Thursday, July 26, 2012

8 comments Quotes from Movies/TV Shows...Bill Simmons...Sports...You Know the Drill by Now, Part 2

Yesterday, in Part 2 of Bill Simmons "Game of Thrones"-NBA postseason article we learned that David Stern made the right move by blocking the Chris Paul-Lakers trade, even if the end didn't justify the means, even though Bill seemed to have no issue with the end in this situation. So the end didn't justify the means, but Bill had no problem with the means or the end. I'm just confused.

In Part 2 Bill comes up with further theories and keeps poking at Mark Cuban out of spite.

After Neil Olshey left for Portland, in classic Don Sterling fashion, the Clips decided against hiring a new general manager — something that, you know, every other team has —

But why don't all NBA teams have a VP of Common Sense? Who says "no" to this?

Fact: The 2012-13 Clippers are better, on paper, then the 2011-12 Clippers.

Even without hiring a VP of Common Sense? I will remember that Bill Simmons said the 12-13 Clippers were better on paper than the 11-12 Clippers in mid-August when the Clippers jack ticket prices up 25% and Bill writes an entire column describing what a shitty organization the Clippers are and always have been.

One day after Griffin signed his monster extension — $35 million more than Donald Sterling has ever guaranteed anybody — he tore his meniscus during a Team USA practice. Supposedly, he'll be ready for the season. Supposedly. This could only happen to the Clippers.

They're so cursed! Has Bill mentioned how incompetent and cursed the Clippers are yet? Even if they jacked up ticket prices, I would bet Bill has no problem with renewing his Clippers season tickets and keeping them around as his backup NBA team in case the Celtics have a bad season and decides to stop writing fawning columns about them every March. It helps for Bill to pick out a backup team in a certain sport. I feel like it has gotten to the point Bill only follows a certain sport when his favorite team is in contention for a title. If only Bill had picked a backup MLB team he could write articles about baseball while the Red Sox are not in the hunt for a division title. I guess this is what happens when you only have so much knowledge about one team in a given sport, yet sell yourself to the world as "The Sports Guy."

And by the way, pulling Grant Hill from the sanctity of Phoenix's training staff to the tortured Clippers and their underwhelming medical staff is like some sort of sick science experiment. I'm patently terrified about this. Let's just move on before I panic and put my 2012-13 season tickets on eBay.

Because Bill be damned if he is going to cheer for a sports team that doesn't have at least a good chance of making the playoffs.

Important note: I didn't mind the logic behind Minnesota's offer sheet for Batum when you remember this formula: "Cold weather + small market + years of incompetence = you're not signing free agents unless you overpay for them."

Or the formula could be shortened, which I do realize would make Bill Simmons look less creative and smart, into calculating years of incompetence = you're not signing free agents unless you overpay for them.

I think cold weather and a small market do matter, but not nearly as much as an organization that has shown themselves to be incompetent over a long period of time.

Over the next four years, I'd rather pay Batum $46 million than Roy Hibbert $58 million.

Of course Bill would, though this may not make sense for Bill to say this. Using Bill's annual trade value column principles, if the Blazers were offered Batum for Hibbert (even including the contracts in the trade, which I know Bill doesn't even do), do you think the Blazers would accept this trade? I do. I could be wrong, but I would rather pay Hibbert $58 million over paying Batum $46 million and I think most NBA teams would agree.

Batum brings three things to the table that the 2012 Finals proved everyone needs going forward: athleticism, perimeter defense and 3-point shooting.

I feel like Bill using the 2012 NBA Finals as a template for every NBA Finals from here on out. I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. I believe Bill is being influenced too much by the 2012 Finals. So while Batum does bring these things to the table, Hibbert brings the fact he's really tall and doesn't fall over his own shoelaces to the table as well. This important to have in a center. I feel like Hibbert's skill set is more difficult to find than Batum's skill set. Either way, I probably wouldn't pay that much for either player.

I can't beat Miami or Oklahoma City with Hibbert — as the Heat proved in the last three games of their comeback against Indiana, when they basically ran Hibbert off the floor — but Batum would be valuable against either team.

So would the Thunder be able to run Hibbert off the floor with Perkins at center? I'm not so sure. It's not like the Pacers biggest flaw against the Heat or Thunder is Hibbert, so it is unfair to single him out as if he is the reason they lost to the Heat. Not to mention, while Batum would be valuable against these teams, I don't think the Pacers would have beaten the Heat with Batum on their roster. So Batum would fix an issue concerning defending the Heat, but Hibbert put up 11-11-3 (blocks) in the playoffs at the center position. Regardless of how valuable Batum would be, those are valuable statistics from the center position.

Remember the 48 hours after Game 3 of the Miami-Indiana series, when it seemed like the frisky Pacers were on the verge of (a) killing the LeBron/Wade era, and (b) sneaking into the Finals? That was fun.

If only they had Nicholas Batum...then the Pacers could have beaten the Heat. Who cares if Hibbert had a monster Game 3 and averaged 12.3-11.5-2.5 in that series?

Now they're building around three overpaid starters — Danny Granger (two years, $27.1 million), Hibbert (four years, $58 million), George Hill (five years, $40 million) — a bunch of overpaid role players ($21 million next year for David West, Ian Mahinmi, D.J. Augustin and Gerald Green???) and one possible blue-chipper (Paul George, who absolutely stunk in the 2012 playoffs). Does Hallmark make "Congrats on locking down the no. 6 seed for the next few years" cards?

Ah yes, we are using Bill Simmons logic here. Even if the Pacers had beaten the Heat they still would have been building around three overpaid starters and a bunch of overpaid role players. The only difference is they would have beaten the Heat. I guess there would be more positivity around the Heat because they had proven they could beat the Heat, but the Pacers circumstances wouldn't have changed. So they were building around most of these players regardless of whether they beat the Heat or not.

Quick tangent to celebrate Lannister — if you don't watch Thrones, he's the diabolical, perverted, entitled, sarcastic, strategic genius of a little person played by Peter Dinklage who rips off classic line after classic line.. Where does he rank among the greatest TV characters ever? I can't see how he falls out of the top 10. I just can't.

This really isn't that notable for the simple reason that Bill is the one making up this list.

"Where does Steve Smith rank on the list of greatest wide receivers in the history of the NFL? I can't see how he falls out of the Top 20. Of course, I am biased and happen to be the one making the list, so I am essentially using my opinion as the sole reason for the ranking of Smith as one of the top 20 wide receivers of all-time and then am remarking on this as of I am not the one creating the question, the list, and giving the final answer."

If there were sabermetrics for television, his KLPE ("Killer lines per episode") rate would probably be the highest ever. Anyway …

On a related note, if there were sabermetrics for sportswriters, Bill's BMUTPHOPAT (Bullshit made up to prove his own point as true) would be the second-highest among sportswriters. Gregg Easterbrook would easily outpace everyone else. He's the God of BMUTPHOPAT.

The Mavericks tossed aside last year's title defense by letting Tyson Chandler leave and placing their dragon eggs in the 2012 Howard/Williams free agency basket … which, of course, blew up in their faces...They tried to regroup by turning the Jasons (Terry and Kidd), Ian Mahinmi and Brendan Haywood (via the amnesty clause) into a multiyear deal for O.J. Mayo (a valuable regular-season player who's been atrocious in the playoffs)

Good thing the playoffs aren't a small sample size or anything...or else I could call this comment by Bill pretty stupid and lacking meaning.

That leaves them enough 2013 cap flexibility for a Dwight Howard run … you know, assuming he'd want to play with the "Dirk and a Bunch of Solid Dudes" roster they just assembled. Hold on, we're not done.

You mean sort of like the 2011 NBA Title team? The team that had Dirk, a red-hot Jason Terry and a bunch of solid dudes?

If I were a Mavs fan, Jason Kidd's comment after picking the Knicks over the Mavericks would worry me: "I looked at the (Mavericks) roster and I felt I could go quietly and retire, or I felt like I can compete and help a team win. So I saw the pieces of the Knicks, and I thought that I could help them out." Translation: If I'm gonna keep playing, I want to be on a team with a chance to win the title. That's not Dallas. You could almost hear the sound of Dirk's second title window slamming shut.

There's no point in the Mavericks even playing out the 12-13 NBA season. Jason Kidd's comments pretty much assure the Mavericks aren't going to contend for the NBA title this upcoming season. This is the same Jason Kidd who is going to backup Raymond Felton this year by the way. It's not exactly like Kidd is in his prime. This comment smells of a player who got more money to play in New York with the Knicks and is upset the Mavericks didn't make him a better offer. This comment does not sound like a player who is neutrally assessing the Mavericks roster.

Then Bill acknowledges his Twitter bitch-fight with Mark Cuban and says he likes it when he gets criticized on Twitter like that by sports figures. Of course Bill likes it, he gets attention out of it.

What a bummer. Right now, there's a steep drop from Miami to the next five Eastern playoff contenders (Boston, Chicago, New York, Brooklyn and Indiana). It's just a fact.

This is actually Bill's opinion, which contrary to his own belief, does not constitute this as a fact. A widely held popular belief is still not a fact. This is a small truth it seems Bill has momentarily lost grasp of.

In a million years, did you ever think Mayor Carcetti from The Wire would be reincarnated as a calculating, horny whorehouse owner named "Littlefinger" in a raunchy, over-the-top medieval sci-fi drama … and totally crush that role?

Yes, I did think this. Clearly, Bill hasn't seen Aidan Gillian's work over the years. He also crushed his role on "Queer as Folk" and pretty much does a great job in whatever his role requires. He's great at being a douchebag on the small screen mostly and that is what Lord Baelish pretty much is.

Isn't it more fun to binge-watch great TV shows than to watch them once a week? We finished 20 episodes in less than three weeks. I love binge-watching.

Yes, watching television shows immediately, without having to wait 8 months for new episodes, is better than having to watch 10-13 episodes of a show and then wait for a new season to start. More obvious words have rarely been spoken.

Next up for me: Breaking Bad. After that: Justified.

Or as I will call it, "The part where Bill Simmons annoys me by watching my favorite television shows and then commenting on things I watched two years ago."

If you think there isn't going to be a "Breaking Bad" quote column in a year, then you just don't know Bill Simmons. He's going to fall in love with Walter White, all the while pretending he hasn't been four years late to the party.

Just warning you: Picasso does NOT have a lot to work with this season. There's Corey Maggette's Expiring Contract, Jose Calderon's Expiring Contract, maybe Kevin Martin's Expiring Contract … and that's about it. This sucks. I hate the amnesty clause.

So does this mean there will be less of Bill Simmons proposing fake trades followed by him saying, "Who says no?'" to the trade offer that he just proposed and makes sense only on paper and not in real life? If so, I love the amnesty clause.

Then Bill starts (and don't pass out in shock when I write this) defending the Celtics offseason moves. Anytime you can get rid of a Hall of Fame player with world-class conditioning (Ray Allen) to get a guy who prefers to come off the bench (Jason Terry) even though depending on the starter's health he could end up starting AND you are adding Jason Collins, you have to do it.

Putting that contract in the context of a bigger picture, it makes more sense — the Celtics extended their relevance for three years by bringing back their nucleus (Rondo, Pierce, Garnett, Bass and Bradley),

I love it. One good year out of Bass and Bradley and they are now part of a "nucleus" in Boston. Meanwhile Danny Granger, Roy Hibbert, and David West are overpaid.

flipping Allen for Terry (a smart move because Terry thrives off the bench),

So what happens when Avery Bradley can't make it back until at the least mid-December and Terry has to start? Possibly nothing, but Bill acts as if Bradley having more surgery on his shoulder is no big deal.

and adding two rookie bigs (Sullinger and Melo).

Fab Melo is a stiff. Don't let anyone tell you differently. He's Jason Collins without the offensive game of Jason Collins.

We hosted Game 6 of the Eastern Conference finals, with a chance to go to the Finals, and it didn't happen because one of the best 12 or 13 players submitted one of the single most spectacular playoff performances in the history of the league.

Besides, what was the alternative … "creating" cap space to make a run at a free agent who never would have actually signed with us? Come on. If you're close enough to sniff the trophy, you keep going for it. Period.

This is true. Of course there is a line of teams in sport who have thought themselves close enough to sniff the trophy and it turned into them not knowing when their window is shut. I would include the early 90's Celtics in this discussion.

The rest was history. And guess what? I actually loved the Joe Johnson trade for the Nets! Was there a more brilliant chess move this summer? Yeah, he's overpaid to the point that it's almost startling. But what do the Nets care? Other than Wade and Kobe, he's the most reliable 2-guard in basketball.

Unfortunately, Joe Johnson isn't going to be the most reliable 2-guard in basketball for the entirety of his contract. So the Nets essentially made a win-now move for a team that isn't ready to win-now. What could go wrong?

For the three seasons after that, they're paying him a jaw-dropping and unequivocally ludicrous $69 million, nearly twice what he will actually be worth, but guess what? He'll still be a valuable piece for them.

Everybody back up, Bill is predicting the future again. He knows Johnson will still be a valuable piece in three years. Fine, let's pretend Johnson will be a valuable piece, but a $23 million valuable piece? I don't get how the hell the same person who calls Danny Granger overpaid at $13.5 million can defend the Joe Johnson acquisition on the basis of money. Sure, the Nets owner has a ton of money, but Johnson's contract is still terrible. How is it fine for the Nets to overpay by double for Johnson in order to grab the 5th seed in the East, but Danny Granger or Roy Hibbert being overpaid to grab the 5th seed in the East shows just how stupid the Pacers front office is? Bill needs to at least use consistent reasoning. Indiana slightly overpays for players, Bill criticizes them because their owner isn't rich. The Nets overpay for players and this isn't an issue because the Nets owner is rich. It is fine for an owner to overspend in the pursuit of the 5th seed in the East as long as that owner is rich. Apparently a team gets additional wins for an owner's net worth.

If Brooklyn's front office said to him, "We had a chance to improve our team, but the money scared us off," now that would infuriate him.

And then there's this: The Johnson trade single-handedly convinced Deron Williams to spurn Dallas and stay in Brooklyn. (Williams even admitted as much.)

I thought Deron Williams spurned Dallas because Mark Cuban was too busy to be there for Williams' free agent visit because he taping "The Shark Tank?" Isn't that what Bill told us in the first part of this opus? So why criticize Cuban for not being there during Williams' free agency visit if his absence had nothing to do with Williams choosing New Jersey over Dallas?...besides the fact Bill wanted to passively-aggressively rip Cuban of course.

What's funny is that Williams (next five years: $100 million) might be almost as overpaid as Johnson (next four years: $89 million).

But hey, at least the Nets owner is really fucking rich. That counts for something, right?

So now Bill has admitted the Nets (a team who only added Joe Johnson to the core of a team that didn't make the playoffs last year) could have widely overpaid for the players on their team (and this doesn't count Brook Lopez), but he LOVES what they did. The Pacers (a playoff team by the way) slightly overpay some of their nucleus and Bill thinks they suck as an organization, awards them no points and may God have mercy on their soul. If you can figure it out, please tell, because I'm confused.

King did guarantee $61 million to Brook Lopez, a 7-footer who averaged 6.0 rebounds per game — no, really, SIX — during the 2010-11 season, then broke the same foot twice last season. That didn't stop Billy from guaranteeing Lopez a million more than the Saints guaranteed Drew Brees. Throw in the comical Kris Humphries extension (two years, $24 million) and Brooklyn is paying close to $73 million for a 2012-13 starting five that might not be able to defend anyone. Will anyone ever pay more for a less charismatic nucleus? None of them have nicknames, YouTube mixes, distinguishable quirks about their game … it's just five quiet, hardworking professionals who play hard and don't stand out in any real way.

But the owner of the Nets has a ton of money he can spend on non-charismatic, poor on defense, underperforming players. Bill seems to believe this is a good thing.

Ray helped win the 2008 title, played all 48 minutes in one of the best Celtics comebacks ever (Game 4 of the Finals), crossed over Vujacic on the defining play AND made that annoying bastard practically cry!!! His 2009 performance against the Bulls was one for the ages. I still think we would win the title in 2010 if Ron Artest didn't give him a charley horse in Game 3. He played in real pain this spring and gave everything he had for three straight playoff series. He was a true Celtic.

Anyone who uses the term "True X" needs to be immediately be kicked in the crotch and then beheaded. There are other annoying phrases fan bases use to pump up the importance of their team, but this one is right near the top. It's truly annoying.

Following Boston sports for nearly four decades, I can't remember being more confident in anything than Ray Allen with the game in his hands.

Somewhere Larry Bird, if he even gave a shit what Bill Simmons thought of him, is upset and asking Bill to take this back.

Just know that I enjoyed the Ray Allen era. Better than advertised. And we'll always have 2008.

Ray Allen was better than advertised. He was a Hall of Fame shooter who came to Boston and continued to be a Hall of Fame shooter. What else did he do in Boston that he had not done previously in Seattle? I'm sure Bill thinks it was the passionate Boston fans who made Ray Allen better than he knew he could be. I don't see how Ray Allen was better than advertised. He was as-advertised.


rich said...

Having missed out on the fun of Part one... a two part comment!

Let's just move on before I panic and put my 2012-13 season tickets on eBay.

For a Celtics fan, he's certainly worried a lot about the quality of play by the Clippers. That and given the fact he's been a season ticket holder for a while now: even if Blake and Grant don't play the entire year, this is still not as bad as some of the Clipper teams Bill has kept his season tickets to watch.

Cold weather

I was unaware basketball was now played outdoors... I mean, Boston is just as (if not more so because of the water bay) than Milwaukee. Same with NY, Philly and Chicago.

Cold weather didn't stop them from signing guys - being either a small market team or being terrible did.

athleticism, perimeter defense and 3-point shooting.

And we all know those are three things every 7-2 Center has.

Comparing a C to a SF on those three categories is incredibly stupid, even for Bill. Oh and Batum hit averaged 1.8 made threes a game... really going to change the momentum of the game there.

when they basically ran Hibbert off the floor

Here's Hibbert's stat line from the last three games (averaged): 10 points, 9.7 rebounds, 2 blocks. Not great numbers, but I wouldn't say he was "run off the court."

After the game 3 loss, LeBron basically said "fuck it" and decided to dominate like he could. Hibbert can only do so much as the C when the opposing team's SF is kicking the shit out of your team.

If anyone actually thinks that if the Pacers had Batum instead of Hibbert that the Pacers could have won that series is criminally retarded. As much as I think he's a douchey crybaby, LeBron dominated the living hell out of the last two rounds of the playoffs and no one on the planet was going to be able to guard him.

I'd also like to point out that the Sixers have all three of those things in droves: they have arguably the best perimeter dman in the league (Iggy), have some very good three point shooters and basically their main attribute as a team is athleticism.

The Heat absolutely crushed them every time they played. I honestly don't think the Sixers ever lost by single digits to them. So you can have as much athleticism and three point shooting as you want, but if you can't get into the paint, eventually your threes won't fall for a couple games or you hit a team that's better for a couple games and you're out.

If I'm gonna keep playing, I want to be on a team with a chance to win the title. That's not Dallas.

Hey Bill, what he meant to say was:
"NY offered me a three year deal; if I'm not going to win a title anyway, I might as well get paid."

There's exactly a 0% chance that Kidd thinks he'll win a title in NY... although to be fair, he was probably half way through a case of PBR when he thought the Knicks were contenders.

FormerPhD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rich said...

And because his analysis of the Nets and Pacers was so baffling to me, it gets its own comment (yay!):

and adding two rookie bigs (Sullinger and Melo).

So you can win with Sullinger (knees were redflagged at the combine) and Melo, but you can't win with Hibbert?

Yeah, he's overpaid to the point that it's almost startling. But what do the Nets care?

It's almost as if he's too stupid to realize he just spent paragraphs explaining how the Pacers were screwed by building around an overpaid group.

If the Pacers are screwed for giving Granger 13M and Hibbert 14M, then the Nets trading for Johnson's hilariously bad contract and then giving out 25M for Humphries and Lopez should mean the Nets are also screwed.

they're paying him a jaw-dropping and unequivocally ludicrous $69 million, nearly twice what he will actually be worth, but guess what? He'll still be a valuable piece for them.

Yes, the 22-44 Nets are now NBA contenders by adding Joe Johnson.

Brooklyn is paying close to $73 million for a 2012-13 starting five that might not be able to defend anyone. Will anyone ever pay more for a less charismatic nucleus?

73M for a starting 5 of Lopez, Humphries, Wallace, Johnson and Williams?

Oh I know, he's going to compare Indiana's overpaid nucleus to NJ's and talk about how Indiana overpaid based on potential, while NJ overpaid for established performance.

This article could actually be interesting.

None of them have nicknames, YouTube mixes, distinguishable quirks about their game … it's just five quiet, hardworking professionals who play hard and don't stand out in any real way.

Or not.

1) Williams has a nickname, in fact he has it tattooed on his arm.

2) Williams and Johnson have plenty of youtube mixes and both have quicks about their game.

3) If paying that sack of crap of a starting five 73M is being talked about as a good thing, then how the hell can you talk negatively about what the Pacers have done?

4) Anytime you have to resort to "hard working" as the attribute you're using - that's not a good sign.

5) What makes Williams, Johnson, Wallace, Humphries and Lopez "quiet and hard working," but Hibbert, West and Granger are just "overpaid"? Do Hibbert and Granger sit on the bench during practice eating chicken wings and drinking beer?

Seriously, how can you spend that much space talking about how Indiana, a team that finished with the third best record in the East and fifth best in league, overpaid for their players, while talking positively about the Nets' overpaying as a good thing.

How is 42-24 and paying to keep the guys around bad, but 22-44 and overpaying to keep guys around good?

Arvind Shrivats said...

The thing is, the Pacers, were by all accounts, one of the best teams in the league when Hibbert was healthy and on the floor. As he's able to increase his minutes, the Pacers should get better. Big men always get paid, so I don't think the Hibbert contract is as bad as Bill says.

Moreover, I disagree that every team is going to go away from using size and playing Miami's hyperathletic perimeter game. You know why? Because if a team does that, Miami will kick the shit out of them. You can't play that way against the Heat because they have the 2 best players in the league for doing so. To me, its smarter to go with someone like Hibbert and use size to your advantage (assuming they can figure out how to get past the fronting of him).

Bengoodfella said...

Rich, the Clippers will still be competent. He'll keep his tickets if only to see other teams play against the Clippers.

I didn't get the Batum v. Hibbert comparison either. It seems they are two different players. I find it hard to believe the Pacers would want to trade Batum for Hibbert. That tells me something, that Hibbert not only didn't get run off the floor but was fairly competent. The Heat are incredibly difficult to beat when they are "on" and they got "on" towards the end of the playoffs. It isn't Hibbert's fault Indiana couldn't guard LeBron.

Obviously great perimeter defense is important against the Heat, but they are the superior team because they have LeBron/Wade. Throwing Batum on the team for Hibbert would have been giving up the advantage in the middle while adding a perimeter defender who probably wouldn't have been much more successful guarding LeBron.

I'm surprised Bill used that quote. Because we all know free agents would never make it seem like their current team is a better option than the team they just left. Free agents never leave b/c of money.

Which would your rather? Lopez/Humphries at $25m or Granger/Hibbert at $27m. I think I know the answer to that. So why love on the Nets and hate on the Pacers?

I don't think either the Pacers or Nets are title contenders, but I think the Pacers have a team better built for the future and for now. The Nets added one piece (Johnson) to a team that wasn't very good last year. I just don't believe they are in a better situation than the Pacers and they are signed in to more expensive and longer deals with their starters than the Pacers are.

Don't get me started on Fab Melo either. He's a stiff. Roy Hibbert is like fucking Wilt Chamberlain compared to Fab Melo. I edited out a part where I compared these two players because it seemed like overkill. If Melo is a good role player than Hibbert is an elite center. Yes, Hibbert is overpaid. A lot of big men are overpaid.

Your last sentence sums it up perfectly. This is why Bill doesn't have comments on his columns. NBA fans would point this out and it would ruin Bill's own perception he is an NBA expert. The Nets overpaid for a nucleus that didn't even get them to the playoffs, which is a good thing, and the Pacers overpaid to keep part of a nucleus that led them to the playoffs, and this is a bad thing?

Arvind, I agree with you on that. Indiana was a good team with a healthy Hibbert. I didn't see the issue with West off the bench either. His contract is up after this season, so it's not like he has an albatross of a contract.

I also completely agree with you on the hyperathletic perimeter game being in vogue. I think Bill is completely overreacting to these Finals. Teams shouldn't try to match the Heat, but find their own way to beat them. I don't see the NBA all of a sudden trying to find more hyperathletic guys on the perimeter. It's not like NBA teams don't look for those guys anyway, but centers are still going to play a huge role.

What's hilarious is Bill whines a/b the Lakers getting Howard and winning titles, which completely negates his idea the 2012 Finals are the new NBA template. Nash, Kobe, Howard, Gasol wouldn't be the hyperathletic perimeter template, but would be a different way to win a title. So Bill basically contradicts his own theory about where the NBA is headed by whining about the Lakers winning titles with Nash/Howard on the same team. I wish I had realized this as I wrote this post.

Anonymous said...

Wait, so you watched "queer as folk"?

Anonymous said...

I love this site! I have been going blind reading these Simmons rips. Fantastic stuff. I started as a fan like most of us but he lost me long ago. I agree with everything you say but could be even more harsh. There are so many writers out there that could give us so much more yet we're stuck reading this trash week after week. Thanks again for what you do. How about this guy huh? If anyone reads this post and hasn't found this link...check it out.

Bengoodfella said...

Anon, I've seen a few episodes of it and thought he was quite good in the roll. I can't say I've watched more than 2-3 episodes. So in what little I watched he crushed the roll and he seemed to get good reviews for the part. I'm very diverse in my viewing habits. I watched the show at the recommendation of a friend who was gay. I didn't hate it, but didn't care to keep watching. I thought Gillen was good in the role though and also really liked him in "The Wire."

Anon2, my blood tends to boil a bit when I read what he writes, but I have a hard time being coherent when I'm really angry. So I try not to be too hard since I feel like I lose my point and come off as simply hating someone. I'm glad you like the site though.

I used to be a huge fan of Simmons. I printed out his articles and read them whenever or wherever I could. Possibly the reason I don't sound as harsh is b/c I'm pretty disappointed in him. I think he is better than he tends to write. He tends to get lazy and make his columns revolve around him and what he does. Just irritating and disappointing.

I have read that post and read it again once you linked it. I can't get enough of that. Bill has seemingly lost a lot of what made him great. His creativity used to be natural and now you can feel him stretching to be creative or make another really creative and original list that will catch on like the Ewing Face and his various "All-Star" teams have.