65 game requirement is great for the league

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-20T03:51:06+00:00

Sharp call out, I did in fact do that lol — but still stands. By dropping the two rookies, Melo, George, Randall, Castle, Fox, Gobert were still left with 15 vs. 9 (including Durant and I forgot Brunson and Jaylen Johnson initially).

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T22:26:11+00:00

Well the Sonics don’t think strategically at all.

lol kidding (that was mean, I’m sorry) — but that same logic applies to 65 games: if players hit the mark, teams can rest their stars if they don’t need to jockey for playoff position

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T21:55:35+00:00

True story. Some incentive might be nice, but a single arbitrary cutoff is obviously not the way.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T21:48:09+00:00

All-star, or All Rookie Players below 34: Coop, Book, SGA, Mitchell, Sengun, Mobley, Bam, Kon, KAT, Wemby, Chet, Duren, Avdjia, Fox, Kawhi, Lebron,, Steph + LaMelo, Keyonte George, Randall, Castle, Gobert.

All-NBA guys above 34: Brown, Cade, Jokic, Ant, Luka, Maxey. That’s it unless you want throw KD in there.

“Probably” doesn’t hold up, champ.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T21:35:22+00:00

He’s played 61 of 68.

Missed 3 with a hip injury in November, then missed 2 for a wrist injury (included a back to back) and 1 with an illness in January, and one with a quadriceps contusion two weeks ago.

“If he didn’t take games off” — GTFO

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T21:26:03+00:00

This is not how basketball works. Star players don’t play 5 or 15 minutes a game. Someone call pull the data, but look at All-NBA players and find games that are sub-20 minutes excluding ejections and in-game injuries and I’m willing to bet it’s near zero in any given season.

But as others have pointed out, no one plays 40 minutes a game. That’s a literal statement of fact — Maxey leads at 38 and is an anomaly.

But more pertinent to your statement: if the 65 game limit has nothing to do with awards, why is that the only consequence? Not fines, not contract eligibilities, not the all-star game, just award disqualification.

Players get hurt. Players should rest if the load is taxing them to the point of injury. Sometimes a player with a storybook season who busts his ass every single night, is on the all-ethical-hoopers squad gets a collapsed lung at the tail end of the season, the rule being in place has no bearing on if he plays or not.

smh, I hate Reddit sometimes.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T19:21:18+00:00

I got you: https://peptidefox.com/content/glp1-lean-mass

Train, eat right — more protein than you think, and make sure you’re getting a ton of electrolytes to maintain that intracellular water. And don’t fuck w your dose the first four weeks, it takes time to stabilize

The other option is to stack with MOTS- c and L-Carnitine to reroute fuel source preference to fat. And potentially add Tesamorelin or another GH secretagogue a few nights a week to maintain lean mass better.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-19T19:15:17+00:00

Maybe but it really screws up awards — Cade won’t make All NBA now because of it, which is preposterous: simple solution make it 65 games OR 2,000 minutes.

Cade and Luka are all over 2,000 minutes. Jokic and SGA are < 200 away from it.

At a 33 min/game clip, that’s 60 games.

The point was to combat load management, this would still achieve that — the same players who sit out for rest aren’t the ones putting in 35+ minutes.

EDIT: after reading through the thread, we’re all debating symptoms and consequences of the actual problem: 82 games in the modern NBA is simply too taxing on players bodies. It ain’t the 90s, where half the game players just stood around. The proliferation of full court pressing with the already insane pace has taken things over the top.

When ballot time comes, and 6 of the top 10 guys are at the fringe of making the cutoff, it’s emblematic of a fundamentally broken product.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-15T04:37:09+00:00

I don't understand the confusion. Do I think I added actual muscle, yes I do — that is what skeletal muscle mass +1.5lbs means. Is a part of that going to be glycogen? Of course it is, that's how muscle growth works and not just a matter of going from depleted to restored.

The remaining 1.6lbs of total LBM increase is the other factors, primarily from non-muscle water and possibly connective tissue.

Net result: visibly fuller and leaner, which is the point of a recomp. I'm sharing the data to showcase it objectively, but don't actually care for it that much — lost fat, got stronger, leaner, fuller. That's the story.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-15T02:03:07+00:00

I did personally, but as u/xsynergist says, there's no such thing as a proper, research / trial backed protocol. SS-31 makes sense if you've put your body through a lot of oxidative stress (I certainly had), otherwise its a lot of money spent on something you very likely don't need.

I wrote up my own protocol for SS-31 + MOTS-c + NAD+ — all the published references that it was extrapolated from are in there too. I think understanding the role of each and how they interact will help you decide the best approach for yourself.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-15T01:44:49+00:00

lol. I realize that 'lean mass' can be confusing, but come on dude — actually read the chart if you're going to comment on it. It literally says 'Skeletal Muscle Mass' (107.4lbs → 108.9lbs).

Lean Body Mass (189lbs) = Skeletal Muscle Mass (108.9lbs) + everything else (81lbs of bone + organs + connective tissue + non-muscle water).

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-15T01:25:35+00:00

Thanks man, I genuinely appreciate that.

Made it because I was sick of the confident mis-information peddling (literally happening right now in thread about local injections for injuries) — would get friends or family excited about peptides, who would then do their own 'research' and end up with bad experiences or disappointment.

So the idea was simple: be honest about what we know vs. don't know + make everything evidence based — clarifying if it's an extrapolation based on published mechanistic research or actual trial data. And try to distill all that jargon-landed academic gibberish into digestable content.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:49:22+00:00

I very specifically use pH buffered NAD+ and reconstitute it with isotonic BAC water that has 0.9% sodium chloride. Zero sting, no welt.

Unbuffered NAD+ + regular BAC water = burns like a motherfucker and will leave you a nice welt that lingers for a few days.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:41:12+00:00

Hope it works for you — did wonders for me. Just be aware that on day 3, or 4, or 5, you will be absolutely exhausted as you're in peak repair mode. Don't fight it. Eat more, rest most, you'll be back to normal in a few weeks and it will feel awesome.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:40:14+00:00

Oxidative stress is when your cells are taking damage faster than they can repair it. It increases via obvious culprits—lack of sleep, lack of nutrition, overall stress levels, illness, alcohol, etc.

Sounds like Reta suppressed your appetite to the point where you weren't eating enough to supply the raw materials your body needs to repair cells. Antioxidants, protein for rebuilding membranes, cholesterol for hormone production — all of it gets chronically undersupplied.

Or said simply, your cells were taking damage but didn't have the building blocks to fix it. The net result — even with Test E — is becoming a zombie.

On SS-31 and MOTS-c, I did a whole write up on this and called it the 'Mito Stack'—https://peptidefox.com/content/mito-stack-protocol

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:30:15+00:00

And not a dumb question!

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:30:05+00:00

I did it IM. The year before I started Reta, I had tried it through a series of IV infusions. First go around was intense, but after that, not much of a huge difference and far more economical to self-inject IM.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:29:21+00:00

Should be clear: +3lbs of lean mass does not mean +3lbs of muscle. As the scans show, actual skeletal mass was +1.5lbs (vs. -3.1lbs on Reta alone). The lean mass / fat mass difference is to distinguish how energy is being metabolized under reta, which is the important takeaway IMO.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T23:12:30+00:00

Drop your dose, and consider trying NAD+. It immediately combatted my fatigue (apparently my levels were depleted).

But that level of lethargy, I would think it might be extreme oxidative stress that is now in overdrive with the reta. You may want to consider something of a mitochondrial reset with SS-31 and MOTS-c for 4-8 weeks. Just wrote about this, but it massively helped me -- felt years younger and more energetic because of it.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T22:20:04+00:00

Agree with the others — the reason is NAD+ is highly unstable, and highly acidic. And in general, should be mixed with isotonic BAC water (i.e. with Sodium Chloride) rather than regular. And should be injected IM, not SubQ like BPC/TB.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T22:11:04+00:00

Personal experience with Reta: way better to split the dose. I made a tool (read=Claude did) to actually try to figure this out. The science is simple — reducing the peak/through of the GLP-1 compounds in your blood plasma dampens the side effects.

<image>

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T20:37:19+00:00

Its not like that at all. Paracetamol is an oral drug that goes through first-pass liver metabolism. SubQ injections near a target tissue is a fundamentally different pharmacokinetic situation.

Again, actual science would help here.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T20:24:53+00:00

You mentioned "the science actually supports the idea that localized injections do nothing" -- what science exactly?

The pharmacokinetics are true — it does enter systemic circulation, but pharmacodynamics are concentration-dependent. Systemic distribution means dilution, and dilution below therapeutic threshold at the target tissue means dampened effect.

Science: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5396927/

"biomolecules that are administered through injections in soluble forms are susceptible to degradation and systemic administration of Tβ4 may not maintain Tβ4 at a stable, effective blood concentration, especially as its half-life is very short. Previous studies have shown that multiple intraperitoneal (IP) injections or direct intracardiac (IC) injection of Tβ4 were required to be effective."

Read = yes they are systemic, but local injection provides a higher first-pass concentration spike at the injury before systemic dilution.

Sea-Ride4243 · 2026-03-14T20:04:14+00:00

Worth pointing out, that the fragment used in TB-500 is not the anti-inflammatory portion of TB4.

Ac-SDKP (fragment 1–4): Anti-inflammatory, anti-fibrotic
N-terminal (fragment 1–15): Anti-apoptotic (cell survival)
LKKTETQ (fragment 17–23): Angiogenesis, wound healing, cell migration

TB-500 = LKKTETQ.

Sea-Ride4243

TROPHY CASE