Seems a bit drastic. The Heat took about 20 games before they started to play well together and went to the finals thereafter, so some patience would seem to be an appropriate response to a slow start, but Brown's calling card is defense and the Lakers are terrible defensively, both this year and last. Their offense wasn't nearly as problematic.
That and they think they can get Phil back, which they would likely know about before this firing and would put all but a few coaches on the firing block, regardless of record.
I don't get the mix there. Kobe, who needs the ball 70 percent of the possessions. Nash, who is only effective if he has the ball leading a running team, and won't have the ball because Kobe needs it. Howard and Gasol, who don't run well. Gasol, a good inside option who doesn't get the ball inside, and will see less of it now because Howard and his ego needs to be fed, even though he's nowhere near the offensive presence that Gasol is.
I get the mix, I think the problem is they're so top heavy, if one of the big four goes down for any long period of time, they don't really have any plug-ins that work - especially in the back court. Blake is terrible, and I can't even remember who would back up Kobe without looking it up. They can probably absorb Gasol or Howard going down better than Nash or Kobe. The goal this season should be to get time together as a unit and make sure everyone is good to go heading into the playoffs. I can't imagine them not making the playoffs, but I would be surprised if they had a better regular season record then the Spurs or Thunder, or even (gasp) the Clippers. How about an all LA first or second round?
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:26 AM on November 12
I think Harden as a top ten player is pretty crazy talk.
Lebron, Dwight, Chris Paul, Durant, Wade, maybe Kevin Love or Rose. Already we're arguing on who gets in. Tyson Chandler? Joakim Noah? Bynum? Griffin? Iguodala? Even Kobe gets a question mark. Carmelo is not in this conversation.
Good list, but I'd add Rondo, Westbrook, Gasol, yes Ginobli and Parker belong, and Carmelo is most certainly in that conversation and Kobe does not get a question mark - not yet. He may not be the most "teamy"of guys, but his scoring prowess is undeniable. Bynum and Griffin are in there because it's easier to replace scoring than rebounding We haven't even mentioned the old guard of still great players like Nash, Duncan (who was really good last year - look at those numbers), Pierce, Garnett and Nowitzki.
The advanced stats also have Ryan Anderson as a beast along with Al Jefferson, Lamarcus Aldridge and Greg Monroe - and they're all good, but they're not great.
Harden had a great regular season, no doubt, but let him do it more than once before we start crowning him as literally one of the best in the game. And he went missing in the playoffs at crucial times (though I think that's largely growing pains).
All in, I think Presti did pretty well here. Martin plus two first rounders (and I think Houston is more than a potential lottery team) is a good haul. Better than what Orlando got for Dwight.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:14 PM on October 28
A-Rod isn't the only hole in that lineup right now. What's Cano done? Swisher? Granderson? Why were you counting on the 37-year old guy on the downside of his career? I'd look more to the guys in their prime who have yet to show up. I don't think A-Rod should be batting fifth, but I don't think he's the reason the Yankees haven't won. The other three guys hit a combined 100 homers this year. They've sucked as bad. Cano hits third or fourth for god's sake.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 02:01 AM on October 12
I'm a Yankee hater, but that was damn impressive. I've not seen such things before. What a moment for Ibanez.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:26 PM on October 10
I think largely that national media will continue to do what they've always done. It's more difficult to change these larger institutions than smaller ones. The larger ones will change when they're forced to - usually they're the last to acknowledge a change in the winds.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:23 PM on October 08
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:24 AM on October 08
I sort of think Keri put it best when he wrote that Cabrera is the league's best hitter, but Trout is clearly the best player, and by most advanced metrics, worth more to a team than Cabrera is. I really can't see too much complaining if Cabrera wins, I could see a lot of complaining if Trout wins, but both are defensible choices. I while ago, I thought that I would pick Cabrera, but I was undervaluing Trout's defense and speed - not to mention that in the better relative metrics (OBP, SLG, RC, WAR, OPS+, etc.) Trout is either close to, or ahead of, Cabrera - so even as a hitter, he isn't so far behind Cabrera that you really have to focus on his defense to suggest he's a better player - he's close as a hitter and miles ahead as a defender and base-runner.
I think Jonah Keri stated in an article at Grantland the other day that Cabrera's season this year is arguably his worst offensively in the past 3 years, when looking at his AVG, OBP, SLG, and certain other stats in combination. Just so happens that the rest of the AL is down, and Cabrera put up leading numbers in certain highly-visible categories.
That's true - it's not his best season, but an MVP award is measured against the performance of a season, within that season. I don't see what's accurate about accounting for the relative weakness of the AL this year. He can only be measured against his peers in the season that happens.
Oh and lastly, batting average is still the dumbest statistic. RBI isn't too far behind, but we really have to stop putting value in batting average.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 04:11 PM on October 06
It doesn't. If it did, an infielder could simply step outside the scope of the infield, then let the ball drop at his feet and throw out the lead runner (or whichever runner he felt it was more advantageous to remove). The umpire has to have the discretion to call it when he feels the infielder is going to make the catch.
I get where you're going with this, but by that logic, doesn't it mean that if a team positioned an infielder in the medium outfield, any medium depth fly ball could be considered an "infield" fly? Shouldn't it have SOMETHING to do with where the ball is hit, rather than where the position player ends up? A really fast infielder who can backpeddle can thereby make a ton of flyouts, or potential flyouts, into automatic outs? And then what do you have? Dogs and cats, living together, MASS HYSTERIA.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:50 PM on October 06
I always thought the infield fly rule, when used correctly, applied largely to, you know, like, the infield.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:36 AM on October 06
Sure was exciting. So much had to go right for Europe, while so much had to go wrong for the US. I don't think it was a case of just simple choking by virtually every US player. The fates conspired it would seem.
Not exactly epic golf, but an incredible narrative.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:29 PM on October 01
Well, they're already a good team, I mean, what with the chance to win the World Series and all.
However, too often no hitters are an indication of nothing.
I do agree that Homer Bailey is a classic baseball name, hell, classic name period. Couldn't you see Homer Bailey being the main character in a Frank Capra movie? A plucky salesman who gives away his big sale to his buddy down on his luck? How 'bout Homer Bailey the bomber pilot in a John Wayne WWII movie? HOW CAN YOU ROOT AGAINST HOMER BAILEY. He saved our ass over Iwo Jima.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:32 PM on September 29
Is Mike Trout's WAR higher simply because most center fielder's suck in this current era? I agree with Hal with respect to his position to the extent that it seems to inflate his stats when compared to other historic seasons. I'm a big fan of OPS as an indicator of offensive strength, and Trout's isn't that impressive (relatively speaking).
However, the kid plays an amazing center field and I don't mean to diminish it. He is a world class outfielder - and that should matter. As should his stolen bases and, perhaps largely under-appreciated, his runs (kid leads the league in runs, despite not playing the first month). But, he has fallen off a bit in the last month or so, whereas Cabrera has flourished. If the vote were at the end of August, I don't think you could vote against Trout - as of today, I have Cabrera with a slight, but certainly definite, advantage.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 02:01 AM on September 23
It's unfortunate, but with 40-man rosters, I don't see how it can be done in a fashion that doesn't subject another player to an equally unfair situation.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:18 PM on September 06
I bet it was death threats - from his own family (obligatory "they take football serious in Texas yadda shmadda").
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:32 PM on September 03
I don't know and neither does this article suggest. In my experience, it's best not to base the entirety of a viewpoint to a single source, especially if it's a Daily Mail article.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:29 PM on August 25
He's inventing the stories he wants to talk about. There is no controversy. Stop paying attention to this bleating moron.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:06 PM on August 21
They can hit, they just can't pitch - seems pretty simple to me.
These kind of public airings of what used to be private matters are a bit confusing. I don't know if these internal conflicts are unique to Boston, or if they happen everywhere and just don't have the media coverage. I'm inclined to think the latter, but the constant reporting of it can't be a positive thing for the team.
I just don't think it matters as much as the starting pitching. Or the pink hats.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:12 AM on August 15
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:28 PM on July 31
I also think the Chinese have less of an issue with total government control of those things than Americans. It's a completely different philosophy at work.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:26 PM on July 31
What about a month? A year? This is a nation of immigrants and the world is getting smaller.
And the Olympics is a competition of individuals who represent nations.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:04 AM on July 28
Is this really the point? That there is some purity test that should be passed? I don't think the Olympic spirit is measured by nationality first, above other factors.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:20 PM on July 27
You're confusing African Americans with an ethnicity. It's a genetically diverse social group. They all didn't descent from the same group. Jesse Owens may not be closer genetically to Lebron James than you are. Again, the idea that African Americans are all descended from Africans (and African slaves at that) is erroneous. Skin color is not the sole indicator of genetic ancestry. And if breeding has such an impact genetically, then why does one see short slave-descendants, fat slave descendants or other genetically "inferior" examples? Were those slave-masters lazy? Or blind? Or maybe genetic evolution is a bit more complicated than that.
And how can you claim that some sports take more importance in genetic based athleticism? Swimming has less athleticism than running? What makes you so certain?
Danny Woodhead lacks size and speed. Who are you to suggest that he lacks any genetic advantage? Point of fact, the argument could be made that because he lacks these obvious advantages could mean that he may have a greater genetic advantages than his colleagues which allow him to overcome the more obvious shortcomings. You see how such bullshit works? It's not science.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:14 PM on July 27
It's ridiculous. Race is more about identity then genealogy. What we call "black"is a mixture of ethnicities - and it's increasingly muddled. We get caught in thinking something is scientific, when we're just organizing socially constructed prejudices. It may appear that the approach, at face value, appears to be logical. It isn't. Is Usain Bolt descended from slaves? Can a "white" athlete win a sprinting event?
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:35 PM on July 26
This might be the only NCAA punishment I've ever agreed with; the only time their position as a hypocritical body of exploitation has some use. For the first time, the scavenger is devouring the right corpse.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:14 PM on July 23
Nope. It's a little known clause in the rule book: Section 34, paragraph 6, subsection B "in the event of sheer pants-shitting awesomeness, traveling will not apply".
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:42 PM on July 19
Ah fuck em. If the school relies on football for the math department then so be it. If not, then so be it sideways.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:48 PM on July 19
You guys have Kobe all wrong. He cares mostly about his sixth championship. His confidence and selfishness are not eclipsed at this stage of his career by his savvy.
This move wasn't made without his express written consent. He wanted this. He knows what it means to the offense. Nash gives him the perfect excuse to not have to work as hard handling the ball. Kobe would rather give up the ball at the top of the key if it means a better chance at that championship. The Jordan championship.
Kobe knows he shot 43% last year. Kobe knows that Durant and Westbrook can make him look old. Kobe knows exactly how many points he needs to pass Kareem. Kobe knows that this is point guard league now. This move is entirely evidence of his acquiescence to these realities.
And he still is taking the last shot. Nothing suggests this has to change.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:04 AM on July 06
If they win one championship, it's worth it.
I can't help but think this is great for the Lakers. It allows Kobe to play without the ball which I think he'd embrace more at this stage in his career. He knows he can't be isolating against the best wing guys in the league anymore. Gasol, Bynum, Nash and Bryant is as good a starting lineup as anyone else - and it's a good match-up against the Thunder. They're going to light up most teams with that front court/back court combo.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:59 PM on July 05
Wow. That is a surprise, but my immediate reaction is that they really overpaid. I guess I never considered either guy to be a $7MM player.
That said, the Wild are undoubtedly a deeper stronger team with these two pick-ups. That roster is looking mighty good right about now.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:51 PM on July 04
Pfft. Sundin deserves it on his NHL career alone. He was better than a shit ton of Hall of Famers. Goddamn right.
All four are no brainers as far as I'm concerned.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:53 PM on June 28
Can you clarify where "here" is? I don't think any of us are arguing that wealth is an inherent sign of smarts or the lack of wealth the reverse.
Here is Philadelphia. It's a beautiful, livable city in parts with an enormously obvious income gap that staggers me. The material pursuits here seem more emphasized than back home. That may not be totally fair, but it's my initial reaction at any rate.
The issue it seems to me with Jay-Z is that people here have addressed his specific brilliance or success with his ability to make money, and that is the way we are supposed to measure his success. Ergo, if he wasn't a hundred-millionaire, he would not be brilliant, or successful. I wouldn't necessarily suggest that his wealth is accidental - it seems to frame a lot of his strategy and tactics - but I would think a mind like his would be equally valuable in a number of fields. I could see him as a high-ranking military mind, or a master chef if those pursuits interested him.
I come from some privilege, and that world is full of morons as much as any other. They just have nicer cars and eat better meals and yet daily manage to moron their way to the top. Their "success" is largely a question of access rather than anything that they're specifically bringing to the table. Access to schools, mentors, investors and leaders. Some people are able to create opportunities out of thin air, but I find them to be the outliers (Jay-Z is most assuredly an outlier). In my experience, opportunities are more invitations than creations. If I had not been invited to that dinner, or known that person, I have no doubt that I would not have experienced what (moderate) success I have.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:25 PM on June 26
I think hal may have chosen a poor example in Jay-Z, who has, I think, displayed something of a brilliance in his specific success, but hal has a broader point and it's something I've noticed a bit more since moving here.
There is a preponderance of thinking that rich people are somehow our betters by the example of their riches. It equates to them being smarter, more hard working and there is an inherent belief in the earning of it. This is, of course, spurious. We can all think of wealthy examples of terribly untalented people who did nothing special to become wealthy. Many of them just managed to maintain someone else's wealth.
I think that there are people who cannot be denied and that the cream largely does rise to the top in most fields, but the vast majority of monetary wealth accumulation does not possess these distinctions.
Here's how I would frame the issue - I would say that Jay-Z isn't brilliant because he is rich, but that he is brilliant. Now, if he wasn't rich - if his fortune was gone all we had left was the music, the fashion and his artistic legacy - would you still say he was brilliant? How important is the money in that equation?
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:12 PM on June 26
The Brits couldn't put three passes together to save their lives.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:18 PM on June 24
Yes, "the decision" is probably the most misguided and ill-conceived event in an athlete's career that I can remember. So I guess I can understand why people would consider Lebron a selfish man. But anyone who watches basketball should be clear that he's anything but that as a player. He earned that ring.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:07 PM on June 22
Or subtlety thing, or good taste thing...
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 07:47 PM on June 16
I'll pray for you.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 07:14 PM on June 11
Agreed. Sportsmanship is what separates ourselves from the animals and the French.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:56 PM on June 10
I don't think the NHL costs anywhere close to top dollar. And if they can manufacture interest, why do they seem so interested in not using hockey? It's in more locations, has a robust history, is a ready-made product, etc. I'm more inclined to think that because it's not on their network, they pretend it barely exists. They're a petty tyrant king.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:46 PM on June 08
Yeah, Hasek is an interesting choice. I have some reservations about putting him ahead of Lidstrom by virtue of his only becoming a starter in his thirties. But he is a top five all-time goalie. Highest save percentage all-time (though it was in the clutch-and-grab era). There's a good argument to be made, for sure.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:56 PM on May 31
Off the top of my considerably emotional head, I would rank him ahead of all but Orr and Potvin. I didn't have the privilege of seeing Harvey or Robinson, and Fetisov didn't have the opportunity to play in his absolute prime in the NHL (but his story is equally impressive for different reasons - in some ways, he shaped the modern NHL). But I do think he was just a tiny bit better than Bourque who played in an epic offensive era.
For my money, Lidstrom is the epitome of a professional hockey player and a legendary talent combined with an unheard of lack of selfishness. It was an honor to watch such a player, play such a game for such a long time. At 42, he was still a top player for a top team. His game seemed effortlessly simple, but was in scrutiny, unimaginably complex.
He was the best of his time. One of the best all-time. The league is now poorer for his absence.
And I fucking HATE the Red Wings - with an equal amount of grudging respect. And that respect is almost all due to Lidstrom. With apologies to Jaromir, Lidstrom was the best European hockey player to ever lace 'em up. Period.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:17 PM on May 31
Because we call it American exceptionalism, not American respectably good all things consideredism.
Oh, don't be so hard on yourself. It's not respectably good.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:14 PM on May 30
And Kevin Maas. 10 homers in his first 72 ABs.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:10 PM on May 22
I think the Spurs are the only team that has a chance of preventing it. They're the most under-the-radar number one seed I can remember. People aren't talking about them enough.
That said, the Thunder look so good and I think they win the match-up battle. Harden is such a game changer, and who guards him with both Durant and Westbrook on the floor? There isn't any team that can take on three players who can create their own shot off the dribble and all of them are terrific transition/open court players.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:06 AM on May 13
As a former fat guy, to put it politely, he can go fuck a cactus.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:19 AM on May 11
Well, I agree entirely. I wouldn't let my kids play, either, not that I have any, but still. I'm of the current opinion that participation at the youth level will be a problem in the near future and will trickle up to the big leagues in a decade or so.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:38 PM on May 06
I wish him the best of luck. The league is better for having him in it.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:28 PM on May 04
Ultimately, we the consumers bare some amount of responsibility here, yes. The culture of pro football doesn't exist in a vacuum.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:07 PM on May 02
He was/is one of my favorite players when I was growing up because I remember reading an article about him in SI when I was 14 or 15 - dear god he looked like a superhero, could run like the wind, bench 500 pounds (my inner teenager may be exaggerating) and looked like he belonged in a comic book.
Reading about his relentless charity work, maybe he was a superhero.
The Duerson similarities are too startling. I'd like to think that his trying to preserve his brain was the last selfless act he had left.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:01 PM on May 02
This means the Heat sail through. I think a healthy Rose doesn't really stop that anyway, but this will just make it easier. Still sucks for Bulls fans, that's a super bad injury for such a young guy. The West might be wide open, but the East is pretty closed up. There isn't a team that can take out the Heat, with the crazy possible exception of the Celtics. No Howard, no Rose? I can't see anyway beating the Heat but themselves.
Great game in OKC tonight.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 02:24 AM on April 29
Age of the internet. It's nice to see that for the vast majority of folk, our standards have risen. I have some confidence that we'll fumble our way through this thing and emerge the better for it.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:36 PM on April 26
Yeah, but here's a guy who, despite our opinion (and it's unanimous), is pretty damn successful and he gets caught in such a pathetic lie that I almost feel sorry for him. What kind of a grown-ass man is still that insecure?
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:36 PM on April 10
Yeah, the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan. The OTPP. The annual ROI off that was between 16 and 22%. I think in 2008 MLSEL cleared $88MM off revenues of $380MM.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:29 PM on April 10
The Pension Plan that owned MLSEL is also about a $118 billion fund - MLSEL was but a small piece of that worth about $1.2 Billion. eggs, basket and all that.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:06 PM on April 10
I still think he's largely under appreciated - even though the good hockey people always mention him when they speak of the best in the game - a lot of fans still don't, but if there is one reason for the consistency of the Red Wings over the last twenty years, it would be him. He's just so, so good.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:35 PM on April 09
"Hi, Jim Carr again. Denis, I know that some in our audience don't know the finer points of hockey. Could you tell them, for example, what is icing?"
"Well, um, icing happen when the puck come down, bang you know, before the other guys you know. Nobody there, you know. My arm go comme a then the game stop then start up."
"Good crowd out there tonight, boys, let's really try to win this one."
"You have to hand it to the old bastard, he's highly original."
"That man traveled 15 hours by bus to say that?"
"Oh this young man has had a very trying rookie season, with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him, well, I guess that's more than most 21-year-olds can handle... Ogie Ogilthorpe!"
"My allergy to those fucking fans has returned!"
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:29 AM on April 01
At home, speedos are called "banana hammocks".
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:57 PM on March 31
The only quote that even compares is:
"Are you trying to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curve ball?!"
Sorry. That's just the ways I sees its.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:52 PM on March 31
Slap Shot is the best. Grum, I love you, but Major League can't hold a candle to Slap Shot. It's still so eminently quotable.
"They brought their fuckin' toys!"
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:16 PM on March 30
"Alcoholism is the only disease you can get yelled at for having."
- Mitch Hedberg
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:48 AM on March 29
What will this do to the viewer ratings in the male 13-? age group? Does anyone watch women's volleyball for the sport?
I'm so sorry for your loss. I pray the world finds a way to again ensure that simpleton heterosexual men are the sole audience for everything.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:03 PM on March 28
Copyright © 2013 SportsFilterAll posts and comments are © their original authors.