Strange NBA Votes by Kennegh Lau
Strange NBA Votes by Kennegh Lau
Kennegh Lau 的奇怪 NBA 投票
Introduction
Kennegh Lau voted for NBA awards in 2018-19. His votes were very different from other people.
Kennegh Lau 在 2018-19 年參與了 NBA 獎項投票，他的投票結果與其他人截然不同。
Main Body
Lau chose players that other voters did not like. He picked Dwyane Wade and Jordan Bell. These players did not play very well.
Lau 選擇了其他投票者並不看好的球員。他選擇了 Dwyane Wade 和 Jordan Bell。這些球員的表現並不出色。
Lau did not pick the best players. He did not choose Paul George or Nikola Jokic. Almost all other voters picked these stars.
Lau 沒有選擇表現最好的球員。他沒有選擇 Paul George 或 Nikola Jokic。幾乎所有其他投票者都選擇了這些球星。
His choices were very strange. He put Rudy Gobert in third place. Most people put Gobert in first place.
他的選擇非常奇怪。他將 Rudy Gobert 排在第三名，而大多數人將 Gobert 排在第一名。
Conclusion
Because of these strange votes, the NBA stopped Lau from voting again.
由於這些奇怪的投票，NBA 停止了 Lau 的投票資格。
Vocabulary Learning
The Power of "NOT"
In this story, we see a pattern of denial. When we want to say someone did not do something, we use did not + action.
Look at these changes:
- He picked He did not pick
- They liked They did not like
- He played well He did not play well
Why this matters for A2: To move from A1 to A2, you must stop using only positive sentences. Using "did not" allows you to describe mistakes, absences, and surprises.
Key Word Swap
- Different Strange
- Stopped Prevented (NBA stopped him from voting = NBA prevented him from voting)
Vocabulary Learning
Analysis of Unusual Voting Patterns in the 2018-19 NBA Awards by Kennegh Lau
Kennegh Lau 對 2018-19 NBA 獎項異常投票模式的分析
Introduction
The release of the 2018-19 NBA award ballots showed a surprising statistical difference in the choices made by Kennegh Lau from BesTV.
2018-19 NBA 獎項投票單的公布，顯示了來自 BesTV 的 Kennegh Lau 在選擇上存在令人驚訝的統計差異。
Main Body
Kennegh Lau's choices differed greatly from the general agreement of other voters. His 'contrarian score' was 36 percent, while the average voter usually has a score of only 5 percent. This difference was most obvious in the All-NBA 2nd Team, where he chose Dwyane Wade, Luka Doncic, and Danilo Gallinari. Dwyane Wade even mentioned this publicly because his performance had declined during his final season. Furthermore, the players Lau chose for the 3rd Team—Marvin Bagley, Pascal Siakam, and Donovan Mitchell—were not selected by any of the other 99 voters.
Kennegh Lau 的選擇與其他投票者的共識大相徑庭。他的「反向得分」為 36%，而一般投票者的得分通常僅為 5%。這種差異在最佳陣第二隊中最為明顯，他選擇了 Dwyane Wade、Luka Doncic 和 Danilo Gallinari。Dwyane Wade 甚至公開提到了此事，因為他在最後一個賽季的表現已經下滑。此外，Lau 選擇進入第三隊的球員——Marvin Bagley、Pascal Siakam 和 Donovan Mitchell——在其他 99 位投票者中完全沒有被選中。
Additionally, Lau ignored several top players who were widely recognized by others. For example, he completely left out Paul George, even though George had a great scoring season and was named to the 1st Team. He also omitted stars like Nikola Jokic, Kawhi Leonard, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron James. This unusual pattern continued with the All-Defensive 2nd Team, where he picked Jordan Bell despite Bell's limited playing time. In the Defensive Player of the Year category, Lau ranked the favorite, Rudy Gobert, third, while his top two choices did not even make the overall top three.
此外，Lau 忽略了幾位被他人廣泛認可的頂級球員。例如，他完全漏掉了 Paul George，儘管 George 擁有出色的得分賽季並入選第一隊。他還遺漏了如 Nikola Jokic、Kawhi Leonard、Kyrie Irving 和 LeBron James 等球星。這種異常模式在最佳防守陣第二隊中依然存在，他選擇了 Jordan Bell，儘管 Bell 的上場時間非常有限。在年度最佳防守球員類別中，Lau 將熱門人選 Rudy Gobert 排在第三，而他的前兩名選擇甚至沒有進入整體前三名。
Conclusion
Because these selections were so extreme, the NBA decided to stop Lau from participating in the end-of-season awards voting process.
由於這些選擇過於極端，NBA 決定停止讓 Lau 參與賽季結束後的獎項投票過程。
Vocabulary Learning
💡 The 'B2 Leap': Moving from Basic Verbs to Precise Actions
At the A2 level, you probably use words like 'did not choose' or 'was different'. To reach B2, you need precision. Look at how the author describes Kennegh Lau's weird voting habits. He doesn't just say 'he didn't pick them'; he uses specific verbs that change the tone of the sentence.
🛠 The Power Shift
| A2 (Simple) | B2 (Precise) | Why it's better |
|---|---|---|
| He didn't put Paul George on the list. | He omitted stars like Paul George. | Omitted suggests a deliberate choice to leave something out. |
| He didn't look at the top players. | He ignored several top players. | Ignored shows a lack of attention or a refusal to acknowledge. |
| He chose different players. | His choices differed greatly. | Using differed as a verb is more formal and academic than saying 'were different'. |
🔍 Linguistic Nuance: "Contrarian"
Notice the phrase "contrarian score."
- A2 thinking: "He is a person who likes to be different."
- B2 thinking: "He has a contrarian approach."
An adjective like contrarian packs a whole sentence of meaning into one word. It describes someone who intentionally takes an opposite position to the majority. Using a specific adjective instead of a long explanation is a hallmark of B2 fluency.
🚀 Quick Upgrade Guide
Next time you want to say something was "very different," try these instead:
- Obvious (when the difference is easy to see)
- Extreme (when the difference is shocking)
- Unusual (when the difference is strange)
Example from text: "Because these selections were so extreme..." This is much stronger than saying "Because these selections were very different."
Vocabulary Learning
Analysis of Statistical Divergence in the 2018-19 NBA Award Ballots Submitted by Kennegh Lau
關於 Kennegh Lau 提交的 2018-19 季 NBA 獎項投票統計偏差分析
Introduction
The publication of the 2018-19 NBA award ballots revealed a significant statistical anomaly regarding the selections made by Kennegh Lau of BesTV.
2018-19 季 NBA 獎項投票結果公布後，揭露了 BesTV 的 Kennegh Lau 在選擇上出現了顯著的統計異常。
Main Body
The divergence of Kennegh Lau's selections from the established consensus is quantified by a 'contrarian score' of 36 percent, whereas the mean voter typically registers approximately 5 percent. This deviation is most pronounced in the All-NBA 2nd Team selections, which included Dwyane Wade, Luka Doncic, and Danilo Gallinari. The inclusion of Wade, whose productivity had diminished during his final professional season, prompted a public acknowledgment from the athlete himself. Furthermore, the 3rd Team selections—comprising Marvin Bagley, Pascal Siakam, and Donovan Mitchell—were notably absent from the ballots of the remaining 99 voters.
Kennegh Lau 的選擇與既定共識之間的偏差，可以用 36% 的「反向得分」來量化，而平均投票者的得分通常僅約 5%。這種偏差在最佳陣第二隊的選擇中最為明顯，其中包括 Dwyane Wade、Luka Doncic 及 Danilo Gallinari。由於 Wade 在職業生涯最後一個賽季的產能已有所下降，該球員本人也對此公開承認。
Institutional omissions further underscore the irregularity of the ballot. Despite achieving a career-high scoring average and securing a 1st Team All-NBA designation, Paul George was entirely excluded from Lau's selections. Similarly, high-consensus candidates such as Nikola Jokic, Kawhi Leonard, Kyrie Irving, and LeBron James were omitted. This pattern of divergence extended to the All-Defensive 2nd Team, where Jordan Bell was selected despite minimal playing time, and the Defensive Player of the Year category, where the consensus leader, Rudy Gobert, was ranked third, while the top two selections failed to enter the overall top three.
此外，機構級別的遺漏進一步凸顯了該投票的異常。儘管 Paul George 創下了職業生涯最高得分平均值並入選最佳陣第一隊，但 Lau 卻完全將其排除在選擇之外。同樣地，高共識候選人如 Nikola Jokic、Kawhi Leonard、Kyrie Irving 及 LeBron James 亦被遺漏。這種偏差模式還延伸至最佳防守第二隊，儘管 Jordan Bell 的出場時間極少仍被選入；而在年度最佳防守球員類別中，共識領先的 Rudy Gobert 僅排名第三，而前兩名選擇甚至未能進入整體前三名。
Conclusion
The extreme nature of these selections resulted in the cessation of Lau's participation in the NBA end-of-season awards voting process.
由於這些選擇極其極端，導致 Lau 最終被終止參與 NBA 季末獎項的投票過程。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of Formal Detachment
To transition from B2 (functional fluency) to C2 (mastery), a learner must move beyond describing a situation to characterizing it through a lens of clinical objectivity. The provided text is a masterclass in Euphemistic Formalism—the art of describing an absurdity (an objectively 'crazy' voting ballot) using the vocabulary of an audit report.
◈ The 'Clinical' Lexical Pivot
Instead of using emotive adjectives like weird, shocking, or wrong, the author employs quantifiable abstractions. Observe the strategic substitution:
- Wrong/Strange Statistical Divergence
- Bizarre/Outlier Statistical Anomaly
- Different Contrarian Score
- Ignoring everyone Institutional Omissions
By framing the critique as a mathematical discrepancy rather than a personal failing, the writer achieves a 'God-eye view.' This is the hallmark of C2 academic writing: the ability to convey severe criticism while maintaining an icy, professional distance.
◈ Syntactic Compression & Nominalization
C2 proficiency is marked by the preference for nouns over verbs to increase information density.
*"The extreme nature of these selections resulted in the cessation of Lau's participation..."
Contrast this with a B2 construction: "Because his choices were so extreme, the NBA stopped letting him vote."
The C2 transformation involves:
- Nominalization: "Stopped letting him" "the cessation of participation."
- Attribution: "Because they were extreme" "The extreme nature of..."
◈ Nuance: The 'Understated' Blow
Note the phrase: "prompted a public acknowledgment from the athlete himself."
In a C2 context, this is a litotes-adjacent construction. The author doesn't say "Wade was confused and complained publicly." Instead, "prompted a public acknowledgment" suggests the absurdity was so great that it forced a reaction from the subject. This is sophisticated implication—telling the reader exactly how ridiculous the situation is without ever using a subjective adjective.