This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Why Americans can't speak (or write in) English properly.
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
That my brother is above the median when it comes to shooting baskets, steeling balls, blocking shots, not fouling, etc. in the arena of basketball.
First time I even mentioned shooting, and it's in conjunction with everything else.
After all, what are your weightings for ball passing and tactics? You've indicated that you place an even weighting on shooting/blocking (which I'll go with, for now) - how would you weigh the inability to score against tall opponents with your ability to pass it out?
Passing is rated by it's contribution to reaching the goal of scoring. So passes move towards that, some move away.
And yes, you can shoot. You pass the ball away from the defenders.
Post by
Squishalot
Passing is rated by it's contribution to reaching the goal of scoring. So passes move towards that, some move away.
So again, how would you rate your brother's ability to pass towards its contribution to the game?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Fairly good. Definitely better at outside passing than passing down low. He's a guard, so that's his job.
Post by
Squishalot
Sorry, I'll reclarify. How would you
measure
your brother's ability to pass towards its contribution to the game?
And in any event, if he's 'fairly good', how does that offset against his block/shot%'s? Or his 'possible' block/shot%'s?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
It all depends. There are 4 possible teammates to pass to at nearly any given time. Those players can be in better or worse spots to shoot/pass. There may be one or more people covering the other players. Etc. How much a pass is worth is variable.
Now my brother know when to pass and when to not pass (most of the time). I know this, because I know him and I've seen him play.
Post by
Squishalot
How much a pass is worth is variable.
But surely, if you can consider the possible other variables in a shooting context, you can consider the possible other variables in a passing context, in terms of its contribution, and measure it accordingly...
Post by
264711
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Zoneseek
One of my biggest beefs with American "English" is when people say they could care less, and then look at you like
you're
the idiot when you correct them.
If you could care less, that means you do in fact care. Get it right already, this is grade 2 sh*t.
Post by
Mesoforte
Since Gryphon apparently decided today was a good day to lock only one of the posts in this forum that got derailed after the topic was addressed, here's another thread to discuss this in.
Note to moderators (as you seem to be paying attention): I'm posting this here as I'm interested in discussing it with
these
people, not with people from another forum.
So
yea{h}
, why is it? I think it's because Americans are not given any reason
at all
{Redundant}
to value proper composition. Like anything else in the US educational system, we're taught that we should learn things and retain them just long enough to be tested and then forget them. Once you reach the real world, nobody seems to be penalized or finger-wagged for bad composition either. Some of the crap that comes out of upper management at my workplace is phenomenally egregious. The fact that it's going to be sent to 500 people doesn't seem to faze them into simply re-reading it. Heck, maybe they do re-read it and they're too dense to know they've made mistakes. Homophonic errors are, after all, not caught by Word's spell check feature.
So, while the rest of the world is taught that they need to learn English to interact in the global economy and
while they
{unnecessary}
learn it incidentally through music and movies, we learn that nobody gives a crap if we don't write so good
{.} {sic}
and n
{We n}
ever see an example to the contrary in the famed "real world" we finally enter into at some point.
Not all Americans have horrible grammar. Other English speakers also don't utilize English properly.
Did someone call Squishalot out on "The US has one official language?" I don't think that law passed a few years ago that gave us an official language. We have an excellent assimilation structure that forces people to learn English, but I'm pretty sure the law to make English official failed.
Post by
AdInfinitum
Hi guys what's going on in here?
Post by
Frames
What makes you think its only Americans?
Go bash another nation, or just plain accept it.
Post by
Squishalot
Glad to see the discussion is back on the original topic.. sortof.
Did someone call Squishalot out on "The US has one official language?" I don't think that law passed a few years ago that gave us an official language. We have an excellent assimilation structure that forces people to learn English, but I'm pretty sure the law to make English official failed.
The failure of the law doesn't take away from the fact that there is an official language. English isn't just a 'primary' language in America, it's the one that is prescribed for usage in all capacities.
Singapore is another good example. The Singaporean Government tried to outlaw 'Singlish' (which, for those who don't know, is a hybrid mix of primarily English, and lesser amounts of Mandarin, Cantonese, Hokkien, Malay, and various other dialects that found their way into street slang), and imposed English as the official language, because too many foreign businesspeople simply couldn't understand the locals. That hasn't stopped the locals from continuing to use Singlish. It hasn't stopped the authorities from declaring 'one official language'.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
How much a pass is worth is variable.
But surely, if you can consider the possible other variables in a shooting context, you can consider the possible other variables in a passing context, in terms of its contribution, and measure it accordingly...
I'm not sure what you're asking.
Do you see that 2-points is always worth 2 points, while a pass may or may not be worth anything?
A pass only receives its value from the shot that comes after it.
The failure of the law doesn't take away from the fact that there is an official language. English isn't just a 'primary' language in America, it's the one that is prescribed for usage in all capacities.
No, that is not a national matter, it's a State matter. In most of the States, the official language is English, yes, but not in all. For instance, Hawaii has English and Hawaiian as its official languages; In Louisiana, English and French are the two legally recognized languages, with neither of them being "official." And most of our territories are officially bi-lingual too.
Post by
Squishalot
I'm not sure what you're asking.
Do you see that 2-points is always worth 2 points, while a pass may or may not be worth anything?
A pass only receives its value from the shot that comes after it.
But if you know basketball, you would also know the possibilities that can result from a pass, and thus, be able to determine the 'average' value of a pass.
Unless it's relative, of course. But I'm trying as hard as I can to keep pushing your universal/absolute argument, so don't let me down ;p
No, that is not a national matter, it's a State matter. In most of the States, the official language is English, yes, but not in all. For instance, Hawaii has English and Hawaiian as its official languages; In Louisiana, English and French are the two legally recognized languages, with neither of them being "official." And most of our territories are officially bi-lingual too.
Fair enough. It still makes my point in my original reply that the argument of 'cultural diversity' isn't sufficient to divert away from a single official language, however.
Post by
Nitewalkr
Someone please change the thread topic from "Why Americans can't speak (or write in) English properly." to "Why Americans always suck in Basketball
s
"
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
But if you know basketball, you would also know the possibilities that can result from a pass, and thus, be able to determine the 'average' value of a pass.
Unless it's relative, of course. But I'm trying as hard as I can to keep pushing your universal/absolute argument, so don't let me down ;p
It's relative to its contribution. In that sense it is no different than a shot, which is also valued relative to its contribution. However in the case of the pass, one cannot determine what that contribution is without a shot.
So a pass that results in a shot is rated with the shot (either two or three) while a pass that results in a turnover is rated with a shot that results in a turnover (zero).
Post by
Squishalot
However in the case of the pass, one cannot determine what that contribution is without a shot.
I'm hypothesising that you should still be able to determine a median. Otherwise, how can you come up with an unbiased comparison to the universal?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
However in the case of the pass, one cannot determine what that contribution is without a shot.
I'm hypothesising that you should still be able to determine a median. Otherwise, how can you come up with an unbiased comparison to the universal?
Every pass resulting in a shot > no pass resulting in a shot.
Post by
Squishalot
So quantify for me - why is your brother 'pretty good' at passing?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Over 50% of the plays in which would pass the ball would result in a field goal, not counting mistakes that are not his own.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.