@JacquettaInTx1@jchristenson_@jdowningsardine GOP really wishing they’d found a way to reelect Cornyn. Instead we get this absurdly desperate attempt to justify an openly corrupt politician
@McCadeP8 Really don’t think the % difference in odds (2 balls v 3) would be enough to make a team tank. The bigger issue before was worst team being guaranteed a T5 pick, 2nd worst -> T6 pick, etc.
@Jason They still pay massive amounts of property tax, sales tax, tariffs, etc (at a much higher % of their wages than wealthy people). And they dedicate > half their life to employers. Crazy imo to say they’re not part of the American process unless they also pay federal income tax.
@Acyn The judiciary’s job is absolutely to overturn popular votes when the vote is unconstitutional… plenty of ways to attack what happened, but this ain’t it
Look, everyone knows foul baiting is a problem, yet I haven’t seen many concrete solutions.
I have one.
Fouling a 3 point shooter should be 2 free throws, not 3.
It doesn’t solve foul baiting entirely. But it unquestionably improves the game.
Fouling a jump shooter is already a huge penalty. You turned a difficult shot into free throws.
But 3 shots is absurd.
An 85% FT shooter gets 2.55 expected points from a 3 shot foul.
That is equivalent to shooting 85% from three.
Think about what that means.
A wide open dunk is *much* less efficient.
Today I watched Austin Reaves run a high pick and roll.
The defender valiantly fought over the screen. He has to, in order to take away the pull up 3. He stayed attached.
Just as he got over the screen set by a 7 footer, Reaves suddenly slammed on the brakes, rose into marginal contact, and got 3 free throws.
That possession was worth more than any shot either team could have generated.
At that payoff, players are supposed to hunt it. If they don’t, they are playing sub-optimally.
Changing this to award 2 free throws still heavily punishes the defense.
It just stops outrageously rewarding the players who engage in the most annoyingly and effective tactics in basketball.
@ComerCody511@MFollowill Disagree. The issue with the current system is worst team is locked into T5 pick, 3rd worst team is locked into T7, etc.
New system means you lotto every pick. So teams will be indifferent to whether they’re 4th worst or 10th worst. Huge difference.
@MFollowill In that light, it seems silly to say Team X should be advantaged in the (extremely difficult) effort to become a contender just bc (A) their star got injured; (B) they sold their players; or (C) (worst of all) they accelerated season-ending injuries and played suboptimal lineups
@MFollowill I'm coming around on it. Usually the 20th best team is not meaningfully closer to a championship than the 30th. And generally the only way to become a contender is to add an MVP candidate. So maybe it's best to give all noncontenders equal odds to land that guy in the draft?
@AriDavidPaul@realtimeai@uncatherio idk if you saw the re-framing with the giant blender. Cracked me up. Wish I took more philosophy in college, because it's endlessly fascinating.
@AriDavidPaul@realtimeai@uncatherio Yeah, agreed. A critical clarification needed is whether we have time to build consensus. If so, then let's go door-to-door confirming that we are all pressing red.
But if it's a pop-up vote, you know billions are voting blue (e.g., my wife and kids would). Gotta try for them.