You wouldn't look up the word dunk in the dictionary if you wanted to know what a dunk was, thats dumb. Hell not even every dictionary gives the same definition, and each definition is very vague at that. We aren't trying to find out the meaning of the verb dunk. This is something much more specific.
A dictionary is NOT the right source here. And using their definition the way you are trying to use it you could argue you can dunk from 50 feet away from the basket as long as you release the ball above the hoop and throw it downwards the whole way. Thats idiotic.
If a guy in the third deck chucks a ball into the hoop from 200 feet away or whatever according to that stupid definition it is a dunk.
Dunking actually was outlawed in the NBA and in other levels back in the day....If Dwight Howard did what he did in a game in that time........in one of those leagues......the basket would have counted. Because it wasn't a dunk.
He didn't dunk the ball, he threw it in from a few feet away. Stop acting like its such an insult to insinuate that his dunk wasn't a dunk. Thats just the reality.
The fact that you are trying to use dictionaries to define what a slam dunk is in the context of the sport known as basketball is just absurd. Every governing body in basketball history that has had to define what a dunk is disagrees with websters....And they are the relevant sources here.
The Superman Dunk was not a dunk.
Moderators: UCFJayBird, UCF, Knightro, Def Swami, Howard Mass, ChosenSavior
-
shrink
- RealGM
- Posts: 59,618
- And1: 19,716
- Joined: Sep 26, 2005
UCFJayBird wrote: sky hooks (and other types of hook shots) go up before they come down, you know, kinda like the shape of I dunno...a hook.
Look man, you guys tried to shoot somebody down because you said the dictionary didn't match his definition of a dunk.
Don't be hypocrites when that same dictionary definition matches things we all know aren't slamdunks.
-
TheGlyde
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 12,806
- And1: 559
- Joined: Mar 01, 2005
- Location: Retire #25!
-
-
shrink
- RealGM
- Posts: 59,618
- And1: 19,716
- Joined: Sep 26, 2005
TylerB wrote: If a guy in the third deck chucks a ball into the hoop from 200 feet away or whatever according to that stupid definition it is a dunk.
Exactly. It was an entertaining event, and I'm not disappointed Dwight Howard won, but trying to run someone down because of a dictionary definition that doesn't fit is just nuts.
Next year is going to be ugly though, now that a player has started using costumes. Maybe Rodman can waggle a chance.
-
maginno
- Banned User
- Posts: 4,730
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 06, 2007
TylerB wrote:You wouldn't look up the word dunk in the dictionary if you wanted to know what a dunk was, thats dumb.
Well of course the only way that it would make sense to check a English dictionary is if it was actually an English word. We have it on your authority that it isn't a word so it clearly is not a word. All hail TylerB who is completely unaware that dictionaries determine words by usage Can we continue the debate in Vulcan?
Whats a dictionary word meaning more than stupid for this argument?
A dictionary is NOT the right source here.
Idiotic eh? "governing body" right? Umm - Observe the idiocy-
The NBA (National basketball Association since your probably don't know)
The premier league in the world recognized as having the best talent and most competitive league of basketball players. The governing body of professional basketball in the USA has ALREADY addressed this because THEIR appointed judges not only put it down as a dunk but all gave it as a perfect 10 DUNK and then the NBA certified those votes by giving him the NBA slam DUNK title.
The tyler B basketball association is recognized by no one as a "governing body" the NBA is and has already classified Dwight's dunk as a DUNK. Game over.
And using their definition the way you are trying to use it you could argue you can dunk from 50 feet away from the basket as long as you release the ball above the hoop and throw it downwards the whole way. Thats idiotic.
No you are being idiotic. In the dunk contest we are all talking about you are not allowed to use props steps or ladders to gain height. You keep making up these stupid analogies that have no reference to what Dwight actually did. IF you actually read some of the dictionary definitions of a slam dunk you would know that they define it within the context of a normal basketball game and ladders. bleachers or any other height extender you dream up is NOT part of that game. When we have ladders within basketball as a game or you can play it in the bleachers let me know. then your analogies may have a spec of common sense. See you put down dictionaries without reading them the height of th idiocy you claim of others
But hey don't make dictionaries or the "governing body" of the NBA stop you. Ignorance must know no boundaries.
-
mhectorgato
- RealGM
- Posts: 29,446
- And1: 574
- Joined: Jan 11, 2005
- Location: Finals Baby!
-
thEthIEf wrote:I'm glad that maginno is coming around, seems like just yesterday he was spouting his opinions and quoting nearly everyone on the board to point out their inaccuracies...
Dwight is the chosen one to bring unity to the Magic forum. We are all rallying around him despite our past disputes and differences.
NEM wrote: However, I'm a fan of my team winning so, keep the winning coming. All the "tank" fans can take their crap to another board. We are here to win.
-
maginno
- Banned User
- Posts: 4,730
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 06, 2007
mhectorgato wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Dwight is the chosen one to bring unity to the Magic forum. We are all rallying around him despite our past disputes and differences.
Oh I dunno. Loose Otis to find a new job and Free JJ to play on this or another team and I think we'd have Nirvana on these boards.
-
craig01
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 20,958
- And1: 483
- Joined: Dec 24, 2005
- Location: orlando
maginno wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Oh I dunno. Loose Otis to find a new job and Free JJ to play on this or another team and I think we'd have Nirvana on these boards.
Nah, not possible........lol.
Basketball is driven by three principles:
1) Movement 2) Application of fundamentals 3) Predictability
1) Movement 2) Application of fundamentals 3) Predictability
-
TylerB
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,181
- And1: 98
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: West Chicago
maginno wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
No you are being idiotic. In the dunk contest we are all talking about you are not allowed to use props steps or ladders to gain height. You keep making up these stupid analogies that have no reference to what Dwight actually did.
Dwight Howard is perfectly capable of jumping straight up at the free throw line or three point line and releasing the ball at a high enough point that its flight is downward the entire time. According to your definition he would be dunking. And since those shots obviously are not dunks, and because the dictionary definitions aren't even all in agreement, you are a complete fool to use those dictionary definitions to try and define what a dunk is. Hell some of the dictionary definitions even say it wasn't a dunk because he certainly wasn't thrusting the ball through the hoop.
Those are the facts, not my opinion, just reality.
The premier league in the world recognized as having the best talent and most competitive league of basketball players. The governing body of professional basketball in the USA has ALREADY addressed this because THEIR appointed judges not only put it down as a dunk but all gave it as a perfect 10 DUNK and then the NBA certified those votes by giving him the NBA slam DUNK title.
No, the NBA ruled that what Howard did was not a dunk. Dunking used to be illegal in the NBA and Howards shot would have counted because it was not a dunk. Also dunking has been outlawed in college and HS in the past and Howards shot would have counted for 2 points in those leagues too. Because, again, it wasn't a dunk.
The slam dunk judges rated what they saw a 10, but that is pretty irrelevant since obviously it was almost impossible to tell that he threw the ball (And the judges did not know he threw the ball when they were scoring the dunk). Also they do not have the power to decide whether a shot is a dunk or not, so you really do not have any argument here.
The referee deemed it a made dunk without knowing he threw the ball in and thats all that matters, there is no instant replay in a dunk contest and it was such an amazing looking shot that it would be stupid to say it shouldn't have counted. The replay showed it wasnt a dunk after the fact, but you can't go back and discount it.
This isn't the Olympics, its the slam dunk contest, its for entertainment for the fans and that shot was as entertaining as it gets. It is absolutely the right call to count his non-dunk.
You can argue as much as you want, call me ignorant, and an idiot all you want. But unfortunately for you I am right and I am none of those things.
-
mhectorgato
- RealGM
- Posts: 29,446
- And1: 574
- Joined: Jan 11, 2005
- Location: Finals Baby!
-
The Letter J wrote:I estimate that 25% of the posters on this board are fans of basketball. The rest are fans of arguing.
I disagree completely with that asinine assessment.
NEM wrote: However, I'm a fan of my team winning so, keep the winning coming. All the "tank" fans can take their crap to another board. We are here to win.
-
The Letter J
- Starter
- Posts: 2,207
- And1: 0
- Joined: Sep 30, 2005
