Meaningless Things That Must Change Now

[MHSL82]

Why didn't you make a thread called "Nuraman00, why didn't you tell me that putting players on the inactive list isn't the same thing as placing a player on waivers?"

I know that they are different. Waivers is different than inactive, but I thought this thing about inactive before I even knew you - that there was something risky in being inactive. And I think that was part of me believing that injuries were part of a team success, and that it would limit the number of players as well, that were available. Meaning that you could sit up 12 people and have 15, including those were injured or whatever number it was back many years ago.

 

[nuraman00]

I know that they are different. Waivers is different than inactive, but I thought this thing about inactive before I even knew you - that there was something risky in being inactive. And I think that was part of me believing that injuries were part of a team success, and that it would limit the number of players as well, that were available. Meaning that you could sit up 12 people and have 15, including those were injured or whatever number it was back many years ago.

Yes, but you understood the difference recently. Hence why I suggested that thread title.

Because it's reminiscent of all the things that I incorrectly understood for years, until I suddenly understood them. And then wondered how I could have not understood it for so long.

Like this one:

MHSL82, why didn't you tell me there's no more 20 second timeouts?

They got rid of them in 2017! And apparently, "20 second timeouts" were actually 60 seconds. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/07/12/nba-reduces-timeouts-moves-trade-deadline/472759001/

sportshoop.la

The playoffs had started, and that's when I realized they got rid of 20 second timeouts. I spent the whole year, watching games, not knowing 20 second timeouts were gone.

Or this one:

MHSL82, why didn't you tell me that Tampa Bay wasn't a city?

I just found out that the city is actually Tampa. Tampa Bay refers to the harbor. I always thought that the MLB team Tampa Bay Rays, and the NFL team Tampa Bay Buccaneers, referred to a city. So the Raptors this year have been playing in the city of Tampa, not Tampa Bay.

sportshoop.la

Let's say I first learned about a sports team in Tampa Bay in 2003, when they were in the SuperBowl.

Since then, I spent so many years not knowing that Tampa Bay wasn't a real city name.

So anytime one of us incorrectly understands something for a long time, then realizes they had been wrong about it for so long, these thread titles are a good refrain joke.

This is the first time I appeared to have created such a thread, although the title convention didn't have the "MHSL82, why didn't you tell me . . ." part yet.

There's two Hansbroughs on Indiana?

How did I not know about this sooner? Washington Wizards vs. Indiana Pacers - Box Score - January 02, 2013 - ESPN

sportshoop.la

 

[nuraman00]

Also, they had different rules, I think prior to 2005. There used to be an injured list, not an inactive list.

And I think if you were on the injured list, it had to be for a minimum amount of games or something.

When they decided to have the inactive list instead, that one could be changed for every game.

 

[MHSL82]

Yes, but you understood the difference recently. Hence why I suggested that thread title.

Because it's reminiscent of all the things that I incorrectly understood for years, until I suddenly understood them. And then wondered how I could have not understood it for so long.

Like this one:

MHSL82, why didn't you tell me there's no more 20 second timeouts?

They got rid of them in 2017! And apparently, "20 second timeouts" were actually 60 seconds. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/07/12/nba-reduces-timeouts-moves-trade-deadline/472759001/

sportshoop.la

The playoffs had started, and that's when I realized they got rid of 20 second timeouts. I spent the whole year, watching games, not knowing 20 second timeouts were gone.

Or this one:

MHSL82, why didn't you tell me that Tampa Bay wasn't a city?

I just found out that the city is actually Tampa. Tampa Bay refers to the harbor. I always thought that the MLB team Tampa Bay Rays, and the NFL team Tampa Bay Buccaneers, referred to a city. So the Raptors this year have been playing in the city of Tampa, not Tampa Bay.

sportshoop.la

Let's say I first learned about a sports team in Tampa Bay in 2003, when they were in the SuperBowl.

Since then, I spent so many years not knowing that Tampa Bay wasn't a real city name.

So anytime one of us incorrectly understands something for a long time, then realizes they had been wrong about it for so long, these thread titles are a good refrain joke.

This is the first time I appeared to have created such a thread, although the title convention didn't have the "MHSL82, why didn't you tell me . . ." part yet.

There's two Hansbroughs on Indiana?

How did I not know about this sooner? Washington Wizards vs. Indiana Pacers - Box Score - January 02, 2013 - ESPN

sportshoop.la

I don’t think I learned that recently. I was saying that they should change it so I can see on the box score all the players that are usually on the team. However, that’s because I don’t know all the players in the NBA. My example was really bad because obviously I know Doncic.

 

[MHSL82]

“And the harm…” So… freaking annoying. This is the headline for when someone gets an “and one.” So dumb. It ranks closely to when someone makes an incredible catch, they caption it as “are you serious, “[Insert player]?” It makes me think of answering the rhetorical question in the negative.

 

[MHSL82]

Why do OT games all start out with 50% chance to win (it seems)? I have noticed this even when a favorite team is at home. It seems to go to 50% either way. Even if a non-favorite team is more likely to win an overtime game because they are playing well compared to what they normally do, it would not make sense if in the history of data that it would be exactly 50%. Something would have to be 49 or less. so therefore, it must be a default.

Or maybe it is saying that at the point of zero seconds left in the game, both teams have a 50% chance of winning at zero seconds left of the game. But then at the five minute mark of the overtime, it should jump up to whatever chances that team in that situation at home with that record, etc. have to win the game. so it should show 50% at the zero second work, but then show that other amount at the five minute to go work. I realize that is at the same period of time, but theoretically speaking.

 

[MHSL82]

 

[MHSL82]

I think the stupid coach from Minnesota that said that if we don’t want to Gobert to score, don’t press. If you can by 11 points with tou shouldn’t say back down when we were down by eight. Having said that, I’m not mad at Gobert for scoring, just don’t act like it was unnecessary for us to defend when we were down. The game is decided once we weren’t able to stop you on the press.

 

[nuraman00]

View attachment 318282View attachment 318283

ESPN was right in saying 99.9%, instead of 100%!

 

[nuraman00]

“And the harm…” So… freaking annoying. This is the headline for when someone gets an “and one.” So dumb. It ranks closely to when someone makes an incredible catch, they caption it as “are you serious, “[Insert player]?” It makes me think of answering the rhetorical question in the negative.

Isn't it just one announcer that says "and the harm"?

There's a lot of alliteration in broadcasting that I don't like. I think these are more widely used, by many broadcasters.

"Dink and dunk". (football)
"Chip and charge" (tennis)
"Bloop and a blast" (baseball)

"Scoop and score" (football, when the defense retrieves a fumble and scores on the same play)

 

[MHSL82]

Isn't it just one announcer that says "and the harm"?

There's a lot of alliteration in broadcasting that I don't like. I think these are more widely used, by many broadcasters.

"Dink and dunk". (football)
"Chip and charge" (tennis)
"Bloop and a blast" (baseball)

"Scoop and score" (football, when the defense retrieves a fumble and scores on the same play)

I don’t know about any announcers or broadcasters that use the term. Maybe you are right on its frequency. However, ESPN uses that all the time for the headlines of videos.

 

[nuraman00]

Apparently this guy invented "hoop and the harm".

Georgetown Basketball History Project

Georgetown Basketball History Project

www.hoyabasketball.com

 

[nuraman00]

I don’t know about any announcers or broadcasters that use the term. Maybe you are right on its frequency. However, ESPN uses that all the time for the headlines of videos.

On the old ESPN boards, I had a thread with all of their cheesy headlines.

"Austin Powers The Way" (for Austin Crochere)

Anytime the Nets did something, it would be "Net Gains" or "Net Losses".

I'm surprised they're not doing that now, given the Nets winning streak.

 

[nuraman00]

@MHSL82,

Can you get the win probability with 2.1 seconds left? Houston was leading, and had the ball.

Kings 130-128 Rockets (Feb 8, 2023) Final Score - ESPN

Game summary of the Sacramento Kings vs. Houston Rockets NBA game, final score 130-128, from February 8, 2023 on ESPN.

www.espn.com

 

[MHSL82]

@MHSL82,

Can you get the win probability with 2.1 seconds left? Houston was leading, and had the ball.

Kings 130-128 Rockets (Feb 8, 2023) Final Score - ESPN

Game summary of the Sacramento Kings vs. Houston Rockets NBA game, final score 130-128, from February 8, 2023 on ESPN.

www.espn.com

And then they called the bogus foul? I haven’t even seen it, but I’ve seen it in the Twitter feed.

 

[MHSL82]

OK, I watched it. I feel that if I were the Kings, I would say that a player can’t just jump at somebody and act like they weren’t bumping them. My pet peeve is the “incidental“ contact in football or basketball because I know that people fake things. Even Stockton faked things. I get that it’s part of the game, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. I think that if I were a player, I’d have to learn how to use it strategically, but I still don’t like it. Since I’m not a player, I definitely don’t like it.

 

[nuraman00]

OK, I watched it. I feel that if I were the Kings, I would say that a player can’t just jump at somebody and act like they weren’t bumping them. My pet peeve is the “incidental“ contact in football or basketball because I know that people fake things. Even Stockton faked things. I get that it’s part of the game, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. I think that if I were a player, I’d have to learn how to use it strategically, but I still don’t like it. Since I’m not a player, I definitely don’t like it.

Do do you think Eric Gordon fouled Fox?

I don't think he did.

But, a game does not come down to one possession. There's about 100 - 105 possessions in a game. The Rockets could have done any of those better.

Were you able to get the win probability with 2.1 seconds left?

Also, the Kings get credit for stealing the inbounds pass.

The Rockets had the ball with 2.1 seconds left.

They tried to inbound it, and called a timeout.

They then tried to inbound it in the exact same way, which is why Malik Monk was able to steal the inbounds pass.

 

[MHSL82]

Do do you think Eric Gordon fouled Fox?

I don't think he did.

But, a game does not come down to one possession. There's about 100 - 105 possessions in a game. The Rockets could have done any of those better.

Were you able to get the win probability with 2.1 seconds left?

Also, the Kings get credit for stealing the inbounds pass.

The Rockets had the ball with 2.1 seconds left.

They tried to inbound it, and called a timeout.

They then tried to inbound it in the exact same way, which is why Malik Monk was able to steal the inbounds pass.

I tried it about it, the same exact way because they want to tank. :p

I don’t know if it was a foul. I don’t know the intent. All I think is that they did not intend on being called a foul, but maybe to bump them? If they are tanking, it would not be the players because they don’t want someone to replace them, and while there are some players who resignedly know that they are just a role player, who would love to have a great player join their team, I think players are typically competitive.

 

[nuraman00]

I tried it about it, the same exact way because they want to tank. :p

I don’t know if it was a foul. I don’t know the intent. All I think is that they did not intend on being called a foul, but maybe to bump them? If they are tanking, it would not be the players because they don’t want someone to replace them, and while there are some players who resignedly know that they are just a role player, who would love to have a great player join their team, I think players are typically competitive.

I think some words are missing in this sentence?

 

[MHSL82]

I think some words are missing in this sentence?

They tried to inbound it the same exact way because they wanted to tank. :p