7 comments Bill Simmons Is Still Using His Opinion as Fact

I got asked recently on Twitter if BotB was done or not. It's not, though the lack of activity probably gives the illusion of a more definitive answer. I start posts (will I ever post this one? Who knows?) and then get busy and never finish them. I have mixed feelings, as I started a new job two years ago and it felt like a clean break from the writing here that I loved, as writing on this blog took up a large portion of my day and caused me some sort of stress to get completed in a timely fashion. A lot of the posts here had some time sensitivity around them. I still enjoy writing here and that is why I haven't put up a farewell post. I'm also an "all or nothing at all" type of person. I'm in, or I'm out. I write 3-5 times per week or don't do anything, as I hate half-assing things. I want to try to half-ass though. Half-assing is the goal, in terms of posting frequently.

I have not read MMQB, TMQ or any Bill Simmons in the last two years. Okay, maybe a few MMQB, but none of the other two. I didn't even know where TMQ was located on the Interwebs anymore until someone Tweeted the link to me. If I read them, I am compelled to write about them. So no, Bottom of the Barrel is not done, I just haven't figured out how to make it not done. I started this blog in 2008. I was 28 years old and I'm now not 28 years old. I don't want to be Bill Simmons, writing the same shit over and over and over again until nobody cares anymore. I read Drew Magary now and think, "Jesus, this guy is doing the same stuff he was doing 5-6 years ago" and feel sympathy for him despite the fact he's doing quite well for himself. I'm getting older and I have less time to bitch about bad sportswriting. I always feel compelled to adapt and change, because staying in a rut singing all the greatest hits isn't my type of thing. I have to change for fear of becoming stale. The change here was a forced step-back to let off the throttle.

There was always an expiration date on this blog in that I didn't want to and couldn't do the same writing I always did here. Sometimes you just have to stop, because a mid-40 year old person making the same jokes he made 15-20 years ago is just not who I want to be. I can't stand in-authenticity (a word?) and don't want to be in my upper 40's being the person I used to mock for pretending to be younger in order to desperately keep the same readership I used to have. I don't want to be the person quoting Meek Mill when I just had to Google his name in order to make the reference. So it felt like a clean break two years ago, but I knew I didn't want to stop completely. Yes, a clean break involves a break entirely, so you see the contradiction there. I still want to be here writing, just not so badly that it interferes with my job and ruins what I see as the tiny amount of authenticity I have to mail in order to mail-in some posts. You can't cover up bad jokes and bad writing, so I chose/was forced to step back. There is my long answer.

So reading some articles from the same people who I have written about a lot here, they do not have this fear of getting stale. As you will see, Bill Simmons has not changed his jokes at all and Gregg Easterbrook is still rotating the same 4-5 topics every NFL season. It is sad to me. What's even more sad is Bill Simmons has tried other things and failed (which, I predicted on multiple occasions here...he wants to be more than a writer, but that's what he is) or not had the same amount of success he had writing. Now he's bashing ESPN in his writing, because he's free of them! FREE! Finally, he has that annoying corporate backing that made him the name he is and paid for all those nice things he has so he can starfuck all day on his podcast off his back. Did you know he used to write for the Jimmy Kimmel show? I wonder if he's mentioned it recently? Probably. So Bill's new schtick is to bash ESPN and then continue with his old schtick.

So...Bill Simmons hasn't changed at all. Today he tries to figure if the NBA is actually more marketable than the NFL. One could find this answer fairly easily using metrics such as viewership, jersey sales, income the athletes in each sport earn through marketing opportunities, etc., but none of these metrics would be as asinine and kill as much column space as Bill's way of determining the answer. He answer this question in a mailbag where Bill's Simmons Clones write in questions to him, desperately hoping he answers the question this time in order to validate their existence.

Today’s agenda: a mailbag-picks hybrid that ends almost as many times as that Chiefs-Raiders game Thursday night. 

Whoa! A hybrid mailbag!? This is totally different from the other 100 mailbag-picks columns that Bill has released through the years. I'm intrigued enough to read, but first, I need to find out how "The Ringer" is different from "Grantland," how much money HBO has given to get the website going and keep it going, as well as figure out exactly what the hell the site is supposed to be. Other than a hybrid pop-culture/sports site that spent an inordinate amount of space on talking about "Girls," at the behest of the HBO leadership as repayment for their investment in Bill's awful television show ("Any Given Wednesday"? Was that the title?) on HBO which failed for reasons that were ABSOLUTELY NOT Bill's fault...what is the Ringer? We may never know.

Bill blames the time slot, the fact other shows were premiering at the same time and anything other than his ability to run a television show for "Any Given Wednesday's" inability to draw an audience. I'll allow others who actually watched the show figure out the reason the show failed. I can take an educated guess though.

As always, these are actual emails from actual readers.

(Narrator) They were not.

Q: On your podcast you said that the NBA is going to pass the NFL eventually, because NBA players are more likable and marketable. What year did this start occurring in your opinion?
—A. Fitzgerald, Boulder

"A. Fitzgerald"...more like Not A. Realperson.

BS: You know how the WWE tells fans not to try wrestling stunts at home? I’m about to pull a Dan Dierdorf and disagree with myself.

But no one else is allowed to disagree with Bill or prove him wrong, because then he will either (a) change the subject or (b) move the goalposts to show he wasn't wrong. 

How could we actually prove this?

You cannot prove this, as it is not able to be definitively proven by the manner in which Bill will go about it achieving this end. There are ways to prove it, but these ways don't waste nearly as much space and don't involve Bill proving his opinion as fact. 

I hopped on Pro-Football-Reference, determined the biggest stars from the ’97 season, then found their 2017 doppelgängers from an admittedly ambiguous age/talent/career/respect/celebrity/resonance/charisma standpoint. Then, I determined which doppelgänger was, for lack of a better word, bigger.

So to prove this, Bill took his opinion of the stars from 1997 and compared them to his opinion of what these 1997 stars are comparable to in 2017, then he used his opinion on a not-carefully selected seven characteristic scale to compare these two generations of athletes. Adding up these statistics he never complied in which to compare these athletes, he then he used his opinion on which athlete was more marketable. So he based his selections on his opinion, used more of his opinion to think of these characteristics for each athlete that would be used to measure marketability, then didn't use a numerical ranking system of any type to show how he reached his conclusions, instead choosing to use his opinion based on (shrugs shoulders, looks around the room)...but more importantly here is Bill's conclusion! 

Bill couldn't even be bothered to pretend to use random numbers to compare the athletes from '97 and 2017? He's so lazy that he introduces criteria and can't even turn this criteria into numbers at least pretending there was a thought process? Well, onward to the conclusion, which is obviously where Bill wanted to go before he created the question "A. Fitzgerald" had. I mean, before "A. Fitzgerald" emailed the question to him.

Before we get there to the conclusion, let's look at the "Mad Scientist Who Shirks Empirical Data or Numbers Because Because Because Because Let's Just Get to the Conclusion," Bill Simmons, and how he compared NFL players to each other (doppelgangers!) who don't even play the same position. 

Von Miller (’17) > John Randle (’97)

Doppelgangers! One is a LB and the other is a DT and they are separated by 40 pounds. It's all the same though. 

Matthew Stafford/Ben Roethlisberger (’17) > Jeff George/Warren Moon (’97)

I just can't with this comparison. I can't. Warren Moon and Ben Roethlisberger? 

Ndamukong Suh (’17) > Bruce Smith (’97) 

One is a DT and the other is a DE. If Bill thinks Ndamukong Suh and Bruce Smith are doppelgangers then I think that says more about his study based on his opinion which uses no numerical data to reach a conclusion than anything else. 

Bill is mailing in his mailed-in mailbags. 

Khalil Mack/Aaron Donald (’17) = Derrick Brooks/Kevin Greene (’97)

Khalil Mack has 34.5 career sacks in his short career, while Derrick Brooks had 13.5 career sacks over his entire career. Their playing style is the exact same, other than it being entirely different. More like identical twins is what Brooks and Mack are, if the identical twins were not identical and didn't know each other at all. Mack and Brooks are basically Ronde and Tiki Barber, joined at the hip in the lore of NFL history. 

Also, Aaron Donald is the doppelganger of Kevin Greene? Really? I didn't miss reading Bill's drivel. 

Kareem Hunt/Tyreek Hill (’17) = Marshall Faulk/Terry Glenn (’97)
Warren Sapp/Michael Strahan (’97) > Geno Atkins/Myles Garrett (’17)

… and it starts getting silly.

Yes, NOW it starts getting silly. Prior to this moment, the exercise in Bill Simmons circle-jerking was based on proven opinion and the scientific method as shown through the use of 7 carefully chosen categories whose results literally don't exist in any form to show how Bill came to the conclusion based on his opinion. But now, things are getting silly. 

But guess what. I was wrong! 2017’s stars more than held their own against 1997’s stars. There goes that theory. What about hoops? The NBA is more popular today, right? Our 2017 guys would win 80 percent of the matchups, right?

2017: LeBron, Curry, Westbrook, Harden, Durant, Giannis, Kawhi, CP3, Griffin, The Brow, Draymond, Dirk, Klay, Giannis, Kyrie, Wall, Carmelo, Thomas, Love, Embiid, Lillard, Gasol, Hayward, Boogie, Towns, Porzingis, Lonzo, Simmons.

1997: Jordan, Shaq, Iverson, Malone, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, Garnett, Kemp, Duncan, Penny, Hill, C-Webb, Ewing, Payton, Miller, Mourning, Hardaway, Kidd, Stockton, Sprewell, Mutombo, Rice, Richmond, Baker, Young Kobe.

Oh shit! Not only were NBA players just as famous and marketable 20 years ago, but Jordan doubled as the biggest basketball star we’ve ever had.

Serious question...are there people who read this and think, "Great point by Bill Simmons!"? I ask because this is honestly pure bullshit and I'm embarrassed that Bill has written it down to where he can share the embarrassment that he has become with the rest of the Internet. 

Where the hell does Bill even get "Our 2017 guys would win 80 percent of the matchups, right?" from? He has absolutely no concrete basis upon which to base this claim. He's basically just typing words. Where in here does it show that NBA players are just as famous and marketable 20 years ago? He literally just wrote down the names of NBA players, typed a curse word and reached his conclusion. I think I can do this.

Is cancer as deadly as the Black Death? 

Cancer: Bones, operations, prostate, breast, Odell Beckham, surgery, brain, liver, doctors, Ewing Theory, Jimmy Kimmel

Black Death: Rat fleas, mice, boats, death, bubonic, Rocky IV, gangrene, pandemic

Oh hell no! Not only is cancer just as deadly as the Black Death, but the Ewing Theory says if I had to have a biopsy to remove malignant tissue, the tissue that grows in it's place could eventually lead to me having even stronger mental and physical abilities. So the Ewing Theory says cancer may not be a bad thing. We all should want it. Let's go to the next mailbag question.

I'm kidding, of course. There is more space to waste with this exercise in showing off Bill's nonsensical findings. 

So, what’s really going on here? Two things …

1. We don’t like football as much because of concussions, greed, Goodell, oversaturation, the gratuitous violence, all the unseemly off-field stuff and everything else I covered in this piece. In 1997, we didn’t cringe when receivers had their clocks cleaned over the middle, or when quarterbacks got annihilated by a weakside blitz and had to be revived with smelling salts. We enjoyed that stuff. That was football, baby! We didn’t feel even remotely guilty about it. The star power didn’t change; we changed.

I see Bill still uses the word "we" to describe himself when he thinks everyone was also wrong or had a misconception. It wasn't Bill that had the misconception, it was all of us. Also, "we" don't like football now as much as "we" liked football in 1997? Really, Bill? Is this a fact? I'm not sure it is.

True story: The Madden NFL ’96 video game arrived with a then-hilarious wrinkle. Whenever a player got injured, you heard a crunch followed by Pat Summerall saying, “Oh no, there’s a man down.” Eventually, anyone playing realized that you could maim players after the whistle, which led to more hilarity, real-life arguments (“How could you do that, you dick????!”) and actual truces between two buddies agreeing NOT to maim players after the whistle. This really happened. I swear to God.

Bill writes this like nobody else in the world has ever played "Madden NFL '96."

He's swearing to God and everything when talking about a video game many people have played and it takes 2 minutes to pull up footage (Bill includes a YouTube link by the way) of this "then-hilarious" wrinkle, but he's perfectly fine blazing through the entirely unprovable conclusion the NBA is more marketable than the NFL without a single shred of empirical evidence outside of his opinion. You can find evidence of the video game wrinkle in a matter of minutes, yet Bill feels the need to swear to God it exists. But proof his conclusion the NBA is more marketable than the NFL, he is confident his complete lack of empirical evidence presented here shows all the proof necessary. No swearing to a deity necessary.

Bill Simmons as a used car dealer:

(Bill) "This car can fly once it gets to the speed of 88 mph."

(Customer) "That's not true."

(Bill) "This car also gets 28 miles per gallon. You have to believe me, I swear to God. Fucking believe me, man."

(Customer) "I do. It's right here on the stic---"

(Bill pulls a knife and threatens a child with it) "You gotta believe me. This car. It gets great gas mileage. Swear to God. It really does!" (starts carving the gas mileage number into his cheek)

(Customer) "I believe you!"

(Bill) "Great, thanks. Also, magic elves are the reason the car flies."

(Customer) "I don't believe you." 

(Bill) "Well, we will just be wrong about that then if the car doesn't really fly. Let's sit down in my office and start talking numbers. I'm kidding, I don't use numbers to quantify anything."

2. We like basketball more than we did in 1997,

There you go. This is how "we" feel. I know you may think you personally feel differently, but you don't. Trust Bill's instinct on this. You like basketball more now than you did in 1997.

YouTube and Twitter allowed us to consume specific plays in easily digestible bites; and the people covering the sport itself went from a bunch of older, out-of-touch white guys to a younger, more diverse group that actually consumed it.

You see how out of touch Bill is? He believes that because the demographics of those who cover basketball has changed, the sport has become popular as a result. Four issues here with these claims: 

1. What? So younger, diverse people were not watching the NBA and now they are because those who cover the sport reflect a younger, diverse crowd? I've heard of people needing to see themselves reflected on a movie screen, television show or in the athletes actually playing a sport, but I've never heard "Well, I would watch the NBA but there just aren't enough young, diverse journalists covering the sport."

It's nonsense, that's what it is.

2. Bill is an older, out of touch white guy.

3. This reasoning could also be used for why the NFL is more popular now. Highlights are everywhere and there is a more diverse group of people covering the sport now. Of course, Bill is functionally incapable of making a cogent point because frankly he doesn't give a shit. Of course, his loyal readers seem to have the same problem solving and reasoning skills as he does.

4. Where is the evidence there is a younger, diverse group of journalists covering the sport and this has caused more people to watch? I'm slowly going dumb at this claim. Bill absolutely does not think his points through. What if the NBA is losing viewers due to white, out of touch white guys not watching it as much due to their demographic no longer represented as often in the sports journalism industry? Bill never thinks about this because he's lost in his tunnel vision, no-facts-used argument right now.

Check out this email from Rez in Sacramento …

“It's October 18 with a full slate of MLB playoff games and another NFL weekend coming, yet it feels like the world is watching the NBA. Boston fans are on suicide watch, Kings fans are screaming the refs screwed them, Giannis is having a statement game, my dad is texting me Thibs is overrated, my girlfriend is arguing Bobby Portis wasn't suspended long enough ... IT'S OCTOBER 18TH!!!! The only people who are supposed to be watching NBA games right now are Zach Lowe and youth groups who scored cheap tickets. No seriously, that's the list. Am I crazy??? This idea of NBA dominance is so delightful my brain won't accept it as possible.”

Until this decade, when did anyone ever treat the preseason, summer league, Opening Night and July 1 like these were monumental events? It’s unbelievable. Did you ever think you’d care about LeBron James’s shirtless workout videos or Russell Westbrook’s passive-aggressive Instagram photos? It never ends. NBA stars stumbled into a way of connecting with fans—during the season, during games, and even during the offseason—that stars from the No Fun League simply can’t replicate.

"Yes, I have anecdotal evidence on line 1, it would like to talk to you." 

This is peak "Here is what my friends and I think, so it must be what everyone else thinks as well" reasoning. I can't argue the NBA didn't have an eventful offseason, but the NFL owns the offseason just as much if not more than the NBA. And NBA diehard fans treated the preseason, summer league, and Opening Night as a monumental event. Did other people who are casual fans feel this way to and this reflects the improved marketability of the NBA? Eh, not so sure. Try to remove yourself from your social media bubble and try to accept that your thoughts are not reflective of everyone else's thoughts. Also, everything that was written here about preseason games being monumental events can be said for the NFL too. 

But again, Bill doesn't care about facts, evidence or anything of the like. He knows the point he wants to prove and will ignore evidence contrary to his point. 

Football isn’t dying by any means; the ratings and attendance and merchandising money tell us as much. 

The ratings say the NFL is more popular than the NBA. 

But culturally? NBA careers last twice as long 

The length of an NBA career is not a culturally related point. Also, the length of a player's NBA career has almost nothing to do with marketability, absent outlying extremely popular players whose careers are cut extremely short for one reason or another. 

and the league’s stars shine a little more brightly.

This is not a fact. This is an opinion. Over the past twenty years Bill has consistently not been able to tell the difference. I'll help him. 

Bill's HBO show was awful - an opinion

Bill's HBO show was canceled- a fact

How does Roger Goodell not get fired yesterday? He’s grown the league so poorly that the NFL’s signature video game was forced to use NBA STARS to seem a little more hip! What?

This is regarding Madden 18 using NBA players in an advertisement for the game. 

I have a very low opinion of  Bill's intelligence. He says a lot of things that are lies, he lives in his own world where the facts are what he chooses them to be, he has the capacity to do better but just doesn't seem to want to go in that direction, and the people who do like him are very loyal, which confuses me. But to say Roger Goodell should be fired because a private company chose to use NBA players in their marketing for an NFL game is an incredibly ridiculous statement. It would be like firing John Skipper because a column on Grantland outed a transgender golfer who eventually committed suicide. There is a lack of causation there.

It's a fucking video game. There are 100 reasons to fire Roger Goodell that are valid. I don't know how Bill Simmons manages human beings at "The Ringer" if he wants to fire the NFL commissioner because of how Madden 18 is marketed. 

Next is a mailbag question about "The Challenge" on MTV. I would think after taking two years off from Bill's mailbags something would change. How naive I am. 

Q: Why don’t we refer to Philip Rivers as Octo-Dad?
—Dean, Juniper Hills, Calif. 

Because it's stupid and only someone who thinks he is funny would call him that. 

BS: I can’t think of a single reason.

As I said. 

Q: Can we find Jared Goff a nickname?
—Tyler Goffi, Shamokin, Pa.

 

BS: Sure—what about J-Go? I’m not afraid of Jared Goff down four with two minutes left. You know who I’m afraid of? J-Go. Done!

Are there really people who read Bill Simmons and are entertained by it? If so, how? Do these people lack friends who can answer these questions? Why must it be Bill who answers them? Also, "J-Go" as a nickname? It's so lazy, but it allows Bill to keep churning content. 

Q: On the heels of Al Michaels's “Harvey Weinstein/Giants” joke, followed by the ensuing apology within an hour, it made me wonder what are the Top 5 or Top 10 Sports “On-Air Comments Then Apologies” of recent memory? A few that come to mind are: Lee Corso's F-bomb, Matt Millen/Jaws Polish Comment, Brent Musburger oozing over Katherine Webb, and Bob Griese's Taco Apology.
—Ross M., San Francisco

BS: Let’s answer this next week. America, please, send me the best on-air apologies you remember to themailbag@theringer.com.

My favorite apology, though it was not on-air, was the one where the editor-in-chief of Grantland apologized for outing a transgender golfer (Dr. V), helping to ruin that golfer's life to the point that golfer committed suicide. That editor-in-chief was really, really sorry for helping to ruin a life though. It's understandable though. Who knew outing someone was a misstep? Certainly not anyone that runs in Bill's young, diverse crowd that has caused the NBA to exceed the NFL in popularity. Bill was surprised to hear you shouldn't just fucking "out" someone:

Caleb’s biggest mistake? Outing Dr. V to one of her investors while she was still alive. I don’t think he understood the moral consequences of that decision, and frankly, neither did anyone working for Grantland. That misstep never occurred to me until I discussed it with Christina Kahrl yesterday. But that speaks to our collective ignorance about the issues facing the transgender community in general, as well as our biggest mistake: not educating ourselves on that front before seriously considering whether to run the piece.

I didn't realize grown adults still needed to be educated on this issue, but again, I also wasn't so concerned with "the scoop and story" that I was willing to publish a story without looking into the impact some parts of the story could have on the subject's life. 

Anyway, Bill needs to bash ESPN real quick. 

I’m always partial to ESPN apologizing at 12:30 a.m. (when just about everyone in Boston was asleep) for erroneously saying two different times that the Patriots illegally taped a St. Louis Rams walkthrough before Super Bowl XXXVI.

Isn't it funny how we didn't hear Bill complain about this a decade ago as ESPN was bankrolling his career, giving him a platform to make his career and throwing money into Grantland? I know Bill is going to bash ESPN, but it's always going to feel spiteful to me based on where he came from and what they helped him to achieve in his career. Bill wasn't a journalist who worked his way up to ESPN like 90% of the other ESPN employees. He was smoking pot, bar tending, and writing a blog when ESPN plucked him up out of obscurity and gave him a platform. It doesn't work that way for most other ESPN employees, so Bill being resentful probably won't ever make sense to me, no matter how it all ended. Plus, I always think Bill is going to come crawling back to ESPN at some point.

Q: In your 9/22 mailbag you wrote: “Bill Simmons is never changing his mind on these six things” and one was “Rocky 3 was the best Rocky movie.” And yet in 2002, you wrote a lengthy breakdown where you not only claimed that “the first Rocky was the finest of the bunch, no question” but went on to rank Rocky IV AHEAD of Rocky III for rewatchability. How can we ever trust you again? My children cried when they found out.
—Ben, Chicago 

Oh no, Bill is contradicting himself again. We all know that Bill is NEVER wrong, so he will weasel out of the fact he can't remember he once had a different opinion based on the point he wants to prove at the time. 

BS: Rocky III is the best Rocky movie. Rocky IV is the most rewatchable movie. Huge difference.

Yes, semantics say this is a massive difference. But let's see how Bill addresses that he ranked "Rocky" ahead of "Rocky 3" in 2002 and now claims in 2017 that he is never changing his mind that "Rocky 3" was the best Rocky movie. I'm sure he will sufficiently expl---

By the way, now Sly Stallone is directing Creed 2? He’s 71 years old!

"By the way, LOOK! SOMETHING SHINY! GO PLAY WITH IT! Now let's go to the next mailbag question and ignore how I ignored a question posed to me about how I contradicted myself. Also, the fact I chose to publish a question where I contradict myself probably doesn't show how little mail I'm getting these days. I'm still popular. It's not like I'm answering questions posed by the same person or anything. THAT would be a clear indication I'm not getting as much email from my SimmonsClones asking me to justify their existence as I used to. Thank goodness that's not happening."

Q: I literally just dropped Aaron Rodgers for Orleans Darkwa on my fantasy football team. Can we all agree to stop doing fantasy football? Thanks.

—Marc, Madison, Wis.

Q: I can't wait for you to mispronounce/misspell Brent Hundley's name for the rest of the Packers season. Or is it Brett Hundley? Brent Hudley?
—Marc, Madison, Wis.

Oh no. There are probably two guys named "Marc" who live in Madison, Wisconsin. Most likely. I doubt Bill gets such little mail these days that he had to publish two unrelated questions from the same person to fill out his mailbag. That would never happen.

Q: The Saints-Packers line moved 10 points with Aaron Rodgers’s injury. Why isn’t this a good way to tell who the MVP is? Which players would cause the biggest line moves?—Eric, Denver

Because gambling lines are not necessarily indicative of which individual players are the most valuable. Gambling lines are set up by Vegas to get gambling action on a game, not an indication of which player that is missing could be the most valuable. Of course, Bill likes this idea because Bill lacks logic and is stupid in that way.

BS: You’re right — only Rodgers swings it by double digits. I’m fine with deciding the MVP this way. 

Okay, I'll play. Drew Brees gets injured and now the line moves 11 points, because Brees' backup isn't as good as the Packers' backup in this scenario. Does this mean Rodgers is not the MVP, instead Brees is? And how in the fucking hell can you tell who the MVP is when that player plays all 16 games? If Tom Brady plays all 16 games and throws for 6000 yards and 98 TD's, is he not the MVP because the line didn't move due to his never getting hurt? This ridiculous method to choose the MVP requires the person to become injured in order to see how much the line would move. Also, this theory is subject to so many outside influences that can affect a gambling line that I can't believe I've wasted this many words talking about it. It's dumb, Eric. That's why it's not a good way to tell who the MVP is.  

My old ESPN teammate Chad Millman once came up with a great “I wish I had thought of that!” idea called PSVAR (point spread value above replacement) that’s basically gambling VORP. Guess who had the highest number every year? Aaron Rodgers. 

It would be really nice if Bill shared how this PSVAR was calculated, but anybody who knows Bill Simmons or how he writes his columns know that PSVAR is calculated through a really shitty process that we are better off never knowing. More than likely, it uses subjective numbers to get to the PSVAR calculation. 

Our PSVAR top five for this goofy 2017 season probably looks like this:

Rodgers: +10
Brees: +8
Brady: +7
Ryan: +7
Wentz: +7
Watson: +7

That. Is. Six. Players. Not. Five. Learn. To. Count. You. Fraud.

What’s the most amazing thing about that list? 

That you are incapable of counting to the number 6? That you don't tell your readers how you came to these numbers which make up PSVAR? That even you don't know how you came to these numbers because you wrote the word "probably" meaning you haven't calculated the actual numbers and are making them up in order to prove the point that Aaron Rodgers is #1 and to feign surprise when your made up list of five players that is really six players comes to a conclusion based on fake data that you think should surprise everyone but really shouldn't, because again, YOU ARE MAKING IT ALL UP OUT OF THIN AIR?

I find all of those things amazing.

Deshaun Watson! Who knew?

Yes, who knew that Deshaun Watson would make the Top of PSVAR? Certainly not anyone who can count to 5 and knew that Watson was number 6 on the list. Certainly not anyone who still has no idea how PSVAR is calculated.

Also, I can't emphasize enough that Bill is feigning surprise at the fact Deshaun Watson is in the Top 6 of PSVAR when it appears to be a metric based on absolutely no real data. In fact, here are my Top 5 NFL players in PSVAR this year:

Aaron Rodgers (+10)
Blake Bortles (+3)
Brian Hoyer (+2)
Drew Brees (-2)
Frank Gore (-455)

OH MY GOD! WHO KNEW THAT FRANK GORE WAS THE FIFTH MOST VALUABLE PLAYER IN THE NFL THIS YEAR? AND HIS NUMBER IS NEGATIVE, WHICH JUST GOES TO SHOW HOW ALL NFL PLAYERS ARE TRASH THIS YEAR AND WHY MADDEN 18 HAD TO USE NBA PLAYERS TO MARKET THE GAME WHICH PROVES THE NBA IS MORE MARKETABLE THAN THE NFL!

This is empirical evidence that PSVAR proves the NFL is less marketable than the NBA right now!

Q: I am perplexed about the cries that the NFL is conspiring to keep Kaepernick out of the league. Isn’t this just a case of the talent not matching the headache? Other notables chased from a job for the same reason: Ray Rice, Greg Hardy, Tim Tebow, Bill Simmons.

—Britt 

If you want circumstantial proof that Bill makes up these mailbag questions, this is an email from "Britt" who apparently doesn't live in a city or state. More than likely, Bill put this fake mailbag question in here as an inside joke. As Britt McHenry, the ex-ESPNer and now conservative pundit, believes that Kaepernick is being kept out of the NFL because of his talent level, not as a result of his being blackballed by the NFL. So I am betting this is a made-up mailbag question that Bill put in as an inside joke directed at an ex-coworker and this is one of many mailbag questions Bill has made up over the years. 

Then Bill outlines the plot for "Speed 3." It's so bad I didn't even have the energy to copy and paste it here. I like you all that much, as there are some things I will spare you from. 

Q: There has been a lot of talk about how the Browns have blundered by passing on good QBs such as Wentz and Watson. I think this wrongly assumes that these quarterbacks would play at a similarly high level if they were with the Browns—it’s the opposite of the Ewing Theory, players of a high caliber will get dragged down on a terrible team. Can you come up with a snappier title than the “Our shit team will always result in shit players” theory?
—Brendan, New York, N.Y.

BS: The Pewing Theory? [Wincing.] Come on! He baited me into that one! Don’t judge me!

So a theory based on money charged for pews. Ummmm...okay. 

By the way? I actually believe in the Pewing Theory. 

No way! Bill believes in a ridiculous theory where he will have to manipulate certain information and leave out certain information in order to show the veracity of his theory? This is so unlike Bill.

We have nearly 20 years of evidence now that the Browns ruin everything. Twenty years! The 2.0 Browns are right around the same age as Shawn Mendes, Lonzo Ball, Markelle Fultz, the daughter from Modern Family and 528 different YouTube stars.

Bill is pretending like he doesn't know who Ariel Winter is. That's funny and kind of inexplicable from the guy who made part of his fame from making it okay to ogle Anna Kournikova when she was still underage. But whatever.

The Browns kept turning away franchise QBs like one of those tortured TV heartthrobs who doesn’t want anyone to fall in love with him because he knows they’ll get hurt.

I mean...what? This is the best tortured comparison Bill can make? 

They’re basically Dylan McKay after he came back to 90210 a few years after his gorgeous wife was murdered by her father’s mafia hitmen, only now he had a heroin problem and even MORE baggage. Guess what. Even THAT pop culture reference was older than the 2.0 Browns.

The self-awareness around knowing you are using an old pop culture reference doesn't take away from the fact that you still used that pop culture reference. That reference is from 1995, so it would be the equivalent of someone in 1995 repeatedly making a pop culture reference to a television show from 1973. Feels old. 

Q: What did you think of your dad’s performance on Curb Your Enthusiasm?

—Brendan, Perth, Australia

BS: It’s been a brutal October for my dad. The Red Sox got knocked out. The Yankees are still alive. It’s the worst Patriots team in eight years.

Oh yeah, cue those violins for Bill's father that this is the worst Patriots team in the past 8 years. This team may not even make the AFC Championship Game, which makes me wonder how Bill's father will ever get past such misery.

The Hayward-Kyrie era lasted five minutes before being derailed by the most gruesome NBA injury maybe ever.

It's so hard being a Celtics fan these days, knowing your team that spent big money to bring in Hayward in order to not win the NBA title this year still isn't going to win the NBA title this year. What a letdown.

Speaking of letdowns, Bill's mailbags are always a letdown for those who don't worship him.

13 comments Bill Simmons and The Inhumane Choice of Having to Choose Between Attending a Game 7 or a Boxing Match

Bill Simmons made his early writing career a success by being just like you and me. He talked with his friends about sports, girls, and pop culture like you talked about those topics with your friends. That was the supposed hook of his columns. Those days where Bill can relate to his readers are long over, not that you would know it from reading how his SimmonsClones readers worship his every move. Bill is more likely to end up on a "Power 100" list from "Sports Illustrated" then he is to end up at a sports bar where he talks to normal people. He's a multi-millionaire who has desperately (and semi-successfully in the eyes of some) hung on to his "everyman" quality. Just as long as you ignore most of what he writes, everyone he hangs out with, his Instagram account, and pretty much everything else about him, then you would think he's JUST LIKE YOU AND ME! In this column/mailbag, Bill talks about ultimate dilemma that the upper 1% entitled of sports fans can face. Should he attend Game 7 of the Spurs-Clippers or go to the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight? Hey SimmonsClones, he's not like you and this should prove it. Drop your idolatry and please realize he's playing you for fools. 

That won't ever happen of course. It's also nice how Bill writes a column about this major, major dilemma like he is rubbing it in his readers' faces that he even has this choice. He's essentially bragging about how he can do either and his readers won't give a shit because they live to serve him and live their lives vicariously through him. Complaining about having to choose between these two options is just a douchebag move. Just try to be humble and not brag. That's not something Bill can do, because he lives to tell everyone how special he is. He should be making this decision without trying to write about the decision in his article. Bill had made the decision to attend Game 7, but he couldn't resist allowing his readers the opportunity to know he made this choice. Bill also takes the time to explain to his readers, who apparently he feels are all mouth-breathing morons because they aren't him, the special bond between a dad and a daughter.

During Eddie Murphy’s first SNL season, Joe Piscopo started appearing on “Weekend Update” as a goofy sports anchor who shouted the big stories in exclamation points. Saturday would have been perfect for him. NHL playoffs! Kentucky Derby! Game 7! The big fight!!! SATURDAY!!!!!!

I mean, this is typical of Bill Simmons' writing. There's no need for this pop culture reference other than for Bill to say he made the reference and cover up for the fact Bill lacks the ability to simply write an introductory paragraph.

In my first playoffs mailbag column two weeks ago, you might remember me seeing the NBA’s schedule for Round 1 and fretting about one of the all-time sports fan conundrums. If the Clips-Spurs battle miraculously produced a Game 7, that would undoubtedly happen on Saturday night. I already had my ticket for that hypothetical game. But I also had a chance to attend Floyd-Manny, which meant witnessing a once-in-a-generation fight in Vegas with my L.A. buddies. Can’t lose either way, right?

Right, which is why this isn't a difficult choice. Which is also why this isn't something you build your weekly mailbag around unless you just simply want to swing your dick around a little bit and point out that you have the choice of attending a fight or going to a Game 7. Honestly, maybe Bill's readers do care and that's pathetic. Otherwise, nobody else cares and this "Saturday decision" column is just a way for Bill to brag about all the cool shit he gets to do. He's very proud of everything he has accomplished and can't wait to tell everyone about it.

You never want to make a tough decision until you HAVE to make a tough decision … and now we’re here.

My definition of a "tough decision" probably is a little bit different from Bill's idea of a "tough decision." This decision is only tough in that Bill will miss out on an opportunity, but either way he's winning.

Game 7, Spurs at Clippers: 5 p.m. PT, Los Angeles.
 
Or …

Mayweather-Pacquiao, 8:30 p.m. PT (approximately), Las Vegas.
 
Pick one.
 
(Yikes.)

Most people would just say, "I'll figure it out" and go from there. But not Bill, not at all. Bill sees a chance to brag about these two opportunities he gets AND he can get half of a column out of fully breaking this decision down? Yes, thank you more please. Bill can kill column space when he's out of ideas AND the world can know that he's wealthy and connected? The least tough choice Bill had to make was whether to do a full breakdown of this decision.

Here are the for-and-against cases for Game 7 and The Fight.

Because nothing screams "excitement" like getting to go through someone else's pros and cons list.

The Case For Game 7: Even before it officially became “One of Best Round 1 Series Ever,” we knew it had a chance to broach “Feels Like The Finals If They Happened In Round 1” (which is exactly what happened) …

IT'S A SERIES THAT IS TOO OVER-QUALIFIED TO JUST BE A ROUND 1 SERIES!

thanks to those quietly dramatic Hack-a-DJ moments, these contests balloon to nearly three hours and feel a little like those Yankees–Red Sox nail-biter marathons from 2003 and 2004 (without 86 years of baggage and eight decades of hammer-versus-nail story lines, but still) …

GREATEST RIVALRY EVER! NO ONE DENIES THIS!

can Clippers fans affect the game without coming off like a bunch of whining maniacs who inadvertently work their boys into a whining froth (and vice versa?) … 

Yes, those Clippers fans are just whining maniacs aren't they? This coming from the guy who built his early career on whining about his favorite sports teams, while inventing new and different ways his teams were cursed for dramatic effect.

I could keep going and going, but one thing I’ve learned in life is that there’s really never a good excuse to miss a Game 7 … in fact, you can use that for your high school yearbook quote if you’re under 18.
  
“One thing I’ve learned in life: There’s really never a good excuse to miss a Game 7.” —Bill Simmons

Bill is trying to get quoted in people's yearbooks now. So by the way, if there is never a good excuse to miss a Game 7 then why is Bill gnashing his teeth so hard trying to make a decision here? If he feels so strongly that Game 7 is a "can't miss" game then the decision is made, right? Of course not! Bill makes up rules, doesn't stick to them and eventually contradicts these rules over time. So he wants to use "never miss a Game 7" as a yearbook quote, but doesn't mind missing a Game 7 himself.

Most likely, Bill realizes he has half of a column idea for a change and he wants to work it out like he really thought of attending the Mayweather-Pacquaio fight.

The Case For The Fight: We’ve been waiting for Floyd-versus-Manny for six to seven solid years …

I really haven't been looking forward to it. Mayweather does not have a very exciting boxing style, which is why he has to be more exciting out of the ring, because his fighting style in the ring is slow and defensive. It's not exactly Mike Tyson in his prime out there.

I’ve been to a couple of Big Fights in my life, and, from a buzz/electricity/eye candy/celebrity/fashion/comedy standpoint, there’s simply nothing like them …

Bill hasn't bragged in a few paragraphs, so he figured he would just go ahead and do it. Bill has many expensive bottles of wine that he keeps in a separate room next to his leather-bounds books.

But a relentless (and deserved) assault by the media and on social media, too, has rendered him so completely unlikable that the unthinkable happened. Within the past two weeks, a groundswell of media members have been imploring everyone to boycott the fight … and they didn’t seem crazy. 

I will not be boycotting the fight for two reasons. 

1. As seen by the constant references in his "Book of Basketball" of women as whores or pornstars, as well as Bill's insistence throughout the history of his columns for ESPN.com where he positions women as nags who can singlehandedly bring down a great man's performance in a sporting event with their nagging, Bill hates women. Just in general. Not any specific women and there are women he likes, but mostly, women are bitches and who hasn't wanted to punch one or two at a certain time? I mean, who says "no" to that?

2. No really, why should Bill care about something like a dude hit a woman a few times?

First, I have been a boxing fan since I fell in love with Ali during the mid-1970s, back when Ali’s Wide World of Sports appearances resonated in ways that you couldn’t possibly understand 40 years later. 

Ah yes, it's another episode of "I was there so I experienced first hand what no one else can ever experience ever again" from Bill. These are all episodes where Bill attends a sporting event or witnesses something that thousands of others witness, but he acts like he has a special, different perspective from everyone else.

Of the top 200 moments in my life when I said to myself, purely as a sports fan, “I don’t know if I feel good about this,” I think boxing was involved in 185 of them.

Oh, well at least Bill feels bad about liking boxing. As long as he continuously apologizes while displaying the same lack of interest in changing his behavior then all should just fine. We'll call it "The Peter King Rule" where a sportswriter does/says dumb shit and never seems to learn.

Remember, the goal of boxing is to repeatedly punch your opponent, either to accumulate points or to knock him unconscious; it’s one of the most primitive sports we have, and if you’re thinking about attaching humanity and morality to it, you’re fooling yourself.

I'm not the one talking about how much I like boxing despite all of the faults the sport and it's participants have. So save the lecture. It sounds like only Bill is the one fooling himself, yet because he likes boxing then obviously "we" are fooling ourselves as well.

Watching Saturday’s fight doesn’t mean that you condone Floyd’s vile behavior. It’s apples and oranges. This isn’t a sport where you can just pick and choose your viewing based on some arbitrary (but well-intentioned) moral compass. It doesn’t exist. Not in boxing.

So basically Bill's reason for not boycotting the fight was that boxing is a terrible sport so there's no way for him to like the sport and take the moral high ground. That's fine, but could very well be a reason to stop watching the sport. Rather than waste space in this column and the reader's time with rambling, Bill should just write, "I like watching boxing and refuse to stop watching it just because there are some reprehensible characters." Instead, Bill rambles around and makes it seem like he's saying more than he truly is saying.

Second and more important, what’s going to be more entertaining than rooting against Floyd Mayweather? He’s the greatest boxing villain we’ve had since George Foreman 40 years ago! How can anyone not dislike this guy? We get to root for someone to punch Floyd in the face for 12 rounds? I’m supposed to BOYCOTT this? Stop it.

This is probably a good point.

The Case Against Game 7: I mean, shit. It’s Game 7. Even Johnnie Cochran in his prime couldn’t make a good case against a Game 7.

And yet, Bill is wasting space pretending like this is a difficult decision. Like I wrote earlier, he'll do anything to find a topic to write about in his columns. Even if Bill has to create a rule like, "There's no excuse for missing a Game 7" in the very same column/mailbag where he is trying to think of an excuse to miss Game 7. Obviously the concept of this column will come off as a contrived since Bill strongly believes there is no reason to miss a Game 7.

The only “case” I can make against it: Add up Hack-a-DJ plus commercials plus prime-time TV timeouts and this baby could swell past 8 p.m. PT; throw in an unexpected overtime and suddenly you’re looking at 8:30 (yeeeesh), and that’s without factoring in the Staples Center exit (never easy) and traffic (always there). So, yeah, attend Game 7 and there’s a real chance of missing a chunk of the fight (which, based on the history of these fights, probably won’t start until 8:45 p.m. PT).

Whatever time this game ends, I’ll be the guy weaving through the postgame crowd like Barry Sanders and driving home like Dom Toretto. Ride or die.

What is Bill's sudden fascination with "Fast and the Furious"? It's like he has attached himself to these films as an example of modern day pop culture that he will use as a reference and wants to keep beating this reference into the ground.

My biggest problem with the timing of this bout: In December 2012, a cartoonishly enhanced Juan Manuel Marquez — 

What kind of 10th grade juvenile fuckery is this to put enhanced in italics? It sounds like you are having a seizure if this sentence is spoken out loud with "enhanced" emphasized.

as Marquez briefly unplugged Manny’s brain for nearly two minutes as everyone frantically Googled “Marquez” and “HGH.” He didn’t just knock Manny out; we thought Manny was dead.

"WE" thought Manny was dead. All of "us."

Now, there are two schools of thought after something like that happens. Either …

There are two schools of thought and only two schools of thought. Any other thought is not a part of either of these schools and should not be considered. There are only two options, at least until Bill thinks of a third option.

1. That knockout (and all the ensuing adversity and doubt) actually made Manny stronger. And it wasn’t just the knockout; it was the devastating feeling of knowing that you had let your entire country down. I mean, Manny IS the Philippines.

That's a link to a Grantland column of course. Because Bill's columns are also a clearinghouse for links to other Grantland columns.

2. You’re never the same after you get knocked the F out like that. You’re never the same. You’re NEVER the same.

Okay, I get it. I'm NEVER the same after I get knocked the fuck out like that. I don't know why Bill insists on using "you" in this situation since 99.9% of his readers aren't boxers and it would be just as easy to write "boxers" as opposed to saying "you," but that's the type of writing that Bill provides to his readers.

Here’s where I would love to be wrong: I believe in the second school of thought (not the first, which feels a little too media-created for me).

(Bengoodfella's head explodes)

Bill Simmons, a member of the media, says "there are two schools of thought after something like that happens..." and then lists these two schools of thought. Bill then dismisses one school of thought, yes he dismissed one of his own ideas, by stating it was a "media creation" which is obviously true because Bill Simmons is a member of the media and just thought of it. I'm not sure how far down the rabbit hole Bill is here, but at this point I think he just created an idea, dismissed the idea and then blamed the media for it's creation.

I don’t see how having your brain get demolished to the point that it says “I’m shutting down for two solid minutes to regroup” is ever a good thing.

(Bengoodfella types sadly) But you just thought of it yourself. With your brain.

By the time that first bell rings, Floyd will have worked himself into a defiant, me-against-the-world frenzy. Only it won’t be a frenzy, because that’s not how Floyd works. He uses outside forces to drive himself to a deeper performance level — improved concentration, deeper resolve, almost like he took Bradley Cooper’s special pill in Limitless.

Cram that pop culture reference in there, Bill. If it won't go at first, just keep pushing. You can get it crammed into the discussion if you just try hard enough.

He’s one of the best ever at hitting people while rarely, if ever, getting hit. And when he’s locked in, when he’s truly locked in, he cannot be beaten. It’s just about impossible.

Hey, remember when this column was about Bill's big decision that had to be made for last Saturday night? Yeah, I barely do too.

Will the fight end up being as special as everyone hopes? Probably not. I hope I’m wrong. I hope Manny pulls off a semi-miracle. Yes, I will watch. No, I’m not going. I made my choice. Game 7.

Great, I'm glad it took hundreds and hundreds of words to get to the point where Bill makes a decision on which sporting event he will choose to attend. His readers definitely needed to be taken through the process on how decided which event to attend, all while feeling like Bill is waving his success in their face and being a douchebag overall, only to come to the conclusion that Bill came to in the beginning based on a rule he created. That rule is there is no excuse to miss a Game 7, yet Bill was going to ignore that rule. Of course.

And by the way? I didn’t have a choice. My daughter turns 10 tomorrow. She’s already a master guilt-tripper and consistently ropes me into doing whatever she wants. It’s a dad-daughter thing and it’s impossible to explain;

Unless you are one of the hundreds of million of people alive on the planet Earth who also have a daughter. In that case, this exclusive club of being whipped by your daughter is easy to explain because it's something hundreds of millions of fathers experience. But go on, tell me about this special bond you and your daughter have that is too difficult to explain. Please tell me more, it's fascinating to hear you experience things no one else has experienced.

I’m spending the entire day with her, then going to Game 7 … and only because she allowed me to do so. Yes, I’m daughter-whipped.

Wow, you are spending the whole day with your daughter? That's amazing and almost like something a parent would do. Fucking bizarre, man. I'm glad she allowed you to go to the basketball game. 

I bring this up for a crucial reason: Every May, my daughter’s birthday party falls on an unbelievable sports day. 

Oh yeah, that does sound crucial. I don't know how Bill managed to make this incredibly hard decision of deciding which sporting event to attend during the same week he had to give up watching sports during the afternoon to spend time with his daughter on her birthday. If choosing between the boxing match and Game 7 was a Sophie's Choice, having to spend time at home prior to making Sophie's Choice with your kids is clearly the equivalent of being locked in a room with Bill Simmons for an entire day.

I still enjoy how Bill goes through his whole thought process. He doesn't mean to, but he comes off pretty douchey. Actually, he probably means to.

And I could have avoided this, year after year, had my wife and I done the math pre-pregnancy and aimed (no pun intended)

I don't get why this would be a pun, because unless Bill's wife has the world's most bizarre vagina that resembles an elaborate hole on a miniature golf course, he shouldn't have to do too much aiming while attempting to conceive a baby.

Here’s the point: If you’re pulling the goalie and you’re a psycho about sports (and there are more of us out there than you’d think),

Oh okay, there are more of "us" out there than I think? Thanks for telling me because I'm currently reading a column about sports, so the odds are decent that I'm pretty psycho about sports. Bill Simmons telling his readers there are more people out there who are psycho about sports is pretty rich. Why must he lecture his readers on obvious matters such as this?

don’t be afraid to get a little Gladwell/Outliers/Canadian Hockey Parent Weird and aim for a certain birthday range. You can get a little sports-fan selfish about it. It might work, it might not.

Bill Simmons probably believes that he is pushing a new idea here. The idea of planning when a child is born. Families plan when they are going to have their children all the time and will avoid certain months or times of the year. It's called "family planning" and it is done all the time, even if Bill wants to try and throw a sports-bent to it in order to pretend this is a new idea.

But that’s how I came to pick Game 7 (and my daughter, kind of) over The Big Fight.

Thanks and feel free to never explain something like this again. Of course, Bill WILL do something like this again because he wants his readers to know he even had the option of attending two exciting sporting events. Bill is never afraid to tell all his readers the cool shit he gets to do. Anything to soothe his ego.

Time to rip through some NBA emails. As always, these are actual emails from actual readers.

Hey Bill, how about you aim to write an entire column without a mailbag of some sort?

(And as I write this, Bill posts a full column about Tim Duncan. He did it once AND he wrote about Tim Duncan yet again when he wrote a two-part column on Duncan just a few years ago. I'll tell you when I'm impressed.)

Q: During G-State/New Orleans, my son said to me, “You know who Curry is? Gretzky.” And we realized that Warriors/Oilers parallels worked all the way down the roster. Draymond Green? Mark Messier. Klay Thompson? Jari Kurri. Andrew Bogut? Grant Fuhr. You can even make a case for Andre Iguodala and Craig MacTavish.  I just can’t think of anyone Curry reminds me of more than the Great One. Skinny. Not a great athlete. And a genius.
 
—Eric S., Provo

I'm just going to stare in silence at the computer screen knowing this reader just compared Draymond Green to Mark Messier and Andrew Bogut as Grant Fuhr. I mean, no. Don't. Let's allow the Warriors to be the Warriors without comparing Draymond Green to Mark Messier. It's like saying Luc Longley is Grant Fuhr just because they both protected the goal on championship teams. Sometimes the similarities begin and end at the same place.

Bill shoots this idea down saying:

Do we have to bring the best hockey forward ever into this? By the time Gretzky turned 27 (Curry’s age now), he’d already won three Cups and eight straight Hart Trophies (EIGHT!!!) and broken every conceivable NHL scoring record...Do we have to bring the best hockey forward ever into this? By the time Gretzky turned 27 (Curry’s age now), he’d already won three Cups and eight straight Hart Trophies (EIGHT!!!) and broken every conceivable NHL scoring record.

Sometimes (okay, oftentimes) Bill's readers are a little too eager to get his attention and resort to just writing stupid shit.

Let’s just say “He’s a little Gretzky-ish at times” and be done with it.

Yes, "let's" say that. I bet since Bill is a huge LA Kings fan now, he wanted to be the one who made the comparison to Wayne Gretzky but his readers beat him to it. So of course, he had to crap on the idea since they got to the idea before he did.

Q: Regarding your mailbag question on the most appropriate name for the Ben Simmons tanking process over here, a great guy is known to be a ‘top bloke.” Why not call the Ben Simmons tanking process “Choke for the Top Bloke?”

—Jono Adelaide, Australia

BS: Not bad. Last Friday, I asked the readers to see if they could top “Lossie for the Aussie” or “Skimmin’ for Simmons.” My favorite runner-up suggestions: Blunder for Down Under, Poo for a Kangaroo, Bend Down for Ben, DeRailin’ for the Australian and Pulled Asunder for Down Under.

I'm pretty sure everyone remembers, Bill. It was a week ago, not a decade ago. Stop trying to run mailbag contests and just get to the part where you top your readers' ideas with a more clever idea of your own.

Q: Wouldn’t the obvious candidate be “B.S. for B.S.?”
—Alex, Manhattan, KS

BS: “B.S. for B.S.!”

That’s right … B.S. for “B.S. for B.S.”!

That's right! That's right! Why is Bill so excited?

That's fine though. Bill can pay attention to college basketball for a month every year, but I'm going to go on record as saying I think Skal Labissiere is going to give Simmons a great run for his money as the #1 overall pick. That is, unless the NBA doesn't want 6'11" power forward/center combo guys who can run the floor, block shots, are good shooters, excellent rebounders, and have great intangibles. In that case, yes, Ben Simmons will probably easily be the #1 overall pick. Don't sleep on Skal. He's going to Kentucky, while Ben Simmons is going to LSU. It should be fun to watch, but I am not even close to giving the #1 overall pick to Simmons right now. I wouldn't expect Bill to know who Skal Labissiere is though. He only knows about Ben Simmons because they have the same "B.S." initials and last name of "Simmons."

After all, we are talking about a franchise forward with the exact same name as my only son and who just so happens to be entering the same draft lottery in which my favorite team has its own pick, Brooklyn’s pick (UNPROTECTED!) and Dallas’s pick (top-seven protected — and yeah, that team is Year 18 Dirk, Knee Surgery Parsons and Just About Nobody Else right now). This is too important. I need more time.

Oh God, I'm not going to be able to handle it if the Celtics landed Ben Simmons in the draft. I mean, I could handle it, but I couldn't handle Bill's bullshit if Simmons was drafted by the Celtics. Fortunately, the Celtics probably won't be in a position to draft Simmons, even with all of those first round picks.

Also in last week’s mailbag, I gave everyone one week to top “James Dolan, disaster expert” in a new game called “Find someone who has the exact same name as a celebrity, but also has a ridiculous job that somehow ties into how ridiculous the celebrity is.”

Now, some might say I cheated by not including the other Bill Simmons — a.k.a. “El Wingador,” the renowned chicken wing eating champion who went to jail for cocaine trafficking. But I’ve been in the same room with cocaine only once in my life — during Game 7, 2004 ALCS, the bathroom of an undisclosed Boston bar, when I had gone in there to pee and inadvertently walked in on two guys snorting lines off the bathroom sink. 

I find it hard to believe that Bill Simmons attended a prep school and Holy Cross, but only managed to be in the same room as cocaine once...and that wasn't even in college.

It’s true: Lenny Bias blew three to four Celtics titles, but he also ruined any chance of me ever trying cocaine.

Well that makes sense. Bill otherwise would have used cocaine, but because Len (not Lenny, it's not Lenny...you aren't Tommy Heinsohn) Bias died after using cocaine Bill decided that it wasn't worth it. Nice to hear that he makes personal life decisions like this not based on what he does or does not choose to want to do, but because it didn't work out well for an NBA player.

"I was going to start using heroin, but the fact Kurt Cobain had a drug problem that helped contribute to his death really turned me off to it. If Kurt Cobain had not used heroin and then died an early death, the urge to stick in a needle in my arm and chase the dragon would have been too much for me to resist! I mean, I really want to use heroin a lot."

That raises a separate mailbag question (I’ll save you the energy): Would I rather have those three to four titles and maybe four to five extra Bird-McHale years (since Bias would have extended their careers) even if it meant there would have been a good chance I’d have at least tried cocaine in college (and then who knows?) … or would I rather keep things the way they were? And the answer, obviously, is OF COURSE I WOULD HAVE WANTED THE EXTRA TITLES AND THE EXTRA BIRD-MCHALE YEARS!!! ARE YOU CRAZY???????

I always have loved the idea that Len Bias would have extended the Bird-McHale years. Bill furthers this idea simply because there is no way anyone can prove him incorrect (there's no way of knowing what Bias would have done for the Celtics), but would having Len Bias around really have caused Bird's minutes to be cut and solved the back problems that plagued him throughout his late career? Bird would have been like, "Oh sure fine, I'll cut my minutes and hand the reins of the team off to this young guy, because I'm concerned about my physical well-being."

That doesn't sound like anything the Larry Bird I knew would do. The same Larry Bird who emotionally abused opponents and teammates. He would have stepped back even just a little bit and shown concern for his physical well-being? Not sure I see that.

Q: Have you noticed that every time CP gets called for a personal, he looks like a toddler who just lost his favorite toy? It’s unbelievable.
 
—Tyler, Fremont, Nebraska

BS: The Clippers can’t beat San Antonio when they’re worried about the refs for three straight hours. Just play basketball, for God’s sake. As a Los Angeles reader named Ryan points out, it’s not a coincidence that they ended up with someone nicknamed “Big Baby” on this team.

It's no coincidence this "Big Baby" character was drafted by the Boston Celtics, which just so happens to be Bill's favorite NBA team. It's also no coincidence this "Big Baby" guy attended the same college that Ben Simmons, Bill Simmons' new favorite college basketball player, will be attending next year.

Q: Kia commercial idea: Doc Rivers forces Blake Griffin to drive his new Kia 220,000 miles. Car predictably breaks down on the highway, leading Doc to complain loudly about the quality of the California roads.
 
—Alex H, Baltimore

BS: Come on, come on. They’re trying. Game 6 was a big step forward.

The fact Bill is noting that current Clippers players and the Clippers' head coach complain all the time, when there are ex-Celtics players on the Clippers team and the Clippers' head coach won an NBA Title in Boston with the Celtics is too much for me. I have died of an irony overdose.

Q: You always talk about Rondo being a 90-10 guy, is he now a 10-90 guy?
 
—Elie, Los Angeles

BS: It’s not that bad. He’s a 50/50 guy now — you love 50 percent of the stuff he does and you hate the other 50 percent. How ’bout the Mavs stiffing Rondo on his 2015 playoff share? Is there a better way to show your contempt for a teammate than stiffing him on his playoff share? I love sports sometimes. I wish ESPN voted on playoff shares every year. I would totall— AHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I’M GETTING ELECTROSHOCKED!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Bill still loves to play the "ESPN rebel" angle in his columns and when he is throwing his annual hissy-fit over something ESPN has done. Yet, he loved ESPN enough to stay with them for the past 15 years and is perfectly fine setting up Grantland knowing he had the full financial backing support of the ESPN web of influence. If Bill does leave ESPN, rest assured he will go to another larger sports organization. He wants to be the rebel and outsider, but he's always taking the money and the influence like an insider, because that's what he is.

Bill is like a politician who states that the power should be taken away from the PAC's and other powerful organizations and put into the hands of the people. Bill the politician would state there needs to be campaign finance reform, all while PAC's "not affiliated" with him that just happen to be affiliated with him in some way are collecting millions of dollars to fund his campaign. He puts on a good show about being the outsider, but he loves that ESPN money and exposure he gets.

Then Bill makes a comparison of The Undertaker to Tim Duncan, which is probably the comparison that inspired him to write (another) column about Tim Duncan. Take inspiration where you can get it, I guess.

Q: Does no one care that Lamarcus Aldridge shot 33% against Memphis in Round One? I know Z-Bo and Big Spain are tough, but that’s not exactly the performance you want going into free agency.
 
—Kevin Linger, Arlington, VA

BS: No because Aldridge wasn’t leaving Portland unless Round 1 went badly. Yes because that series proved something we already knew: Aldridge is a star, but he’s not a superstar. (You’re not a title contender just because he showed up. But in a 2008 Celtics-type scenario, where he’s one of three All-Stars, that’s different. So you’re one-third of the way there with him.)

Oh really? From last week's mailbag:

You could make a strong case for Aldridge being in play this summer.

He’s from Dallas and attended the University of Texas, which opens up going-back-home possibilities in San Antonio (Duncan’s replacement?), Dallas (the Mavs’ new franchise guy?) AND Houston (his best chance for a quickie Finals trip).

So with two of those teams Aldridge would be part of a three-headed All-Star, but Dallas? As the franchise guy? Is Bill referring to Aldridge as a franchise guy here, because if so, he contradicts his own opinion a week later. Then Bill listed the three NBA teams that Aldridge would seriously consider joining.

Which makes me think Orlando (assets + talent + youth + Florida), Boston (assets + youth + role players + President Stevens + great owner/front office) and New York (biggest market, Carmelo, top-three pick, cap space) could be legitimate LaMarcus players here.

Now a bigger contradiction! So where are the three-headed All-Stars on these teams? The Knicks have Carmelo, while the Magic and Celtics don't really have any perennial All-Stars at this point. At no point when providing the formula each team has that would draw Aldridge does Bill write "another All-Star" as being part of the draw. So either Bill thinks another All-Star isn't a draw for Aldridge (which would make sense because he mentions Aldridge doesn't like sharing face time with Lillard for commercial opportunities) or he made up the whole "Aldridge needs two other All-Stars around him to succeed" idea in this very mailbag and has no concern if it contradicts his idea of where Aldridge would end up this summer as a free agent.

In the mailbag a week or two ago, Bill never mentioned that Aldridge would need two other All-Stars around him to win a title. This leads me to believe he, as usual, is making things up on the spot. One would think when discussing Aldridge's free agency and the teams he might choose as a free agent that "Hey, he won't win a title with any of these teams because they don't have two other All-Stars" would come up at some point. It seems like something Bill would mention this since he seems to believe this statement is true.

Q: Save this email, because I’m calling it right now: Myles Turner is going to be an NBA superstar. In three years, when he’s first-team All-NBA and carrying the Cs with Smart and Thomas to the Finals, you can run this email and say “Man, that guy nailed it.”
 
—Tito Crafts, Northampton, MA

BS: I’ll do you one better: I will run that email and say, “Man, Tito Crafts nailed it.” I’ll throw in italics and everything.

HAHA! Maybe it's the stink of Rick Barnes, but I don't think Myles Turner will make one All-Star team. He's a center who doesn't run the floor like a young person should (seriously, he doesn't move like a 19 year old) and loves to shoot three-point shots when allowed to. He could be a star, but the fact he chose to play for Rick Barnes concerns me greatly. That's bad decision-making right there. I don't think Myles Turner will be an NBA superstar. Ever. Never. Not happening. Of course, I thought Andre Drummond wasn't motivated enough to be an NBA star, so I've been wrong before. I feel pretty confident about this one. Turner couldn't steal minutes from Grimace (that's Cameron Ridley) at Texas, so I don't feel good about him stealing minutes from actually good basketball players in the NBA.

Q: In your 2007 MVP Column you wrote this about Tim Duncan:

This is simply a reminder that Bill Simmons has written about Tim Duncan A LOT over the years. Imagine if the Celtics had landed Duncan in the draft instead of not having a shot at him. There is a chance Bill would have written 2-3 columns per year about Duncan. And yes, it seems at this point writing about Duncan is the only thing that gets Bill motivated enough to write a full column without gimmicks other than YouTube videos.

Now regarding Kelly Olynyk ripping Kevin Love's arm out of socket: 

By the way, I’ve been watching Father Kelly for two years; he’s a clumsy, uncoordinated, way-too-nice, laid-back Canadian who sucks at boxing out and had just heard his coach scream at his entire team about not giving up offensive rebounds. I believe it was a fluke. Then again, I’m the same guy who still believes Bernard Karmell Pollard should serve prison time, so I’m probably not an unbiased observer here.

Which is why Bill should be ignored when it comes to almost anything he writes. He tends to come to a conclusion and then finds a way to defend that conclusion. Olynyk meant to do it and it wasn't a fluke. Maybe I'm biased because I never wanted the Celtics to draft Olynyk.

Q: Did the Celtics just lose whatever (admittedly small) chance they had of signing Kevin Love this summer when Olynyk dislocated Love’s shoulder?

—Josh, Boston

BS: Are you kidding? If Love holds any real bitterness, we’ll waive Father Kelly tomorrow! We’ll strip his clothes, force him to walk from Charlestown to the South End wearing an “I’m sorry, Kevin” sign.

Yes, "we" will do this. Also, why shame Olynyk in this way if the injury was a fluke? If it was a fluke then Olynyk should have nothing to be sorry for.

The reason he didn’t intentionally hurt Love doubles as the reason he’s expendable: Again, he’s a clumsy, uncoordinated, way-too-nice, laid-back Canadian who sucks at boxing out (and can’t protect the rim).

Keep repeating the same shit over and over. At some point, maybe you can find someone to believe you. And yes, all of those reasons are why a Gonzaga team built around Olynyk couldn't make the Sweet Sixteen and I didn't want the Celtics to draft him.

Q: It’s not like we need any more proof that God hates Cleveland, but doesn’t Olynyk bear a striking resemblance to Jesus? God isn’t even trying to hide it at this point.
 
—Mike, Chicago

Sure Mike, if you are one of the idiotic people who thought Jesus looked more like a Canadian and less like a dude of Middle Eastern descent and want to white-wash Jesus into looking like something he probably didn't look like, Olynyk and Jesus are pretty much twins.

BS: I’m starting to feel bad. Can I cheer the Cleveland fans up for a second?

When Wade knocked Rondo out of the playoffs in 2011 I'm sure Bill thought it was just "a fluke" and he has no hard feelings. Sure, I believe that. There's always a reason why Bill's favorite team isn't dirty or didn't intentionally hurt a player. In this case, Olynyk is just uncoordinated so he mistook a player's arm for something else. Maybe Olynyk was frustrated because Stevens was on the team's ass about offensive rebounding and took his anger out on Love? Of course not. He's a nice guy.

Then one of Bill's readers gives a convoluted analogy to why the Cavs fans are not loud enough at games, and of course, it ends with a reference to masturbating. Shouldn't it disturb Bill (because it disturbs the shit out of me) that so many of his readers write into his mailbag by talking about masturbating?

So Cavs fans have the breakup reunion hangover where you can’t quite put 100% of your emotion into it yet because your brain won’t let you! After all, you still keep the lotion and tissues in your bedside drawer just in case.
 
—Craig, Columbia, MD

BS: Yup … these are my readers.

Yes, they write into your mailbag to discuss jerking themselves off. It reflects on you that these are your fans. But hey, let's ignore that and hear more about how you had to make the difficult choice between buying a fully loaded BMW convertible or a fully loaded Lexus that has more room for the family. I'm sure your readers would love to read about you swinging your dick around a little bit more. 

6 comments Bill Simmons Keeps His Mailbag Oath for One Week, Manages to Shoehorn an "Awards" Column Gimmick Into a Mailbag

Bill Simmons vowed to do mailbags every week during the NBA playoffs. Even he doesn't believe that he will be able to keep this vow. In his first playoff mailbag, Bill manages to not only use the mailbag gimmick, but he also does the "handing out awards" gimmick for his column as well. AND he calls the mailbag the "Mailbag Reunion Tour," which is a gimmick-y name given to the mailbag. So that's three gimmicks to pump out one column. Things are getting dicey for Bill of late and he's probably disappointed Kelly Olynyk's battery upon Kevin Love could have hurt Love's chances of signing with the Celtics in the offseason. Of course, that happened after this mailbag was published, so his reaction will come later. For now, Bill kept his oath to not be lazy and published a mailbag for one week. Bill was so lazy that he couldn't even write an introduction to the mailbag without a gimmick like "handing out awards."

Before we tackle a few mailbag questions, I need to jack up some shots to get loose. Let’s rip through a few quick Round 1 awards.

Bill can't even get through writing part of a column without attaching some gimmick to it. It's becoming ridiculous.

Stand under the basket and rebound for me, please. Seriously. Go down there. And throw me nice, crisp passes right at my chest. Thanks.

You can almost hear Bill counting out the words to make sure the introduction is long enough to merit moving on to the awards. He feels like his introduction has to be more than two sentences, so he rambles a little bit.

The Game of Thrones Award for Most Enjoyable Viewing Experience

Game 1 of Clips-Spurs featured two all-time Blake dunks; the best-ever CP3-and-Blake-peaking-in-the-same-game performance; Aron Baynes being defiled in so many different ways that everyone in Staples Center kept waiting for the Gimp from Pulp Fiction to climb out of a trunk;

Everyone in the crowd was immediately thinking about a pop-culture reference to a 21 year old movie while at a sporting event. 

In 10 years of owning Clips season tickets, that’s the fourth-best Clips game I’ve ever attended, trailing only Game 7 of Warriors-Clips in 2014, LeBron vs. Peak Dumbleavy in 2009 and the unforgettable 2007 contest when Tim Thomas played 30 minutes without ever crossing either 3-point line.

Great, glad you had a good time. My main concern is whether Bill Simmons has a good time at a Clippers game and where he would rank this Clippers game in the Official Pantheon of Clippers Games That He Has Attended. This is all I'm concerned about. 

The Joe House/Other Shoe Theory Award for Worst But Most Inevitable Playoff Loss
In Game 3 against Golden State, the Pelicans blew a 55-point fourth-quarter lead in less than four minutes (all numbers approximate) in such an unsurprising meltdown that (a) I had to catch a 6:11 a.m. Acela train this morning from Boston to New York, (b) I was lying in my hotel bed at midnight thinking to myself, I could go to sleep right now and I’d get five solid hours, and (c) I stayed awake only because the Warriors AND Monty Williams were involved. Any member of the 400-Hour Club (those who have watched more than 400 hours of League Pass this season) learned by December never to give up on a seemingly insurmountable Pelicans lead or Warriors deficit. This was the perfect storm.

You can tell that Bill's parents spent a good portion of his childhood telling him just how fucking special and important he was. Bill has to create special, exclusive clubs that he's a member of in order to give himself some sense of authority for the statements he's made. So Bill's opinion that the playoff loss was inevitable comes from Bill's opinion that 400 hours of watching League Pass gives him the knowledge to know this. So to sum it up, Bill's opinion the lead was not insurmountable was proven by Bill's opinion (after the fact of course) that he had watched enough basketball this year to come to the conclusion. Personally, I could know the lead wasn't insurmountable because the Warriors won 67 games this year and the Hornets are the #8 seed. But that's just me.

Additional note for the history nerds out there: For the 2015 Warriors to go down as an all-time team, they need to win the title AND finish 16-4 in the playoffs AND sweep at least two series AND submit a few memorable lay-the-smack-down games along the way AND create three or four iconic moments (like Curry’s game-saving Shoulda-Been-A-Four-Pointer). 

Additional note for Bill Simmons: He doesn't make the rules and the Warriors don't have to do all of this and can still be considered an all-time team. His opinion isn't the fact upon which all other judgments should be based.

Additional additional note for Bill Simmons: Lay-the-smack-down games and iconic moments are completely subjective metrics and have zero meaning as to whether the Warriors are an all-time team.

The G-Baby Award for Most Depressing Sports Funeral

The violent, grisly, emotionally scarring and unexpectedly abrupt death of Playoff Rondo ranks right up there with the end of Furious 7 for me. I loved Playoff Rondo almost as much as I loved National TV Rondo.

IT'S ONLY BECAUSE RONDO COULDN'T MOTIVATE HIMSELF TO PLAY IN THE PLAYOFFS WHEN HE'S NOT IN FRONT OF THE GREATEST FAN BASE IN SPORTS! NO ONE DENIES THIS IS TRUE!

I would love to know how my wife handled it if we were to go out for dinner once a week for four weeks, and every time, I wouldn’t say that much and would act weird but make just enough jokes to make the dinner passable … only every time we went out with another couple, I’d be hilarious and gregarious and charismatic and keep telling everyone, “You’re with Double-Date Simmons tonight!!!!!”

Bill's wife would probably point out that your jokes aren't as hilarious as he thinks they are and I think he seems to have the on-air charisma of a cardboard cut-out, so it's probably not much better in person. I do like how Bill clearly thinks so highly of himself to where he knows he can be hilarious, gregarious and charismatic any time that he wants to. It's quite the ego that Bill has to where he thinks, "I can make anyone like me any time I want because I have all these positive characteristics."

You know what would happen? She’d dump Double Date Simmons and Regular Season Simmons. Only in sports can you pull off the idea of Playoff Rondo.

You are an abomination.

The Comedy Central Not Locking Up John Oliver Award for Biggest Mistake

Dallas gambled (AND ruined their bench AND wasted a first-round pick) by flagrantly violating the “You can get away with one head case, just don’t give him someone to hang out with” rule by teaming up Monta Ellis and Rondo.

This is a hard-and-fast rule, just as long as you ignore that Dennis Rodman played on the same team as Adrian Dantley, Bill Laimbeer, and Rick Mahorn. Those guys may not have been all head cases, but they weren't always easy to get along with. But whatever, I'm sure Bill believes this rule is hard-and-fast because he made it up.

And even worse, they never considered things like, “Should we be worried that Rick Carlisle is a control freak who wants constant ball movement and Rondo loves to dominate the ball and control everything?” and “Should we be worried that Rondo can’t get to the line, can’t make free throws and can’t shoot 3s even though we’re in the pace-and-space/3s-and-free-throws era?”

Which is an excellent question to ask in order to explain why Rondo didn't succeed with the Mavericks. Though I would wonder how Rondo succeeded with the Celtics while playing in the same era where pace-and-space/3s-and-free-throws were important. Ah, it's needless to ask. Bill's making shit up again. It seems this era of making free throws and 3s started when Rondo got traded to the Mavericks. That exact day. It's weird how Playoff Rondo never played in this era and managed to succeed regardless.

The Roger Goodell Award for Biggest Hypocrite

Me. For everything in the previous paragraph. See, I absolutely LOVED the Rondo trade for Dallas and thought he was a semi-shell of himself in Boston only because he was playing possum. I haven’t misfired like that since … oh, wait, I’m wrong all the time. On the bright side, we finally got to watch an NBA star carry himself in playoff games with the exact same enthusiasm as a divorced dad ringing the doorbell of his ex-wife’s house.

Bill is admitting he was wrong and is always wrong! This, of course, won't stop him from making up laws/rules/corollaries/lists that prove his own opinion that he's right about something. He's wrong all the time, but this list of four questions, AND ONLY FOUR QUESTIONS, that determine an MVP season? You can totally trust those four FOOL-PROOF questions to be the only questions you need when determining an MVP season, even though Bill is wrong all the time. It's the Gospel of Bill unless it isn't.

I swear, my marriage isn’t in trouble. That Rondo thing was so ugly that I could only think of it in terms of divorce analogies. You should have seen the extended Squid and the Whale analogy that I ended up not using.

I'm sure there is one of Bill's lemming-like followers that would actually be concerned if Bill's marriage is in trouble. These are sad people, if true. Overall, I don't give a shit if Bill's marriage is in trouble or not. Just because your readers read what you write, doesn't mean they care about you personally...or they shouldn't at least.  

The Scott Mitchell Award for Biggest Loser
Rondo lost between $30 million and $40 million this summer with that Mavericks fiasco. On the bright side, drunk Lakers fans and drunk Knicks fans everywhere are texting their friends, “Dp you think we csn get Ronddo at a bigf disconyt?”

Apparently Lakers and Knicks fans are texting their friends on phones that don't have auto-correct.

The Last Man on Earth Award for Best New Series That Can’t Be Missed for Any Reason

If you have to explain the award then it sort of ruins the point of naming the award for that new series. Rather than name it "The Last Man on Earth" award, it could just be called "The Award for Best New Series that Can't be Missed for Any Reason." See? Naming it after the show becomes slightly redundant and I don't need the name of the show for the reader to understand what point I'm trying to get across. I know why Bill wants to include the show, because he is constantly compelled to make pop culture references. So the point of including "The Last Man on Earth" isn't to complement the column Bill is writing, but to drop a pop culture reference. Only the best writers include references that don't complement the body of the work he/she is writing.

Spurs-Clips is wildly overqualified for Round 1, which is the biggest reason it’s so damned fun — the NBA equivalent of throwing Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson into eight True Detective episodes. 

And Bill is still using "overqualified" as a thing that can describe a playoff series.

Game 2? That one had the intensity, weightiness, electricity and sophistication of an actual Finals game; got derailed by Hack-A-DeAndre and some uncharacteristically horrific Pop/Doc coaching; featured multiple bricks and multiple turnovers and multiple stars coming up short … and yet I absolutely loved being there for it. 

Bill Simmons was at this game. He's only mentioned that he was there for the game once, so he felt like he should mention it again in a less-subtle manner so that his readers understand that he was actually there for the game and it was a great experience for Bill personally. 

(Quick aside: I’ve been sharing Clips tickets with my friend Tollin since 2008, when I was about to give them up and he said, “Wait, you can’t give them up. What if they become good?” And then we both laughed for about 20 seconds before I said, “Screw it, one more year.” Anyway, we were walking out after Game 2 and Tollin said, “Spurs-Clippers … it’s just never gonna change with these guys, is it?” In other words, the Spurs continue to be the hammer and the Clippers continue to be the nail.)

Yes, it's never going to change with the Clippers. Wait, Bill and "Tollin" do realize how bad the Clippers were prior to be a consistent playoff contender, right? The Clippers were awful, so losing to the Spurs in the playoffs is a major step up for them. Like a big one compared to where they once were as a franchise. So it has changed for the Clippers and there's no "never gonna change" about it.

The Johnny Depp/Tonto Award for Most Glaring Moment That Doubled As a Snapshot for Someone’s Unfortunate Career Decline

If you have to explain why the award is named "Johnny Depp/Tonto Award," then the pop culture reference serves no point then does it? Name the award "Johnny Depp/Tonto Award," but don't explain it. Doing both ruins the point of the reference by making the reference more about the pop culture reference and less about the content of the article. Of course, Bill's writing isn't as snappy without the pop culture references, which should tell me something about his writing ability.

The Charlize Theron in Seth MacFarlane’s Wild West Movie Award for Best Unexpected Reminder That Someone Is Still an All-Time Treasure

I love Charlize. Best combination of looks and talent in the past 20 years. I will defend that lady to the death. Her IMDb page is the equivalent of LeBron being stuck with those crappy late-2000s supporting casts in perpetuity.

Bill loves "Charlize." She's so great and it's not her fault that she chooses to do crappy movies with crappy actors. It's not like she has a choice in the roles she takes. Charlize is just great though. By the way Bill, since you respect her so much, have you had the Theron?

But you know what? How many of these LeBronian playoff eviscerations are left? You know, the ones when he shows up in someone else’s house and breaks windows and plates and tables for two hours as 15,000 to 20,000 exuberant people slowly lose the will to live? Maybe … 15? Does he have 20?

17 more games. I just used the Three Questions for When LeBron Would Stop Dominating to come to this fool-proof conclusion. These three questions I asked myself to get the definitive answer on how many more playoff eviscerations LeBron has left. The questions are:

1. What number did Bill Simmons use? Pick a bigger number than Bill did.

2. What does "playoff evisceration" really mean? It will mean what I want it to be mean after LeBron is retired in order to make the point I want to make. Ask me after LeBron has retired.

3. If I had to pick one number that I wanted to represent how many playoff eviscerations LeBron has left, what would that number be? Does it match the number I want to choose in #1? If not, make them match.

Also, if LeBron has 15 or 20 playoff eviscerations left in him, that's still pretty good. That's the equivalent of 3.75 to 5 more playoff series that LeBron will singlehandedly win by eviscerating the opponent. Plus, 15 to 20 games is equivalent to 3.75 or 5 more playoff games on the road. So if LeBron has 15-20 road playoff game eviscerations left in him still, that's pretty fucking impressive. That's 15-20 road games he will win for his team (presumably the Cavs) in the playoffs. I'd take that. Yet, Bill makes it seem like this is a low number.

I mean, he’s closing in on 44,000 minutes by the end of this postseason.

LeBron eviscerating an opponent on the road for 15-20 more games is still an incredible amount of games. It's shockingly impressive. I'm not sure Bill understands what he's writing. He thinks he's making a great point that LeBron will get tired and not be able to compete at a high level in the playoffs much longer, but he's actually proving the opposite with his guess of 15-20 road games.

LeBron was, I don’t know, maybe EIGHT PERCENT better two years ago during his Miami apex?

Actually Bill, he's 9.87% percent better than he was two years ago during his Miami apex. It's a fact, so don't question it.

Then Bill rosterbates for a minute about potential trades the Raptors could make. I generally hate "what if's," which is a form of speculation that Bill insists on constantly participating in.

The Dragon Babies Award for Best Running Subplot

See? This reference didn't need to be explained. Good for Bill that he figured it out. 

Derrick Rose suddenly looking kinda maybe sorta like Derrick Rose again. (Note: I’m obeying all jinxing rules.) Even if they don’t make it past Round 2, he’s reclaimed enough of his trade value that, at the very least, Knicks fans are now petrified that Phil Jackson might flip their top-three pick for Rose in two months.

ALL Knicks fans are concerned about this. It just so happens this Knicks fan represents all Knicks fans because all of Bill's friends represent the opinion of fans from a certain team. Bill knows a Knicks fan who feels like Phil Jackson will trade for Derrick Rose, so Knicks fans in general obviously feel this same way.

Good time to morph into a mini-mailbag. 

Welp, this gimmick has run out. Time for a new one.

As always, these are actual questions from actual readers.

Sure they are. I believe it. If they are actual readers, their questions are also heavily edited, but I also don't believe all of these readers are real. I try to believe that real humans can't be as pathetic as those who write into Bill's mailbags are.

Q: Derrick Rose carrying the Bulls to the 2015 championship would be the best playoff story in NBA history, right?
 
—Dominic G., Champaign, IL

Here’s your current top five:

This is the official top five with no exceptions. None at all. It's the Gospel of Bill Simmons.

2. A running-on-fumes Celtics dynasty winning its last title (11 out of 13!) even though (a) player-coach Bill Russell and crunch-time god Sam Jones were retiring after the season, (b) they didn’t have home court in any playoff series, (c) they were heavy Finals dogs against a Lakers team that had Wilt, Elgin AND West, (d) three of their four Finals games were won in the final minute, (e) they won Game 7 on the road partly because a pissed-off Russell had stumbled upon the Lakers’ elaborate postgame plan for a balloon celebration.

I would have been shocked if the Celtics weren't a part of this top five.

3. The 2014 Spurs redeem the worst Finals loss ever while simultaneously murdering the LeBron era in Miami.

Really? This is one of the five greatest playoff stories in NBA history? I disagree.

Here’s what I love about Rose’s story (if it plays out in the best possible way): It’s like a sports movie, right? Local kid wins MVP, signs two huge contracts with the Bulls and Adidas, blows out his knee, comes back, keeps getting hurt, never gives up … and suddenly he’s holding a Finals MVP, crying on the podium and hugging his mom (played by Octavia Spencer) and his brother (played by Anthony Anderson). “Based on a true story: Michael B. Jordan plays Derrick Rose in The Rebound.”

It is like a shitty sports movie that I would have no chance of watching. In Bill's opinion all sporting events are basically just pop culture references waiting to happen. Throw a few narratives in there and create some fake drama, that's all Bill wants to do. Then he will find tenuous ties between sports and pop culture. It's his dream that's become reality.

Q: On various podcasts, you’ve mentioned how home court advantage may no longer exist due to various reasons (StubHub, increasing cost, HDTV is so good). Flash forward to Wednesday night — had the Clips not given away Game 2, home teams would have been 14-2 in the first round. Have fun with that, road teams! Enjoy that SIMMONS STINK! SIMMONS!
 
—Ross, Santa Barbara, CA

Will Bill say, "I made it up and I'm full of shit"? Of course not. He doesn't like to be wrong. Just ask him, he'll tell you.

BS: My defense, only because I hate being wrong:

Told you.

Couldn’t you say that more people than ever are selling their regular-season tickets, then holding on to their playoff seats? Let’s see how Games 3 and 4 play out.

You could say that, but then Bill would still be absolutely wrong. The statement he has made several times is that home court advantage may no longer exist. Bill doesn't say home court advantage doesn't exist "only in the regular season," so he's wrong, because this home court advantage does seem to have appeared during the 2014-2015 playoffs. And to make matters worse, Bill attempts to weasel out of being wrong by pointing out that home court advantage isn't present in the regular season because more people are selling their regular season tickets, then wants to hold off on a sample of 16 games because he wants to see how two more games play out. But of course.

Q: The year Tim Duncan made his NBA debut, Seinfeld was still on the air, Bill Clinton was still having “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky, The English Patient won the Oscar, Spice Girls had the top-selling album, Google didn’t exist and I didn’t know how to masturbate yet (side note: I’m 30 now). Damn.
 
—Alex V

I'm going to guess that Alex is single and will probably stay single for a while, perhaps until the day his heart stops beating and he's put into the ground with a small group of loved ones who haven't alienated him as he slowly developed a life-long obsession with Bill Simmons gathered for his funeral. I'm guessing that Alex also probably has now learned to masturbate and Bill could be prominently involved with the inspiration Alex received to learn how. I don't even understand the point of writing in to Bill to say these things, other than simply craving the recognition that Bill gives him by printing his email.

It's disturbing to write "I didn't know to masturbate yet" to a man his mid-40's if there isn't some liquor involved and a few dollars exchanging hands immediately after this comment was made. Who writes in to a grown man with children and discusses when he learned to jerk himself off? It's disturbing.

Q: What would you say the LVP rankings of the playoffs are so far? Rondo is obviously first, then I would say D-Will at two.

—Brad, Huntington, WV

Honorable mention: Dame Lillard (even earned a rare TV upbraid from Barkley), Kyle Lowry (is he hurt???), Dirk Nowitzki (for defensive reasons only), Omer Asik (a plus-minus calamity), Masai Ujiri (for freezing at the trade deadline), Kelly Olynyk (could someone tell him the playoffs started?),

It's interesting that after Bill wrote this Kelly Olynyk tried to pull Kevin Love's arm off. I guess he moved off Bill's LVP honorable mention list.

Q: In the DFW area, it seems the common view now is that not resigning Josh Hamilton to a huge deal was a GREAT decision. Watching the Angels try to find ANY way to shed his albatross of a contract, we feel good about the decision. Is that how Boston fans feel about Rondo? Are Boston fans glad they “sold high,” or are they waiting to re-sign him after the season?
 
—Wes, Dallas

Great question and since Bill speaks for all Celtics fans he will be glad to answer it as if he does really speak for all Celtics fans.

BS: The only four things that would excite Boston fans less than a Rondo return: another 109 inches of snow next winter; the Globe announcing that it had re-signed Dan Shaughnessy for another 15 years; Boston winning the 2024 Summer Olympics bid; and the Red Sox signing Rick Porcello to a four-year, $82.5 million contract extension. (Listening.) Wait, what????

I can't disagree with most of those, but I would like to add that Bill Simmons moving back to Boston or writing another article about how one of his favorite teams defended their title better than any other team in the history of sports probably is something I would be less excited about as well.

Q: Thanks to State Farm we know that every NBA player has a separated-at-birth twin who ends up being an insurance agent. Chris Paul has Cliff, Stephen Curry has Sebastian, John Stockton has Don etc. Who would Rajon Rondo’s twin insurance agent would be?
 
—Matt, New York

BS: Definitely Rick Rondo, a name that makes him sound like a porn actor, WWE star or twin insurance agent. Are we sure Rick Rondo wasn’t the guy that Boston sent to Dallas three months ago? Your best case for a Rondo resurgence next season: If Dennis Rodman can average 15 rebounds per game in Chicago and win a ring 12 months after his 1995 Spurs flame-out that reverse-peaked with Rodman taking his sneakers off in a huddle during a key timeout in a key playoff game, I’m pretty sure we can’t write off Rondo yet.

Rondo's best case for a resurgence is a case that has absolutely nothing to do with Rajon Rondo. Of course, because 20 years ago Dennis Rodman rebounded from a tough time in San Antonio, this means Rondo can rebound as well. Also, notice how Bill is all like, "I'm pretty sure we can't write Rondo off yet," but he's playing both sides here. Earlier in the column he said the following three statements:

(And before you review Bill's statements, read that last sentence that is in italics again with emphasis on all those words. It sounds dumb when read a loud to emphasize those italicized words.)

Anyway, here are the three statements Bill made earlier in this gimmick-filled mailbag.

The violent, grisly, emotionally scarring and unexpectedly abrupt death of Playoff Rondo ranks right up there with the end of Furious 7 for me. I loved Playoff Rondo almost as much as I loved National TV Rondo.

Only in sports can you pull off the idea of Playoff Rondo. And now it’s dead. R.I.P.

And even worse, they never considered things like, “Should we be worried that Rick Carlisle is a control freak who wants constant ball movement and Rondo loves to dominate the ball and control everything?” and “Should we be worried that Rondo can’t get to the line, can’t make free throws and can’t shoot 3s even though we’re in the pace-and-space/3s-and-free-throws era?”

Bill believes it is too early to write off Rondo, yet he has already declared Playoff Rondo dead (which last time I checked meant, "not alive and won't come back") and said that the Mavericks should have worried about Rondo in an era where getting to the line, making free throws and shooting 3s is so vitally important. It sort of sounds like Bill is writing Rondo off himself, doesn't it?

Maybe Bill means that Playoff Rondo is dead in the same way Bill stated he was a hockey widow. What Bill means is once Rondo starts playing well again, then Playoff Rondo will be back, just like when the Bruins started competing for titles again Bill was right back on the bandwagon. Perhaps Bill also believes that after this season the era of making free throws and shooting 3s will be over. More likely, Bill is playing both sides and can now claim he said not to write Rondo off, while also semi-writing Rondo off himself.

Then Bill makes a reference to an MTV reality television show that I didn't get because I'm an adult and not one of the 14 people left in the world who still watch MTV reality shows. Really, there isn't anything wrong with these shows, but the vigor with which Bill Simmons cares about "Rivals II" or "The Gauntlet" is bizarre.

Q: With the Trail Blazers stunning playoff collapse, the injury to Wes Matthews, and The Assassination of Damian Lillard by the Coward Mike Conley, does LaMarcus Aldridge seriously contemplate leaving this summer? Imagine him and Kawhi in S.A. for the next five years!
 
—Paul C., Los Altos, CA

BS: I don’t mean to anger Rip City, but we have to discuss this one.

Yes Bill, you can anger an entire city with your opinion. You are that powerful with the bullshit you spew in a mailbag.

You could make a strong case for Aldridge being in play this summer.

Not a strong case, but a strong case. 

He’s from Dallas and attended the University of Texas, which opens up going-back-home possibilities in San Antonio (Duncan’s replacement?), Dallas (the Mavs’ new franchise guy?) AND Houston (his best chance for a quickie Finals trip).

Yes, Houston is Aldridge's best chance for a quickie Finals trip. You know, since the Rockets have made it to the Western Conference Finals on a consistent basis and all, plus his game matched with Dwight Howard's game on the low block aren't guaranteed to work together. Now Bill begins to ramble and contradict himself about how Aldridge wants to be more famous and get more commercials, even stating:

And by the way, Lillard is the Blazer getting commercials these days, not Aldridge. If you don’t think that matters to these guys, you’re crazy.

So of course playing with Howard and Harden, replacing Duncan, and going to a lesser Mavs team is the goal then, right? Actually these three teams and the "homecoming" possibility Bill threw out there was just a way to kill space and get to the real teams Bill thought Aldridge will want to play for. You'll never guess who one of the teams are. Never, ever guess. Think "homecoming in Texas," and then think the opposite of that.

Which makes me think Orlando (assets + talent + youth + Florida), Boston (assets + youth + role players + President Stevens + great owner/front office) and New York (biggest market, Carmelo, top-three pick, cap space) could be legitimate LaMarcus players here.

The Celtics are on the list Bill made of potential LaMarcus Aldridge destinations? No way! And of course Bill has stated before that few free agents want to play for the Knicks and Aldridge would be competing with Carmelo Anthony for commercials. Why wouldn't Aldridge want to come play for the Celtics? Doesn't every player want to come to Boston?

Four months ago, I would have said it was a 99 percent chance he stayed. Right now, it has to be 50/50. And dropping.

Gosh Bill, I have it at 64.3% right now. There must be something wrong with your "insistence on pulling a number out of thin air and hope it means something" metric.

If it means something to him to retire in Portland someday, he’ll stay. If not, he’ll leave. But it’s definitely not the best basketball situation for him.

And of course, going to one of three teams that are rebuilding, and one team specifically that is always rebuilding...now that is the best basketball situation for LaMarcus Aldridge.

Q: Do you think Tim Duncan has a painting with his soul entrapped in it that he is not allowed to look at?

—Michael, Binghamton, NY

BS: It can’t be ruled out. Important Duncan note that jumps out when you watch him in person … his left leg does not work.

His left leg does not work? I wonder if Duncan is aware of this? More importantly, why the fuck would I have to watch him in person to notice this? Isn't this noticeable on television or is this one of those dick-swinging things that Bill does where he acts like he is an expert on a team/player because he saw that team/player in person? 

Q: I went and played golf with three friends on Sunday. After we played, we went to a bar to drink beer, eat wings and watch the NBA playoffs. 

That's fucking great, Jeff from Webster, Texas. I'm glad you had a great day and felt the need to email Bill Simmons about it. I should probably just be happy Jeff didn't write in to Bill talking about when he learned to jerk off. It's really scary to think about the emails Bill receives which he doesn't publish. What do Bill's pathetic SimmonsClones write in that isn't appropriate to be published on Grantland? Anyway, back Jeff's riveting fucking day that I absolutely care about and is relevant to his question.

When we got to the bar the Hawks and Nets were playing. On another TV, My 600 Lb Life was on. I was more interested in the struggles of a 600 lb woman than watching another horrible Eastern Conference Playoff Series. I have been watching the NBA Playoffs since 1987 religiously every year but I had zero interest in this game. Can we please start a petition to have the playoffs reseeded by record?
 
—Jeff, Webster, TX

Well Jeff, Adam Silver was initially against it. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut...now that YOU have zero interest in one playoff series then I think he's probably going to change his mind. The world does revolve around you and your opinions and experiences ARE representative of the NBA-loving population as a whole. So yes, consider it done.

BS: When I take over as President Hillary’s sports czar in 2017, all American professional sports leagues will be forced to adopt a “You have to finish .500 or better to make the playoffs” rule and we’ll never have to worry about things like the dead-eyed Nets making the playoffs over Westbrook and the Thunder again.

But Bill, if the Thunder had made the playoffs then you couldn't point out how the Thunder trading James Harden was so stupid and it's proven by the fact the Thunder didn't make the playoffs this season. So it's good the Thunder didn't make the playoffs, because it allowed you a chance to ignore the three injuries the Thunder have suffered around playoff time to all three stars they have over the past three seasons, all in an effort to pretend the team as it is currently built can't make it back to the NBA Finals.

Q: What are we naming the tanking process for the 2015-16 NBA season now that your illegitimate son, Ben Simmons, is poised to be the top pick? Can we come up with something as good as “Suck for Luck” or “Riggin’ for Wiggins”? What about “Trimmin’ for Simmons” or “The Skid for Bill’s Kid?”

—Bryce, Dayton

I think Skal Labissiere is going to have something to say about that.

BS: Putting “Lossie for the Aussie” and “Skimmin’ for Simmons” as placeholders until the readers can top it.

What Bill means by "until the readers can top it" is "Until a reader comes up with an idea that I will immediately top in one of my mailbags because I have to be the smartest, most clever guy in the room."

Q: When we’re first introduced to Jaime Lannister in Game of Thrones, he’s having sex with his SISTER and then PUSHES A KID OUT OF A WINDOW (intending to kill him). Amazingly, by the end of that season we’re thinking, “Ah, he’s not so bad. Pretty charming, actually.” Now we’re actively rooting for him. Can you think of another instance where a real person or a character did something so despicable, only to later turn babyface?
 
—Trent Smith, Cary

BS: It would have to be something really egregious and really unrealistic — like LeBron failing to bring Cleveland a title, then ditching Cleveland in his prime on a live television special so he could team up with Wade and Bosh in Miami, winning two titles for the Heat and making four straight Finals, then heroically returning to Cleveland like nothing ever happened.

Considering that LeBron specifically addressed leaving Cleveland in the letter he (or someone else) wrote in "Sports Illustrated" when he chose to return to Cleveland this past offseason, I wouldn't say that he returned to Cleveland like nothing ever happened. LeBron specifically addressed his reasons for leaving Cleveland, his success in Miami and his reasons for his return to Cleveland, so I wouldn't say he returned "like nothing happened."

Q: On Sunday night, Marten Weiner (aka Mad Men’s Glen Bishop) and Austin Rivers faced off tonight in a primetime showdown to determine which one of them is the most flagrant example of nepotism currently on television. Can we just start calling Rivers “Glen Bishop” right now? After all, they might both be going off the air soon.
 
—Jimmy, Los Angeles

This questions leads to a story from Bill about his son. Because, of course it does. Sadly, SimmonsClones eat up stories about Bill's family because they are so desperate to know their idol and feel like he understands them.

BUT I can totally identify with Weiner-Rivers syndrome. You’re always going to overrate your own son. Just this week, my 7-year-old son figured out how to rig NHL 15 to start goalie fights — he plays the Kings’ opponent, repeatedly goes offside and makes runs at Jonathan Quick, and then, when Quick gets upset, he switches controllers and presses the “Y” button until Quick is fighting with the other team’s goalie. It’s the dumbest, most brilliant video-game strategy I have ever witnessed.

Obviously Bill's son is an absolute genius. This is the important takeaway from this story.

Q: Has there ever been a show with a more pointless “Scenes from next week’s episode” than the Mad Men montage at the end of each episode? With gems like “Get me a drink” and “Who’s there?”, I figure next week’s episode could just as well be about making a turkey sandwich or assembling furniture than running an ad agency.
 
—Dave, Greensboro

Oh, Dave from Greensboro. You disappoint me by writing into Bill. You are from Greensboro, be better than that. I will file this under "Observations everyone made during Season 2 of 'Mad Men'" It's all been done. Welcome to the party, pal.

Q: For our senior trip, my high school graduating class went to Disneyland for the day. We entered the park at 7 a.m. and thirty minutes later saw Robin Lopez in line for a ride by himself wearing a Chip n’ Dale Rescue Rangers shirt. (I am still baffled their exists a market for seven foot men who want to wear shirts with Disney characters on them). Being from Arizona we wildly greeted him, as he had absolutely bombed for the Suns two years prior, to which we received the least enthusiastic wave in recorded history. Several hours later we saw a jovial Asian family riding the River Rapids ride with Robin Lopez as the sixth person on the ride. The sheer comedy of a diminutive Asian family and a seven foot NBA player with a red afro sharing the same ride cannot be explained, it seriously might have been the funniest thing I have ever seen. At 10 PM I again saw him completely alone, and again tried to start a conversation with him, which he completely ignored. In case your keeping track, that’s 13 hours at Disneyland, completely by himself, wearing a children’s T-shirt.
 
—Daniel Skelly, Scottsdale

BS: I never run I saw (fill in the celebrity) and something funny happened emails in the mailbag,

Bill prefers for the only "I saw (fill in celebrity) and something happened" emails to be stories that he tells in his mailbags. Bill prefers to be the one doing the starfucking and relating HILARIOUS stories about running into celebrities and interacting with them.

So I believe this story and it made me laugh. 

So Bill doesn't run these stories because he doesn't believe they are true normally? That's what my takeaway should be? But of course, Bill's stories about running into celebrities are all true. Everyone else is a lying about meeting celebrities, but let Bill tell this hilarious story about running into the guy who played the quarterback on "Friday Night Lights!" Quick, he'll Instagram a picture so everyone knows he met a famous person. 

And yup, these are my readers.

Yes, they talk to you about when they started jerking themselves off. You should not be proud of this.