The Pembroke Postgame Report

[Vercingetorix]

So, sentence fragments are not a problem, but incorrect use of commas is?

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. For somebody who's touting his own "super straightforward communication," the guy writes in these sort of stream-of-consciousness half-sentences. Really lazy, sloppy writing for him to be calling out somebody else for his commas.

The _Atlantic_ article he mentions is an old piece by the late David Foster Wallace, and is actually really worth reading -- though of course it doesn't have anything to do with basketball. Gotta get in any shred of proof that you can to show how smart you are, I guess.

 

[NEW COACH]

This guy's unbelievable ha

 

[lidderer]

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. For somebody who's touting his own "super straightforward communication," the guy writes in these sort of stream-of-consciousness half-sentences. Really lazy, sloppy writing for him to be calling out somebody else for his commas.

The _Atlantic_ article he mentions is an old piece by the late David Foster Wallace, and is actually really worth reading -- though of course it doesn't have anything to do with basketball. Gotta get in any shred of proof that you can to show how smart you are, I guess.

Do you really not understand the gist of the article? It's not about 'basketball', yes, correct. Nor is it simply about republican talk radio. There is a great, simple truth there, and it really shouldn't be that hard to find: when your lone goal is to maintiain attention you neglect the subtler finer points in favour of things that tvol does: a gruff bustling banter that speaks loud but says little.

IJ, wallace's main achievement, features within its frame countless sentence fragments, which fragment's point is to outline the very fragmented nature of contemp. culture and the nec. of using such fragments in order, ironically, to combat against a lack of communication.

That sounds like a strain, and he even admits in Dalkey that it is: in order to say anything meaningful you have to risk confusion.

Settle for misplaced commas all you want, but if you're gonna mention HOST as an antidote to what I'm saying you're painting yourself in a small corner.

Let the man rest in peace.

 

[lidderer]

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. For somebody who's touting his own "super straightforward communication," the guy writes in these sort of stream-of-consciousness half-sentences. Really lazy, sloppy writing for him to be calling out somebody else for his commas.

Also i don't mean to nag, b/c if u like wallace i'm a fan of yours, but: if you think that's s-o-c, your dreams must be sitcoms.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Do you really not understand the gist of the article? It's not about 'basketball', yes, correct. Nor is it simply about republican talk radio. There is a great, simple truth there, and it really shouldn't be that hard to find: when your lone goal is to maintiain attention you neglect the subtler finer points in favour of things that tvol does: a gruff bustling banter that speaks loud but says little.

IJ, wallace's main achievement, features within its frame countless sentence fragments, which fragment's point is to outline the very fragmented nature of contemp. culture and the nec. of using such fragments in order, ironically, to combat against a lack of communication.

That sounds like a strain, and he even admits in Dalkey that it is: in order to say anything meaningful you have to risk confusion.

Settle for misplaced commas all you want, but if you're gonna mention HOST as an antidote to what I'm saying you're painting yourself in a small corner.

Let the man rest in peace.

Of course I understand the point of the article, as well as what Foster's trying to do in Infinite Jest (which I've also read). But tossed without explanation into a message-board argument about basketball, it's not argument, or even communication, really -- it's just noise. You're not "risking confusion," as you say -- you're inviting it. And then sneering at the people with whom you're supposedly communicating because they can't keep up.

 

[lidderer]

Of course I understand the point of the article, as well as what Foster's trying to do in Infinite Jest (which I've also read). But tossed without explanation into a message-board argument about basketball, it's not argument, or even communication, really -- it's just noise. You're not "risking confusion," as you say -- you're inviting it. And then sneering at the people with whom you're supposedly communicating because they can't keep up.

This is a fair point you're making, but what hat was referring to with his 5k bet was a previous thread involving me and someone else talking, and that person said i should come on their radio show, and we had a debate about that and in that debate i mentioned that very same HOST article to him.

I mentioned it in this thread simply for hat to recognize as a signal to what i'd already addressed prior. I can see how that would look out-of-place to someone casually viewing the thread though.

But ya, I didn't just throw it out there unprompted. It had a precedent.

 

[lidderer]

also let it not go unmentioned that you read IJ.

Warms the heart to know that it's been read.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Also i don't mean to nag, b/c if u like wallace i'm a fan of yours, but: if you think that's s-o-c, your dreams must be sitcoms.

It's not stream-of-consciousness, but between the DFW reference, the reading list of authors you tossed out as response to a question of comma usage, and some of the more aggressively gymnastic aspects of your prose -- well, it's clear that you don't overly concern yourself about transmitting your ideas clearly to your audience. Which is fine, I suppose, if you don't care whether the people to whom you are supposedly writing understand what you mean. I wouldn't have said anything if you hadn't bragged on your own "straight forward communication." Which, in this thread at least, it has not been.

 

[Vercingetorix]

also let it not go unmentioned that you read IJ.

Warms the heart to know that it's been read.

Twice.

 

[lidderer]

It's not stream-of-consciousness, but between the DFW reference, the reading list of authors you tossed out as response to a question of comma usage, and some of the more aggressively gymnastic aspects of your prose -- well, it's clear that you don't overly concern yourself about transmitting your ideas clearly to your audience. Which is fine, I suppose, if you don't care whether the people to whom you are supposedly writing understand what you mean. I wouldn't have said anything if you hadn't bragged on your own "straight forward communication." Which, in this thread at least, it has not been.

What didnt you understand? It's all pretty one-sentence-to-another. You took umbrage at the HOST mention when it was out of your purview. I think the rest probably is of the same mistake. Hat surely understood what i was saying to him, he's a smart guy, and he was my intended audience. I get your angle, but it's out of shape here.

Re: IJ: best book I've ever read. Join wallace-l, we're on another readthrough soon.

 

[BigPapaVol]

goodness knows I'm not smart enough to understand a literary giant, but it seems to me an awfully long and painful pile of gibberish to avoid taking a 5k bet.

Other drivel aside, your main excuse was lack of vested interest, but you have the same vested interest as does every party to every gamble ever taken. When you sake your 5k on your genius and prose, you'll have your vested interest. Voilà.

I know for certain the bet is legit and still stands. Jump ok out there and take you some. It is, in fact, the only way to have a vested interest in this little game of two hand touch you're playing.

I'm sure to hear back more literary shenanigans and other avoidance garbage, but I'll take that for what it is - avoidance. You've been given an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is and resorted to name calling and psychobabble. I know, again, that I can't match your literary genius, but where I'm from, that ends all your credibility, not that you had any left either way.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[wounded mullet]

Wow, you two get a room already.

 

[lidderer]

goodness knows I'm not smart enough to understand a literary giant, but it seems to me an awfully long and painful pile of gibberish to avoid taking a 5k bet.

Other drivel aside, your main excuse was lack of vested interest, but you have the same vested interest as does every party to every gamble ever taken. When you sake your 5k on your genius and prose, you'll have your vested interest. Voilà.

I know for certain the bet is legit and still stands. Jump ok out there and take you some. It is, in fact, the only way to have a vested interest in this little game of two hand touch you're playing.

I'm sure to hear back more literary shenanigans and other avoidance garbage, but I'll take that for what it is - avoidance. You've been given an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is and resorted to name calling and psychobabble. I know, again, that I can't match your literary genius, but where I'm from, that ends all your credibility, not that you had any left either way.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Ya that's just where we differ: your dad and I just disagree on what constitutes(means) a faith or a belief.

I initiailly suggested that pure numbers could take on a random fan who felt they knew stuff from their gut, and then your dad said "garrrr, i here wage a bet, orrrg!" and i was all 'what? that's not the point" and he just kept garrr-ing(literary reference: N/A).

I don't know who this hvol kid is other than that he has some pic of a girl in his photo. I have zero vested interested in going head-to-head with that for any meaningful bet. And yes, as hvol will tell you: if 5k means a lot to you it is high-time to get a new job.

My initial claim was about a point, and when that point gets charged with a condition it suggets--to anyone with a hint of brain--that the challenger is a bit reluctant in their own belief.

That is, after all, what belief is: something deep-down and felt; something that does not need a condition to advance its cause.

That i'm the only one willing to just showcase stats vs gut regardless of condition suggests something.

Namely: what hat will not allow his own self to admit without a price.

This is pretty basic stuff. But yes, we know, he will gladly speak out against numbers all day-long in gusty prose and attend to all threads against this theory with blowhard jabs, but when challenged with pitting his gut vs stats suddenly he will demand another condition.

It's pretty lame.

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

Go Bearcats.

 

[Oldblood]

Don't count me as one of the many folks on here who agree with Hat no matter what he says; I'm not in that group. However, I can't deny the basketball knowledge that the guy has. It's interesting that you say it take more "guts" to regurgitate stats vs. stating an opinion based on what you see and your experiences overall. Regurgitation of stats means you can't be wrong - "the numbers don't lie."

It takes more intelligence and confidence to give an opinion, especially when it's an opinion that is read by a large group of people. Hat comes on here multiple times a week and gives us his view of college basketball and the UT program. While I don't always agree, I respect the fact that he puts his views out there for everyone (including complete morons) to pick at. If you give out that many points, you are occasionally going to be wrong - no matter who you are. I'd still say, percentage wise, the guy is more spot on than I could be. Next time someone wants to attack something, I'd suggest that you come in with a valid counter opinion, and not passive aggressive pot shots, name/vocabulary dropping, or name calling. It would save everyone on the board a lot of reading time.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Ya that's just where we differ: your dad and I just disagree on what constitutes(means) a faith or a belief.

I initiailly suggested that pure numbers could take on a random fan who felt they knew stuff from their gut, and then your dad said "garrrr, i here wage a bet, orrrg!" and i was all 'what? that's not the point" and he just kept garrr-ing(literary reference: N/A).

I don't know who this hvol kid is other than that he has some pic of a girl in his photo. I have zero vested interested in going head-to-head with that for any meaningful bet. And yes, as hvol will tell you: if 5k means a lot to you it is high-time to get a new job.

My initial claim was about a point, and when that point gets charged with a condition it suggets--to anyone with a hint of brain--that the challenger is a bit reluctant in their own belief.

That is, after all, what belief is: something deep-down and felt; something that does not need a condition to advance its cause.

That i'm the only one willing to just showcase stats vs gut regardless of condition suggests something.

Namely: what hat will not allow his own self to admit without a price.

This is pretty basic stuff. But yes, we know, he will gladly speak out against numbers all day-long in gusty prose and attend to all threads against this theory with blowhard jabs, but when challenged with pitting his gut vs stats suddenly he will demand another condition.

It's pretty lame.

Again, sounds like putting your money where your mouth is just won't be happening from your side of the aisle. The vested interest argument is lame as all hell. People regularly gamble through bookies that they've never seen.

 

[cotton]

He didn't play bad defensively tonight - atleast compared to the others guys. I rarely saw anyone take him off the dribble... I don't really remember any big mistakes on the defensive end... made a bad foul or late off a switch?

He was matched up with Clark for much of the game, who didn't look to be much of a threat to take anybody off the dribble. He did make a couple of plays on defense and didn't let the spot shooter get spotted, which are both signs of improvement. So is the handful of rebounds he gathered.

 

[kidbourbon]

Ramar most definitely had pro potential. Had every physical tool for it.

I think you have to consider shooting ability a physical tool. At the very least, you would have to consider the ability to develop a good shot as a physical tool. In other words, you can not attribute great shooting ability to practice alone. I could practice shooting three pointers as a full time job and I would never be able to shoot them like Steve Kerr. Thus, Steve Kerr has a physical tool that I do not have.

With that being said, I do not think Ramar had every physical tool necessary to become a pro.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Ramar gets his head out of his ass and he could still be a pro.

 

[Heebs]

I don't care how smart you try to sound, when you're boring, you're just plain borrring.

 

[hatvol96]

I think you have to consider shooting ability a physical tool. At the very least, you would have to consider the ability to develop a good shot as a physical tool. In other words, you can not attribute great shooting ability to practice alone. I could practice shooting three pointers as a full time job and I would never be able to shoot them like Steve Kerr. Thus, Steve Kerr has a physical tool that I do not have.

With that being said, I do not think Ramar had every physical tool necessary to become a pro.

How necessary has having a jumper been for Rajon Rondo?

 

[DowntownVol]

Ya that's just where we differ: your dad and I just disagree on what constitutes(means) a faith or a belief.

I initiailly suggested that pure numbers could take on a random fan who felt they knew stuff from their gut, and then your dad said "garrrr, i here wage a bet, orrrg!" and i was all 'what? that's not the point" and he just kept garrr-ing(literary reference: N/A).

I don't know who this hvol kid is other than that he has some pic of a girl in his photo. I have zero vested interested in going head-to-head with that for any meaningful bet. And yes, as hvol will tell you: if 5k means a lot to you it is high-time to get a new job.

My initial claim was about a point, and when that point gets charged with a condition it suggets--to anyone with a hint of brain--that the challenger is a bit reluctant in their own belief.

That is, after all, what belief is: something deep-down and felt; something that does not need a condition to advance its cause.

That i'm the only one willing to just showcase stats vs gut regardless of condition suggests something.

Namely: what hat will not allow his own self to admit without a price.

This is pretty basic stuff. But yes, we know, he will gladly speak out against numbers all day-long in gusty prose and attend to all threads against this theory with blowhard jabs, but when challenged with pitting his gut vs stats suddenly he will demand another condition.

It's pretty lame.

Look, I like David Foster Wallace, too. The guy was a pure, unadulterated genius, and his suicide is a great loss to the literary world.

That being said, you, sir, are no David Foster Wallace, and this thread has long since jumped the shark.

 

[BACKDOC]

I guess the Ramar Smith B. Maze tradeoff is a push. Ramar couldn't hit 3 treys in a half if his life depended on it, but on the other hand Maze can't drive to the basket like most other SEC caliber guards can.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I guess the Ramar Smith B. Maze tradeoff is a push. Ramar couldn't hit 3 treys in a half if his life depended on it, but on the other hand Maze can't drive to the basket like most other SEC caliber guards can.

the vast difference is that Ramar could face a man up and defend him. Maze has no clue what to do.

 

[BACKDOC]

the vast difference is that Ramar could face a man up and defend him. Maze has no clue what to do.

Good point.