OT: WRONG AGAIN Wiretap...

[Stuckey-man]

Donnie Walsh is in search of a first-round pick in order to satisfy Denver's requirements for a Carmelo Anthony trade. The Nuggets recently told the Knicks they will need to include a pick before a deal for Anthony is possible.

Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... z10MX6G0z2

That's an utterly misrepresented version of that story...

But I'm not doing your work for you this time, you're going to have to figure out how you f****d this one up yourselves.

[Gek]

The source article says the same thing, bro.

[skanktorious SAM]

[Stuckey-man]

The source article says the same thing, bro.

[sigh] No, it doesn't.

Source article says the Nuggets are seeking at lease one first round pick in a trade.

Source article says Walsh "indicated" what he needs most to make the Knicks a title contender "is a future first-round draft pick to use in a Carmelo Anthony trade."

Those are two different facts.

Wiretap article says: " The Nuggets recently told the Knicks they will need to include a pick before a deal for Anthony is possible."

1st of all, "recently" is pure embellishment by Wiretap, as is the notion the Nuggets told the Knicks this directly.

The source article never says this, and given this is incredibly important context, if this was the case, it would have.

Source article implies the Knicks are under the impression a trade for Anthony would require a first rounder and that if he wanted to pursue a trade for Anthony, Knicks would have to get one.

Wiretap article says the Nuggets and Knicks have engaged in "recent", direct talks and that Walsh was revealing aspects of that conversation to the press.

I suppose it something of a futile gesture to advocate Wiretap getting context and facts correct when many of its readers won't recognize the difference anyway.

[K_ick_God]

The source article says the same thing, bro.

[sigh] No, it doesn't.

Source article says the Nuggets are seeking at lease one first round pick in a trade.

Source article says Walsh "indicated" what he needs most to make the Knicks a title contender "is a future first-round draft pick to use in a Carmelo Anthony trade."

Those are two different facts.

Wiretap article says: " The Nuggets recently told the Knicks they will need to include a pick before a deal for Anthony is possible."

1st of all, "recently" is pure embellishment by Wiretap, as is the notion the Nuggets told the Knicks this directly.

The source article never says this, and given this is incredibly important context, if this was the case, it would have.

Source article implies the Knicks are under the impression a trade for Anthony would require a first rounder and that if he wanted to pursue a trade for Anthony, Knicks would have to get one.

Wiretap article says the Nuggets and Knicks have engaged in "recent", direct talks and that Walsh was revealing aspects of that conversation to the press.

I suppose it something of a futile gesture to advocate Wiretap getting context and facts correct when many of its readers won't recognize the difference anyway.

Danilo Gallinari, Anthony Randolph and Wilson Chandler are three young players the Nuggets might consider, but the Nuggets recently told a Knicks official that without a first-rounder, they don't have enough assets to make a trade. Last month, there was a report Walsh was trying to trade for the Pacers' first-rounder.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/k ... z10MwAsuxL

[Stuckey-man]

Danilo Gallinari, Anthony Randolph and Wilson Chandler are three young players the Nuggets might consider, but the Nuggets recently told a Knicks official that without a first-rounder, they don't have enough assets to make a trade. Last month, there was a report Walsh was trying to trade for the Pacers' first-rounder.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/k ... z10MwAsuxL

That's a different article. Wiretap doesn't compile facts, it summarize individual stories. There are rules to both.

if they are in fact doing the former (which is entirely legitimate and in fact something I encourage, mind you), then it needs to be cited. The two articles they are joining to attempt to present a more comprehensive version of events must both be cited for readers. This is where "according to a Sept. xx article by the XXX" come in very handy.

Not saying anything you don't learn the first week of journalism 101, or should simply gather through osmosis.

Q: Did YOU write the Wiretap article?

[Gek]

[sigh]


Want me to unbunch your panties for you?

[Stuckey-man]

[sigh]


Want me to unbunch your panties for you?

With your teeth, please..

[Gek]

K.




viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1000631

[Rendezvous]

[sigh]


Want me to unbunch your panties for you?

With your teeth, please..

Put that on Youtube.

I want ta FAP.

[kyphi]

Don't pay attention to wire tap titles - read the articles.