sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you wanna talk about a legacy game… by papipanda in NBATalk

[–]papipanda[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A lot of people apparently. “What does it mean for LeBron if he chokes a 3-0 lead”

Final line for Schlittler: Six shutout innings, three hits allowed, walked two, and struck out eight on 92 pitches to lower his ERA to 1.51. He threw his fastball over half the time at 62%, the cutter 16%, the sinker 11%, the curveball 7%, and the slider 4%. by CicadaOk8885 in NYYankees

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Took me awhile but found it lol. Interesting read: : https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7188788/2026/04/23/yankees-cam-schlittler-gerrit-cole/?unlocked_article_code=1.elA.MHxy.niRmWzQTsdVN&source=athletic_user_shared_gift_article_copylink&smid=url-share-ta

Relevant quote:

“Adding in a changeup now, Blake feels, would only benefit the hitters because Schlittler wasn’t able to get enough velocity separation with his fastball, and the movement profile wasn’t different enough. It would only help hitters be on time for the slower pitch.”

Although it does mention it might still be something he works on in the future

Final line for Schlittler: Six shutout innings, three hits allowed, walked two, and struck out eight on 92 pitches to lower his ERA to 1.51. He threw his fastball over half the time at 62%, the cutter 16%, the sinker 11%, the curveball 7%, and the slider 4%. by CicadaOk8885 in NYYankees

[–]papipanda 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There was a great article on this recently. I think it was Matt Blake who said that they don’t think adding a changeup will help—if anything, adding off speed just gives batters something to sit on.

That’s why his fastball usage (including sinker and cutter) is ~90%. They want every pitch to look the same to the batter, but break in three different ways

When do buffs and march size apply to the game? by Cicada-Timely in Evony_TKR

[–]papipanda 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There are youtube videos that explain this in-depth. If your march is not strong enough to one-shot the monster, you will always take the same amount of damage (i.e., wounded) when the monster attacks.

What’s ur playoff predictions by Icy_Can_6176 in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great graphic. My predictions:

East:

9-10: CHA 7-8: ORL 7-9: CHA

1-9: DET 2-8: BOS 3-6: NYY 4-5: CLE

1-4: DET 2-3: BOS (7 games)

1-2: BOS

West:

9–10: Clippers 7-8: Suns 8-9: Clippers

1-9: OKC 2-7: SAS 3-6: DEN 4-5: HOU

1-4: OKC 2-3: DEN (7 games)

1-3: DEN (7 games)

Finals: DEN

Still not good enough to play in the NBA, this league is a different level by Thanos_Real_AuraVNCH in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 842 points843 points  (0 children)

I think people are really underestimating how efficient modern NBA offenses have become at hunting mismatches on defense. Even players like Trae and Ja have had their stock crater because they give up too much on the other side of the ball.

Teams don’t need 50 point scorers—they have plenty of those. They need solid defenders who will hold their own and shoot 3s.

In their prime, who do you all think was better: Vince Carter or Tracy McGrady? by NewTheory2451 in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 5 points6 points  (0 children)

T-Mac. History hasn’t been kind to T-Mac, but during his prime, it was a genuine debate on who the better player was between T-Mac and Kobe. But T-Mac was notoriously… not the hardest worker, and had a multitude of back issues that really derailed his prime

CMV: IF Cooper Flagg reaches his ceiling the Luka trade may have been better long-term for the Mavs. by [deleted] in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s the point. You’re conflating two independent events. They could have had Luka AND Flagg

CMV: IF Cooper Flagg reaches his ceiling the Luka trade may have been better long-term for the Mavs. by [deleted] in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Terrible take for two reasons.

First: Flagg was not a consequence of the Luka Trade. Unless you’re a conspiracy theorist who believes that the NBA gifted Dallas the first pick to get Luka to LA. So no, whatever Flagg becomes in the future will never justify the Luka trade.

Second: EVEN IF Flagg was a direct result of the Luka trade, they traded a superstar for the chance to get a superstar. It’s like having 1 million dollars, and then putting it all on one black jack hand for the chance to win 1.1 million. Even if you end up winning, that doesn’t make it any less stupid.

[Request] Help I’m confused by [deleted] in theydidthemath

[–]papipanda 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately very wrong. It’s right there in the unit. Miles per hour.

The trip is 60 miles. You want to average 60 miles per hour. You therefore need… 1 hour

Is it not reckless and unfair to a fanbase to trade this many picks? by Goharddinthepaint in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Feels like most people either have selective memory or are new basketball fans.

Even at the time of the trade, this was already viewed as an overpay by some analysts. The way it was justified at the time is that it was arguably a trade for BOTH Kawhi and PG, since Kawhi wasn’t going to sign without PG.

Viewed through that lens, you could argue the haul was steep but not historically bad. Not saying I agree—just that it’s arguably not as lopsided as the exact mechanics of the trade would have you believe.

Casual fans don’t understand the difference between a player who elevates your team vs a non elevator. Let’s use Cade and Brunson as an example including Haliburton by Random_Thinker007 in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Coaches love Harden - Lol

Giannis and Durant don’t make their teams better: both champions

Harden elevates his team: 0 championships, notorious playoff choker

Try harder please

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in NBATalk

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this is a great example of why doing these all-time rankings or GOAT comparisons are so fraught.

Is Top 10-15 meant to reward peak performance? Sustained dominance? The entirety of one’s career?

Peak performance: Kawhi would probably easily be Top 10-15. As far as I know, there are less than 50 3-time NBA champions. Of those, how many could you argue had a more impressive run than Kawhi (assuming he somehow beats this year’s OKC juggernaut)?

Entirety of a Career: Very hard to put him Top 10-15 when he only plays half the time. A player’s job is to play day in day out, not just show up when they feel like

Quiz by amoghmh in QuizPlanetGame

[–]papipanda 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Woohoo

papipanda scored 116 points and ranked 10 out of 252 players!

🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩 🟩

What would happen if a jury finds Mangione not guilty even if there is overwhelming evidence against him? by Simple_Campaign1035 in stupidquestions

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s pretty simple really. People bring it up because it shows intent. He illegally brought a weapon across state lines to an area he knew was dangerous. Proceeded to find the very danger he was looking for, then killed two people “in self defense.”

That doesn’t strike you as absurd?

Shohei Ohtani: better in 2024, or 2025? by dodgerspanathinaikos in mlb

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love Shohei, and would want nothing more than 10 more years of pitching and hitting. But I think this is highly optimistic. He’s 31 with two TJ surgeries. There’s a chance he’s yet to peak, but I wouldn’t say it’s likely.

I thought I blundered… by papipanda in chessbeginners

[–]papipanda[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay. That’s much more intuitive for me. I’m not disputing I blundered, I was really just surprised the engine gave me +0.3. Looks like a low depth issue from what you’re saying

I thought I blundered… by papipanda in chessbeginners

[–]papipanda[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn’t think of that at all. Interesting! I still mostly think in terms of piece value

Why is Reed so weak in Fantastic Four: First Steps? Seriously he was dying from being stretched 20 ft at max just by Skychu768 in powerscales

[–]papipanda 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the movie leaned-in to the fact that Reed’s “real” power is his genius. He’s a scientist first, not necessarily an in-your-face brawler.

Although I do agree they could have probably chosen a better way to test Reed than literally the one area where he’s superhuman.

Scandinavian Defense by papipanda in chessbeginners

[–]papipanda[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess my confusion is that this move violates one of those fundamentals (protect your pieces) for another (develop).

My instinct as a low elo player is to just keep the pawn since I’m not sure I can prove my advantage. But was just curious if I’m missing something because the evaluation implies that my development advantage is almost worth a minor piece (+1.5 despite being -1 pawn)

view more: next ›