SAEN confirms Aldridge is on the trading block.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You're wrong in both sentences.

1. In that article she shared in-depth information and quotes from R.C himself --- but of course she didn't get it from R.C herself right?

2. When Jabari Young first came out with the article, what I quoted is all of what he said in the sentence. Go read his Twitter timeline, he made an update a few hours later and added the sentence after what I quoted.

Nice try again.

I asked for quotes. Not your assertions.

[Chinook]

You're wrong in both sentences.

1. In that article she shared in-depth information and quotes from R.C himself --- but of course she didn't get it from R.C herself right?

2. When Jabari Young first came out with the article, what I quoted is all of what he said in the sentence. Go read his Twitter timeline, he made an update a few hours later and added the sentence after what I quoted.

Nice try again.

Fuzzy is being a little harsh for sure. But you did run with this when multiple posters warned you that you were jumping the gun. The primary reason for that is that you conflated being willing to trade someone with having that person on the block. And that just continued what has likely been a string of misinterpretations starting with the Lowe prediction.

It's like people mistaking the warmth at the bottom of a compost heap for evidence of a fire. It's really just the ac ulation of a bunch of speculation feeding off itself.

[MaNu4Tres]

Fuzzy is being a little harsh for sure. But you did run with this when multiple posters warned you that you were jumping the gun. The primary reason for that is that you conflated being willing to trade someone with having that person on the block. And that just continued what has likely been a string of misinterpretations starting with the Lowe prediction.

I didn't jump the gun, I simply posted what Jabari posted.

Jabari jumped the gun, and went back and updated the information.

Now I'm just saying you can't totally discredit Jackie.. and apparently I'm wrong for having that opinion instead of the opinion that Ainge and Jackie teammed up to sabotage the Spurs' and Aldridge.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Fuzzy is being a little harsh for sure. But you did run with this when multiple posters warned you that you were jumping the gun. The primary reason for that is that you conflated being willing to trade someone with having that person on the block. And that just continued what has likely been a string of misinterpretations starting with the Lowe prediction.

It's like people mistaking the warmth at the bottom of a compost heap for evidence of a fire. It's really just the ac ulation of a bunch of speculation feeding off itself.

Then there is the tabloid nature of ESPN as he willfully parrots from the echo chamber.

Further this is the unupdated article posted on the 18th:

http://m.mysanantonio.com/sports/spu...re-9981115.php

This is the updated article:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...re-9981115.php

They both differ from the OP's quote.

[Hoops Czar]

Yes it does. It doesn't dismiss them altogether, but it does call the whole thing into question. Folks outside the Spurs organization would only know because of specific events and would likely have agendas.

Really? What would be Jackie's motivation behind creating a fic ious fluff piece centering around the Spurs second best player all while covering another basketball team in an entirely different conference? Just because Jackie's source doesn't have ties to the Spurs organization doesn't mean source of Jackie's source doesn't. I'm not dismissing it but, it's out of character for MacMullan to just make stuff up.

[MaNu4Tres]

Then there is the tabloid nature of ESPN as he willfully parrots from the echo chamber.

Further this is the unupdated article posted on the 18th:

http://m.mysanantonio.com/sports/spu...re-9981115.php

This is the updated article:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...re-9981115.php

They both differ from the OP's quote.

It was updated. When he first came out with the article, what I quoted is all that was written in the paragraph.

Whenever he started getting a lot of feedback, he updated the very first one quickly to add that last sentence then came back and re-wrote the whole article.

I'm not lying or one to troll. Anyone who first read it can attest to it. Whether you believe me or not, that's not my problem.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It was updated. When he first came out with the article, what I quoted is all that was written in the paragraph.

Whenever he started getting a lot of feedback, he updated the very first one quickly to add that last sentence then came back and re-wrote the whole article.

I'm not lying or one to troll. Anyone who first read it can attest to it. Whether you believe me or not, that's not my problem.

News sites post UPDATED on the dateline when they are updated. I have shown where mysa does this as well.

With trade rumors surfacing, LaMarcus Aldridge's future with Spurs blurry
By Jabari Young Updated 12:20 pm, Wednesday, October 19, 2016

I just showed the unupdated, original article too and he indeed did edit it. He just didn't alter the portion you have in your OP which remains different.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Really? What would be Jackie's motivation behind creating a fic ious fluff piece centering around the Spurs second best player all while covering another basketball team in an entirely different conference? Just because Jackie's source doesn't have ties to the Spurs organization doesn't mean source of Jackie's source doesn't. I'm not dismissing it but, it's out of character for MacMullan to just make stuff up.

Creating controversy gets clicks. It's what tabloids do. This shouldn't be hard.

[MaNu4Tres]

News sites post UPDATED on the dateline when they are updated. I have shown where mysa does this as well. I just showed the original and the updated article and he indeed did update it. He just didn't update the portion you have in your OP which remains different.

Like I said, when he first wrote the article he didn't have any other sentence written after what I quoted. That's why when you read the thread, nobody ever pointed out that I "misquoted". He made an edit to the original to add that sentence before he made re-wrote the updated article.
So yes, the link of the original has the content with the first edit.

Keep reaching man.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Like I said, when he first wrote the article he didn't have any other sentence written after what I quoted. That's why when you read the thread, nobody never pointed out that I "misquoted". He made an edit to the original to add that sentence before he made re-wrote the updated article.

Keep reaching man.

I'll let our audience decide for themselves. And actually alpha_haze and others pointed out portions that you left out too. Shall we revisit that too?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I repeat, those within the Spurs refuted the suggestion. Nothing here, of course the Spurs would trade LMA for the right package.

This post also has the correct quote quoted in it as well.

[dabom]

Manutres is correct on all points of the timeline.

[tonight...you]

Manutres is correct on all points of the timeline.

What about the point of MacMullen not making anything up?

[MaNu4Tres]

I'll let our audience decide for themselves. And actually alpha_haze and others pointed out portions that you left out too. Shall we revisit that too?

You wanted me to quote the whole article? I only posted what Jabari first reported a few minutes after what he first reported. I have no agenda.

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish but it's all based on your assumptions -- which are wrong.

[dabom]

Anyone else saying otherwise wasn't there from the first second of the post.

[coachmac87]

The rumors are real. But nothing is in the works. This will only catch fire again around the trade deadline...let's proceed

[dabom]

What about the point of MacMullen not making anything up?

I think people keep confusing what was originally posted and if anyone agrees with the original source.

[MaNu4Tres]

This post also has the correct quote quoted in it as well.

That was after Jabaris' edit. Like I said, he made an edit 30 minutes to an hour after he first published the article. I posted the OP minutes after he posted it on twitter.

[MaNu4Tres]

Manutres is correct on all points of the timeline.

Thank you dabom.

[tonight...you]

I think people keep confusing what was originally posted and if anyone agrees with the original source.

That may be true, but for many multiple posts throughout this thread has been tres defending her honor to bouy his points. How is that working out for you?

[MaNu4Tres]

That may be true, but for many multiple posts throughout this thread has been tres defending her honor to bouy his points. How is that working out for you?

I'm simply saying you can't discredit her because of her ties and her credibility. I have no agenda. I'm simply being objective.'

And this thread was started because of Jabari saying " SAEN has been informed Spurs are looking to trade Aldridge......". It confirmed and backed up what Jackie was saying coming from Jabari and the SAEN by saying SAEN was informed.

This thread initially had nothing to do with Jackie. That's why I posted what Jabari had initially quoted in his original piece.

[tonight...you]

I'm simply saying you can't discredit her because of her ties and her credibility. I have no agenda. I'm simply being objective.

Well... now she can be discredited. Otherwise why would she be calling the Spurs to apologize?

[MaNu4Tres]

Well... now she can be discredited. Otherwise why would she be calling the Spurs to apologize?

So Joe Reinagel says. The guy always breaking news, right?

That may be true, but there's no way to know the truth of that either.

[tonight...you]

So Joe Reinagel says. The guy always breaking news, right?

That may be true, but there's no way to know the truth of that either.

You calling him a liar on her calling the Spurs to apologize? He has a job to protect too. Someone's definitely lying. I'll await her denial on this, should it ever even come up...

[MaNu4Tres]

You calling him a liar on her calling the Spurs to apologize? He has a job to protect too. Someone's definitely lying. I'll await her denial on this, should it ever even come up...

I'm not calling him a liar, but if I'm in the Spurs shoes, I'd say and do anything possible to squash these rumors for the sake of my team.

You don't think there's any possibility that Spurs' brass would lie and say whatever possible to destroy these rumors to start the season?

You think they'd want to keep these rumors around the team to start the year?

You think they'd admit guilt and ruin their lockeroom and any potential trade value with Aldridge?

You don't think there's any possibility the Spurs would lie to local reporters to get them to shut down these rumors down?

Common sense people. Whether there's truth behind the rumors or not, Spurs would never admit it and would probably do everything in their power to squash the rumors. It's common sense.

I could have told you myself they'd squash these rumors -- even if there was some truth behind them. IF there was truth -- I'm not saying there is.

Some people have trouble understanding the thoughts of objective minded people.