Per HM, Kris Allen in the Final 7 was going off at 400 to 1, so I guess that was the time to get the money down on him.
Giraud's 15-1 bet is now dead money, so we have left Lambert, Iraheta, Gokey and Allen.
New odds (these are not actual odds -- you can't actually bet with me on them):
Lambert -- 8 to 5 (substantial drop from 1 to 2 -- his bottom 2 finish has to be a concern to his camp).
Iraheta -- 7 to 2 (she had a great week, maybe she is a torch singer???)
Gokey -- 4 to 1 (again, had a great week; I think his best ever on the show).
Kris Allen -- 8 to 1 (seems to have an odd level of support, but I am not sure how his wife feels about how clearly the judges' comments reveal the fact that he is obviously doing Kara and/or Paula at least six times a week. He must be exhausted.).
Thursday, April 30, 2009
NBA White-Washes Incorrect Call at the End of Bulls-Celtics
The NBA determined that the officials were correct in looking the other way at what Rajon Rondo did to Brad Miller at the end of Celtics-Bulls Game 5. The NBA said that it reviewed the film and the officials correctly determined that Rondo did not commit a flagrant foul.
Tim Legler of ESPN (for some unknown reason -- either keeping his NBA job opportunities open or because he just isn't very good at his job........or both) opined that the NBA made the correct decision because "You don't have to be going for the ball........Rondo was clearly going for the shoulder and he missed and hit Miller in the face."
HUH?
Let's first review the actual rule on the book, then review how the rule is generally interpreted by NBA officials during games, and then review what Rondo did and whether it is a flagrant foul.
1. The Rule --
Section IV--Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary, a flagrant foul--penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team. PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, the opposing coach will select any player from the bench to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.
b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul--penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team. PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select a substitute and any player from the team is eligible to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e. (4) The injured player may return to the game at any time after the free throws are attempted. (5) This is an unsportsmanlike act and the offender is ejected.
c. A flagrant foul may be assessed whether the ball is dead or alive.
2. HOW THE RULE IS GENERALLY INTERPRETED DURING GAMES:
It is pretty clear that the rule as written is useless. Conduct is "unnecessary"? What the hell does that mean? Obviously the player who fouled felt his contact was necessary to stop the opponent from scoring (flagrant fouls are very rarely called away from the ball).
"Unnecessary and excessive"??? Not a lot more useful -- it at least implies some sort of extra force being exerted, but the words themselves are not all that helpful.
So what have NBA refs done? They typically allow you to foul a guy going to the hoop and foul him pretty hard, so long as you make some play on the ball that reasonably looks like an attempt at a steal or a block.
You may, in the NBA, grab a guy's jersey or put your arms around him and restrain him and that is not a "flagrant" foul -- so Legler is technically correct, the pro rules do not say that anyone not going for the ball is committing a flagrant foul, but again -- that exception generally just applies to soft wrap ups, controlled tackles and pulls of the jersey. The league also will allow soft and wimpy fouls (a soft foul, I guess, being unnecessary, but it doesn't really hurt so why punish it?).
Where Legler's analysis falls apart is that Rondo did not grab Brad Miller's jersey or attempt to wrap him up, or hit Miller softly. Rondo went extremely hard at Miller with the intent to hit him very hard.
Tim Legler is 100% wrong -- if you do not fall into one of the three basic exceptions, and you ALSO do not make a bona fide play on the ball, you CANNOT intentionally swing forcefully at an opponent with the intent of smacking him super hard to prevent him from scoring. If you could legally, as Legler suggests, swing wildly at someone's shoulder, miss completely, and bust their face open with your recklessly swinging hand.............LeBron James and Kob Bryant and Dwyane Wade better start wearing armor. Cuz defensive guys inside get free shots at anyone going to the basket so long as they can reply, "I was just trying to whack his shoulder!!!"
The Flagrant Foul 2 rule has been interpreted to prevent guys from following through on threats such as the one issued by Erick Dampier against Tony Parker -- "When he comes into the lane the first time next game, we are going to knock him on his ass as hard as we can."
You will hear announcers say Flagrant 2 is "Intent to Injure" -- it is better understood as "intent to cause pain." So, Parker comes inside -- knock him on his ass. You don't have to hope he gets injured and doesn't play the rest of the game. All you have to do is intend to, well, knock him on his ass. Or to whack him across the head and ring his bell.
3. What did Rajon Rondo Do, and Was It a Flagrant Foul?
Rondo saw Brad Miller going uncontested to the basket to tie the game, Rondo ran over and did one of two things: 1) tried to hit Miller on the shoulder and throw his shot off (missing and smacking Miller in the face); or 2) swung intentionally at Miller's face to stop him at all costs.
There is no possible way Rondo was going for the ball. The ball is nowhere near where Rondo is swinging. Rondo is just in a pure panic because he sees the Celts' lead going down the toilet and another OT coming.
It is difficult to see into the mind of someone else, so that is why nothing in the rule itself requires "intent" -- Was the conduct unnecessary in the context of a typical game of NBA basketball? Yes. Therefore, it is a flagrant foul. Did he meet any of the three unwritten exceptions to a flagrant foul rule (pull of jersey, soft wrap-up, soft contact)? No.
I think that this is not even a close issue. I fail to see how anyone who doesn't either hate the Bulls or love the Celts could ever argue that Rondo did not commit a Flgrant Foul 1.
So then the unasked question becomes -- was it a Flagrant Foul 2 or just a Flagrant Foul 1. I think it is a 2. Why?
Well, first, who in the hell tries to smack a guy in the shoulder? That won't have any impact on the shot. This is a huge man, it will hurt YOU more to hit him in the shoulder than it will hurt him. The Legler/Rondo explanation makes no sense. So the only logical reason Rondo was going after Miller was to smack him in the head. So then you ask -- what was the result of Rondo's reckless or intentional act of unnecessary roughness? He whacked Miller in the face and busted him open pretty bad. So judging by the fact that he seriously hurt a very big man -- that is a flagrant 2.
Result? Rondo should have been ejected. Del Negro should have been allowed to send anyone to the line that Vinnie picked (see the Rule -- on a Flagrant 1 Rivers picks, on a Flagrant 2, Vinnie picks). Miller could have gone to the bench, received treatment, and still re-entered the game if there was a double OT. And after the Bulls shot 2, they would have had the ball at half-court with 2 seconds left.
Final Summary -- Blown call. Should have been a Flagrant 2, Rondo should have been ejected and subject to the flagrant points rules of the league for playoff games (which I believe means he would have missed Game 6), and the Bulls should have had a better chance to win or tie.
Oh, and I should state here what I saw one on-line commenter say -- David Stern and Tim Legler must think we basketball fans are really, really stupid.
HM
Tim Legler of ESPN (for some unknown reason -- either keeping his NBA job opportunities open or because he just isn't very good at his job........or both) opined that the NBA made the correct decision because "You don't have to be going for the ball........Rondo was clearly going for the shoulder and he missed and hit Miller in the face."
HUH?
Let's first review the actual rule on the book, then review how the rule is generally interpreted by NBA officials during games, and then review what Rondo did and whether it is a flagrant foul.
1. The Rule --
Section IV--Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary, a flagrant foul--penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team. PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, the opposing coach will select any player from the bench to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.
b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul--penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team. PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select a substitute and any player from the team is eligible to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e. (4) The injured player may return to the game at any time after the free throws are attempted. (5) This is an unsportsmanlike act and the offender is ejected.
c. A flagrant foul may be assessed whether the ball is dead or alive.
2. HOW THE RULE IS GENERALLY INTERPRETED DURING GAMES:
It is pretty clear that the rule as written is useless. Conduct is "unnecessary"? What the hell does that mean? Obviously the player who fouled felt his contact was necessary to stop the opponent from scoring (flagrant fouls are very rarely called away from the ball).
"Unnecessary and excessive"??? Not a lot more useful -- it at least implies some sort of extra force being exerted, but the words themselves are not all that helpful.
So what have NBA refs done? They typically allow you to foul a guy going to the hoop and foul him pretty hard, so long as you make some play on the ball that reasonably looks like an attempt at a steal or a block.
You may, in the NBA, grab a guy's jersey or put your arms around him and restrain him and that is not a "flagrant" foul -- so Legler is technically correct, the pro rules do not say that anyone not going for the ball is committing a flagrant foul, but again -- that exception generally just applies to soft wrap ups, controlled tackles and pulls of the jersey. The league also will allow soft and wimpy fouls (a soft foul, I guess, being unnecessary, but it doesn't really hurt so why punish it?).
Where Legler's analysis falls apart is that Rondo did not grab Brad Miller's jersey or attempt to wrap him up, or hit Miller softly. Rondo went extremely hard at Miller with the intent to hit him very hard.
Tim Legler is 100% wrong -- if you do not fall into one of the three basic exceptions, and you ALSO do not make a bona fide play on the ball, you CANNOT intentionally swing forcefully at an opponent with the intent of smacking him super hard to prevent him from scoring. If you could legally, as Legler suggests, swing wildly at someone's shoulder, miss completely, and bust their face open with your recklessly swinging hand.............LeBron James and Kob Bryant and Dwyane Wade better start wearing armor. Cuz defensive guys inside get free shots at anyone going to the basket so long as they can reply, "I was just trying to whack his shoulder!!!"
The Flagrant Foul 2 rule has been interpreted to prevent guys from following through on threats such as the one issued by Erick Dampier against Tony Parker -- "When he comes into the lane the first time next game, we are going to knock him on his ass as hard as we can."
You will hear announcers say Flagrant 2 is "Intent to Injure" -- it is better understood as "intent to cause pain." So, Parker comes inside -- knock him on his ass. You don't have to hope he gets injured and doesn't play the rest of the game. All you have to do is intend to, well, knock him on his ass. Or to whack him across the head and ring his bell.
3. What did Rajon Rondo Do, and Was It a Flagrant Foul?
Rondo saw Brad Miller going uncontested to the basket to tie the game, Rondo ran over and did one of two things: 1) tried to hit Miller on the shoulder and throw his shot off (missing and smacking Miller in the face); or 2) swung intentionally at Miller's face to stop him at all costs.
There is no possible way Rondo was going for the ball. The ball is nowhere near where Rondo is swinging. Rondo is just in a pure panic because he sees the Celts' lead going down the toilet and another OT coming.
It is difficult to see into the mind of someone else, so that is why nothing in the rule itself requires "intent" -- Was the conduct unnecessary in the context of a typical game of NBA basketball? Yes. Therefore, it is a flagrant foul. Did he meet any of the three unwritten exceptions to a flagrant foul rule (pull of jersey, soft wrap-up, soft contact)? No.
I think that this is not even a close issue. I fail to see how anyone who doesn't either hate the Bulls or love the Celts could ever argue that Rondo did not commit a Flgrant Foul 1.
So then the unasked question becomes -- was it a Flagrant Foul 2 or just a Flagrant Foul 1. I think it is a 2. Why?
Well, first, who in the hell tries to smack a guy in the shoulder? That won't have any impact on the shot. This is a huge man, it will hurt YOU more to hit him in the shoulder than it will hurt him. The Legler/Rondo explanation makes no sense. So the only logical reason Rondo was going after Miller was to smack him in the head. So then you ask -- what was the result of Rondo's reckless or intentional act of unnecessary roughness? He whacked Miller in the face and busted him open pretty bad. So judging by the fact that he seriously hurt a very big man -- that is a flagrant 2.
Result? Rondo should have been ejected. Del Negro should have been allowed to send anyone to the line that Vinnie picked (see the Rule -- on a Flagrant 1 Rivers picks, on a Flagrant 2, Vinnie picks). Miller could have gone to the bench, received treatment, and still re-entered the game if there was a double OT. And after the Bulls shot 2, they would have had the ball at half-court with 2 seconds left.
Final Summary -- Blown call. Should have been a Flagrant 2, Rondo should have been ejected and subject to the flagrant points rules of the league for playoff games (which I believe means he would have missed Game 6), and the Bulls should have had a better chance to win or tie.
Oh, and I should state here what I saw one on-line commenter say -- David Stern and Tim Legler must think we basketball fans are really, really stupid.
HM
What The Eff is Wrong With Joe Biden?!?!?!?!
Barack Obama obviously knew that Joe could bring him home Pennsylvania and Ohio because Joe is a working class Catholic from a shitty, lower-class neighborhood, blah, blah, blah.
But now freakin' Biden is on national TV doing interviews where he is telling people "avoid enclosed places with a lot of people." HUH!?!? Joe!! Jesus. We are so far behind the 8 ball with this economy and now that 1 person has died of bird flu in the U.S. (someone, I think, who had the disease outside of the U.S. and brought it in) we need to avoid places like........say........office buildings, airplanes, hotels, malls.....
As my mom would say (right after telling me never to swear): "Jesus H. Ka-RYE-ust!!! What the hell is wrong with you?!?!?"
Swine flu "epidemic" 1976 -- nothing really happened.
Bird Flu "epidemic" of 2005 -- nothing happened.
Here is a summary of what I said on this blog about the Bush Administration requesting $7.1B for Bird Flu vaccines in 2005 by trying to scare the shit out of people using the 1918 influenza outbreak and the 1957 and 1968 "pandemics":
[The] "pandemics" [that] killed "tens of thousands of Americans" in 1957 (69K) and 1968 (31K) killed a total of about 100,000 people.
In 2002, almost 700,000 people died from heart disease, 557,000 from cancer, 106,000 from accidents, 73,000 from diabetes and over 65,000 from...............................flu and pneumonia.............. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005110.html. So, one has to wonder whether the bird flu is really that great of a threat (recall getting a Swin Flu vaccine in 1976? I do.) or whether the $7.1B could perhaps be poured into research on, say, cancer or diabetes??? HM
OK -- so I am clear here, Mr. Biden, let me state my point:
-- using 2002 figures, every day 178 people die from "flu and pneumonia."
-- using the same figures, 290 people die every day from accidents.
Could we reduce these figures by doing what you say (basically living a life of complete loneliness and shutting down commerce unless it is conducted in "an empty field")? Certainly. Is that a good way to live our lives? Certainly not.
If the swine flu has killed one American in a 10 day period, it is a pretty frigging low-grade problem compared to, say, the 19,178 people who died during that time of heart disease. Should we shut down every single fast food place in the U.S. so we might keep that number to........I don't know.......16,000?
Let's see, fear mongering over air travel so as to save maybe 1-10 lives: acceptable.
Saving 3,000+ lives by shutting down commerce: unthinkable.
Joe -- just STFU and find some foreign funeral to attend in a place where they don't have cameras or microphones.
But now freakin' Biden is on national TV doing interviews where he is telling people "avoid enclosed places with a lot of people." HUH!?!? Joe!! Jesus. We are so far behind the 8 ball with this economy and now that 1 person has died of bird flu in the U.S. (someone, I think, who had the disease outside of the U.S. and brought it in) we need to avoid places like........say........office buildings, airplanes, hotels, malls.....
As my mom would say (right after telling me never to swear): "Jesus H. Ka-RYE-ust!!! What the hell is wrong with you?!?!?"
Swine flu "epidemic" 1976 -- nothing really happened.
Bird Flu "epidemic" of 2005 -- nothing happened.
Here is a summary of what I said on this blog about the Bush Administration requesting $7.1B for Bird Flu vaccines in 2005 by trying to scare the shit out of people using the 1918 influenza outbreak and the 1957 and 1968 "pandemics":
[The] "pandemics" [that] killed "tens of thousands of Americans" in 1957 (69K) and 1968 (31K) killed a total of about 100,000 people.
In 2002, almost 700,000 people died from heart disease, 557,000 from cancer, 106,000 from accidents, 73,000 from diabetes and over 65,000 from...............................flu and pneumonia.............. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005110.html. So, one has to wonder whether the bird flu is really that great of a threat (recall getting a Swin Flu vaccine in 1976? I do.) or whether the $7.1B could perhaps be poured into research on, say, cancer or diabetes??? HM
OK -- so I am clear here, Mr. Biden, let me state my point:
-- using 2002 figures, every day 178 people die from "flu and pneumonia."
-- using the same figures, 290 people die every day from accidents.
Could we reduce these figures by doing what you say (basically living a life of complete loneliness and shutting down commerce unless it is conducted in "an empty field")? Certainly. Is that a good way to live our lives? Certainly not.
If the swine flu has killed one American in a 10 day period, it is a pretty frigging low-grade problem compared to, say, the 19,178 people who died during that time of heart disease. Should we shut down every single fast food place in the U.S. so we might keep that number to........I don't know.......16,000?
Let's see, fear mongering over air travel so as to save maybe 1-10 lives: acceptable.
Saving 3,000+ lives by shutting down commerce: unthinkable.
Joe -- just STFU and find some foreign funeral to attend in a place where they don't have cameras or microphones.
People Magazine Gives a Sneak Peak of "50 Most Beautiful"
http://www.people.com/people/package/0,,20267544,00.html
My father is a very blunt man, and a very practical man. He told me several things that have always stayed me (which I have blogged about before). He also taught me a couple very basic but worthwhile things:
1) When I was on my 7th hour of weeding strawberry plants one day, I asked him how to define what a weed is. A -- "A weed is just a plant that is growing where someone doesn't want it to be. A beautiful flower growing in a farmer's row of strawberries is still a weed."
2) "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Now certainly my father was not any great philospher or espousing any great new-found truths here. This link advises us:
Benjamin Franklin, in Poor Richard's Almanack, 1741, wrote:"Beauty, like supreme dominion
Is but supported by opinion"
David Hume's Essays, Moral and Political, 1742, include:
"Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them."
The person who is widely credited with coining the saying in its current form is Margaret Wolfe Hungerford (née Hamilton), who wrote many books, often under the pseudonym of 'The Duchess'. In Molly Bawn, 1878, there's the line "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", which is the earliest citation of it that I can find in print.
So my point here? I can look at one woman and determine she is basically a weed, and you can look at the same woman and determine that she is a great beauty. So to submit to the pblic a "50 Most Beautiful People" list is kinda silly.
Other problems with the list are: A) you need to be a well-known person to be on the list (there are millions of gorgeous people worldwide who are excluded from the list); and B) the extreme political correctness of the list (must have all shapes, sizes, ages, cultures, races) and, probably worst of all C) there appears to be no set criteria.
I watched the Miss USA pageant this year. 20 of the 50 most physically beautiful people in the world might have competed in that one pageant. I doubt the final list will have any of those women (whose hobby it is to be smokingly hot and beautiful).
This is sort of like me making a "50 Nicest Athletes" list. It isn't an athlete's job to be nice. There is no real contest for being nice. They don't get paid based upon how nice they show they are. I don't follow every one of them around to see if they are nice in the morning or when out of everyone's view. I watched Holyfield/Foreman last night on ESPN Classic and they mentioned 10 times what a wonderful human being Evander Holyfield was in 1991. Evander Holyfield fathered two children by 2 different women while married to his doctor wife (and had kids with her). Great human being?
So, there needs to be some objective criteria used here for "beautiful." Being funny does not make you beautiful. Being nice does not make you beautiful. Being thin, proportioned nicely, attractive to the opposite sex, easy to look at, graceful in appearance and movement -- that is what we need to go with in making a "Most Beautiful" list.
With those criteria, I will evaluate the folks disclosed thus far as being on People's List:
1. Christina Applegate -- being a pleasant looking woman suffering from a terrible form of cancer makes you a good story, it does not make you a top-50 beauty. No.
2. Halle Berry -- yes.
3. The NEW 90210 Girls -- I like the Nip/Tuck girl, but they are all way to skinny for me, but overall, objectively, it is a close call.
4. Ciara -- no. Looks like one of any 40 women you might see on the city streets of New York or Chicago.
5. Zac Efron -- certainly yes.
6. Christina Aguilera -- very pretty young mom, but not a contender for 50 most beautiful
7. Freida Pinto -- see Ciara
8. Channing Tatum -- yes.
9. Julianne Hough -- maybe the easiest choice of the list. Yes.
10. Robert Patterson -- um, no, no, no. Where is Danial Radcliffe?
11. Taylor Swift -- tough, tough call; there is something off-putting about her look and yet something so alluring as well. Not going to criticize the pick, but not sure I would have gone there.
12. Michelle Obama -- nice, nice lady; good role model -- no business being on this list. I know Sir Mixalot may be upset with me, but I stand by this analysis.
13. Melissa Rycroft -- former Dallas Cowboys cheerleader, dumped after being picked on "The Bachelor," on "Dancing with the Stars." A very tough call -- no question she has the goods physically. See Taylor Swift.
14. Tristan Wilds -- no.
15. Taylor Momsen -- she is 15!!!!!!!!!!! Look at the picture of her that they offer up -- she is 15!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have no interest in being shut down by the federal government, so I express no opinion on this selection.
16. Kristen Wiig -- come on. She makes her living playing annoying and kinda creepy characters. No, no, a million times no.
17. Angelina Jolie -- easy win here. Yes.
HM
My father is a very blunt man, and a very practical man. He told me several things that have always stayed me (which I have blogged about before). He also taught me a couple very basic but worthwhile things:
1) When I was on my 7th hour of weeding strawberry plants one day, I asked him how to define what a weed is. A -- "A weed is just a plant that is growing where someone doesn't want it to be. A beautiful flower growing in a farmer's row of strawberries is still a weed."
2) "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
Now certainly my father was not any great philospher or espousing any great new-found truths here. This link advises us:
Benjamin Franklin, in Poor Richard's Almanack, 1741, wrote:"Beauty, like supreme dominion
Is but supported by opinion"
David Hume's Essays, Moral and Political, 1742, include:
"Beauty in things exists merely in the mind which contemplates them."
The person who is widely credited with coining the saying in its current form is Margaret Wolfe Hungerford (née Hamilton), who wrote many books, often under the pseudonym of 'The Duchess'. In Molly Bawn, 1878, there's the line "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", which is the earliest citation of it that I can find in print.
So my point here? I can look at one woman and determine she is basically a weed, and you can look at the same woman and determine that she is a great beauty. So to submit to the pblic a "50 Most Beautiful People" list is kinda silly.
Other problems with the list are: A) you need to be a well-known person to be on the list (there are millions of gorgeous people worldwide who are excluded from the list); and B) the extreme political correctness of the list (must have all shapes, sizes, ages, cultures, races) and, probably worst of all C) there appears to be no set criteria.
I watched the Miss USA pageant this year. 20 of the 50 most physically beautiful people in the world might have competed in that one pageant. I doubt the final list will have any of those women (whose hobby it is to be smokingly hot and beautiful).
This is sort of like me making a "50 Nicest Athletes" list. It isn't an athlete's job to be nice. There is no real contest for being nice. They don't get paid based upon how nice they show they are. I don't follow every one of them around to see if they are nice in the morning or when out of everyone's view. I watched Holyfield/Foreman last night on ESPN Classic and they mentioned 10 times what a wonderful human being Evander Holyfield was in 1991. Evander Holyfield fathered two children by 2 different women while married to his doctor wife (and had kids with her). Great human being?
So, there needs to be some objective criteria used here for "beautiful." Being funny does not make you beautiful. Being nice does not make you beautiful. Being thin, proportioned nicely, attractive to the opposite sex, easy to look at, graceful in appearance and movement -- that is what we need to go with in making a "Most Beautiful" list.
With those criteria, I will evaluate the folks disclosed thus far as being on People's List:
1. Christina Applegate -- being a pleasant looking woman suffering from a terrible form of cancer makes you a good story, it does not make you a top-50 beauty. No.
2. Halle Berry -- yes.
3. The NEW 90210 Girls -- I like the Nip/Tuck girl, but they are all way to skinny for me, but overall, objectively, it is a close call.
4. Ciara -- no. Looks like one of any 40 women you might see on the city streets of New York or Chicago.
5. Zac Efron -- certainly yes.
6. Christina Aguilera -- very pretty young mom, but not a contender for 50 most beautiful
7. Freida Pinto -- see Ciara
8. Channing Tatum -- yes.
9. Julianne Hough -- maybe the easiest choice of the list. Yes.
10. Robert Patterson -- um, no, no, no. Where is Danial Radcliffe?
11. Taylor Swift -- tough, tough call; there is something off-putting about her look and yet something so alluring as well. Not going to criticize the pick, but not sure I would have gone there.
12. Michelle Obama -- nice, nice lady; good role model -- no business being on this list. I know Sir Mixalot may be upset with me, but I stand by this analysis.
13. Melissa Rycroft -- former Dallas Cowboys cheerleader, dumped after being picked on "The Bachelor," on "Dancing with the Stars." A very tough call -- no question she has the goods physically. See Taylor Swift.
14. Tristan Wilds -- no.
15. Taylor Momsen -- she is 15!!!!!!!!!!! Look at the picture of her that they offer up -- she is 15!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have no interest in being shut down by the federal government, so I express no opinion on this selection.
16. Kristen Wiig -- come on. She makes her living playing annoying and kinda creepy characters. No, no, a million times no.
17. Angelina Jolie -- easy win here. Yes.
HM
Man Caves for Sports Fans
http://www.asylum.com/2009/04/29/man-caves-for-sporting-types/
The two I liked best were
Silver Medal -- hot dogs stand
Gold Medal -- hockey rink.
I can't stand hockey, but I love the look of that room.
The two I liked best were
Silver Medal -- hot dogs stand
Gold Medal -- hockey rink.
I can't stand hockey, but I love the look of that room.
Monday, April 27, 2009
NFL Draft
Generally every year I go through each first round pick and say something nasty about them. But this year I am on the road and, quite frankly, this seemed like such a no-name draft that it is like making fun of the third-string tackle on a high school team.
So instead I will just make some observations:
Matthew Stafford? Was David Greene unavailable? When every year the predictors say you have the best team and every year you don't win it all, does that say "overall number 1 pick" to you?
The Raiders picked a receiver whose downside is that he doesn't catch the ball well. Is this like drafting any NBA off guard who cannot shoot?
Two different teams used 1st round picks next year to get second round picks this year....OK....how bad is that draft going to be!?!?!
Someone took Kansas State's QB in round one. That is a bad pick. Sorry. That has TJack written all over it.
Is it part of the Vikings' revised "Code of Conduct" that they must pick only guys with a history of illegal behavior? Percy Harvin was asked at the Combine if he smoked weed -- "yes". Call me crazy, but his newfound claim of "mistake" doesn't quite square wit that answer.
Does every single team in the league need a tackle? I mean there were. What? 23 drafted in round 1?
That is all for now. I am off to Chicago.
So instead I will just make some observations:
Matthew Stafford? Was David Greene unavailable? When every year the predictors say you have the best team and every year you don't win it all, does that say "overall number 1 pick" to you?
The Raiders picked a receiver whose downside is that he doesn't catch the ball well. Is this like drafting any NBA off guard who cannot shoot?
Two different teams used 1st round picks next year to get second round picks this year....OK....how bad is that draft going to be!?!?!
Someone took Kansas State's QB in round one. That is a bad pick. Sorry. That has TJack written all over it.
Is it part of the Vikings' revised "Code of Conduct" that they must pick only guys with a history of illegal behavior? Percy Harvin was asked at the Combine if he smoked weed -- "yes". Call me crazy, but his newfound claim of "mistake" doesn't quite square wit that answer.
Does every single team in the league need a tackle? I mean there were. What? 23 drafted in round 1?
That is all for now. I am off to Chicago.
Former Heavyweight Champ -- RIP
http://www.fanhouse.com/news/main/greg-page-dies/447774?icid=mainhtmlws-maindl4link4http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fanhouse.com%2Fnews%2Fmain%2Fgreg-page-dies%2F447774
For those of you fortunate enough not to follow boxing back in the early 1980s, things were awfully bleak for some time before Mike Tyson came on the scene. Look at this article (detailing how Greg Page lost to Tim Witherspoon (champion) and Tony Tubbs (champion) but did defeat Gerri Coetze (champion) to become........champion (Greg Page -- champion). I am only disappointed that the article couldn't find a way to work in Mike Weaver's name (champion). Looking at wikipedia, you can also find all-time great champions like Bonecrusher Smith and Michael Dokes and Pinklon Thomas.
Mike Tyson is a horrible person, but we do owe him a small debt of gratitude for saving us from this for 4-5 years.
Quick -- name any current heavyweight champion. Are things actually WORSE today than they were in the early 1980s????
For those of you fortunate enough not to follow boxing back in the early 1980s, things were awfully bleak for some time before Mike Tyson came on the scene. Look at this article (detailing how Greg Page lost to Tim Witherspoon (champion) and Tony Tubbs (champion) but did defeat Gerri Coetze (champion) to become........champion (Greg Page -- champion). I am only disappointed that the article couldn't find a way to work in Mike Weaver's name (champion). Looking at wikipedia, you can also find all-time great champions like Bonecrusher Smith and Michael Dokes and Pinklon Thomas.
Mike Tyson is a horrible person, but we do owe him a small debt of gratitude for saving us from this for 4-5 years.
Quick -- name any current heavyweight champion. Are things actually WORSE today than they were in the early 1980s????
Friday, April 24, 2009
NFL Draft -- Worst All-Time Picks At Each First-Round Slot
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=cr-worstfirstroundpicks042407
Let me tell you a little story about the guy selected at #5 -- Mike Junkin.
When I was at Duke, Junkin played linebacker. Duke was one of the worst defensive teams I have ever seen in my 45 years on this earth. Junkin was their defensive "star." He rarely if ever made a sack, or tackle for loss, and he never forced a turnover. Teams routinely scored 45 a game against Duke. So why was Junkin a #1 pick? Well, he was a heady white kid who had good stats (pretty big, pretty fast), but more importantly.........
Junkin averaged like 19 tackles a game. Now I would go to the games and see him get maybe 3 impressive tackles and 5 where he dragged a guy down after a 7-10 yard gain, so I didn't understand how he got his extra 11 tackles a game. The answer? A friend of mine kept the tackle stats at Duke and he was told that any time Junkin got anywhere near a pile to even get a fingernail near the downed offensive player, that was an "assist" for Junkin. A two-man tackle, went down as an unassisted Junkin tackle. So, in other words, Duke just put out completely false information and at least one team (Cleveland) was dumb enough to buy it.
HM
Let me tell you a little story about the guy selected at #5 -- Mike Junkin.
When I was at Duke, Junkin played linebacker. Duke was one of the worst defensive teams I have ever seen in my 45 years on this earth. Junkin was their defensive "star." He rarely if ever made a sack, or tackle for loss, and he never forced a turnover. Teams routinely scored 45 a game against Duke. So why was Junkin a #1 pick? Well, he was a heady white kid who had good stats (pretty big, pretty fast), but more importantly.........
Junkin averaged like 19 tackles a game. Now I would go to the games and see him get maybe 3 impressive tackles and 5 where he dragged a guy down after a 7-10 yard gain, so I didn't understand how he got his extra 11 tackles a game. The answer? A friend of mine kept the tackle stats at Duke and he was told that any time Junkin got anywhere near a pile to even get a fingernail near the downed offensive player, that was an "assist" for Junkin. A two-man tackle, went down as an unassisted Junkin tackle. So, in other words, Duke just put out completely false information and at least one team (Cleveland) was dumb enough to buy it.
HM
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Big Day For Wolves Draft Prospects
Holding Miami's pick this year (#18) the Timberwolves must have been happy today to hear that Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington and Stephon Curry are bound for the NBA draft.
All three guys are rumored to get picked before #18 -- http://www.nbadraft.net/2009mock_draft but at the very least, their presence in the draft will force someone down closer to the Wolves pick at #18.
Here is one thing I cannot figure out about nbadraft.net -- why in the hell would they have Minnesota selecting Patrick Patterson (PF, 6'8") at #18? We have 4 undersized power forwards (Al, Love, Smith, Gomes) and two guys who could fill that role in a pinch (Cardinal, Madsen). So we have 6 undersized power forwards on the roster. Why in the hell would we pick Patrick Patterson?
The addition of these three guys to the draft also indicates to me that I may win my "Tyler Hansbrough will be picked #29 or later" bet with RKG!!!!!!!
Strippers Smarter, But Hookers Now Poorer
In a previous Item, I noted that in the U.S. more and more educated women are turning to stripping to make some cash.
Well, it now appears that German hookers are feeling the impact of the economic downturn. http://news.aol.com/article/german-sex-industry/441881
I think a Euro is less than $2, so the "70E all you can eat, drink and do" Deal for six hours would appear to be a pretty good deal if the women pictured with the article are any fair indicator.
Hey, I am just saying!!!!!!!!
Well, it now appears that German hookers are feeling the impact of the economic downturn. http://news.aol.com/article/german-sex-industry/441881
I think a Euro is less than $2, so the "70E all you can eat, drink and do" Deal for six hours would appear to be a pretty good deal if the women pictured with the article are any fair indicator.
Hey, I am just saying!!!!!!!!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
American Idol -- Could Disco Night Turn Into "Oh No!" Night?
What www.dialidol.com has taught us this year is that America really doesn't really have a very strong allegiance to any of these folks. Every single contestant could be in the Bottom 3 tonight, and, since they are booting 2 people, anyone could go.
Another factoid -- the judges foolishly used their one and only "Judges' Save" last week to save Matt Giraud. Giraud isn't going to win. And by saving Giraud, they have opened up a terrible can of worms where someone who is actually a higher quality performer (Allen, Iraheta, Gokey, Lambert) could be booted this week and there is absolutely nothing the judges can do to stop it.
Based upon busy signals (again, all are within the margin of error, so this tells us nothing statistically significant):
Best -- Lil Rounds
Adam Lambert
Danny Gokey
Anoop Desai
Matt Giraud
Kris Allen
Worst -- Allison Iraheta
Based upon my actually listening to them:
Best -- Kris Allen
Adam Lambert
Danny Gokey
(significant gap)
Allisson Iraheta
Matt Giraud
(huge gap)
Lil Rounds
(huge gap)
Anoop Desai.
I will be VERY disappointed is Desai or Rounds is not eliminated. They were simply awful. Anoop's smarmy "Dim All the Lights" literally made me want to throw up.
Another factoid -- the judges foolishly used their one and only "Judges' Save" last week to save Matt Giraud. Giraud isn't going to win. And by saving Giraud, they have opened up a terrible can of worms where someone who is actually a higher quality performer (Allen, Iraheta, Gokey, Lambert) could be booted this week and there is absolutely nothing the judges can do to stop it.
Based upon busy signals (again, all are within the margin of error, so this tells us nothing statistically significant):
Best -- Lil Rounds
Adam Lambert
Danny Gokey
Anoop Desai
Matt Giraud
Kris Allen
Worst -- Allison Iraheta
Based upon my actually listening to them:
Best -- Kris Allen
Adam Lambert
Danny Gokey
(significant gap)
Allisson Iraheta
Matt Giraud
(huge gap)
Lil Rounds
(huge gap)
Anoop Desai.
I will be VERY disappointed is Desai or Rounds is not eliminated. They were simply awful. Anoop's smarmy "Dim All the Lights" literally made me want to throw up.
Cloud 9
How in the world did I miss this Bert Reynolds vehicle? Sounds like a movie I would have enjoyed!!! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0403946/
Rip Hamilton Puts Up a Minus 30!!!!!
http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=290421005
Wow. That is not easy to do in a game where your team loses by only 12..............and you play 40 of the 48 minutes!! So in the 8 minutes that Rip was not playing, the Pistons were plus 18.
Every 4 minutes Rip played, his team fell behind by 3 more points. In every 4 minutes he was off the court, they caught up by 9 points.
This has to be one of the worst plus/minus performances in NBA history.
Do you think Rip misses Chauncey any?
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Gay Marriage Ads
And
and
Who'da Thunk that tiny little boring Iowa would create such an awful gay storm?
TCF Bank To Repay $361MM -- Thought the Program Was Only For Well-Capitalized Banks
TCF CEO Bill Cooper (long-time Minnesota Republican Party contributor):
On March 2, 2009, Cooper said, "In November when we agreed to accept the funds under the Capital Purchase Program, it was with the understanding that only healthy banks would be granted the funds. These healthy banks would then employ the funds within their markets to expand lending to creditworthy individuals and businesses. Recent actions by the U.S. Treasury and possible congressional or regulatory restrictions/mandates changed the rules."
You thought that money disbursed in the middle of a banking crisis by George W. Bush in November of 2008 would only go to healthy banks? Was it the fact that the program you were in was part of what was called the "Toxic Assets Recovery Plan" that led you to believe that?
My goodness. Why lie?
Just say, "I want to make more money than God and send people on junkets to Aspen any time I want, so I just gotta find a way to give back this money!"
I could live with that.
I am happy that any of these banks are paying back the money. If the government can make money from loans to banks who can quickly pay it back (instead of loans to, for example, Saudi Arabia and China), maybe we should do this program every so often just to shake things up?
On March 2, 2009, Cooper said, "In November when we agreed to accept the funds under the Capital Purchase Program, it was with the understanding that only healthy banks would be granted the funds. These healthy banks would then employ the funds within their markets to expand lending to creditworthy individuals and businesses. Recent actions by the U.S. Treasury and possible congressional or regulatory restrictions/mandates changed the rules."
You thought that money disbursed in the middle of a banking crisis by George W. Bush in November of 2008 would only go to healthy banks? Was it the fact that the program you were in was part of what was called the "Toxic Assets Recovery Plan" that led you to believe that?
My goodness. Why lie?
Just say, "I want to make more money than God and send people on junkets to Aspen any time I want, so I just gotta find a way to give back this money!"
I could live with that.
I am happy that any of these banks are paying back the money. If the government can make money from loans to banks who can quickly pay it back (instead of loans to, for example, Saudi Arabia and China), maybe we should do this program every so often just to shake things up?
Miss California USA Warring With Perez Hilton
As I reported yesterday, Miss California USA faced a tough question from the gay Perez Hilton that surely cost her his vote and maybe the vote of others. She didn't do such a great job of stating her opinion either. Oh well, Fox News Babe here we come!
(To correct El-right-wing-o-chickie -- I think Miss NC was ahead on points going into the final round, so you actually had to win that round by a lot to win. So it didn't, "Cost me my crown." The other girl was prettier.)
HM
Monday, April 20, 2009
76ers Win Powered By.....Donyell Marshall and Theo Ratliff?!?!?!
Now Theo I thought had quit basketball, but it turns out he has played a fair amount this year and still averaged over 1 block per game.
Theo turned 36 on Friday -- Happy Birthday, Theo (age 36, 1995 draft pick out of Wyoming).
But Donyell Marshall? Look at his game log: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=512
Would anyone have ever thought that the 34 year old Marshall (35 in May, 1994 draft pick out of UConn) would ever play in a playoff game, or get 11 points in 11 minutes or go +18 in plus-minus at any level above YMCA!?!?!?!??
And who knew (certainly not me) that The Devil only SHARES the record for most threes in a game (12) with..........................Donyell Marshall:
I guess the Timberwolves should have kept him.............15 years ago!
Theo turned 36 on Friday -- Happy Birthday, Theo (age 36, 1995 draft pick out of Wyoming).
But Donyell Marshall? Look at his game log: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=512
Would anyone have ever thought that the 34 year old Marshall (35 in May, 1994 draft pick out of UConn) would ever play in a playoff game, or get 11 points in 11 minutes or go +18 in plus-minus at any level above YMCA!?!?!?!??
And who knew (certainly not me) that The Devil only SHARES the record for most threes in a game (12) with..........................Donyell Marshall:
I guess the Timberwolves should have kept him.............15 years ago!
Miss Arizona USA 2009 Blows Her Final Interview Question
So the best three in swimsuit and evening gown scores are Miss North Carolina, Miss California and Miss Arizona. I picked NC and CA in my top 7 during the initial walkway portion, and my youngest had NC as one of her top 5 (she ultimately won).
CA was unfortunate to be a right-wing whacko born-again who fielded a "Vermont Just Passed Gay Marriage -- your thoughts?" question from the gay Perez Hilton (Answer: "It is great that we have the right of choice in this country.....but in my country....and my family....marriage is between one man and one woman"). This answer is at least an admirable try, but it misstates the entire premise of the "sanctity of marriage" people -- any gay marriage anywhere harms me irreparably and can never be allowed to stand.
But Arizona? Oh Miss Arizona. Miss Teen South Carolina at least TRIED to answer the question "some people don't have maps...." Miss Arizona's "strategery" when asked HER opinion? It doesn't matter, because it is all a matter of integrity.........and I say that with great conviction.
Please identify for me her position on whether we should have universal health care:
CA was unfortunate to be a right-wing whacko born-again who fielded a "Vermont Just Passed Gay Marriage -- your thoughts?" question from the gay Perez Hilton (Answer: "It is great that we have the right of choice in this country.....but in my country....and my family....marriage is between one man and one woman"). This answer is at least an admirable try, but it misstates the entire premise of the "sanctity of marriage" people -- any gay marriage anywhere harms me irreparably and can never be allowed to stand.
But Arizona? Oh Miss Arizona. Miss Teen South Carolina at least TRIED to answer the question "some people don't have maps...." Miss Arizona's "strategery" when asked HER opinion? It doesn't matter, because it is all a matter of integrity.........and I say that with great conviction.
Please identify for me her position on whether we should have universal health care:
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Sunday Soccer -- Final post
We lead 3 to 0. Our neighbor scored (nice girl -- young 10th grader playing down a year). Due to injury, DGM was subbed back into the tilt as midfielder. Clearly her best position (though she played defense on last year's state runner up squad). Excellent passer and tireless. If she were 3 inches or 25 pounds bigger, she would be a great midfielder.
Game over. Umbrellas down. Dockers guy looks absolutely distraught that his sqaud lost. Fat lady who blocked my view with her vehicle SAT OUTSIDE. ArGggggggggg!!!!! No way.
Oh well. Now we go to Subway and I have drawn afternoon movie duty for "17 again" for my youngest. DGMs team will not go without a win this year. Lady next to me juist woke up!!!! She is walking down to see her daughter -- no doubt to say "good game".
Game over. Umbrellas down. Dockers guy looks absolutely distraught that his sqaud lost. Fat lady who blocked my view with her vehicle SAT OUTSIDE. ArGggggggggg!!!!! No way.
Oh well. Now we go to Subway and I have drawn afternoon movie duty for "17 again" for my youngest. DGMs team will not go without a win this year. Lady next to me juist woke up!!!! She is walking down to see her daughter -- no doubt to say "good game".
More Sunday Soccer -- part 4??
I thought I was a bad dad for watching in the car. The chunky mom (note the pattern here?) In the SUV next to me is, literally, sleeping.
We lead 2 to 0 at half and just had the shortest halftime ever (I guess when you are playing a losers' bracket game in 40 degree drizzle no one wants much more delay).
I received a text message about 5 minutes ago. I looked down to read it and we scored. Not sure how, but the girl they mobbed was 20 yards out. More reason to hate soccer. Imagine "I got a text so I missed half of the basketball scoring". Even worse "half of the shots".
DGM back at Striker with her friend Taylor. Which is good because Taylor can actually score and DGM's best skill is passing. As I get older and watch youth sports it is clear to me what "chemistry" actually means. It means you enjoy playing the game with the people around you and that you know they are not selfish pigs who play for themselves. You need some great athletes to win, but the reason these guys don't always win is that no one wants to play on their team. It is hard to play when you hate the guys you are teammates with.
DGM shot on Goal - right to the goalie. Another 2 minutes later -- ditto.
We lead 2 to 0 at half and just had the shortest halftime ever (I guess when you are playing a losers' bracket game in 40 degree drizzle no one wants much more delay).
I received a text message about 5 minutes ago. I looked down to read it and we scored. Not sure how, but the girl they mobbed was 20 yards out. More reason to hate soccer. Imagine "I got a text so I missed half of the basketball scoring". Even worse "half of the shots".
DGM back at Striker with her friend Taylor. Which is good because Taylor can actually score and DGM's best skill is passing. As I get older and watch youth sports it is clear to me what "chemistry" actually means. It means you enjoy playing the game with the people around you and that you know they are not selfish pigs who play for themselves. You need some great athletes to win, but the reason these guys don't always win is that no one wants to play on their team. It is hard to play when you hate the guys you are teammates with.
DGM shot on Goal - right to the goalie. Another 2 minutes later -- ditto.
Sunday Soccer Part 3
My daughter (Daddy's Girl Maven -- DGM) enters the game. She is playing Striker (center forward). Great girl, gets a 97 or better in every class, but she is 5 foot 4 and slim and not quick. Her insertion at Striker clues you in on how offensively challenged this team will be all year.
She is blowing on her hand. Funny - I am plenty warm. Oh. I am still in the car. I am now blocked by the Dockers Golf guy and by a chunky lady who looks to be using Cesar Cedeno's old jersey as any umbrella (if Cedeno were 500 pounds).
Still 1 to 0.
She is blowing on her hand. Funny - I am plenty warm. Oh. I am still in the car. I am now blocked by the Dockers Golf guy and by a chunky lady who looks to be using Cesar Cedeno's old jersey as any umbrella (if Cedeno were 500 pounds).
Still 1 to 0.
Sunday Soccer - Part 2
So there is a place on a hill overlooking the game where you can park and not leave your car. I pull up, get a great spot. Fat mom pulls up her up Expedition and parks it backward, thus blocking my view of half the field. I then have to move my car to another spot behind the Blue team's fans. They all stand up and sport umbrellas that would have saved the aliens in Signs from extinction (it is drizzling). I can now only see play in the two penalty boxes.
We just scored on a three hopper by their, um, goalie. Thus marking our first goal of the year, and a 1 to 0 lead.
The guy who blocks the majority of my view does so with a Dockers Golf umbrella. It says in huge letters "DOCKERS GOLF". Could it just say "I am a yuppie douchebag?". My 10 year old makes fun of me for wearing Dockers.
We just scored on a three hopper by their, um, goalie. Thus marking our first goal of the year, and a 1 to 0 lead.
The guy who blocks the majority of my view does so with a Dockers Golf umbrella. It says in huge letters "DOCKERS GOLF". Could it just say "I am a yuppie douchebag?". My 10 year old makes fun of me for wearing Dockers.
Sunday Around Noon -- Far East Metro
I drew the short straw, so I am in the far East Metro waiting for my daughter's team (0 and 2) to begin their game. Forecast today -- 43 and light rain.
Went to the gas station and got gas (needed), coffee (needed) and 2 cheeseburgers (awful, but needed). Have 6 ketchup packets to spare. Cashier was super nice.
Some pre-game thoughts -- how about LeBron, huh? Detroit has some guard matchups they can exploit. And I think Michael Curry might start to do so....just before he is fired at mid-season next year.
If you are Brandon Roy, you get to see Shane Battier and Ron Artest every night for a week. Fuck. That is every NBA guard's nightmare.
If the Spurs don't have Ginobili and the Celtics don't have Garnett, should we just list these teams as "old and declining" and move on to other series?
More to come. The soccer game will be starting soon. Of course I am wearing my Cabela's rain fishing jacket. For those of you outside of Minny, Cabela's is a hunting and fishing store. We have a credit card that gives us 1 percent credit for store purchases. So I have a lot of unnecessary Cabela's items. On the plus side, every Minnesota redneck I meet says "Dude, Great Jacket!".
So if I die from pneumonia watching this tilt, I will still have that going for me.
Went to the gas station and got gas (needed), coffee (needed) and 2 cheeseburgers (awful, but needed). Have 6 ketchup packets to spare. Cashier was super nice.
Some pre-game thoughts -- how about LeBron, huh? Detroit has some guard matchups they can exploit. And I think Michael Curry might start to do so....just before he is fired at mid-season next year.
If you are Brandon Roy, you get to see Shane Battier and Ron Artest every night for a week. Fuck. That is every NBA guard's nightmare.
If the Spurs don't have Ginobili and the Celtics don't have Garnett, should we just list these teams as "old and declining" and move on to other series?
More to come. The soccer game will be starting soon. Of course I am wearing my Cabela's rain fishing jacket. For those of you outside of Minny, Cabela's is a hunting and fishing store. We have a credit card that gives us 1 percent credit for store purchases. So I have a lot of unnecessary Cabela's items. On the plus side, every Minnesota redneck I meet says "Dude, Great Jacket!".
So if I die from pneumonia watching this tilt, I will still have that going for me.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
How to Fix the Timberwolves -- Version 2,987,986,249
Oh, once again, I make my annual commentary on how to fix the shitty Timberwolves (24-58, tied for 5th worst team in the league).
While Barack Obama probably has an easier job than the new Wolves GM (to be named next week) will have in front of him, here is an analysis.
Assets:
1) Wolves have a very good young player in Al Jefferson who can get you 25 and 12 if healthy and playing at peak efficiency.
2) Wolves have an extremely wealthy owner who is worth something like $3B. So spending and losing money is not that much of a factor for the Wolves.
3) Wolves will probably have a top 6 or top 7 draft pick. Wolves will also have picks 18, 28 and 35or36.
4) Wolves have $20MM of expiring contract this year and three white guys with about $16MM of expiring contracts in one year (Cardinal, Miller, Madsen).
5) Kevin Love has played enough that his value may be inflated enough to deal him.
Liabilities:
1) Except for Al Jefferson, McHale as GM has left the cupboard basically bare of NBA starters. Randy Foye and Mike Miller would be 6th or 7th men on low-level playoff teams. Everyone else would be 8th-11th men elsewhere.
2) Absolutely no size -- Wolves are the smallest NBA team in my recent memory. They are undersized at every position except whatever position Mike Miller is playing. They have a midget playing PG, a PG playing 2 guard, a SF playing PF, and a PF playing center.
3) Terrible, terrible defensive club. There are 6 clubs in the league who had a steals+blocks per game number at least 1 less than their opponents (meaning they were at least 82 steals+blocks worse): Houston -1.45, OKC -1.51, Charlotte -1.67, Sacramento -2.54, Minnesota -3.16, and the Knicks -3.37 http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable2.html?cnf=1&prd=1
The Knicks play no defense out of design (Mike D'Antoni), Charlotte regularly plays two point guards at the same time.
But it is tough to win when you give up 259 more steals+blocks than your opponents.
4) History of Failure
5) Terrible weather keeps away potential free agents.
ACTION PLAN -- IF I WERE GM
1) First of all, you need to give the public hope by firing everyone currently employed on the basketball side. That would mean McHale, Hoiberg, Stack, Babcock. Everyone is gone. Signal -- we are no longer associated at all with that group.
2) Once you do #1, you need a new coach. Best choice -- veteran coach who can take a shitty, shitty team and make it more respectable. I haven't reviewed the choices out there, but it certainly hurts if Flip Saunders is now going to be the Wizards' coach. He is a good regular season coach....which is what this franchise needs right now.
3) Trade your expiring contracts for some player with a big contract that a team is trying to dump. Examples -- Luol Deng, Kirk Hinrich, Michael Redd, Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Tyson Chandler, Sam Dalembert, Kevin Martin, Andrei Kirilenko.
Why? Because it would be nice for once to be able to say, "We have two legit NBA starters."
4) Sign a free agent to a position of need. Hey, who is going to offer Shawn Marion any money? No one. So................do we need to upgrade our small forward position? Sure. Do we need improved defense? Yes. Would Andre Miller be a huge improvement over what we have? Yes.
If we have a lot of money, would we like Lamar Odom? Sure. I will take the #2 plus/minus guy in the whole league.
5) Try to get some deals in place BEFORE you draft. Recall that last year the Wolves decided that they didn't need Mario Chalmers......because they had Marko Jaric.......who they 3 minutes later traded to Memphis.......
OK.
6) Do a good job drafting and use all of your picks. Look, I am SO effing tired of the Wolves saying after the draft "we don't need all of these picks because we have 14 guys under contract already." Well you know what? You know what those guys can do -- suck. So draft some NEW guys and bring them in to camp. If you have to release Ryan Gomes the world will continue to spin. If you have to eat Bobby Brown's $700,000 contract, that is the cost of doing business.
As far as I am concerned as GM, on draft night you have this roster:
Al Jefferson
Randy Foye
Free Agent Acquisition
Trade Acquisition
Kevin Love (if not dealt)
7-10 open roster spots.
So, max upside of this strategy? You go into next year:
Shawn Marion
Al Jefferson
Thabeet or Dalembert or Chandler
Draft Pick at off guard or Foye
Andre Miller and/or draft pick.
You probably can't move 100% of the shit you have on the bench, so maybe players 8-12 are your existing players, but you can live with that.
That team maybe wins 35-42 games.
HM
While Barack Obama probably has an easier job than the new Wolves GM (to be named next week) will have in front of him, here is an analysis.
Assets:
1) Wolves have a very good young player in Al Jefferson who can get you 25 and 12 if healthy and playing at peak efficiency.
2) Wolves have an extremely wealthy owner who is worth something like $3B. So spending and losing money is not that much of a factor for the Wolves.
3) Wolves will probably have a top 6 or top 7 draft pick. Wolves will also have picks 18, 28 and 35or36.
4) Wolves have $20MM of expiring contract this year and three white guys with about $16MM of expiring contracts in one year (Cardinal, Miller, Madsen).
5) Kevin Love has played enough that his value may be inflated enough to deal him.
Liabilities:
1) Except for Al Jefferson, McHale as GM has left the cupboard basically bare of NBA starters. Randy Foye and Mike Miller would be 6th or 7th men on low-level playoff teams. Everyone else would be 8th-11th men elsewhere.
2) Absolutely no size -- Wolves are the smallest NBA team in my recent memory. They are undersized at every position except whatever position Mike Miller is playing. They have a midget playing PG, a PG playing 2 guard, a SF playing PF, and a PF playing center.
3) Terrible, terrible defensive club. There are 6 clubs in the league who had a steals+blocks per game number at least 1 less than their opponents (meaning they were at least 82 steals+blocks worse): Houston -1.45, OKC -1.51, Charlotte -1.67, Sacramento -2.54, Minnesota -3.16, and the Knicks -3.37 http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable2.html?cnf=1&prd=1
The Knicks play no defense out of design (Mike D'Antoni), Charlotte regularly plays two point guards at the same time.
But it is tough to win when you give up 259 more steals+blocks than your opponents.
4) History of Failure
5) Terrible weather keeps away potential free agents.
ACTION PLAN -- IF I WERE GM
1) First of all, you need to give the public hope by firing everyone currently employed on the basketball side. That would mean McHale, Hoiberg, Stack, Babcock. Everyone is gone. Signal -- we are no longer associated at all with that group.
2) Once you do #1, you need a new coach. Best choice -- veteran coach who can take a shitty, shitty team and make it more respectable. I haven't reviewed the choices out there, but it certainly hurts if Flip Saunders is now going to be the Wizards' coach. He is a good regular season coach....which is what this franchise needs right now.
3) Trade your expiring contracts for some player with a big contract that a team is trying to dump. Examples -- Luol Deng, Kirk Hinrich, Michael Redd, Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, Tyson Chandler, Sam Dalembert, Kevin Martin, Andrei Kirilenko.
Why? Because it would be nice for once to be able to say, "We have two legit NBA starters."
4) Sign a free agent to a position of need. Hey, who is going to offer Shawn Marion any money? No one. So................do we need to upgrade our small forward position? Sure. Do we need improved defense? Yes. Would Andre Miller be a huge improvement over what we have? Yes.
If we have a lot of money, would we like Lamar Odom? Sure. I will take the #2 plus/minus guy in the whole league.
5) Try to get some deals in place BEFORE you draft. Recall that last year the Wolves decided that they didn't need Mario Chalmers......because they had Marko Jaric.......who they 3 minutes later traded to Memphis.......
OK.
6) Do a good job drafting and use all of your picks. Look, I am SO effing tired of the Wolves saying after the draft "we don't need all of these picks because we have 14 guys under contract already." Well you know what? You know what those guys can do -- suck. So draft some NEW guys and bring them in to camp. If you have to release Ryan Gomes the world will continue to spin. If you have to eat Bobby Brown's $700,000 contract, that is the cost of doing business.
As far as I am concerned as GM, on draft night you have this roster:
Al Jefferson
Randy Foye
Free Agent Acquisition
Trade Acquisition
Kevin Love (if not dealt)
7-10 open roster spots.
So, max upside of this strategy? You go into next year:
Shawn Marion
Al Jefferson
Thabeet or Dalembert or Chandler
Draft Pick at off guard or Foye
Andre Miller and/or draft pick.
You probably can't move 100% of the shit you have on the bench, so maybe players 8-12 are your existing players, but you can live with that.
That team maybe wins 35-42 games.
HM
General Growth Files For Bankruptcy Protection -- I Will Shed No Tears
http://www.cnbc.com/id/30239789/
I have over my almost 20 years of lawyering run across General Growth Properties a number of times. Every single time (and I have tried hard to think of one exception) they have been complete pricks to deal with. They give their local affiliates in the market absolutely no discretion, you always need to deal with "the corporate office" and you are always in the back of the line, no matter if you have a $1MM issue or a $600 issue.
The general response when you finally do get to speak with someone? "We are General Growth, I don't think you realize who you are dealing with here." After 3 or 4 times of that, you so badly want to respond, "Yes. The biggest pricks of all time." But you don't, and you bring your issue up and they generally say, "Absolutely not [unstated -- cuz we are enormous pricks with very tiny actual pricks]."
So, why would General Growth bondholders force them into BK rather than accept some slower payments? Call me crazy, but it may have something to do with the pompous, ass-holish attitude that GGP has displayed to everyone over the years.
I only regret that the filing was not a Chapter 7.
I have over my almost 20 years of lawyering run across General Growth Properties a number of times. Every single time (and I have tried hard to think of one exception) they have been complete pricks to deal with. They give their local affiliates in the market absolutely no discretion, you always need to deal with "the corporate office" and you are always in the back of the line, no matter if you have a $1MM issue or a $600 issue.
The general response when you finally do get to speak with someone? "We are General Growth, I don't think you realize who you are dealing with here." After 3 or 4 times of that, you so badly want to respond, "Yes. The biggest pricks of all time." But you don't, and you bring your issue up and they generally say, "Absolutely not [unstated -- cuz we are enormous pricks with very tiny actual pricks]."
So, why would General Growth bondholders force them into BK rather than accept some slower payments? Call me crazy, but it may have something to do with the pompous, ass-holish attitude that GGP has displayed to everyone over the years.
I only regret that the filing was not a Chapter 7.
Hulk Hogan -- OJ Was Justified
In the controversial Rolling Stone interview, Hogan said the following:
"You live half a mile from the 20,000-square-foot home you can't go to anymore, you're driving through downtown Clearwater [Florida] and see a 19-year-old boy driving your Escalade, and you know that a 19-year-old boy is sleeping in your bed, with your wife ... I totally understand OJ. I get it."
Hulk obviously fails to remember that O.J. Simpson was wrongfully accused and found not guilty by a jury of his peers. Shocking and distasteful rip at O.J.
Oh, the other thing? About understanding why someone would want to kill his ex-wife. Hulk fell into the Michael Scott-esque trap of believing that if Chris Rock said it in a comedy routine, you can also say it with impunity.
(No Picture)
Michael Scott doing Chris Rock at "Diversity Day": http://www.imeem.com/people/DLWxas/music/OM8BHm9r/the-office-michael-scott-does-chris-rockmp3/
"You live half a mile from the 20,000-square-foot home you can't go to anymore, you're driving through downtown Clearwater [Florida] and see a 19-year-old boy driving your Escalade, and you know that a 19-year-old boy is sleeping in your bed, with your wife ... I totally understand OJ. I get it."
Hulk obviously fails to remember that O.J. Simpson was wrongfully accused and found not guilty by a jury of his peers. Shocking and distasteful rip at O.J.
Oh, the other thing? About understanding why someone would want to kill his ex-wife. Hulk fell into the Michael Scott-esque trap of believing that if Chris Rock said it in a comedy routine, you can also say it with impunity.
(No Picture)
Michael Scott doing Chris Rock at "Diversity Day": http://www.imeem.com/people/DLWxas/music/OM8BHm9r/the-office-michael-scott-does-chris-rockmp3/
Cheerleading Coach Fired
For posing nude. If you examine the issue at all, you will find that "Carlie Christine" turns 20 today (Happy Birthday) http://www.myspace.com/playboyscarliechristine and she states on her MySpace page that she is glad she turned pro and has no regrets.
So....................everyone is all up in arms about her getting fired as a cheerleading coach when she will now go town to town doing appearances for Playboy and making multiple times what she was making as a cheerleading coach. And she knew and accepted that she would get the boot for posing nude.........Pictured -- Carlie looking distraught.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
American Idol -- Movie Week
http://www.dialidol.com/ predicts by busy signals each week who is likely to be voted off and who is likely to stay. Unfortunately, this year the site has been basically worthless because so many weeks have one person clearly safe and then a bunch of people all around the same level of busy signal.
Again this week (due to a 3% margin of error each way), we see that only one person is predicted to be "Safe" (Danny Gokey) and all of the rest could be in the bottom 3.
The one useful prupose of the site this week is I can take their list and use it to critique performances.
From Most Busy Signals to Least
1. Danny Gokey (12.3% busy) -- I actually enjoyed his version of "Endless Love," though I thought it was particularly cruel to not allow him any backing singers. I guess the point was that he picked a duet so they were going to stick him with his choice of singing a duet as a single.
Deserves to advance.
2. Lil Rounds (11.99% busy) -- Her version of "The Rose" was dreadful. The normal parts were not good and the "gospel/R&B" parts were not good -- (Note to Lil, Gospel and R&B are not necessarily the same thing -- making a song sound "blacker" does not make it necessarily either gospel or R&B). She is now the http://www.votefortheworst.com/ candidate of choice.....and last night deservedly so. That voting block might help her stay around.
Deserves to go.
3. Adam Lambert (10.79% busy)
I never knew that "Born to Be Wild" had so many parts that sounded exactly like "Ring of Fire"!!! Amazing. When he sticks his tongue past his lower lip and screams, I always fear for our troops in the Middle East for some odd reason.
Mediocre, but not bottom 3.
4. Anoop Desai (9.83% busy)
It pains me to no end to say this, but "Everything I Do, I Do It For You" was a good song choice and a highlight of an otherwise disappointing night.
Deserves to stay.
5. Allison Iraheta (7.67% busy)
Took a wonderful song in "I Don't Want To Miss A Thing" and really showed.......why it should not be sung by a woman. It wasn't very good.
Mediocre, not bottom 3.
6. Matt Giraud (6.07 busy)
"When You Love A Woman" is a nice pleasant song to have on in the background when you are driving home in the summer or when you are throwing the ball around with the kids in the back yard. Would I pay ANY money to see ANYONE sing "When You Love a Woman" in person? No.
The song has just too many odd breaks and tempo changes and different rhythms. And every possible booby trap that the song offers? Giraud stumbled right into it.
Bottom 3.
7. Kris Allen (5.63% busy) -- He picked a song called "Falling Slowly" from a movie called "Once." How forgettable is this song?
Well: 1) it defeated 3 songs from "Enchanted" for the Academy Award in 2007!!!!!!!! Yet I do not remember it at all despite being pissed that 2007 Oscar night that it had defeated the songs from Enchanted. 2) it was allowed to be an Oscar-nominated song despite the fact that it had appeared in a different movie first and had actually been recorded on an album before the movie appearance. The primary reason? "Little public notice outside of the movie."
So to say Allen was starting behind the 8 ball here is an understatement.
I have determined that his singing performance will be graded based solely upon how "cute" you think he is. Randy Jackson and I hated the performance, Kara DioGuardi and my 14 year old daughter loved it.
Bottom 2 -- he should stay and Lil should go.
HM
Again this week (due to a 3% margin of error each way), we see that only one person is predicted to be "Safe" (Danny Gokey) and all of the rest could be in the bottom 3.
The one useful prupose of the site this week is I can take their list and use it to critique performances.
From Most Busy Signals to Least
1. Danny Gokey (12.3% busy) -- I actually enjoyed his version of "Endless Love," though I thought it was particularly cruel to not allow him any backing singers. I guess the point was that he picked a duet so they were going to stick him with his choice of singing a duet as a single.
Deserves to advance.
2. Lil Rounds (11.99% busy) -- Her version of "The Rose" was dreadful. The normal parts were not good and the "gospel/R&B" parts were not good -- (Note to Lil, Gospel and R&B are not necessarily the same thing -- making a song sound "blacker" does not make it necessarily either gospel or R&B). She is now the http://www.votefortheworst.com/ candidate of choice.....and last night deservedly so. That voting block might help her stay around.
Deserves to go.
3. Adam Lambert (10.79% busy)
I never knew that "Born to Be Wild" had so many parts that sounded exactly like "Ring of Fire"!!! Amazing. When he sticks his tongue past his lower lip and screams, I always fear for our troops in the Middle East for some odd reason.
Mediocre, but not bottom 3.
4. Anoop Desai (9.83% busy)
It pains me to no end to say this, but "Everything I Do, I Do It For You" was a good song choice and a highlight of an otherwise disappointing night.
Deserves to stay.
5. Allison Iraheta (7.67% busy)
Took a wonderful song in "I Don't Want To Miss A Thing" and really showed.......why it should not be sung by a woman. It wasn't very good.
Mediocre, not bottom 3.
6. Matt Giraud (6.07 busy)
"When You Love A Woman" is a nice pleasant song to have on in the background when you are driving home in the summer or when you are throwing the ball around with the kids in the back yard. Would I pay ANY money to see ANYONE sing "When You Love a Woman" in person? No.
The song has just too many odd breaks and tempo changes and different rhythms. And every possible booby trap that the song offers? Giraud stumbled right into it.
Bottom 3.
7. Kris Allen (5.63% busy) -- He picked a song called "Falling Slowly" from a movie called "Once." How forgettable is this song?
Well: 1) it defeated 3 songs from "Enchanted" for the Academy Award in 2007!!!!!!!! Yet I do not remember it at all despite being pissed that 2007 Oscar night that it had defeated the songs from Enchanted. 2) it was allowed to be an Oscar-nominated song despite the fact that it had appeared in a different movie first and had actually been recorded on an album before the movie appearance. The primary reason? "Little public notice outside of the movie."
So to say Allen was starting behind the 8 ball here is an understatement.
I have determined that his singing performance will be graded based solely upon how "cute" you think he is. Randy Jackson and I hated the performance, Kara DioGuardi and my 14 year old daughter loved it.
Bottom 2 -- he should stay and Lil should go.
HM
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Oldie, But A Goodie
Please ignore the scientology tag on the end. I am not trying to convert anyone.
19 of 20 ESPN Analysts Surveyed.........Know The Other Guy Is An Idiot
19 guys voted LeBron James for MVP -- http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=MVP-0809
Jon Barry went with Dwyane Wade. It may be that this is just a tribute by Jon to the dickishness of his father Rick (who, if you will recall, stated earlier this year that LeBron really doesn't know how to play basketball correctly). But let me give Jon a chance here and try to break down whatever stats might favor Wade:
James:
28.4 points
7.6 rebounds
7.2 assists
1.7 steals
1.15 blocks
2.98 turnovers a game
Wade:
30.9 points
5 rebounds
7.6 assists
2.2 steals
1.3 blocks
3.44 turnovers a game
These stats are basically a wash. Wade is up a little in scoring, and steals+blocks, while he doesn't rebound as well and turns it over more. LeBron has fewer total assists, but has a better assist-to-turnover ratio.
If you look up their shooting percentages, you would swear that they are the same player. Wade leads in shooting percentage by .002, trails in 3 point percentage by .027 and trails in free throw percentage by .015.
Then you go to Efficiency.
LeBron -- 30.88, Wade 29.3
Efficiency per 48 -- LeBron 39.31, Wade 36.44
(It is worth noting that Chris Paul is in between these two guys in the ratings, LBJ is 1st, Wade is 3rd).
There is no basis for Jon Barry to state that Wade has had a clearly better individual year than LeBron.
So then you call this part of the MVP analysis "at best a tie" for Wade and move to "what has he done for his team?" Wade's team added the #2 pick in the draft and his team is barely above .500. James added Mo Williams and his team is going to be at least 66-16, around 24 wins better than the Heat.
Then you go to the "Plus/Minus" stat and it is all over for Wade.
James has gone on a late tear and he is now +855. He leads the league by 233 points. He is +247 better than his best teammate (Mo Williams). Of guys who will log 2,500 or more minutes, he is plus 263 over Kobe, plus 335 over Ray Allen, plus 386 over Yao and plus 560 over Jason Kidd. http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus/plusminus_sort.jsp?pcomb=1&season=22008&split=9&team=
Wade is plus 168. He is only 167 better than Udonis Haslem. http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus/plusminus_sort.jsp?pcomb=1&season=22008&split=9&team=Heat
So -- LeBron: 233 points better than anyone in the league. Wade: Not 233 points better than Udonis Haslem. (To find a guy who Wade is 233 points better than who played for the Heat this year you need to go down to..........Marcus Banks.)
So, yeah, Jon Barry -- I think you just lost the right to vote here. LeBron is the regular-season MVP. And everyone seems to know it but you.
Jon Barry went with Dwyane Wade. It may be that this is just a tribute by Jon to the dickishness of his father Rick (who, if you will recall, stated earlier this year that LeBron really doesn't know how to play basketball correctly). But let me give Jon a chance here and try to break down whatever stats might favor Wade:
James:
28.4 points
7.6 rebounds
7.2 assists
1.7 steals
1.15 blocks
2.98 turnovers a game
Wade:
30.9 points
5 rebounds
7.6 assists
2.2 steals
1.3 blocks
3.44 turnovers a game
These stats are basically a wash. Wade is up a little in scoring, and steals+blocks, while he doesn't rebound as well and turns it over more. LeBron has fewer total assists, but has a better assist-to-turnover ratio.
If you look up their shooting percentages, you would swear that they are the same player. Wade leads in shooting percentage by .002, trails in 3 point percentage by .027 and trails in free throw percentage by .015.
Then you go to Efficiency.
LeBron -- 30.88, Wade 29.3
Efficiency per 48 -- LeBron 39.31, Wade 36.44
(It is worth noting that Chris Paul is in between these two guys in the ratings, LBJ is 1st, Wade is 3rd).
There is no basis for Jon Barry to state that Wade has had a clearly better individual year than LeBron.
So then you call this part of the MVP analysis "at best a tie" for Wade and move to "what has he done for his team?" Wade's team added the #2 pick in the draft and his team is barely above .500. James added Mo Williams and his team is going to be at least 66-16, around 24 wins better than the Heat.
Then you go to the "Plus/Minus" stat and it is all over for Wade.
James has gone on a late tear and he is now +855. He leads the league by 233 points. He is +247 better than his best teammate (Mo Williams). Of guys who will log 2,500 or more minutes, he is plus 263 over Kobe, plus 335 over Ray Allen, plus 386 over Yao and plus 560 over Jason Kidd. http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus/plusminus_sort.jsp?pcomb=1&season=22008&split=9&team=
Wade is plus 168. He is only 167 better than Udonis Haslem. http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus/plusminus_sort.jsp?pcomb=1&season=22008&split=9&team=Heat
So -- LeBron: 233 points better than anyone in the league. Wade: Not 233 points better than Udonis Haslem. (To find a guy who Wade is 233 points better than who played for the Heat this year you need to go down to..........Marcus Banks.)
So, yeah, Jon Barry -- I think you just lost the right to vote here. LeBron is the regular-season MVP. And everyone seems to know it but you.
Isiah Thomas to Coach at Florida International
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=4067233
You hire a guy who just recently attempted suicide (and then said it was his child who did it) and who just got nailed with an $11MM sexual harassment verdict.
So.............what happens if he comes to your school and sexually harasses female students? You gonna pick up the cost of that? What if the team starts poorly and he kills himself 10 games in?
Exactly why does Zeke keep getting jobs? You don't hear about baseball teams hiring Darrell Strawberry or football teams hiring O.J. Simpson (pre-prison). No youth boxing academy is out there hiring Mike Tyson as a teacher. These were all great athletes, without a question, so was Zeke. But he seemingly can do anything and still be marketable AS A COACH OF YOUNG MEN!!!!
Wow.
You hire a guy who just recently attempted suicide (and then said it was his child who did it) and who just got nailed with an $11MM sexual harassment verdict.
So.............what happens if he comes to your school and sexually harasses female students? You gonna pick up the cost of that? What if the team starts poorly and he kills himself 10 games in?
Exactly why does Zeke keep getting jobs? You don't hear about baseball teams hiring Darrell Strawberry or football teams hiring O.J. Simpson (pre-prison). No youth boxing academy is out there hiring Mike Tyson as a teacher. These were all great athletes, without a question, so was Zeke. But he seemingly can do anything and still be marketable AS A COACH OF YOUNG MEN!!!!
Wow.
Monday, April 13, 2009
The Masters -- Hard To Beat The Third Round Leaders
So, Angel Cabrera banks one off a tree on the first playoff hole and still manages to beat one guy on that hole, on his way to a playoff win over Chad Campbell and Kenny Perry.
Noted Angel Cabrera in reference to Perry -- "He bogeyed a hole, and I liked it."
Cabrera's win marks (per TV -- I didn't look it up) the 18th time in 19 years that the winner has come from the final group. Why? Well, I have some ideas.
1) The course record at Augusta is 63. So you have to assume that the best someone is going to shoot on a Sunday afternoon under pressure is 64 or 65. So take Sunday -- Cabrera is at 11 under, his playing partner is at 11 under, then you have a guy at 9 under and a stray guy at 8 under and 7 under, etc. Woods and Mickelson are 7 shots back. Now, assume that Phil shoots 64 instead of his 67. He is 12 under. All Cabrera and Perry need to do is shoot one under for a tie. Despite the fact that they tried very hard to suck it away late on Sunday, each managed to make it to 12 under, which brings me to point #2......
2) The stretch of 13-14-15-16 has become too easy for really good golfers.
It used to be that you would see the ball going over the green on 13 and 15 or sometimes into the water. Occasionally you would see a ball in the water on 16. When was the last time you saw a leader on Sunday in trouble on 13, 15 or 16? 5 or 6 years ago?
If you are the leader and someone 3 or 4 holes in front of you has made a charge to pull even, you just say, "Well, I can go birdie-par-birdie-birdie on 13-16 and now I am up 3 shots."
You still see eagle opportunities on 13 and 15, but you don't see anyone getting a 6, 7 or 8.
Is this just my perception? Uh, no. http://www.masters.com/en_US/scores/stats/cstats.html
13 through 16 all played under par on Sunday.
13 -- 4.38
14 -- 3.96
15 -- 4.32
16 -- 2.72
Even worse, almost no one was ever in trouble on 13, 15 or 16.
13 -- 30 birdie or better, 1 bogey, 1 other
15 -- 35 birdie or better, 1 bogey, 1 double
16 -- 17 birdies, 31 pars, 1 bogey, 1 other
So the final 9 at Augusta is set up great for "risk-reward"?? Bull. Once you get past 12 you have a 4 hole stretch with nearly zero risk and some real easy birdie opportunities. So a leader falling apart on the back 9 at Augusta? Hard to do. Once you clear 12 you will have a hard time losing strokes.
Let's take Phil Mickelson coming in, and let's even start him at #12 where he gags hard trying to hit a 9 iron.
Double bogey -- terrible tee shot
Birdie -- makable eagle putt misses
Par
Birdie -- completely whiffs the hole on a 6 foot eagle putt
Par -- makeable birdie putt not close
Par -- completly whiffs the hole for birdie from 6 feet again
Bogey -- hits a terrible drive, a terrible bunker shot, a terrible wedge and then 2 putts
So despite numerous choke-job shots and putting as if he is using one of my 1985-era softball bats from my garage, PMick ends up:
+1 for that stretch and
-2 for 13-16 and
-1 for 13-18. Where exactly is this great "risk-reward" setup?
So maybe it was just an easy Sunday set-up?
Well, #13 on the week had 138 birdies or better and 26 bogeys or worse.
#15 on the week had 144 birdies or better and 26 bogeys or worse.
A lot of reward, not much risk all week on 13 or 15.
But #16 on the week was a much harder hole than it was on Sunday (where you had 17 birdies, 31 pars, 1 bogey and one double).
What to do? Well, there needs to be some real risk put into the stretch of 13 through 16.
I don't design golf courses, but I would say that 16's traditional Sunday pin placement should be a thing of the past. It is basically a mini-golf placement where everything funnels down toward the hole. Move the Sunday pin placement up onto the top tier and watch guys get double bogeys.
Use the easy pin placement for Thursday or Saturday.
And something really needs to be done about 13 and 15. Right now they are the most socialistic holes in major championship golf -- need a birdie? "Here you go -- you got one. Now go along your way." I don't know precisely what you can do, but somehow the water needs to be a lot more in play. These holes have become a joke. So much so that when Kenny Perry failed to birdie one on Sunday everyone in the crowd was stunned. Not surprising, since you were more than twice as likely to get a birdie or better as you were a par at either hole.
On Sunday you were 30 times as likely to be under par on 13 as over par (30 to 1) while 15 showed little more teeth (going 35 to 2).
HM
Noted Angel Cabrera in reference to Perry -- "He bogeyed a hole, and I liked it."
Cabrera's win marks (per TV -- I didn't look it up) the 18th time in 19 years that the winner has come from the final group. Why? Well, I have some ideas.
1) The course record at Augusta is 63. So you have to assume that the best someone is going to shoot on a Sunday afternoon under pressure is 64 or 65. So take Sunday -- Cabrera is at 11 under, his playing partner is at 11 under, then you have a guy at 9 under and a stray guy at 8 under and 7 under, etc. Woods and Mickelson are 7 shots back. Now, assume that Phil shoots 64 instead of his 67. He is 12 under. All Cabrera and Perry need to do is shoot one under for a tie. Despite the fact that they tried very hard to suck it away late on Sunday, each managed to make it to 12 under, which brings me to point #2......
2) The stretch of 13-14-15-16 has become too easy for really good golfers.
It used to be that you would see the ball going over the green on 13 and 15 or sometimes into the water. Occasionally you would see a ball in the water on 16. When was the last time you saw a leader on Sunday in trouble on 13, 15 or 16? 5 or 6 years ago?
If you are the leader and someone 3 or 4 holes in front of you has made a charge to pull even, you just say, "Well, I can go birdie-par-birdie-birdie on 13-16 and now I am up 3 shots."
You still see eagle opportunities on 13 and 15, but you don't see anyone getting a 6, 7 or 8.
Is this just my perception? Uh, no. http://www.masters.com/en_US/scores/stats/cstats.html
13 through 16 all played under par on Sunday.
13 -- 4.38
14 -- 3.96
15 -- 4.32
16 -- 2.72
Even worse, almost no one was ever in trouble on 13, 15 or 16.
13 -- 30 birdie or better, 1 bogey, 1 other
15 -- 35 birdie or better, 1 bogey, 1 double
16 -- 17 birdies, 31 pars, 1 bogey, 1 other
So the final 9 at Augusta is set up great for "risk-reward"?? Bull. Once you get past 12 you have a 4 hole stretch with nearly zero risk and some real easy birdie opportunities. So a leader falling apart on the back 9 at Augusta? Hard to do. Once you clear 12 you will have a hard time losing strokes.
Let's take Phil Mickelson coming in, and let's even start him at #12 where he gags hard trying to hit a 9 iron.
Double bogey -- terrible tee shot
Birdie -- makable eagle putt misses
Par
Birdie -- completely whiffs the hole on a 6 foot eagle putt
Par -- makeable birdie putt not close
Par -- completly whiffs the hole for birdie from 6 feet again
Bogey -- hits a terrible drive, a terrible bunker shot, a terrible wedge and then 2 putts
So despite numerous choke-job shots and putting as if he is using one of my 1985-era softball bats from my garage, PMick ends up:
+1 for that stretch and
-2 for 13-16 and
-1 for 13-18. Where exactly is this great "risk-reward" setup?
So maybe it was just an easy Sunday set-up?
Well, #13 on the week had 138 birdies or better and 26 bogeys or worse.
#15 on the week had 144 birdies or better and 26 bogeys or worse.
A lot of reward, not much risk all week on 13 or 15.
But #16 on the week was a much harder hole than it was on Sunday (where you had 17 birdies, 31 pars, 1 bogey and one double).
What to do? Well, there needs to be some real risk put into the stretch of 13 through 16.
I don't design golf courses, but I would say that 16's traditional Sunday pin placement should be a thing of the past. It is basically a mini-golf placement where everything funnels down toward the hole. Move the Sunday pin placement up onto the top tier and watch guys get double bogeys.
Use the easy pin placement for Thursday or Saturday.
And something really needs to be done about 13 and 15. Right now they are the most socialistic holes in major championship golf -- need a birdie? "Here you go -- you got one. Now go along your way." I don't know precisely what you can do, but somehow the water needs to be a lot more in play. These holes have become a joke. So much so that when Kenny Perry failed to birdie one on Sunday everyone in the crowd was stunned. Not surprising, since you were more than twice as likely to get a birdie or better as you were a par at either hole.
On Sunday you were 30 times as likely to be under par on 13 as over par (30 to 1) while 15 showed little more teeth (going 35 to 2).
HM
Snoop Dogg -- My Wife Is Not Dead
Friday, April 10, 2009
Despite Obvious Problem, GOP To Go Through With "National Teabagging Day"
Oh well..........think Sarah Palin.....think today's Katherine Harris........
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Hate Letter to Democrats
On www.dailykos.com today they posted a piece of hate mail they received. Thought you pro-Obama folks might enjoy (or you anti-Obama folks might see who is on your team):
I read your pathetic Oboma ass kissing site and you people are fucking morons. I saw you on TV and you look like a little smug faggot. I think all liberals should paint themselves black and find some black ass to have gay sex with. You people are a disgrace to the white race and to America. Your bastard president and he is a bastard cuz his white mom was a single whore when she got knocked up with him. He is a one termer, he lied, he duped, he brainwashed Americans and now they are GETTING it. You live by your whacked out biased polls, I dont need fucking numbers to see what Americans minus the liberals think of this disgusting person and his dog face bucked teeth wife. THEY ARE HATED. I CAN ONLY HOPE HE DROPS FUCKING DEAD.
O.............K.........
I read your pathetic Oboma ass kissing site and you people are fucking morons. I saw you on TV and you look like a little smug faggot. I think all liberals should paint themselves black and find some black ass to have gay sex with. You people are a disgrace to the white race and to America. Your bastard president and he is a bastard cuz his white mom was a single whore when she got knocked up with him. He is a one termer, he lied, he duped, he brainwashed Americans and now they are GETTING it. You live by your whacked out biased polls, I dont need fucking numbers to see what Americans minus the liberals think of this disgusting person and his dog face bucked teeth wife. THEY ARE HATED. I CAN ONLY HOPE HE DROPS FUCKING DEAD.
O.............K.........
Idol Final 7 -- Not Much To Recommend Here
Ranking them 7 to 1:
7. Anoop Desai -- if you went to a karaoke bar on a Saturday night and Anoop sang, you would say, "Hey, not bad." Then you would hope that a few people throughout the night would be better.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The exotic performer from another land/background who specializes in slow drippy tunes. Examples -- Jasmine Trias, Anthony Federov, Sanjaya Malakar.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- None. His Stereotype finishes somewhere between 3rd and 10th and people are glad they are gone.
6. Lil Rounds -- She is someone who if you could pick her out a song and tell her exactly how to sing it, she would be very good. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen until the final 2 or 3 and she will be gone or overmatched by then.
Idol Stereotype She Matches -- the nice, inoffensive black girl whose schtick never really catches fire with the public. Tamyra Gray, Paris Bennett, LaToya London, Tryence, Syesha Mercado, there are a LOT of this type.
Idol Winner She Most Resembles -- None. America is glad to allow a blind guy with little talent to finish 8th, and America will allow this Stereotype to finish 3rd to 9th, but win it all? Yeah, uh, not gonna happen.
5. Kris Allen -- Kris just has no idea what his strengths or weaknesses are. He is probably a drippy pop or country troubadour who can toss out really syrupy efforts in a higher voice range.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The above average vocal talent who young girls and middle-aged moms like, but who has no business winning. Jason Castro, George Huff, Chris Richardson, etc. A better looking Elliot Yamin.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- None. Sorry, Kris, but for you to win you would have to become much, much better.
4. Matt Giraud -- As Simon noted this week, it is scary to try to predict what Giraud will do. Some weeks he appears really prepared and ready to provide great entertainment. Other weeks he appears ready to do nothing but suck. He is modern and different, just not particularly stellar.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The hip, young performer who the judges have great hopes for because he or she is "different." Nikki McKibbon, Blake Lewis, Carmen Rasmussen, Carly Smithson, Michael Johns.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Taylor Hicks. His vocals are not quite the equal of Ruben Studdard's, so his only real chance to prevail is to entertain and be likeable, ala Hicks, and hope the 3 I have rated above him falter or that his popular support grows.
3. Danny Gokey -- now, if you went to a karaoke bar on a Saturday night and Danny Gokey got up and sang, everyone would know that he was the best of the night........but you wouldn't be surprised he was there. His "wife dying story" has moved him into Elliot Yamin territory for the Idol sympathy vote. And he is a nice churchgoing lad.
Idol Stereotype He Fits -- very good singer who is just not quite there as a performer. LaKisha Jones, Michael Johns, Carly Smithson.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Ruben Studdard. You hear him sing and you say, "Almost a star." But he just never seems to quite shine through 100%. In a bad year (which this is) and against an off-putting set of opponents (see ##1 and 2) that may actually be enough.
2. Allison Iraheta -- Walks to the stage and you say, "Oh good God, what is gonna happen here?" And sometimes you get the terrible bizarre effort you expect, while other times you see a bit of stardom shining through.
Idol Stereotype She Fits -- different-looking person with a big, big star voice. Clay Aiken, Eliott Yamin, Diana DiGarmo, Justin Guarini.
Idol Winner She Most Resembles -- She PHYSICALLY looks like Kelly Clarkson, but Kelly was a far better entertainer and 100 times more polished at this stage of her career. So I will say Jordin Sparks. Young, good voice, not particularly charming, helpless in stage presence, and facing very weak and odd competition. If you see a final 4 of Gokey, Giraud, Allison and Lambert, don't be surprised to see her advance twice, then people will really have to swallow hard and see if they want to vote for Adam Lambert when they have a reasonable alternative.
1. Adam Lambert -- A professional against amateurs. On a weekly basis it appears like Adam plans an entire stage play while the others just try to eke out remembering 5 lines for a tryout. Huge, huge voice, but mannerisms that can be very, very off-putting.
Idol Stereotype He Fits -- Huge, huge voice, 50% of the country can't stand them. Fantasia, Chris Daughtry, David Archuleta.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Fantasia Barrino. But for the fact that he is white and she is far more masculine, they could be twins. Huge exciting voice coupled with very unfortunate habits (Fantasia's quack-like tone, screaming and bizarre jumping up and down -- Lambert's Middle-Eastern tongue-twirling scream with the odd hair and clothes and screaming "It BURNS, It BURNS!" to a Johnny Cash song.)
The question becomes, can any of 2-4 provide America with a reasonable alternative to Lambert? Many, many people do not want to vote for him. In Archuleta's case, people had Cook. In Daughtry's case, people had THREE likeable alternatives (Hicks, McPhee, Yamin). In Fantasia's case they had, well, none.
My Odds:
Lambert 1-2
Allison 7-1
Gokey 9-1
Giraud 15-1
Allen 400 to 1
Rounds -- 500 to 1
Desai -- 2,000 to 1
7. Anoop Desai -- if you went to a karaoke bar on a Saturday night and Anoop sang, you would say, "Hey, not bad." Then you would hope that a few people throughout the night would be better.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The exotic performer from another land/background who specializes in slow drippy tunes. Examples -- Jasmine Trias, Anthony Federov, Sanjaya Malakar.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- None. His Stereotype finishes somewhere between 3rd and 10th and people are glad they are gone.
6. Lil Rounds -- She is someone who if you could pick her out a song and tell her exactly how to sing it, she would be very good. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen until the final 2 or 3 and she will be gone or overmatched by then.
Idol Stereotype She Matches -- the nice, inoffensive black girl whose schtick never really catches fire with the public. Tamyra Gray, Paris Bennett, LaToya London, Tryence, Syesha Mercado, there are a LOT of this type.
Idol Winner She Most Resembles -- None. America is glad to allow a blind guy with little talent to finish 8th, and America will allow this Stereotype to finish 3rd to 9th, but win it all? Yeah, uh, not gonna happen.
5. Kris Allen -- Kris just has no idea what his strengths or weaknesses are. He is probably a drippy pop or country troubadour who can toss out really syrupy efforts in a higher voice range.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The above average vocal talent who young girls and middle-aged moms like, but who has no business winning. Jason Castro, George Huff, Chris Richardson, etc. A better looking Elliot Yamin.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- None. Sorry, Kris, but for you to win you would have to become much, much better.
4. Matt Giraud -- As Simon noted this week, it is scary to try to predict what Giraud will do. Some weeks he appears really prepared and ready to provide great entertainment. Other weeks he appears ready to do nothing but suck. He is modern and different, just not particularly stellar.
Idol Stereotype He Matches -- The hip, young performer who the judges have great hopes for because he or she is "different." Nikki McKibbon, Blake Lewis, Carmen Rasmussen, Carly Smithson, Michael Johns.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Taylor Hicks. His vocals are not quite the equal of Ruben Studdard's, so his only real chance to prevail is to entertain and be likeable, ala Hicks, and hope the 3 I have rated above him falter or that his popular support grows.
3. Danny Gokey -- now, if you went to a karaoke bar on a Saturday night and Danny Gokey got up and sang, everyone would know that he was the best of the night........but you wouldn't be surprised he was there. His "wife dying story" has moved him into Elliot Yamin territory for the Idol sympathy vote. And he is a nice churchgoing lad.
Idol Stereotype He Fits -- very good singer who is just not quite there as a performer. LaKisha Jones, Michael Johns, Carly Smithson.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Ruben Studdard. You hear him sing and you say, "Almost a star." But he just never seems to quite shine through 100%. In a bad year (which this is) and against an off-putting set of opponents (see ##1 and 2) that may actually be enough.
2. Allison Iraheta -- Walks to the stage and you say, "Oh good God, what is gonna happen here?" And sometimes you get the terrible bizarre effort you expect, while other times you see a bit of stardom shining through.
Idol Stereotype She Fits -- different-looking person with a big, big star voice. Clay Aiken, Eliott Yamin, Diana DiGarmo, Justin Guarini.
Idol Winner She Most Resembles -- She PHYSICALLY looks like Kelly Clarkson, but Kelly was a far better entertainer and 100 times more polished at this stage of her career. So I will say Jordin Sparks. Young, good voice, not particularly charming, helpless in stage presence, and facing very weak and odd competition. If you see a final 4 of Gokey, Giraud, Allison and Lambert, don't be surprised to see her advance twice, then people will really have to swallow hard and see if they want to vote for Adam Lambert when they have a reasonable alternative.
1. Adam Lambert -- A professional against amateurs. On a weekly basis it appears like Adam plans an entire stage play while the others just try to eke out remembering 5 lines for a tryout. Huge, huge voice, but mannerisms that can be very, very off-putting.
Idol Stereotype He Fits -- Huge, huge voice, 50% of the country can't stand them. Fantasia, Chris Daughtry, David Archuleta.
Idol Winner He Most Resembles -- Fantasia Barrino. But for the fact that he is white and she is far more masculine, they could be twins. Huge exciting voice coupled with very unfortunate habits (Fantasia's quack-like tone, screaming and bizarre jumping up and down -- Lambert's Middle-Eastern tongue-twirling scream with the odd hair and clothes and screaming "It BURNS, It BURNS!" to a Johnny Cash song.)
The question becomes, can any of 2-4 provide America with a reasonable alternative to Lambert? Many, many people do not want to vote for him. In Archuleta's case, people had Cook. In Daughtry's case, people had THREE likeable alternatives (Hicks, McPhee, Yamin). In Fantasia's case they had, well, none.
My Odds:
Lambert 1-2
Allison 7-1
Gokey 9-1
Giraud 15-1
Allen 400 to 1
Rounds -- 500 to 1
Desai -- 2,000 to 1
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Some NBA Thoughts
1) Can the basketball announcers PLEASE not discuss how Phoenix doesn't try hard enough on defense? Three of their starters are Grant Hill, Steve Nash and Shaq. Combined age of........115? (I just looked it up -- the answer is only 108).
Nash has always been a disaster defensively. Shaq is old and rickety, and Hill is playing on body parts more surgically repaired than Joan Rivers or Kathy Griffin.
These three guys could try super hard every night and they would never stop anyone.
Jason Richardson is only 28, but he has logged 32-38 minutes a game in this league for YEARS and only once cleared 2.0 steals+blocks. He is now at 1.4 or 1.5. So he is 28 and getting worse defensively.
2) Money aside, Doesn't the Billups/Iverson Trade Have to Go Down as One of the Worst of all-time?
I mean, Chauncey comes to a mediocre Denver team and they may very well finish second in the East. Iverson goes to Detroit and he is done for the rest of the year (and maybe his career) and the Pistons are hoping that the Bobcats don't make a late run and knock them out of the last playoff spot.
The acquisition of Iverson changed Richard Hamilton from a 48.5% shooter to a 44% shooter and dropped his 3 point percentage by 8+ points. And Detroit is, well, just not Detroit anymore.
3) Looking at Kevin Love's defensive stats -- Not sure they could be much worse. Now Love is 6'8 3/4 inches in shoes, around 6'7" in bare feet, so you don't expect a LOT of steals+blocks playing inside, but.............1.5 steals+blocks per 36 minutes played? How bad is that? Wally Szczerbiak had 1.4 his rookie year, and 1.3 a few years later. Malik Rose regularly was in the high twos and low 3s.
You play inside and you are the CENTER for a bad NBA club. You get 83 steals+blocks in 77 games? That is terrible.
(His 1.1 assists per game is also terrible, but not as disturbing as the defensive stats).
4) LeBron's "Plus-Minus" Figure is Just Frightening -- LeBron on the year is at +793!!!!!! Plus 793. He has played over 2,700 minutes. No one else in the top 50 as of today has played 2,700 minutes (Kobe has played 72 fewer minutes and is at plus 591 -- meaning that The Devil would have to go +203 or better in his remaining few games to pass James). Lamar Odom is second in the league at +603.
Why is this so amazing?
The Cavs are +10.5 points a game for the periods when LeBron plays. So they are a dominant, dominant team --
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2009.html They are in the top 4 in both offensive and defensive efficiency.
But overall? They give up 99.9 points and allow 91.1........plus only 8.8. So with LeBron sitting? Their opponents outscore them by about 1.7 points in that 12 minute stretch.
So you are a team that wins roughly 81% of your games, yet without your star on the court you get outscored?
The 66-16 Celtics from 2007-08 were a +10.2 as a team in plus-minus. Paul Pierce (who led the league in plus-minus) was only a +9.8 for his time on the court. So the Celtics GREW their lead with Pierce off the court. With LeBron off the court, the Cavs (who may end up at 66-16 as well) actually lose ground.
If LeBron can just stay even for the rest of the year (at +793) he will have the highest plus minus point total for a year since the NBA started logging the stat in 2005-06. Of course, if he only remains at +793 for the year, it is likely that the Cavs will lose every single game coming in, so you have to expect that LeBron will do better than that, he will probably end up at plus 830 or plus 840 for the year.
Another stat -- the NBA keeps track of the best 50 5-man combinations for a team in "5-man plus minus." Of Cleveland's top 50, only 6 combos do not include LeBron. Of the Lakers' top 50, 16 combos do not involve Kobe.
HM
Nash has always been a disaster defensively. Shaq is old and rickety, and Hill is playing on body parts more surgically repaired than Joan Rivers or Kathy Griffin.
These three guys could try super hard every night and they would never stop anyone.
Jason Richardson is only 28, but he has logged 32-38 minutes a game in this league for YEARS and only once cleared 2.0 steals+blocks. He is now at 1.4 or 1.5. So he is 28 and getting worse defensively.
2) Money aside, Doesn't the Billups/Iverson Trade Have to Go Down as One of the Worst of all-time?
I mean, Chauncey comes to a mediocre Denver team and they may very well finish second in the East. Iverson goes to Detroit and he is done for the rest of the year (and maybe his career) and the Pistons are hoping that the Bobcats don't make a late run and knock them out of the last playoff spot.
The acquisition of Iverson changed Richard Hamilton from a 48.5% shooter to a 44% shooter and dropped his 3 point percentage by 8+ points. And Detroit is, well, just not Detroit anymore.
3) Looking at Kevin Love's defensive stats -- Not sure they could be much worse. Now Love is 6'8 3/4 inches in shoes, around 6'7" in bare feet, so you don't expect a LOT of steals+blocks playing inside, but.............1.5 steals+blocks per 36 minutes played? How bad is that? Wally Szczerbiak had 1.4 his rookie year, and 1.3 a few years later. Malik Rose regularly was in the high twos and low 3s.
You play inside and you are the CENTER for a bad NBA club. You get 83 steals+blocks in 77 games? That is terrible.
(His 1.1 assists per game is also terrible, but not as disturbing as the defensive stats).
4) LeBron's "Plus-Minus" Figure is Just Frightening -- LeBron on the year is at +793!!!!!! Plus 793. He has played over 2,700 minutes. No one else in the top 50 as of today has played 2,700 minutes (Kobe has played 72 fewer minutes and is at plus 591 -- meaning that The Devil would have to go +203 or better in his remaining few games to pass James). Lamar Odom is second in the league at +603.
Why is this so amazing?
The Cavs are +10.5 points a game for the periods when LeBron plays. So they are a dominant, dominant team --
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2009.html They are in the top 4 in both offensive and defensive efficiency.
But overall? They give up 99.9 points and allow 91.1........plus only 8.8. So with LeBron sitting? Their opponents outscore them by about 1.7 points in that 12 minute stretch.
So you are a team that wins roughly 81% of your games, yet without your star on the court you get outscored?
The 66-16 Celtics from 2007-08 were a +10.2 as a team in plus-minus. Paul Pierce (who led the league in plus-minus) was only a +9.8 for his time on the court. So the Celtics GREW their lead with Pierce off the court. With LeBron off the court, the Cavs (who may end up at 66-16 as well) actually lose ground.
If LeBron can just stay even for the rest of the year (at +793) he will have the highest plus minus point total for a year since the NBA started logging the stat in 2005-06. Of course, if he only remains at +793 for the year, it is likely that the Cavs will lose every single game coming in, so you have to expect that LeBron will do better than that, he will probably end up at plus 830 or plus 840 for the year.
Another stat -- the NBA keeps track of the best 50 5-man combinations for a team in "5-man plus minus." Of Cleveland's top 50, only 6 combos do not include LeBron. Of the Lakers' top 50, 16 combos do not involve Kobe.
HM
Anti-Gay Commercial -- Um........Wow
Now I have never been a strong advocate of gay marriage, but it would seem to me that when your arguments come down to "Good god, the storm is coming and we are all going to die" then maybe you need better arguments/leadership.
I can imagine this same level of commercial being run in 1963 -- "Some people want to pass a NATIONAL law saying that I need to serve darkies in my restaurant. They are taking away my freedom and the freedom of my customers who for 400 years have NEVER had to eat with dark-skinned folk."
Looking back, it is clear to me that the floodgates broke when the states started passing laws saying you couldn't refuse to hire someone or fire someone because they are gay. At that point, the states recognized that discriminating against gay people was illegal. Once you reach that conclusion, it is tough to say, "Well, except, yeah, they can't attend Boy Scouts" or "Except they shouldn't be able to adopt" or "Except they can't have sex (overturned by, I believe, a 7-2 vote in the USSCt)."
That was the point in time when the argument needed to be made -- you needed to argue that gay people should not be a suspect class like minorities or women. Once you failed to win that culture war, you end up with saying things like, "I love gay people, but they can't get married" or you end up with THIS as your commercial:
http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=18852128001
I can imagine this same level of commercial being run in 1963 -- "Some people want to pass a NATIONAL law saying that I need to serve darkies in my restaurant. They are taking away my freedom and the freedom of my customers who for 400 years have NEVER had to eat with dark-skinned folk."
Looking back, it is clear to me that the floodgates broke when the states started passing laws saying you couldn't refuse to hire someone or fire someone because they are gay. At that point, the states recognized that discriminating against gay people was illegal. Once you reach that conclusion, it is tough to say, "Well, except, yeah, they can't attend Boy Scouts" or "Except they shouldn't be able to adopt" or "Except they can't have sex (overturned by, I believe, a 7-2 vote in the USSCt)."
That was the point in time when the argument needed to be made -- you needed to argue that gay people should not be a suspect class like minorities or women. Once you failed to win that culture war, you end up with saying things like, "I love gay people, but they can't get married" or you end up with THIS as your commercial:
http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=18852128001
What Really Grinds My Gears #1 -- Officious Jerks
You know what really grinds my gears? Officious jerks.
You know who I am talking about -- people given small amounts of power who decide that they are suddenly in charge of the world. Categories include:
1) Umpires and Referees -- umpiring and refereeing sports is best done as a give and take between the players, coaches and referees. Watch Danny Crawford ref a basketball game -- he will tell a coach, "Hey, OK, I will watch that" or "You know, maybe I missed it. I will look at it on the tape." Officials in youth sports, no matter how terrible they are at their jobs, have now been taught that they are invincible and that no one should be allowed to talk to them or question their perfect judgment. Does this make them better officials? No. Does it create a healthy coach/official relationship? No. Does it allow them to think that their dicks are slightly bigger and they are slightly better looking? It seems so -- there seems to be no other point.
2) People "In Charge" Of Meaningless Ministerial Duties -- So you go to the library and the woman makes you stand "on the line" while you wait. Or you are part of some small group and the person in charge of the technology department decides that he or she will send out an e-mail stating that certain "guidelines" have been established and are being abused.
Note to these people -- get over yourself. Good lord. You are a cog in a bigger wheel, nothing but a figurehead put in place by the true powers that be. I understand that you may want to establish that you have some control over your menial task -- reality: you don't. You are the Dwight Schrute equivalent. You declare, "From now on....." but then Michael Scott comes out and says, "Yeah, that is a stupid idea. We aren't doing that."
3) Bosses -- for example, one day you go on a 90 minute lunch for someone's birthday. The boss wanted you while you are out of the office. The next day you get a memo saying,"No lunches, ever, over 45 minutes without my approval." Or you leave at 3:45 one day because it is 80 degrees out on April, and your boss leaves you a voice mail saying, "We just can't have people leaving willy-nilly, blah, blah blah."
I welcome any other categories you can think of. But dealing with or watching officious jerks? That really grinds my gears.
HM
You know who I am talking about -- people given small amounts of power who decide that they are suddenly in charge of the world. Categories include:
1) Umpires and Referees -- umpiring and refereeing sports is best done as a give and take between the players, coaches and referees. Watch Danny Crawford ref a basketball game -- he will tell a coach, "Hey, OK, I will watch that" or "You know, maybe I missed it. I will look at it on the tape." Officials in youth sports, no matter how terrible they are at their jobs, have now been taught that they are invincible and that no one should be allowed to talk to them or question their perfect judgment. Does this make them better officials? No. Does it create a healthy coach/official relationship? No. Does it allow them to think that their dicks are slightly bigger and they are slightly better looking? It seems so -- there seems to be no other point.
2) People "In Charge" Of Meaningless Ministerial Duties -- So you go to the library and the woman makes you stand "on the line" while you wait. Or you are part of some small group and the person in charge of the technology department decides that he or she will send out an e-mail stating that certain "guidelines" have been established and are being abused.
Note to these people -- get over yourself. Good lord. You are a cog in a bigger wheel, nothing but a figurehead put in place by the true powers that be. I understand that you may want to establish that you have some control over your menial task -- reality: you don't. You are the Dwight Schrute equivalent. You declare, "From now on....." but then Michael Scott comes out and says, "Yeah, that is a stupid idea. We aren't doing that."
3) Bosses -- for example, one day you go on a 90 minute lunch for someone's birthday. The boss wanted you while you are out of the office. The next day you get a memo saying,"No lunches, ever, over 45 minutes without my approval." Or you leave at 3:45 one day because it is 80 degrees out on April, and your boss leaves you a voice mail saying, "We just can't have people leaving willy-nilly, blah, blah blah."
I welcome any other categories you can think of. But dealing with or watching officious jerks? That really grinds my gears.
HM
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
The Big Ten -- The Andy Roddick of Sports Conferences
Oh, you know, the Big Ten is proud to be a plucky, scrappy conference just happy to get there and lose -- sometimes with some pride (Illinois basketball 2005) but most often in an embarrassing loss:
Indiana basketball 2002
Michigan State basketball 2009
Ohio State football 2006
Ohio State football 2007
The Big Ten is basically the Andy Roddick of conferences. In tournaments it generally advances against weaker competition and then occasionally beats someone better (allowing supporters to scream "yeah, baby, you doubted us!").
And then you have the most glorious of days when you actually reach a final and now supporters says, "See! You thought Roddick/Big Ten was overrated!"
Then what happens? The best Big Ten team draws the best team in the ACC in basketball or the best team in the SEC in football and......well.......the Big Ten looks like Roddick against Federer or Nadal. Sometimes the contest is close, but that isn't the way to bet.
But of course that doesn't mean that Roddick loses his chick Brooklyn Decker or that the Big Ten loses its central-states rube pinache. For some reason the belief remains that a key turning point major championship cannot be far away.......right?? I mean, we finish second a lot.......right? And about 7-10 years back we won a U.S. Open/BCS/Final 4, right?
So, congrats to the Big Ten on another embarrassing collapse in a major final. I know -- you were just happy to be there.
Indiana basketball 2002
Michigan State basketball 2009
Ohio State football 2006
Ohio State football 2007
The Big Ten is basically the Andy Roddick of conferences. In tournaments it generally advances against weaker competition and then occasionally beats someone better (allowing supporters to scream "yeah, baby, you doubted us!").
And then you have the most glorious of days when you actually reach a final and now supporters says, "See! You thought Roddick/Big Ten was overrated!"
Then what happens? The best Big Ten team draws the best team in the ACC in basketball or the best team in the SEC in football and......well.......the Big Ten looks like Roddick against Federer or Nadal. Sometimes the contest is close, but that isn't the way to bet.
But of course that doesn't mean that Roddick loses his chick Brooklyn Decker or that the Big Ten loses its central-states rube pinache. For some reason the belief remains that a key turning point major championship cannot be far away.......right?? I mean, we finish second a lot.......right? And about 7-10 years back we won a U.S. Open/BCS/Final 4, right?
So, congrats to the Big Ten on another embarrassing collapse in a major final. I know -- you were just happy to be there.
ACC Versus Big Ten Title Games Since April of 2000
2002 -- Maryland outclasses Indiana
2005 -- UNC beats Illinois by 5
2009 -- UNC embarrasses Michigan State 89-72
In the past 10 years, number of Big Ten titles -- 1 (Michigan State 2000)
Number of ACC Titles -- 4 (3 stated above plus Duke over Arizona in 2001).
2005 -- UNC beats Illinois by 5
2009 -- UNC embarrasses Michigan State 89-72
In the past 10 years, number of Big Ten titles -- 1 (Michigan State 2000)
Number of ACC Titles -- 4 (3 stated above plus Duke over Arizona in 2001).
Monday, April 06, 2009
Have Drink On Me........Zach Randolph
Forget about the check, we'll get Hell to pay:
http://www.fanhouse.com/news/main/zach-randolph-arrested/416042?icid=mainhtmlws-maindl4link6http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fanhouse.com%2Fnews%2Fmain%2Fzach-randolph-arrested%2F416042
I guess the good news for Clippers fans is that he is owed only a measly.........WHAT!?!?!? $33MM over two more years!?!?!
Oh, yeah, and Randolph, Baron Davis and Chris Kaman are owed $120MM total by the Clips.
Baron Davis is signed through the end of Barack Obama's first term (for once, I am not exaggerating -- he is signed through June of 2013).
http://www.fanhouse.com/news/main/zach-randolph-arrested/416042?icid=mainhtmlws-maindl4link6http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fanhouse.com%2Fnews%2Fmain%2Fzach-randolph-arrested%2F416042
I guess the good news for Clippers fans is that he is owed only a measly.........WHAT!?!?!? $33MM over two more years!?!?!
Oh, yeah, and Randolph, Baron Davis and Chris Kaman are owed $120MM total by the Clips.
Baron Davis is signed through the end of Barack Obama's first term (for once, I am not exaggerating -- he is signed through June of 2013).
Carrie Underwood -- Entertainer of the Year
In an amazing upset, Underwood not only got nominated, but defeated 5 guys to win the CMA's Entertainer of the Year award. Hey, she gets my vote for anything she wants, but to be named as EOTY is so rare for a female artist that it certainly deserves mention here.
Carrie currently dating a hockey player.......so you can see that she obviously enjoys being the smarter person in a relationship......
Teacher In Hot Water
So I read the headline "school upset at teacher over thong photos." Uh, oh! OK, so here is another 28 year old high school teacher sexting her students, right?
Well, no.
She is a 32 year old teacher/model. She teaches physical education.......at a community college in England......and she won a TV contest in 2002 where she went on a reality show and was named "England's sexiest teacher."
NOW the school is all upset that she actually found modeling work? What exactly is her crime here? That the 20+ year old students at the school........what? Pleasure themselves to pics of their hot teacher? Sorry, but I doubt you can keep that from happening.
Friday, April 03, 2009
Around My Age and Born on April 4
1966
Michal Clingman, born in Indio, California, WPVA volleyballer, Nationals-9th-1994
1966
Myriam Schropp, West Germany, tennis star
1966
Nancy McKeon, born in Westbury, New York, actress, Jo Polniazek-Facts of Life
1966
Stanislav Medrik, born in Nitra, Czechoslovakia, hockey defenseman, Team Slovakia
1965
Black Francis, [Charles Thompson], U.S. singer and songwriter, Pixies
1965
Robert Downey, Jr., born in New York City, comedian, SNL, Less than Zero, Back to School
1965
Tony Burse, CFL fullback for the Edmonton Eskimos
1964
Gregory Thomas Kraft, born in Detroit, Michigan, PGA golfer, 1993 Walt Disney-2nd
1964
Paul Parker, soccer player
1964
Robbie Rist, born in California, actor, Oliver-Brady Bunch
1964
David Cross, American Actor
1963
Anthony Clark, comedian, Boyd Pritchett-Boston Common
1963
David Gavurin, English pop guitarist/composer, Sundays, Blind
1963
Jack Del Rio, NFL linebacker for the Minnesota Vikings
1963
Graham Norton, Irish Celebrity
Michal Clingman, born in Indio, California, WPVA volleyballer, Nationals-9th-1994
1966
Myriam Schropp, West Germany, tennis star
1966
Nancy McKeon, born in Westbury, New York, actress, Jo Polniazek-Facts of Life
1966
Stanislav Medrik, born in Nitra, Czechoslovakia, hockey defenseman, Team Slovakia
1965
Black Francis, [Charles Thompson], U.S. singer and songwriter, Pixies
1965
Robert Downey, Jr., born in New York City, comedian, SNL, Less than Zero, Back to School
1965
Tony Burse, CFL fullback for the Edmonton Eskimos
1964
Gregory Thomas Kraft, born in Detroit, Michigan, PGA golfer, 1993 Walt Disney-2nd
1964
Paul Parker, soccer player
1964
Robbie Rist, born in California, actor, Oliver-Brady Bunch
1964
David Cross, American Actor
1963
Anthony Clark, comedian, Boyd Pritchett-Boston Common
1963
David Gavurin, English pop guitarist/composer, Sundays, Blind
1963
Jack Del Rio, NFL linebacker for the Minnesota Vikings
1963
Graham Norton, Irish Celebrity
Obama and Catholics
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/04/declaring_war_on_catholics.html
Let's be straight here (yes, that was another Iowa reference). There are Catholics and then there are TRUE Catholics.
I would say that in my experience about 25% of Catholics are TRUE Catholics. If the Pope told them to butter their asses and slide down the side of Buckingham Palace, they would. And they would be pissed at anyone who said it was stupid to do it.
These are the people who hate gays and gay marriage and stem cell research and abortion and basically anything the Pope tells them to hate. The Pope, by the way, it bears repeat mentioning: former Nazi. Your religious leader was a Nazi Youth member. You follow everything he says, to the letter. How scary is THAT!?!?!?
Anyway, why do we have 75% of Catholics who are wishy-washy? Who eat meat on Friday ("Ooops, I guess I shouldn't....oh well") or who advise people that abortion is, well, sometimes a relief from the burden of a birth defect, or who go to church....twice a year? Because most people don't like stupid rules any more just because they were raised Catholic.
I spoke to a Catholic woman about stem cell research the other day. "Well, I think that it is better that they don't do that." Why? "It isn't something we agree with." Why? "It is against our religion." Why? "Well, it is taking life." So if the frozen embryos are going to be thrown away, is that OK or not? "What?" To throw them away -- OK or not? "I guess, you know that people want children so much, it would be unfair to deny them." So they can make 50 embryos, have two kids and throw the rest away? "I guess." So they can kill 48 people because they are infertile? "That isn't what they do." So if I use those 48 embryos for medical research to help people?????????? "I don't know. The church says it is wrong and I go with that."
So she is a 25%er.
The other 75% are CINO (Catholics in name only), because most folks who are crazy, whacko religious zealots tend to gravitate to the southern Protestant religions (where there are even more rules and they can actively preach hatred for non-believers).
So anyway, should Barack Obama be concerned that some Catholics don't want him speaking at Notre Dame? I would guess if you rounded up 100 Catholics and asked them, here would be your response:
25% -- Who is speaking where?
35% -- That is just stupid. Let him speak.
25% -- I am outraged, and I am waiting for the Pope to tell me exactly why....but I am...
20% -- I don't go to church much, what is the church's position? Yeah, I don't care (slash "I see both sides" -- Catholics are notoriously wishy-washy and uninformed of church doctrine).
War on Catholics? Yeah, that war would be over quickly. 75% would surrender quicker than the French and 25% would come over to their side if you threatened their tax-exempt status.
Going to Hell, I Remain,
HM
Let's be straight here (yes, that was another Iowa reference). There are Catholics and then there are TRUE Catholics.
I would say that in my experience about 25% of Catholics are TRUE Catholics. If the Pope told them to butter their asses and slide down the side of Buckingham Palace, they would. And they would be pissed at anyone who said it was stupid to do it.
These are the people who hate gays and gay marriage and stem cell research and abortion and basically anything the Pope tells them to hate. The Pope, by the way, it bears repeat mentioning: former Nazi. Your religious leader was a Nazi Youth member. You follow everything he says, to the letter. How scary is THAT!?!?!?
Anyway, why do we have 75% of Catholics who are wishy-washy? Who eat meat on Friday ("Ooops, I guess I shouldn't....oh well") or who advise people that abortion is, well, sometimes a relief from the burden of a birth defect, or who go to church....twice a year? Because most people don't like stupid rules any more just because they were raised Catholic.
I spoke to a Catholic woman about stem cell research the other day. "Well, I think that it is better that they don't do that." Why? "It isn't something we agree with." Why? "It is against our religion." Why? "Well, it is taking life." So if the frozen embryos are going to be thrown away, is that OK or not? "What?" To throw them away -- OK or not? "I guess, you know that people want children so much, it would be unfair to deny them." So they can make 50 embryos, have two kids and throw the rest away? "I guess." So they can kill 48 people because they are infertile? "That isn't what they do." So if I use those 48 embryos for medical research to help people?????????? "I don't know. The church says it is wrong and I go with that."
So she is a 25%er.
The other 75% are CINO (Catholics in name only), because most folks who are crazy, whacko religious zealots tend to gravitate to the southern Protestant religions (where there are even more rules and they can actively preach hatred for non-believers).
So anyway, should Barack Obama be concerned that some Catholics don't want him speaking at Notre Dame? I would guess if you rounded up 100 Catholics and asked them, here would be your response:
25% -- Who is speaking where?
35% -- That is just stupid. Let him speak.
25% -- I am outraged, and I am waiting for the Pope to tell me exactly why....but I am...
20% -- I don't go to church much, what is the church's position? Yeah, I don't care (slash "I see both sides" -- Catholics are notoriously wishy-washy and uninformed of church doctrine).
War on Catholics? Yeah, that war would be over quickly. 75% would surrender quicker than the French and 25% would come over to their side if you threatened their tax-exempt status.
Going to Hell, I Remain,
HM
Iowa -- Land of Gay Marriage
Iowa Supreme Court today issued an opinion taking up 60+ pages in which they found that the Iowa constitution prohibited a law banning gay marriage. That law will be stricken in 21 days.
Unlike California (where you can amend your state constitution by 50.0000000001% vote in a referendum), Iowa requires that two different legislative bodies (elected every two years) vote on and approve constitional amendments.
So, wanna be a gay couple? Move to Iowa.
This, of course, makes for a very difficult decision for many gays. Die or move to Iowa? Don't get married or move to Iowa? Imagine how much better women's softball teams will become. Imagine how much better dressed men on the street of Dubuque will become.
Truly the Field of Dreams.
"Pass the lube, honey, we are entering Iowa."
Unlike California (where you can amend your state constitution by 50.0000000001% vote in a referendum), Iowa requires that two different legislative bodies (elected every two years) vote on and approve constitional amendments.
So, wanna be a gay couple? Move to Iowa.
This, of course, makes for a very difficult decision for many gays. Die or move to Iowa? Don't get married or move to Iowa? Imagine how much better women's softball teams will become. Imagine how much better dressed men on the street of Dubuque will become.
Truly the Field of Dreams.
"Pass the lube, honey, we are entering Iowa."
More Tragedy In Upstate NY
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212220284.shtml
Binghamton has always stood out in my mind as sort of the crossroads of New York.
You can take the highway north to Syracuse, west to Jamestown Rochester and Buffalo, south to Philly, east and then south down to NYC, east and then north to Albany. If you sales territory were the State of New York, Binghamton would be a nice play to be. But not today.
At least 12 dead, many more injured, gunman committed suicide.
This is a town of less than 50,000 full-time residents, but with a huge student population for its size (the former "SUNY Binghamton" now "Binghamton University" is there).
Binghamton has always stood out in my mind as sort of the crossroads of New York.
You can take the highway north to Syracuse, west to Jamestown Rochester and Buffalo, south to Philly, east and then south down to NYC, east and then north to Albany. If you sales territory were the State of New York, Binghamton would be a nice play to be. But not today.
At least 12 dead, many more injured, gunman committed suicide.
This is a town of less than 50,000 full-time residents, but with a huge student population for its size (the former "SUNY Binghamton" now "Binghamton University" is there).
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Jay Cutler -- Worse Than What the Vikings Have?
Go to www.startribune.com and find Patrick Reusse's column today stating that the Vikes are WAY better off at QB with mature adults like T-Jack and Sage Rosenfels than they would be with whiny crybaby Jay Cutler.
Thoughts?
I would have listened to Reusse's radio show today, but his sidkick just was too busy discussing Britney Spears and Lady Gaga for me to avoid turning the dial. Who the hell is this new guy? His input reminds me of "Poochie"'s appearances on "The Itchy and Scratchy Show".
HM
Thoughts?
I would have listened to Reusse's radio show today, but his sidkick just was too busy discussing Britney Spears and Lady Gaga for me to avoid turning the dial. Who the hell is this new guy? His input reminds me of "Poochie"'s appearances on "The Itchy and Scratchy Show".
HM
A Reprieve
After my April 1 posting, I talked things over with counsel and we got waivers from Sarah Palin and GWB and RKG and Al S. and PAR (his was offered in Spanish, but he demanded an English language version -- who knew?). We also got Scott Savol on board and various GOP politicians and Idol losers and Jessica Simpson.
So I am back. Since Al was one of two people expressing genuine concern, I will toss him a Jay Cutler entry as a softball. And to my only loyal female reader -- I guess I could run a couple shirtless male photos for you some time soon. Extra bonus -- they won't be of me.
HM.
So I am back. Since Al was one of two people expressing genuine concern, I will toss him a Jay Cutler entry as a softball. And to my only loyal female reader -- I guess I could run a couple shirtless male photos for you some time soon. Extra bonus -- they won't be of me.
HM.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
