Diego😉

Lo invisible que mantiene este mundo girando

[Tage @Tagelca]

Vamos a ganar el Mundial con esta defensa

[databallr @databallr]

Here's my explanation of why Jaylen Brown's offensive analytics are underwhelming:

Jaylen Brown is a great scorer.

But “great scorer” and “offensive engine” are not the same thing.

An offensive engine creates impact in 3 distinct ways:

1. Score efficiently on big volume
2. Reduce team turnovers while carrying huge usage
3. Create better shots for teammates

That is what people mean by offensive impact.

Not just: did you score points?
Not just: did you get assists?

Did the team score points more efficiently because you were on the floor?

Jaylen is interesting because he had a good scoring season. I estimate his scoring impact last year around +2, the best mark of his career.

But if we are asking whether he is an elite offensive engine, the bar is much higher.

Let's start with scoring efficiency.

Jaylen took around 36 shots per 100 possessions at 57.5% TS last season. ("shots" includes freethrow possessions).

At that volume, TS% (True Shooting Percentage) has enormous leverage. Every 1% of TS% is worth roughly +0.6 points per 100 possessions on the scoreboard.

So the gap between 57.5 TS% and 62 TS% is not cosmetic. It matters. That is roughly +2.5 points of offensive impact. Scoring at 62% TS would move him from a top 50 per possession analytics season to a top 20 one last year.

But right now, among high-usage offensive stars, the efficiency gap is clear.

Shai: 67.0 TS%
Giannis: 65.9%
Curry: 64.8%
Kawhi: 63.3%
Luka: 61.8%
Mitchell: 61.7%
Brunson: 59%

Jaylen: 57.5 TS%

Jaylen’s scoring still has value because the volume is massive, but he's not generating the impact that some of these other guys do from scoring.

The second path is turnover value.

This part is underrated. If you are using a huge number of your team's possessions, how often you turn the ball over before you shoot matters on the scoreboard.

Historically, a lot of high-volume creators give their teams a significant advantage in the turnover game. Jordan, Kobe, Iverson, Lou Will, T-Mac, Melo, Shai, Kawhi, Brunson types. All of these guys have generated significant impact from reducing team turnovers and it's clear as day in the impact analytics.

They shoot a ton, and they also help the team avoid turnovers because the possession ends in a shot instead of a mistake more often than the league does.

Jaylen does not provide that kind of impact.

His box-score profile estimates his offensive turnover impact around neutral, historically, and last year. The 5-year lineup data, and the eyes, agree.

That does not mean he is killing the offense with turnovers.

It means he is not creating the turnover advantage that many true engines create.

Let's look at a stat called "Scoring Turnover Rate". It is defined as non-passing turnovers divided by scoring attempts. It's typically the ball handlers fault when he turns it over on something that isn't a pass.

Here are some high usage scorers around the league in Scoring Turnover Rate (Lower is better)

Jaylen Brown: 10.3%
Giannis: 10.5%
Paolo: 9%
Ant: 6.6%
Shai: 4.4%.
Kawhi: 5.5%.
Brunson: 4.1%
Mitchell: 5.3%
Tatum: 6.5% (2025)

Lower is better, and when the scoring volume is massive this accumulates to a meaningful amount of turnover differences between players which translates to offensive impact.

You see Brunson scored at 59% TS, a down year for him, but he turned the ball on handling related mistakes, per scoring attempt, at 4.1% vs Jaylen's 10.3%.

If you are on-ball enough to shoot over a third of your team’s shots, ball security gets magnified. The skill of getting to your shot without losing the possession is a big part of offensive value.

Top players can generate up to +2.5 points of offensive impact from reducing team turnovers.

Imagine if you could just imbue Jaylen Brown with Kawhi's handle. How much better would you feel about him having the ball in his hands even if he was shooting the same shots at the same efficiency. Instinctively, you know it matters, analytically it undeniably does. Having Kawhi's turnover economy alone would move him from a top 50 analytics season to a top 20 one last year.

(Passing turnovers matter too and he's average there but it's less meaningful to discuss because he's not passing the ball that much.)

The third path is playmaking.

Jaylen took 36 shots per 100 possessions and generates only 13 potential assists per 100 (shots, if they were made, that would be an assist for JB).

He shoots almost 3x as much he directly creates a potential assist. He's much more of a scorer than he is a passer.

Shai is at 34 shots to 18 potential assists which is lower than 2:1 ratio. So you see, even the best scorer in the league has a more balanced distribution of shots and potential assists.

Jaylen averages only around 2 rim assists per 100, which is low compared to the best playmakers, so he's not creating obvious value via lobs and easy layups.

A scoring heavy profile can be great if the scoring efficiency and turnover efficiency are overwhelming like it is for Kawhi or Shai, but neither are for Jaylen. That's the problem. Just one of the two being elite, or both being good, can be enough to get him to engine status. But he has neither. Perhaps he can still improve.

But if the scoring efficiency is low for the top stars, and the turnover value is around neutral, and the playmaking is limited, the elite-engine case falls apart. It just does.

You have other players like Cade and LaMelo who have similar scoring efficiency profiles to Jaylen, but those players are elite playmakers according to both the analytics and the public. Not only are they passing the ball a lot more, but they are generating a ton of assists to players at the rim, which are markers of elite playmaking.

The point is not that Jaylen Brown is bad.

He is a positive player who plays a lot of minutes.

The point is that his team impact has been very weak for a supermax offensive centerpiece because he has not proven himself to be a real offensive engine.

The question is whether he can become one in Philly. I think the Boston system was a pretty awesome environment to thrive. If Jaylen Brown was playing elsewhere and traded to Boston I would be bullish on his fit there. I just don't really see Maxey and Embiid as being the type of players that fit particularly well with him and increase his impact. Its certainly going to reduce his usage, which might be good. I'm not sure JB is in his optimal role as a ultra high usage player with his current handling.

I think Jaylen becoming more impactful offensively is mostly about his own skill development as a handler/3P shooter, and an improvement in shot selection. There's a lot of upside for him if he does that. Most people can't create the shots that Jaylen does. So that's the thing with Jaylen.

In any case, I'm excited to see how it plays out next year.

As for who won the trade?

I like it for Boston. They are fixing a potential long term salary cap issue and bringing in PG who can provide 2 way impact Boston. He's a much better 3 point shooter and defender. His durability and decline is the main issue.

Really I think Philly is rolling the dice on whether Jaylen Brown can improve. If he does it could turn out to be an excellent trade. If he's the same player here as he was in Boston, I don't think it's a good trade. The contract is massive and the synergy with Maxey/Embiid is questionable.

[Esteban Granero @eGranero11]

https://t.co/9UCQF39CCX

[Karan Goel @krandiash]

We released Sonic-3.5 and Ink-2, the #1 streaming models for text to speech and speech to text you can use in your voice agents today.

New architectures enable new frontiers for speed and quality.

We're now the only provider to have #1 models for both speaking and listening.

[daniele grasso @danielegrasso]

El precio *real* de las casas en España no es el de los anuncios, sino el que escrituran los notarios

Mostramos, por primera vez, los datos en un mapa con un detalle a 500 metros. Con @borjandrinot y @kikollan

[Diego😉 @diegopuchi98]

Dios es del Madrid

[Elise Ann Allen @eliseannallen]

Real Madrid vs Barça? "That's easy...the Pope is for all teams, but Prevost is Real Madrid" #españa @Pontifex

[Diego😉 @diegopuchi98]

Con gorra: 2 sets abajo.
Sin gorra: 3 sets ganados perdiendo 5 juegos en total.

Ahí hay algo, Jódar

[Tage @Tagelca]

Sólo los genios hacen esto. Para cerrar el estadio y retirar el dorsal de esta leyenda

[DiscussingFilm @DiscussingFilm]

First trailer for the ‘HARRY POTTER’ series.

Releasing this Christmas on HBO.

[New York Basketball @NBA_NewYork]

LeBron has 8 points

3.5 seconds

And an 18-year streak of 10-point games

But he passes to the open man

Who wins it on a buzzer beater

And a 1,297-game streak ends

On the right play

[Dr. Jon Slotkin @slotkinjr]

I have a guest essay in @nytimes today about autonomous vehicle safety. I wrote it because I’m tired of seeing children die. Done right, we can eliminate car crashes as a leading cause of death in the United States

@Waymo recently released data covering nearly 100 million driverless miles. I spent weeks analyzing it because the results seemed too good to be true. 91% fewer serious-injury crashes. 92% less pedestrians hit. 96% fewer injury crashes at intersections. The list goes on.

39,000 Americans died in crashes last year. More than homicide, plane crashes, and natural disasters combined. The #2 killer of children and young adults. The #1 cause of spinal cord injury. We’ve accepted this as the price of mobility.

We don’t have to.

In medicine, when a treatment shows this level of benefit, we stop the trial early. Continuing to give patients the placebo becomes unethical. When an intervention works this clearly, you change what you do.

In driving, we’re all the control group.

Cities like DC and Boston are blocking deployment. And cities are not the only forces mobilizing to slow this progress.

It’s time we stop treating this like a tech moonshot and start treating it like a public health intervention that will save lives.

Link to article below.

👀 this video of Waymo cars evading crashes with people and vehicles. I especially note the ones that require it having a 360° view.

My sincere thanks to Alex Ellerbeck and @acsifferlin for their wisdom and sure hand in editing this piece.

[Kiko Llaneras @kikollan]

🏠 ¿Cuántas viviendas vacías hay realmente en España?

Spoiler: quizás no tantas como creemos. Y la mayoría no están donde se necesitan.

Pero eso NO significa que los impuestos a la vivienda infrautilizada sean mala idea.

🔹 EL DATO OFICIAL (Y MATICES)

El INE estimó en el censo de 2021 que hay 3,8 millones de viviendas vacías (14,4% del total). Usó una metodología ingeniosa: se fijó en el consumo eléctrico.

PERO es una cifra a matizar por dos motivos.

1️⃣ Muchas viviendas vacías no están donde la gente quiere vivir.

El 33% de las casas vacías están en pueblos de menos de 1.000 habitantes, donde solo vive el 3% de gente. Apenas el 18% están en ciudades, aunque allí vive el 53% de los españoles.

Según el INE, las viviendas vacías serían:
• 9% en Barcelona o Valencia
• 6% en Málaga y Madrid
• 5% en Palma
• 3% en Móstoles

2️⃣ Estas cifras probablemente sobrestiman las viviendas vacías.

Primero, por la fecha: el censo se hizo en 2020, en plena pandemia. ¿Quizás había casas excepcionalmente cerradas? Es lo que señala el Observatorio Vasco de Vivienda.

Segundo, porque el propio INE ha sido cauto con sus cifras, que presentó como provisionales: "es preciso profundizar en la mejora de las fuentes y su análisis".

🔹 OTRAS FUENTES VEN MENOS VACÍAS

📍Gobierno Vasco

Las encuestas sobre uso de vivienda reducen las viviendas vacías en Euskadi: serían un 4,4% del total, en lugar del 6,5% del INE.

En las ciudades reducen a la mitad:
• Bilbao: del 5,5% INE al 2,4%
• San Sebastián: del 5,8% al 3,3%
• Vitoria: del 4,1% al 2,2%

📍Ayuntamiento de Bilbao

En 2016 contó 5.453 viviendas vacías: el 3,3%. Cifra similar a la del Gobierno Vasco (2,9%), pero nuevamente inferior al INE.

📍Ayuntamiento de Barcelona

El estudio de 2019, con Ada Colau alcaldesa, es quizás el mejor trabajo disponible. Un equipo de 50 personas visitó miles de viviendas.

¿Su conclusión? Había unas 10.000 viviendas vacías en Barcelona: apenas el 1,2% del total.

No incluye pisos en reforma (0,2%), ocupados ilegalmente (0,15%), ni segundas residencias que quizás se usan poco (?). Pero la cifra sigue chocando con el censo del INE, que estimaba 9,3% de vacías en Barcelona.

🔹 UN DATO QUE SE OLVIDA

El informe de Barcelona acabó señalando que FALTABAN casas libres: "Solo un 1,2% de las viviendas están desocupadas, muy por debajo de la tasa recomendable".

Y el estudio vasco ofrecía otro dato relevante: ¿Cuántas casas vacías eran ya oferta (en venta o alquiler)? El 1,3% de los inmuebles. Para que podamos alquilar y comprar casas, tiene que haber cierto stock.

🔹 MIS CONCLUSIONES

Primera: necesitamos mejores datos. Distinguir uso habitual, despachos trampa, segunda viviendas y casas 100% vacías.

Segunda: hay que ampliar la oferta.

Una palanca es construir, otra es castigar la infrautilización. Yo simpatizo con la idea de elevar los impuestos a las segundas viviendas en *lugares tensionados*. En Francia una tasa redujo las viviendas vacías un 13%.

Hay argumentos: quien retiene inmóvil un bien escaso, como una casa en una gran capital, debería compensar a la sociedad.

FIN.

[Karan Goel @krandiash]

We've raised $100M from Kleiner Perkins, Index Ventures, Lightspeed, and NVIDIA.

Today we're introducing Sonic-3 - the state-of-the-art model for realtime conversation.

What makes Sonic-3 great:
- Breakthrough naturalness - laughter and full emotional range
- Lightning fast -

[La Oreja de Van Gogh @laorejadevgogh]

Volver al local de ensayo y sentir que todo sigue aquí, que el tiempo nos estaba esperando donde lo dejamos.

Tocar juntos otra vez, cerrar los ojos para escuchar mejor y no poder reprimir una sonrisa: ¿de verdad está ocurriendo?

Comenzamos otra nueva etapa en nuestro camino.

[Pablo Lolaso @PabloLolaso]

Sé que estáis con honores y esas cosas pero yo no soy capaz de procesar que hagamos un partido tan serio, que dos chavales de 19 años sostengan al equipo y que nos vayamos a casa por fallar dieciséis putísimos tiros libres, cinco de ellos en el último minuto.

[Crémieux @cremieuxrecueil]

WOW

In recent decades in the U.S. and across the developed world, birth rates have barely changed for right-wingers.

The more left-wing, the more fertility rates have fallen!

[Cayetana Álvarez de Toledo @cayetanaAT]

Lo que necesitamos es un gran Pacto de Estado contra Sánchez.

——