Miscellaneous Discussion Thread
ba-dum tss!
one of them is an attack helicopter
Quote: RSExcuse my French but what in the heck does "BONUS" mean when looking at live basketball (NBA) scores mean? I'm hecka teed off.
I like to google basketball bonus to get https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-bonus-mean-that-is-shown-underneath-the-scores-in-basketball .
Quote: RSExcuse my French but what in the heck does "BONUS" mean when looking at live basketball (NBA) scores mean? I'm hecka teed off.
Beginning with the 5th team foul each quarter , any foul other than an offensive foul results in two free throws. That’s known as being in the bonus. Also , the second foul in the last two minutes puts you in the bonus regardless of total number of fouls in the quarter
Quote: RSExcuse my French but what in the heck does "BONUS" mean when looking at live basketball (NBA) scores mean? I'm hecka teed off.
Not sure what you know and what you don't. So.
Free throw from the line made = 1 pt.
Shot made from the field inside the arc = 2 pts.
Shot made from the field outside the arc= 3 pts.
Foul on someone in the act of shooting, if they miss their shot, they get the number of free throw attempts equal to what they would have made without interference (2 or 3 shots).
Foul someone shooting who makes his shot anyway, the shooter gets that score and one additional free throw.
Foul someone NOT in the act of shooting, one of 2 things will happen. Either the fouled players team will get to retain possession of the ball and inbound it again, or:
The person who was fouled will get a 1 and 1 free throw attempt. If he makes the first one, he will get another attempt. If he misses the first one, they rebound for the ball and he doesn't get that second attempt.
So.
Every player gets 6 fouls in the NBA, then they have to leave the game permanently. But fouls are added up for each team as well.
So, when a team's fouls add up to what Michael said above, the other team goes into bonus until the end of the half or game.
What changes is, all fouls in the bonus act like shooting fouls, where you always attempt 2 free throws, whether you make the first one or not. No more 1 and 1, no more just inbounding. The made field shots and 3 pt shot foul rules continue.
Probably TMI.
Edit: Michael says bonus by quarter, I said by half. I haven't watched much NBA lately, so I'm guessing they changed that rule and he's correct.. I think it's still by half in college ball.
Gorging without any exercise sets a bad example until you die young.Quote: GWAEHaha my 5 year old just told me I should exercise so I won't be fat.
The Earth as a whole is neither flat nor round, yet both.Quote: onenickelmiracleYou'd think there would be something mildly convincing looking up flat Earth theories, but haven't seen anything yet.
I guess that adds one more reason as to why I can't stand basketball. It makes no damn sense, boring as hell to watch, and nothing ever interesting happens. Like ooooh, wow, look, he just stole the ball, ran down the court, and did a slam dunk for 2 points! WOOOWWWWW!!!! Those 2 points sure add up a lot, considering the game is going to end up being something like 109 to 110 with 9 seconds to go at the end of the game...and those last 9 seconds will take 10 hours to play because they just keep doing fouls and time outs and somehow I'm gonna get screwed on my bet even though my team was just up by 10 points with like 30 seconds left.
At least in soccer when they score a goal it's like -- oh yeah, so now we know the game is either going to end in a 1-0 win for them or in a 1-1 tie. In hockey, a score actually matters because it's not 110 to 112 at the end of the game. In baseball a score matters because well it's not like a billion points to a billion points. In football stuff is interesting because they can do athletic plays and do cool stuff.
In basketball? NOPE. Nothing! Best play of the game is some guy stealing the ball from another guy, running down the court, and scoring 2 points (and those 2 points pretty much don't matter at all).
Quote: RSIn football stuff is interesting because they can do athletic plays and do cool stuff.In basketball? NOPE. Nothing.
you really can't be serious can you in saying basketball players don't make athletic plays are you? if you are serious then you really don't know basketball.
in soccer, IMHO, all the ties, or if you prefer, draws SUCK bigtime. in a mid-season game are you going jump up and down thrilled by a draw?
Quote: onenickelmiracleYou'd think there would be something mildly convincing looking up flat Earth theories, but haven't seen anything yet.
Idk what it's called, but basically the theory is something like this ... and as far as I know, it's legit.
With the premise the earth is round, you should be able to measure the curvature of the earth. Thus, the further away an object is, the less of the object you should be able to see. Imagine you're a small bug on a basketball. You shouldn't be able to see another bug on the basketball if it's 1 inch away from you, since the ball curves away from you. In order to see the other bug, you'd have to be able to look directly through the ball.
Ignore all the nonsense on the right. Just a random picture I finna hit up the googs.
Imagine you're at position A and your friend is at position E. You shouldn't be able to see all of your friend at E, you should only be able to see his knees and up, or his waist and up. If you look at positions E and D, you'll notice if you're at position E, you wouldn't be able to see D, since the only way to see him is to look directly through that line.
Or pretend you're at position B. Looking "straight forward" your view would either go toward F or G. In order to see the person at position C, he's going to have to be pretty tall, and much of him you won't even see, since you can't see anything above that F-G line (or if turned upside down, you wouldn't be able to see anything below that line, from the other perspective).
/Geometry-of-a-Circle-589cbe2c5f9b58819c160fc7.jpg)
Whatever I just wrote probably doesn't make sense.
But I remember reading something about this and it was kinda interesting. I don't know if the math was legit, but from what I could tell, the math seemed legit. For instance, you'd want to calculate the distance between "C" and "G", from the image above, where the distance between "B" and "C" are 5 arc-miles (or however far away). The number you come up with is the, essentially, stuff you shouldn't be able to see.
I'm sure someone else can explain this better. Actually, I think I posted a link or a video about this in this very thread a while back. i'll post it if i can find it yolo capitalizer letters
edit: something else that's kind of interesting in a way (BTW i don't believe the earth is flat)....is that the disproof of a flat earth uses round-earth science. So IF the earth actually is flat, then what we currently "know" or "think" about gravity wouldn't be true, and those premises wouldn't be able to be used to disprove a flat earth. It "begs the question", in a way. "That band is great because they make good music. They make good music because they're a great band."
Quote: lilredroosteryou really can't be serious can you in saying basketball players don't make athletic plays are you? if you are serious then you really don't know basketball.
in soccer, IMHO, all the ties, or if you prefer, draws SUCK bigtime. in a mid-season game are you going jump up and down thrilled by a draw?
I can't stand soccer, but I can appreciate that when they score it actually means something and it's significant to the game's outcome (even though 99% of games probably end in a tie).
I'm not saying there aren't athletic plays in basketball. I'm just saying the scoring of points is way overhyped. Scoring 2 points in basketball, over the course of a game, isn't game changing. It accounts for ~2% of the team's total points. Whoop-de-doo.
Of American major sports,* NBA players are usually the most athletic. (Possible exception: wide receivers/corners, but they still get at least 30 seconds' rest on each down, and only play 1/2 the time). They also, by far, wear the least amount of protection, but they have more rough contact than anyone except football. Even hockey IMO is less, partly because the players are sliding and that takes some of the power out of most impacts. (Face will tell you different, i bet.) And they're BIG. Guys 250+ pounds slamming into each other have a lot of mass.
*Soccer is pretty equivalent athleticism and requires more endurance with a longer game, and about the same amount of protection, but far less rough contact is allowed. It's also not a major sport, and they play a lot less games per season.
If you want to love basketball, start watching NCAA college games, especially ACC and Big East conference teams. It's a beautiful balance between teamwork and individual skill.
NBA games are mostly a slam fest among thugs and a dunk contest, at least these days. Big exception is Golden State Warriors, who play amazing team ball and have 2 or 3 of the most gifted players of their generation. Watch their games, even if you don't watch otherwise.
But NBA players go immediately from offense to defense, are constantly running, jumping, and play the longest game at 60 minutes (4Q). I played for several years, high school and college, and it's easily the hardest sport I played, just for how taxing it is.
Quote: beachbumbabsNBA games are mostly a slam fest among thugs
you are one of those responsible for moderating this forum and you are calling NBA players thugs.
pathetic
Quote: lilredroosteryou are one of those responsible for moderating this forum and you are calling NBA players thugs.
pathetic
Not at all. Its descriptive of a style of play contrasting athletic skill and maneuvering versus just brute force dumping of the ball thru the hoop.
Quote: beachbumbabs
NBA games are mostly a slam fest among thugs and a dunk contest, at least these days.
Babs! This is such an ignorant comment, I don't know where to start! I play basketball at a pretty high level for an old anesthesiologist. I do know what I'm talking about here. Next time you watch a game, just watch the defense. The intense teamwork needed to 'rotate' properly, to 'defend the 3 point line', to properly box out, to be close enough to your man not to have a defensive 3 second violation but still able to help out a teammate, to fill a passing lane, to take a charge but not be in the restricted area, to know when to commit to a double team, I could go on and on.....
Please explain what you mean by thugs? Athletic black men?
Quote: FleaStiffNot at all. Its descriptive of a style of play contrasting athletic skill and maneuvering versus just brute force dumping of the ball thru the hoop.
sorry buddy, but you don't know very much about basketball. dunking only occasionally involves brute force. it more often requires the skill to get open enough to begin your jump and of course, jumping ability. there are sports that feature brute force much, much more than basketball and you are pretending that you don't know the connotations of using that word in reference to NBA players. you're not fooling anybody.
Ha! Very good!Quote: RSIt "begs the question", in a way. "That band is great because they make good music. They make good music because they're a great band."
The thing is, do you really believe that an example where "you shouldnt be able to see" certain objects is not debunkable? "The example is compelling because it is a great example" pretty much is where they put you.
To follow everything to its logical conclusion, you have to explain away how it is possible to circumnavigate the earth, explain away that no one has seen the edge of the earth, etc., things that started showing the truth centuries ago. Of course these guys do "go there" and if you can buy all that you have to be smoking something.
At Diversity Tomorrow there is a thread where we discussed some of this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF5E4bzEqm8
There is no local market, e.g. craigslist, for our perfectly good older TV, and Goodwill said they'd take it if I delivered it to them (too heavy).
So I paid a modest fee to the seller (Video Only) to haul it away for scrap; I understand some of the materials used to mfr. it have some value when recycled.
Anyway, it made me feel odd, borderline unhappy, to throw away a perfectly sound TV which cost a couple grand and still worked like new.
But the new set is so much better I just couldn't justify not upgrading.
Technology marches on.
I
Quote: RSIdk what it's called, but basically the theory is something like this ... and as far as I know, it's legit.
With the premise the earth is round, you should be able to measure the curvature of the earth. Thus, the further away an object is, the less of the object you should be able to see. Imagine you're a small bug on a basketball. You shouldn't be able to see another bug on the basketball if it's 1 inch away from you, since the ball curves away from you. In order to see the other bug, you'd have to be able to look directly through the ball.
Ignore all the nonsense on the right. Just a random picture I finna hit up the googs.
Imagine you're at position A and your friend is at position E. You shouldn't be able to see all of your friend at E, you should only be able to see his knees and up, or his waist and up. If you look at positions E and D, you'll notice if you're at position E, you wouldn't be able to see D, since the only way to see him is to look directly through that line.
Or pretend you're at position B. Looking "straight forward" your view would either go toward F or G. In order to see the person at position C, he's going to have to be pretty tall, and much of him you won't even see, since you can't see anything above that F-G line (or if turned upside down, you wouldn't be able to see anything below that line, from the other perspective).
Whatever I just wrote probably doesn't make sense.
But I remember reading something about this and it was kinda interesting. I don't know if the math was legit, but from what I could tell, the math seemed legit. For instance, you'd want to calculate the distance between "C" and "G", from the image above, where the distance between "B" and "C" are 5 arc-miles (or however far away). The number you come up with is the, essentially, stuff you shouldn't be able to see.
I'm sure someone else can explain this better. Actually, I think I posted a link or a video about this in this very thread a while back. i'll post it if i can find it yolo capitalizer letters
edit: something else that's kind of interesting in a way (BTW i don't believe the earth is flat)....is that the disproof of a flat earth uses round-earth science. So IF the earth actually is flat, then what we currently "know" or "think" about gravity wouldn't be true, and those premises wouldn't be able to be used to disprove a flat earth. It "begs the question", in a way. "That band is great because they make good music. They make good music because they're a great band."
The concept of flat earth doesn't take any belief. No one's ever seen a curved horizon. The globe spinning and zooming faster than the speed of sound requires faith.
"Imagine that everything you see, feel and hear in three dimensions (and your perception of time) in fact emanates from a flat two-dimensional field."Quote: odiousgambitOf course these guys do "go there" and if you can buy all that you have to be smoking something.
http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/30/our-entire-universe-is-an-illusion-and-reality-is-actually-a-2d-hologram-say-scientists-6415724/
But if they got too close to the edge, they might fall off! Safety first! :)Quote: TigerWuFlat Earth could easily be proven by flat Earthers just going to the edge of the Earth but for some reason none of them want to do that.
If the world were flat, I'd like to buy some property on the edge to build a summer house!
You cant fall off, there is an Ice wall.Quote: JoemanBut if they got too close to the edge, they might fall off! Safety first! :)
If the world were flat, I'd like to but some property on the edge to build a summer house!
Quote: AxelWolfYou cant fall off, there is an Ice wall.
This is actually their serious theory belief. They say it is Antarctica and Antarctica is not a continent but an ice wall that surrounds the flat earth.
[they don't work with such things as theories]
Quote: beachbumbabsRe: basketball.
Of American major sports,* NBA players are usually the most athletic. (Possible exception: wide receivers/corners, but they still get at least 30 seconds' rest on each down, and only play 1/2 the time). They also, by far, wear the least amount of protection, but they have more rough contact than anyone except football. Even hockey IMO is less, partly because the players are sliding and that takes some of the power out of most impacts. (Face will tell you different, i bet.) And they're BIG. Guys 250+ pounds slamming into each other have a lot of mass.
*Soccer is pretty equivalent athleticism and requires more endurance with a longer game, and about the same amount of protection, but far less rough contact is allowed. It's also not a major sport, and they play a lot less games per season.
If you want to love basketball, start watching NCAA college games, especially ACC and Big East conference teams. It's a beautiful balance between teamwork and individual skill.
NBA games are mostly a slam fest among thugs and a dunk contest, at least these days. Big exception is Golden State Warriors, who play amazing team ball and have 2 or 3 of the most gifted players of their generation. Watch their games, even if you don't watch otherwise.
But NBA players go immediately from offense to defense, are constantly running, jumping, and play the longest game at 60 minutes (4Q). I played for several years, high school and college, and it's easily the hardest sport I played, just for how taxing it is.
Someone say hockey? =)
I'll say hox is less than foosball, sure, in a way. Has nothing to do with size, or the fact that those with the ball are often much smaller than those trying to take it. It's the resistance. Foosball and hockey are pretty identical when approaching a hit. Your goal is angles and deflection, to prevent as much of the opponents energy from entering you as possible. But in hockey, that's it. You deflect and then you're done. In foosball, deflection is just the beginning. Once hit, you've then got a giant rabid ape (or two or nine) trying to twist you any which way possible to overpower your balance, and likely drive you into the dirt. Add in no blocking and no out of bounds and we spend a good deal of our time simply floating around folks lithely. It's just that when pain is intended, it's 2 guys hitting each other at a combined 60mph. That particular part is worst of any sport, but (fortunately for me) it doesn't happen as often.
As for b-ball, I'm struggling with trying to believe it's a subject worthy of discussion. I'll give ya the cardio aspect. It's as bad as soccer in that regard. But seeing grown men being carted off in tears for cramps is...well, also as bad as soccer. I not only "get" but agree with SOOPOO about "the dance"; the defensive aspect is the only thing that kept me on the court. There is a sort of beauty, I can recognize the skill, all that jazz. But... frankly it's just not violent enough. Trying to put a ball in a hoop that you can reach without jumping and no one's allowed to touch you while you do it? That's not sport. That's recess.
Stock car racing is harder, physically, than basketball. Plus there's fire!
Quote: MrVWe decided to buy a smart TV after owning and enjoying a rear projection TV bought new in 2004.
There is no local market, e.g. craigslist, for our perfectly good older TV, and Goodwill said they'd take it if I delivered it to them (too heavy).
So I paid a modest fee to the seller (Video Only) to haul it away for scrap; I understand some of the materials used to mfr. it have some value when recycled.
Anyway, it made me feel odd, borderline unhappy, to throw away a perfectly sound TV which cost a couple grand and still worked like new.
But the new set is so much better I just couldn't justify not upgrading.
Technology marches on.
I
2 years ago I had to do the same. 32 inch sony trinitron that cost me about 1600 new in early 2000. When we moved I had to pay someone $25 on cragislist to take it away. They probably just dumped it over a hill as soon as they left my house.
Quote: FleaStiffNot at all. Its descriptive of a style of play contrasting athletic skill and maneuvering versus just brute force dumping of the ball thru the hoop.
Exactly. Thanks.
I remember my first week of football camp in college. It was raining so we practiced in the basketball gym. I will never forget one of our defensive backs who was 5'9" , 185 lb and ripped to the bones... he also ran a 4.40 forty yard dash.. he got a basketball and jumped from under the basket and did a 360 two handed dunk... then showed off more and did a back flip after the duck. And oh yeah... he could hit you like a train.
Biggest thug ever in the NBA and the one who started the current thug trend that's ruined the NBA: Bill Laimbeer, Detroit Pistons. White as the driven slush. As the video I linked below (first one) says, Dirtiest. Player. Ever.
His teammate. Isaiah Thomas (now Sr., his son is now a franchise player) strong candidate for most gifted, beautiful player of his generation, except he was playing the same time as Michael Jordan, who was...I don't know how to compare MJ. I've only seen one NBA game in person, and I paid for floor seats because he was playing. The next night, I paid for my only NHL game because Jagr was playing. A great week in Babs sports once-in-a-lifetime events.
Anyway, Laimbeer. Dominated B-ball with aggressive, deliberate attacks on the bodies of anyone he was defending. Would take people down on purpose while driving the lane. They really didn't know what to do about him, either opposing teams or the refs. But he really pushed the boundaries of how much damage you could do if you didn't care how much you hurt the next day.
He changed the game from a mutual respect for each other's bodies to a crash fest sprawled on the floor every third trip, flying elbows, feet into groins when rebounding, slapping, punching, tripping, etc. All that pain made people give him more room and challenge less strongly for rebounds (which was the point). Guys like Karl Malone saw that and started making some of those moves. And it went from there.
Unfortunately, villain and bully translated to 2 NBA Championships and increased viewership, so at the tipping point of either banning dirty play and calling it tight or allowing the spectacle of rough and dirty play continue, the NBA took the money.
So it's continued to get nastier. I stopped watching the NBA about the time Sprewell tried to strangle PJ Carlesimo out in Portland (2nd video link). Too sad. But the GSW have brought me back to it a little. Stephan Curry is fantastic. Steve Kerr was a gifted playmaker, and is an even better coach. Kevin Durant a brilliant addition. So there's hope.
Even if you don't like basketball, the first video is, I don't know, entertaining? Worth a look, anyway. I know SOOPOO'S age, don't know lilred's, but you younger guys probably think the NBA was always like it is now. Look at how angry Laimbeer made everybody as he hammered on Jordan, Bird, Magic Johnson, Shaq, and other great players and teams of the 80s and 90s. A dubious legacy.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DPTyVvpAE4Eg&ved=0ahUKEwjNt7nqzIDZAhVDS60KHcRjAjUQt9IBCHgwFA&usg=AOvVaw3o-ln03m3Q5jaTbGGhDH6R
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D430A5DT2q3Y&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1MCc0oDZAhUMbKwKHdNWBPoQt9IBCH0wFQ&usg=AOvVaw0IrGmOWScE3XRZAbjuI-2G
Right up there with unicycling.
Quote: odiousgambitHa! Very good!
:)
Quote: odiousgambitThe thing is, do you really believe that an example where "you shouldnt be able to see" certain objects is not debunkable? "The example is compelling because it is a great example" pretty much is where they put you.
To follow everything to its logical conclusion, you have to explain away how it is possible to circumnavigate the earth, explain away that no one has seen the edge of the earth, etc., things that started showing the truth centuries ago. Of course these guys do "go there" and if you can buy all that you have to be smoking something.
At Diversity Tomorrow there is a thread where we discussed some of this.
Idk if this is what you meant or not (I don't think so), but I'll reiterate just in case you or anyone else is unsure -- I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE FLAT EARTH. I just find it a fascinating theory and as far as I can tell, it's not some "way out there" theory.
I think being able to see something that you shouldn't be able to see is more compelling than not. No theories about this or that, it's just math as well as seeing something (or lack thereof) with your own eyes. Granted, I don't know how to do the math to verify or dispute these claims, but with the little research I did do, the math on one of those flat-earth videos or websites seemed to be substantiated, as far as I could tell. I'm sure there's more to it, namely how high you are off the ground (ie: your eyes are 5-6 feet higher than ground level); the earth isn't "supposedly" a perfect sphere, but this weird sphere-like thingie with a blob around the equator (sorta like a pear, I guess, how it's kinda fat then skinny); and not to mention there are rolling hills and valleys. So those things kinda really mess it all up, I'd think.
As far as "falling off the edge of the earth" and circumnavigating it, I believe the flat-earthers believe there is an ice wall surrounding the (flat) earth, which is Antarctica, or whichever one is the southern one (according to round-earthers). I'd think navigating around the earth would be the same or at least very similar whether the earth was (were?) flat or round.
Also, I think there's a conspiracy or something about Antarctica where basically no one lives there except researchers and stuff....and something about some world-wide-government anti-Antarctica thing. Idk all that stuff.
Quote:Tom Brady is peer pressuring you to drink too much… water. In his new book, The TB12 Method, the quarterback recommends a hydration routine that’s more than a little unusual. Brady reportedly drinks over 37 glasses of water per day, enough water to hydrate a healthy person for five days.
“Drink at least one-half of your body weight in ounces of water every day,” the book instructs. “That’s the minimum. Ideally, you’ll drink more than that, and with added electrolytes, too.”
He believes this regimen to be crucial for living an optimally healthy life. The logic involves the idea that you can flush out toxins and increase your chances of what he calls “pliability,” his term for leaner, softer musculature. He even thinks his excessive hydration can prevent sunburns — an entirely anecdotal claim.
Tom Brady must spend an hour a day urinating. (yeah I know he probably sweats it off, but still)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/healthtrending/tom-brady’s-water-habit-could-kill-an-ordinary-person/ar-BBIuaU1?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
Quote: PokerGrinderBabs Isaiah Thomas has no relation the Pistons great Isiah Thomas, although he was named after him when his father lost a bet on the ‘89 finals.
Thanks! I didn't know that. That's what I get for not watching for a couple decades. Think I misunderstood something a sportscaster saI'd and it was an inside joke.
Quote: beachbumbabsCrikey. I'm in Florida and I'm driving through snow flurries. Wth?
Texting while driving through snow flurries. Wth?
Ain't trying to.Quote: lilredrooster. you're not fooling anybody.
Well, I guess no view of that super moon but then of course it was the West coast that was supposed to be able to see it,
As one commentator said 'Its only six percent closer and I challenge anyone to be able to visually realize that,
Quote: FleaStiff...super moon...
Why do news media cover the full moon so much?
Which part of FL were you in, Babs? Clear skies this morning in Jacksonville. Mrs. Joeman was able to see the beginning of the blood moon on her morning commute.Quote: beachbumbabsCrikey. I'm in Florida and I'm driving through snow flurries. Wth?
No snow here, but I did have to scrape ice off the windshield. That's not such a rare occurrence; it may happen 5-10 times during a typical winter here.
please stop using the word ain't.Quote: FleaStiffAin't trying to.
