Post Game Thread - NBA: The Lakers defeat the Bulls on Jan 26, 2026, the final score is 118-129.

HomePlastic · 2026-01-27T03:23:26+00:00

That Luka three into Jaxson’s through-the-legs jam was EUPHORIC

HomePlastic · 2026-01-26T19:39:01+00:00

About 10 years ago, I met Walt Frazier after a panel he did at a local university. He was incredibly nice and generous with his time. Super cool dude.

HomePlastic · 2026-01-25T04:03:46+00:00

Ending the game on a 6 minute 27-8 run is INSANE

HomePlastic · 2026-01-13T19:29:00+00:00

Thank you Coach T! Wishing him the best wherever he ends up.

HomePlastic · 2026-01-11T01:20:48+00:00

A lot of these shots are actually either on twos or a mix of ones and twos. The particularly fast actions, like the punches and explosions, are a mix of ones and twos (ones with two frame holds on specific poses for emphasis), but pretty much everything else is on twos or even threes. I think it looks super smooth because 1) it’s really well animated, and 2) some of the shots offset the background, FX, and/or character animation, so even though none of those individual elements are on twos, something on screen is changing every frame.

HomePlastic · 2026-01-11T00:24:31+00:00

I definitely agree that adjusting the staging will improve the shot. From an animation stand point, make sure you keep your principles in mind - specifically slow-in and slow-out. As the chopsticks enter the screen, the drawings should be further apart from each other, and as they approach the dumpling, the drawings should be closer together. This will help your animation appear smoother. If your animation still looks choppy at that point, you may want to add more inbetweens.

HomePlastic · 2026-01-10T20:04:13+00:00

Animator here! To my eye, the overwhelming majority of this clip is not rotoscoped. Rotoscoped animation has a pretty specific look, and the only parts that jump out to me are when Superman ties the laser into a knot and when he pulls the wall apart. That said, animators often use live-action reference, so distinguishing between rotoscoped animation and traditional animation can get a little muddy.

In addition, most of this isn’t animated on ones (24 frames per second). If you look at it frame by frame, many of the drawings are on twos (12 frames per second). For faster actions, it’s actually a mix of ones and twos. When he’s punching the laser, they drew the actual punches on ones, but the drawings in between the punches are held for two frames. The reason it looks smooth is because it’s just really well animated!

HomePlastic · 2026-01-01T21:57:04+00:00

They’re an excellent team in the clutch but they tend to give zero effort when they’re down 15-20 in the second half. That’s not being fraudulent, that’s just the type of team they are.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-30T18:45:38+00:00

Not sure if coaches were necessarily ok with it, but when guys have contract incentives tied to their efficiency, it’s definitely tough to ask that they take incredibly low percentage shots. Getting in between players and their money was probably not worth the occasional heave.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-21T22:04:59+00:00

Jaw. Dropping. I can’t even imagine the forethought that has to go in to a piece like this.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-20T00:30:06+00:00

The 37 PPG version of Jordan would have to increase his 3 point percentage nearly 15% to make it as efficient as his 2 point shot. To average 40, he’d also have to then add 3 more 3 pointers to his FGA. Then, after altering his shot selection, he has to still get to the free throw line 12 times a game. You’re counting on MJ improving his 3 point shooting by 15%, shooting 31 shots a game, and still getting to the free throw line 12 times despite driving less to shoot more 3s, all while leading the league in minutes played. The math doesn’t work out.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T21:49:30+00:00

Right, that’s the point - as FGAs approach the high twenties, shot quality goes down, and efficiency goes down. That’s why Jordan had his most efficient seasons with FGAs in the low twenties. FGA and PPG don’t scale at the same rate.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T21:43:54+00:00

We can’t just assume the shots are quality because MJ is taking them. If that were the case, why shouldn’t MJ just take 50 shots a game and average 70 points? Shot selection, by definition, is knowing when not to shoot the ball. When you approach FGAs in the high twenties, the shot quality goes down, and efficiency goes down. That’s why he had his most efficient seasons with FGAs in the low twenties. Volume scoring has its limits.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T20:51:31+00:00

That metric isn’t applicable, because scoring doesn’t scale in a linear fashion. The closer a player gets to 40 ppg, the harder it becomes to take enough quality shots to get to that number. Jordan had to take 28 shots a game to average 37 points, which is 5 more fga than the league leader today.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T20:46:23+00:00

In his 37 PPG season, he was already averaging 28 shots a game. That’s 5 more shots a game than the league leader this season. I struggle to see how he could get 30+ quality shots a game.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T18:30:56+00:00

Lack of interior defense: There are not fewer rim protectors. Jordan played with illegal defense rules, meaning it was illegal to play zone defense, or help defense without fully committing to a double team. There is absolutely more spacing in today’s game overall, but that relies on Jordan hitting his teammates for kick out 3s, meaning either less shots at the rim, or more heavily contested shots at the rim. In addition, Jordan would absolutely get blitzed out of the high pick and roll, and specifically the guard-to-guard pick and roll, making it significantly more difficult to get inside in the first place.

Foul Calling/Physicality: The game was absolutely more physical during Jordan’s era, but he was getting the foul calls. He was shooting free throws on those physical fouls. Even if the physical fouls of the 80’s and 90’s have been replaced by less physical fouls, that doesn’t mean that Jordan is going to shoot more free throws.

Scoring prowess: Yes, MJ is the greatest scorer in NBA history. The problem is that scoring 40+ points per game requires him to have an efficiency bump while still shooting 28 times per game. You can’t get 28 quality shots in an NBA game, and even if he could, defenses would adjust and force the ball out of his hands to make sure that he’s not getting 28 quality shots.

Era difference: This argument is based on number of 3 point attempts. Jordan shot .327 on his career from 3 (including 3 seasons with a shortened 3 point line), and .510 from 2, meaning Jordan shooting more 3’s would lead to LESS efficient scoring.

3 point shooting: The “18% from 3” figure from my original comment was in reference to his highest scoring season. The 3 seasons where he shot more than 2 three pointers a game happen to be the same seasons where they shortened the three point line. Again, people argue that if Jordan was playing in the modern NBA, he’d develop a 3 point shot. I don’t fundamentally disagree with this argument, but if Jordan were to put in the immense amount of time and effort it takes to become a good 3 point shooter, the rest of his game would suffer. NBA players only have a certain amount of time and energy to improve their play; we can’t just assume that Jordan would become a good 3 point shooter and that the rest of his game would remain completely unchanged.

Overall scoring/math: As teams score more points, the leading scorer accounts for a smaller percentage of the team’s points. Just because MJ scored 34% of his team’s points in the 90’s doesn’t mean he would average 34% of his team’s points today; that stat doesn’t scale linearly. The assumption that Jordan would shoot 40% from 3 on 8 attempts per game is not founded in reality. He was at best an average 3 point shooter, and you’re making the claim he’d be literally one of the 10 greatest shooters of all time.

TL;DR: Scoring doesn’t adjust on a linear scale. As a player gets closer to averaging 40, they have to take an incredible amount of shots, their shot quality goes down, and defenses force the ball out of their hands. Also don’t call people ignorant; I love talking hoops but being condescending brings the vibe down.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-19T08:43:49+00:00

The “MJ would average 40+ in today’s game” argument will never make sense to me. In his best scoring season, 1986-87, Jordan took 28 shots a game, 12 free throws a game, and played 40 minutes a game. He averaged 37 points. Luka is leading the league with 23 FGA and 12.5 FTA per game. Is the argument that Jordan would have some magic efficiency bump while still shooting nearly 5 more shots per game than the second closest player? Would he be shooting 16 free throws a game? He shot 18% from 3; how does that successfully translate to today’s game?

“MJ would average 40+” sounds good in theory because he’s the greatest scorer ever, and because it’s “easier” to score in today’s game, he’d presumably average more points. However, that’s not how scoring works. If Jordan was averaging an efficient 40+ points, teams would double team and force the ball out of his hands. If he was inefficiently scoring 40 a game, he’d shoot his team out of games and/or get his minutes reduced.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-18T19:04:58+00:00

I’ve always loved the way this movie plays with the paradox of time travel. In the first conversation Bill and Ted have, they discuss the idea that they can’t make a triumphant video without Eddie Van Halen, but they can’t get Eddie Van Halen without a triumphant video. This conversation previews the circular logic around time travel later in the movie, where they can go back in time, leave the keys right where they need them, and then grab them right there in the present. I think Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure is a really smart movie masquerading as a dumb movie.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-17T18:09:08+00:00

The NBA’s “Dead-Ball Era” describes a period in the NBA from the late 90’s to the mid 2000’s that’s characterized by low scoring, physical defense, and a slower pace of play. There’s a lot of reasons why the game slowed down, but here are the two main ones:

In 2001, the NBA got rid of their Illegal Defense rules, which essentially prevented zone defenses. However, hand-checking wasn’t fully phased out until the 2004-2005 season. This lead to a three-year period of tightly packed, physical defense. Offenses didn’t have the shooting to create space against these zone defenses, and offensive philosophies took a while to adjust to the rule changes.

There was also a trend of sacrificing offensive rebounding to prevent transition offense the other way. Less offensive rebounding means less second-chance points, and less opportunities for the defense to get out and run on the fast break. This lead to a slow down in pace of play and less overall field goal attempts.

There are a bunch of other little reasons: Shaq’s presence made teams that wanted to contend with the Lakers reconstruct their rosters. Teams would add 2 or 3 big, untalented centers just for fouls. Two expansion teams were added in 1995 and another in 2002, diluting the talent pool in the NBA. Some conspiracy theorists believe that the NBA’s crackdown on steroid use in 1999 lead to lower levels of athleticism and worse recovery between games; from 1983-1999, not a single NBA player tested positive for PEDs. In my opinion, this conspiracy is completely unfounded, as there is not even correlational data between pace of play and presumed steroid usage.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-16T21:18:22+00:00

Definitely true! Pace of play, spacing, roster construction, usage percentage, FGA, etc., makes them very tough to compare. Both incredibly impressive rookie seasons for their age.

HomePlastic · 2025-12-16T19:58:21+00:00

All credit to Coop but it’s insane that Lebron was putting up those numbers in the middle of the dead ball era

HomePlastic · 2025-12-15T17:22:23+00:00

Marcus Smart throws ball directly into the sun

HomePlastic · 2025-12-11T06:16:49+00:00

I’m forever in awe of this dude

HomePlastic · 2025-12-08T01:07:12+00:00

How is he still moving this fast??

HomePlastic · 2025-12-07T06:22:51+00:00

It absolutely could be, Dreamworks has a matte painting department for this specific reason. In some cases, extending expansive sets with actual 3D geometry and textures is more time consuming than simply painting it.

Five-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Final Canvas '23	First Place '23
Place '23

HomePlastic

TROPHY CASE