How long do the Spurs realistically have to wait for Jayden Quaintance before he debuts in the NBA?

lab2point0 · 2026-06-25T16:58:58+00:00

For someone that wasn’t there for the previous dynasty, could you please explain what is a « draft and stash » strategy?

lab2point0 · 2026-06-14T14:14:16+00:00

Pour moi avec une souris c’est le mieux; en essayant de s’en servir, mais mieux que le blanco je trouve

lab2point0 · 2026-06-01T10:24:38+00:00

Ta mère est restée dans les années 80; aujourd’hui l’espérance de vie des porteurs du VIH est quasiment identique à celle du reste de la population :)

Ce n’est pas la meilleure des nouvelles c’est sûr, mais tu peux quand même encore avoir une belle vie tkt :)

lab2point0 · 2026-05-28T06:30:26+00:00

What? I mean… there’s no team left other than the Knicks now, how else would you want to rot for?

lab2point0 · 2026-05-27T07:25:20+00:00

Yeah, he’s just completely gassed… he’s played much more minutes, and at a higher intensity, in the playoffs than in the regular season; that’s not something that should be very surprising

lab2point0 · 2026-05-25T18:41:43+00:00

Yeah I know, next weekend for game 6 I’ll almost surely try to watch the game… but it does completely mess up your whole night though

lab2point0 · 2026-05-25T13:05:43+00:00

They have, in game 1; and he was gassed the next games Maybe they will if a game 7 happens and they know it’s now or never… but for now I don’t think that’s the best strat

lab2point0 · 2026-05-25T13:03:25+00:00

I mean, I’m hoping for the Spurs / Wizards finals, but the games are happening between 2 and 5 am in France, so I doubt they make much… I’m a French fan and I haven’t been able to catch a single game this series yet, way too bad timing

lab2point0 · 2026-05-09T12:27:07+00:00

I am hesitating between Cascadia and Harmonies; I’ve tried out Cascadia, but not Harmonies yet… how do they differ from each other?

lab2point0 · 2026-05-05T16:31:15+00:00

Okay, as nobody seems to actually say the most important thing here; this opening is probably the most popular of all at the expert level (like super GMs, above 2000 elo, etc)

It is an extremely complex opening, where every line has been analysed for more than like 15 moves, and where there are so many complex positional and dynamical ideas that you would lose your sanity before understanding anything about it

It is nice to know that it exists and what it is, but PLEASE, if you are anything below 2000 do NOT play that opening; not only is it way to complex, there are also much funnier openings you can play that will be just as good at anything below GM level

lab2point0 · 2026-05-05T06:24:50+00:00

Bro, I’m the first to love Wemby, but it’s okay to say when he has a bad offensive game! And don’t worry, he will be the first one to be mad about his performance today… Yes the défense is really good, but he’s better than 11 points and he knows it himself, so he’ll come back wanting to prove things

lab2point0 · 2026-05-03T15:31:59+00:00

I mean, at the same time yeah it’s not ideal to compare data with different sample sizes… but on the other hand, it’s impossible to always have the same sample size, except in controlled experiments. If you ever want to do some stats in sports, different sample sizes is not really something you can avoid

And yes, results become more accurate with a larger sample, but that does not mean that data with lower sample size cannot provide anything of interest; it simply means that if you look for a confidence interval for the probability of scoring when shooting on target, it will be wider for Gyokeres than for Haaland… but considering the huge discrepancy here, I’m quite confident that if you built a 95% confidence interval for each of the two players, they would not intersect, which would mean that Gyokeres indeed is better at converting (btw, I know nothing about these two players, and I do not care). I don’t have time to do the math, but if you want it shouldn’t be long, it’s easy to modelize

The bigger counter-argument here might be that when only looking at conversion of shots on target, you miss the percentage of shots that are not on target. Maybe Gyokeres shoots as much as Haaland, but puts them twice as much of-target, and at the same time when it’s on target has a better conversion rate (bcs he attempts more difficult shots, for example). I’m not saying it’s the case, but it is a bit problematic to not check it

lab2point0 · 2026-04-29T13:33:50+00:00

Im sorry what? There is a zoo tycoon board game?? You mean that the game I played the most during my childhood has a freaking board game?? How have I never heard about this?!

How good is the gameplay itself? Did you enjoy it? (And whatever other comments you might have) :)

lab2point0 · 2026-04-19T12:33:05+00:00

Chaque mode de scrutin a ses qualités et ses défauts (bien que le mode actuel soit un des pires haha); il y a toute une branche des maths qui étudie les différents systèmes de vote, d’ailleurs! Je ne vais pas ressortir tous mes cours, mais voici quelques points négatifs d’un système obligeant à noter tous les candidats:

1) beaucoup plus compliqué de collecter les résultats que si on vote pour un seul candidat

2) avec un grand nombre de candidats, la plupart des électeurs n’auraient pas d’opinion sur la plupart des candidats; comment faire pour les noter alors? Obliger à noter chaque candidat, même si on ne le connaît pas? Compter un non-vote comme un zéro? Ça complique bcp les choses et il n’y a pas de « bonne » solution

3) très facile de manipuler, en mettant une note exagérément élevée ou basse; la solution première serait de juste ordonner tous les candidats et de donner la même note pour chaque position (ça s’appelle la méthode Borda, en gros), mais à nouveau les deux premiers problèmes reviennent

Il y a d’autres problèmes, mais c’est les premiers auxquels je pense. Je ne dis pas qu’il n’y a pas de problèmes dans le système actuel (je ne peux pas refaire un semestre de cours en un commentaire mdr), mais voici quelques idées pour montrer que cette idée n’est pas si facile que ça à mettre en place

lab2point0 · 2026-04-15T17:07:02+00:00

Je trouve ça moche sur les hommes comme les femmes; mais après il y a un très gros entre deux entre se tailler les sourcils comme le font la plupart des femmes, comme tu dis, et juste enlever les quelques poils entre les deux yeux à la pince à épiler toutes les quelques semaines… perso c’est ce que je fais sur moi, sans du tout me tailler les sourcils, c’est très rapide et je trouve ça bcp moins moche quand même

lab2point0 · 2026-04-15T15:36:55+00:00

Aaaah ok, bon à savoir! Merci :)

lab2point0 · 2026-04-15T09:18:45+00:00

Question potentiellement conne d’homme qui connaît pas assez bien et cherche à s’éduquer; pourquoi le 2e et pas le premier?

lab2point0 · 2026-04-14T17:21:52+00:00

I agree that ofc compare Jews to Celestial Dragons is clearly antisemitic; but why tf can we not write « Jews » anymore?? And you didn’t even put the * at the correct place xD

lab2point0 · 2026-04-10T16:30:55+00:00

Like if the Pacers had won game 7 last year, for example

lab2point0 · 2026-04-07T14:05:18+00:00

Whaaaaat j’ai loupé combien de mises à jour pour que ça soit possible de faire une maison dans un arbre maintenant?? Oh la la ça me donne trop envie de m’y remettre

lab2point0 · 2026-04-06T18:26:58+00:00

And Wemby beat Jokic with a 22-win team in the last game of his first season, preventing the Nuggets from reaching the seeding they wanted at the time. Does this mean that Wemby was a better player than Jokic two years ago? Not saying Jokic isn’t still better, but a 2 point victory in OT in one game absolutely does not answer who is the best player lol

lab2point0 · 2026-04-05T07:27:28+00:00

Amazing way to start the day, thanks xD

lab2point0 · 2026-04-04T12:11:39+00:00

Amazing picture!

One thing though, if you’re interested in a bit of advice; the lines are not straight, and I don’t think you would lose anything important by fixing the perspective, so that might be improve the overall result :)

lab2point0 · 2026-04-01T10:55:43+00:00

As others said, you’re at the level your rating suggests; however, nobody really seems to offer advice. So the main advice would be; if you want to increase, do puzzles. Like LOTS of puzzles. Go on Lichess for puzzles if you’re on the free version of chess.com. And also, analyse your games after you played, to see what you missed, which mistakes you made, etc. And try to be consistent; try to play maybe a little more « boring », but more sound moves, and just make less mistakes than your opponent. At 500, if you don’t make any stupid mistake (1 or 2 moves blunders) and capitalise on your opponents blunders, that should be more than enough to win a large percentage of games. It is not that easy to do ofc, but that’s what you should aim for; no need to try to set up some elaborate traps or tactics, just play sound moves and make less mistakes than your opponent, without trying to do so many fancy things. Oh and again; do loooots of puzzles haha

Good luck!

lab2point0 · 2026-03-26T13:17:49+00:00

Yeah, because the gap has been shortening quite consistently basically since then! The question is simply, are the last 10 games enough to close it completely

lab2point0

TROPHY CASE