GiantRobot wrote:Daily News is a great example of why not all unions are all that great. Boring, old writers who can't write a good, relevant article to save their lives thump anything new as scary and wrong. Always behind the curve, never informative... basically sports news for the 50+ year old crowd who hasn't figured out the internet yet.
Some of these writers like Gerardi and Hayes have personality problems that just comes out in their stories. It is totally fair to be against the tank, but they get so worked up in their disagreement that the motives or competence of the other side has to be destroyed. The people on the other side of the argument become idiots, or morons, or cult members, or charlatans, etc..
You can be against it like John Smallwood and keep your dignity.
If two years from now Embiid is a superstar and we have another star, or even two, next to him and are winning 55+ games, they will never own up to their previous opinions. They will say that Hinkie had nothing to do with it, or that we could have done this with out losing 60+ games a year, or that they were just wrong before, but they will never admit that that the character assassination, bravado, and vitriol was not fair. They will never learn the lesson of disagreeing without being disagreeable.
Howard Eskin is a master of this. He won't ever say "I think such and such will happen" He will say "It's a lock that this will happen and any of you that disagree with me are idiots". Then if he turns out to be wrong about something he will just say something like "Ah, you get some things right and some things wrong. Nobody is perfect. I get paid to give my opinion"
These guys never learn the humility that should come to everyone as they realize that they don't know all of the answers. Never argue in bad faith with people.
You will NEVER EVER see me get in a fan's face if my team beats his team. I have had enough crushing defeats to know how that feels, and it is plain juvenile and cruel to be a sore winner.
One of the things that I really like about the Realgm boards, is that there is so much less abuse and immaturity as there was on the espn boards before. All of that stuff is relegated to the general board which I see no reason to ever visit frankly. The general discourse between fans of various teams talking to each other on the team boards is pretty darn civil.
Also, people who are vehemently anti-Hinkie can never defend what they think that we SHOULD have done differently. They just say things like, he gutted the team, he's a disgrace, look how team X was able to get good without tanking, etc... When it comes down to getting people to commit on the major decisions of the time, they are no where to be found.
What free agents should we have signed?
Should we have resigned Evan Turner, Thad Young, Spencer Hawes?
Is Jrue Holiday worth more than Noel, Saric, our 2017 first round pick, the 2015 Magic second round pick plus an indeterminate number of draft slots of difference between where we would have drafted and where we DID draft the following year? (the difference between getting worse and getting the 3rd pick verses staying better and getting the 8-12th pick)
If we shouldn't have taken Embiid 3rd, who should we have taken?
If we shouldn't have taken Saric, the 2017 first rounder, and the 2015 first rounder for our 10th pick, who should we have taken?
I want these people on the record affirmatively stating the course that they think we should have taken instead of being allowed to get away with simply hating on the course that we DID take.
