

Just because you want to be a journalist doesn't mean you can't be better than these hacks. And I do mean hacks.
You're right, I was a little harsh, and am an aspiring journalist....
what pisses me off is when people try to blanket their opinion across a very vast field. bullocks contention is with SPORTS JOURNALISM!!!! .....let me let you guys in on a little secret.....sports journalists are not the smartest of journalist....if you were an editor of a major newspaper, who would you assign to cover the NBA beat? * Would you choose the brillant writer who just turned in a piece exposing corruption, or the guy who can barely string a sentance together.
the fact is the best journalist write on the biggest issues, and sports, particullary in Canada, is not a big issue.
yes the industry has it's problems, much like any other. Are all members of the police racist? Are all lawyers bad people? No, but bad news stays with people longer then good news.
If a journalist does a bad job it's easy to see, but have you noticed the hundreds of well writen articles you've probably read?
Journalism has brought down presidents and saved lives....sports journalism is a different animal....sports opinion pieces, or columns or completely different.
Take our city, look at one paper, let's say the nations largest....we all know a certain column writer that most people don't like, but that's only a small part of journalism. what about the other guy (Doug Smith), who really does, call a spade a spade, and in my opinion does a great job of covering a bad team.
Journalism is a good thing, without it we'd be counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drum....I've studied the subject for a couple of years now, and if anyone needs me to explain the fourth and fifth estates further, I will.
I'll end by saying this: Did you read the Gomery report? No, well untill you are that is why there will always be journalists, to accuratly, the best we can report on what is out there, possibly in places that the average person would not have access to.
-peace

*example, I just wrote a feature story outlining the steps young women can take to prevent being sexually assualted....is anyone going to tell me there's no use in that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
blowuptheraptors said:
Learn from the Lenny Wilkens debacle, say no to Silas.
I have gotten over the novelty of ridding ourselves of Mitchell and somewhat cooled on the Silas idea, But I still don't understand the Lenny comparison.

Pls explain how the two are at all similar
 

·
Chillin'
Joined
·
20,141 Posts
shookem - it's easy to sell yourself out and write bad news because that's what people want to read. Just like it's easy for a dude like 50 to sell himself out and make low quality music because that's what people want to hear.

Now whether that really portrays the profession... is up to debate. But I'd find it very, VERY hard for someone to continually write solely for the satisfaction of others and stay true to themselves. Just like I'd find it very hard for a musician to write and play solely for the satisfaction of others and stay true to themselves.

Am I calling the majority of journalists sell-outs? Yeah, maybe I am. But this doesn't even only go for Toronto or Canadian journalists. Last time I checked, Doug Smith is no worse or better than Sam Smith, Peter Vescey, or Steven A. Don't play the game just to be another player.... play the game to win....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,201 Posts
Budweiser_Boy said:
Exactly. By respecting the "work" these guys do, we're just adding fuel to their fire. Hey, I'm an aspiring musician, but I don't respect a dude like 50 Cent... just because I'd like to hold the same professional title as him, doesn't mean I have to like what he does.

There are good journalists out there... but that number is dwarfed by the amount of bad ones. Not all journalism is good journalism, and frankly, in today's sports media, most journalism is bad journalism. Take the good, throw away the bad... don't stick up for all of it.
you are exactly right on, Bud Boi.
If Bully came out and said "some sports journalism is bad"...fine nothing wrong with that, but he tried to make it seem like everything written in a paper is bad, and that's not true.

You make it similiar to music, cool. let's say he said "Music is stupid and the act of creating it for consumption is dumb" you'd probably take offence to that (if you are passionate about what you do)
remember he didn't say "musicians like 50 cents are bad" he said "all musicians are bad"
just so we are all on the same page.
 

·
Chillin'
Joined
·
20,141 Posts
shookem said:
you are exactly right on, Bud Boi.
If Bully came out and said "some sports journalism is bad"...fine nothing wrong with that, but he tried to make it seem like everything written in a paper is bad, and that's not true.

You make it similiar to music, cool. let's say he said "Music is stupid and the act of creating it for consumption is dumb" you'd probably take offence to that (if you are passionate about what you do)
remember he didn't say "musicians like 50 cents are bad" he said "all musicians are bad"
just so we are all on the same page.
To be fair, I think both of you weren't clear enough... ballocks said simply these journalists... whether that means he's calling out sports journalists, or bad journalists, wasn't really truly stated. While his original comments did come off as pretty abrasive - and don't get me wrong, I understand why you'd come back the way you did - I think a response like you just gave me would have been a better way to address it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,201 Posts
Budweiser_Boy said:
To be fair, I think both of you weren't clear enough... ballocks said simply these journalists... whether that means he's calling out sports journalists, or bad journalists, wasn't really truly stated. While his original comments did come off as pretty abrasive - and don't get me wrong, I understand why you'd come back the way you did - I think a response like you just gave me would have been a better way to address it.
true dat, my mind's been somewhere else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
My signature is exactly about this crap.

Talk, talk... Nothing but talk.
Pure bull****.

Is seems that they are suggesting to replace Mitchell, and Silas is their default.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,337 Posts
shookem said:
you are totally out to lunch, you have no idea what journalism is, and I would suggest you doing some research before you bash a industry you know nothing about.
-peace
i dunno, i think some of what i wrote was pulled out of context- in order to possibly have it interpreted in the way you wanted to have it interpreted, and that's a bigger problem- but if you find it so offensive, i'm guessing you need to deal with it. if you're an aspiring writer, you can still be a good one, i never stated that "all journalists were scum" or summat. give me a break. but you know this already.

look at the criticism you gave to me, though: read it. read it word for word. then tell me where you learned that i "have no idea what journalism is" and "bash an industry (i) know nothing about". this is the point: you had/have an opinion of me first, and then went to these lengths to have it confirmed. that's backwards- and we know that. we all do it. but i wish journalists in the bigger picture could understand their responsibility to the people, in order prevent themselves from doing it on the job, because the people (whether i like it or not) do still turn to the opinions brought forth by the media to build their own.

really, i'm glad that my post appears to have had some kind of an effect on you- for whatever the reason. it tells me that you probably have your eye on this issue already. if i had to guess, i'd say that you reacted in the way that you did out of basic denial because, really, how could you/anyone justify the virgin opinion/editorial thought posted in the detroit news? that's almost painful to read, imo, i think it's the product of misinformation and myopia, and i think it has an adverse effect on our society in the long-run. i think you'd agree.

if you're a journalist and want to keep your occupation/"industry" alive for many more generations, maybe it'd be a good idea to not attack me for reacting to what i see. instead, maybe it'd be a better idea to be proactive, be responsible, and become an brotherhood that- from the best writers to its worst- isn't wholly swallowed by the tabloids and cheap garbage.

"jalen rose, whom the raptors are paying $15 million, played seven minutes and didn't score- ending his 551-game streak of scoring at least a point" ... makes me want to vomit. i'd put it past anyone to read this without feeling compelled to see their lunch again. :)

peace
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,865 Posts
Flush said:
I have gotten over the novelty of ridding ourselves of Mitchell and somewhat cooled on the Silas idea, But I still don't understand the Lenny comparison.

Pls explain how the two are at all similar
Old, past their time, and don't like kids unless named Lebron in Silas' case. This is not a veteran team.

Sam is doing OK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
blowuptheraptors said:
Old, past their time, and don't like kids unless named Lebron in Silas' case. This is not a veteran team.

Sam is doing OK.
I've never heard that Silas prefers veterans over youth, if that is the case then you are absolutely right he isn't the coach for this team. However I couldn't imagine that he would put himself in a rebuilding situation.

I disagree that Sam is doing ok. I hate his substitutions, emotional outbursts and lack of x's and o's. We need a patient coach right now. Not someone that will pull our only legitimate prospect at centre after every mistake. Not someone that will smash his clipboard out of frustration.

We have a young team that, regardless of the coach, will end up in the lottery baring some sort of miracle. We need someone that will help our young players build confidence. I don't think sam mitchell is that guy.

Is paul silas? I don't know that he would be the long term solution, but I am very tempted by addition by subtraction at this point. We are at a crucial stage with players like bosh, hoffa and villa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,865 Posts
I agree that Sam is not ideal.

But it could be worse. The rooks could be seeing less time. I want more and better subs too, but it could be worse.

He sat the vets on a few occasions. I'll give him that.

I still want more Jose and Joey.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top