7 comments Bill Simmons Writes an NBA Team Lottery Preview Using Quotes from Vin Diesel

Bill Simmons must have made a mistake. It seems he actually wrote a column and posted it on Grantland. I keep waiting for it to be pulled back and Bill to admit it was an accident and he didn't mean to actually write a column that isn't a mailbag. Surprisingly, this column is not a mailbag but it is the same old contrived breakdown that Bill does where he previews/reviews something and uses movie quotes to do it. It's in his bag of four tricks he has used lately in order to churn out a column (YouTube videos, a conversation with another Grantland columnist, and of course a mailbag seem to be the other three). So Bill uses quotes from Vin Diesel's character in the "Fast and the Furious" to write about the NBA lottery teams. Yep, Bill is using quotes from a Vin Diesel character more known for taking action than having actual important things he has to say. It's desperate times in Bill's writing career. But hey, I'm sure the SimmonsClones are just excited to have another column from Bill they can worship and send in questions to him about, thereby allowing Bill to answer the questions in a mailbag and justify the existence of the SimmonsClone asking the question. Plus, Bill gets to pretend he's writing a column and not really simply relying on mailbags as the crutch for his writing career.

The NBA’s final regular-season week usually revolves around playoff seed positioning, MVP conversations, awards ballots, this Spurs picture, some unapologetic mega-tanking by the worst seven to eight teams, the annual “Ricky Rubio might be the worst shooter ever” conversation,

As a reminder, Bill loved Ricky Rubio prior to Rubio being drafted and playing in the NBA. He thought the Thunder should have drafted Rubio over James Harden.

the annual OKC newspaper article that revises Harden trade history,

But Bill got Kevin Durant to notice him on Twitter after Bill commented on this newspaper article. That's really why Bill brings it up.

(That reminds me: Round 1, Celtics vs. Hawks, Brad Stevens back in his old, familiar Butler-against-the-world underdog situation, 5,000 Boston fans at every Atlanta home game, Paul Millsap’s achy shoulder, no Thabo Sefolosha, some off-the-court Hawks drama, at least one Isaiah Thomas Heat Check looming, Brad Stevens a second time … I mean, WHY NOT US?????????)

It always circles back to the Celtics at some point for some reason or another. 

But you know what else always happens in that final week?

You write a column about all the things that "we" were wrong about during the NBA season?

Unless you root for a team with a legitimate chance to make postseason noise, you can’t shake the nagging sense that you wasted your life for six months.

Which, while remembering I blog on a site dedicated to sports, is a pretty sad way to go about living your life. It's sad to feel like you wasted your life over six months simply because your favorite NBA team isn't very good.

Just know that you didn’t waste your life for the past six months. Every NBA season yields positives for the noncontenders, no matter how hopeless or snakebitten or talent-deprived or poorly run your favorite franchise might have been.

The biggest positive being that you don't have to watch your favorite NBA team play again for another six months.

Just for kicks, we’re throwing in a meaningful Dom Toretto quote to capture every noncontender’s state of mind.

"Just for kicks" being defined as Bill saying, "I can't write a column anymore, there has to be some contrivance that the column revolves around."

So Bill writes this column revolving around quotes from "The Fast and the Furious." I have seen the first movie, didn't care to see any of the others, but I feel pretty confident to believe these aren't going to be the best quotes to base a column on the NBA around. But the alternative for Bill is to spend time thinking of other quotes from another movie or (the horror) not having a contrivance the column will revolve around. There MUST be a contrivance.

(By the way, I'm going to leave a lot of the quotes from Diesel's character out, they really don't seem to add to the content of what is written)

I mean, what other Dom quote would you use for Knicks fans? Did their favorite team just spend $85 million last spring on a Derek Fisher mannequin and a 70-year-old tweeter who lives 3,000 miles away? (Yessir.) Are those the two people running the team? (Unfortunately, yes.) Have James Dolan’s last 15 seasons yielded just five playoff appearances, one playoff series victory and 11 under-.500 seasons? (Um, yeah.) So why should Knicks fans be feeling good right now?
THEY HAVE A TOP-FIVE LOTTERY PICK!!!!

A team that has historically managed to screw up personnel moves and has executives Bill doesn't trust to run the team has a chance to draft early and screw up a personnel move? Obviously this is nothing but good news in the mind of Bill.

One problem: They kept dumping lottery picks or future lottery picks for established players like Antonio McDyess, Stephon Marbury, Eddy Curry and Carmelo Anthony. Another problem: They kept landing in the wrong top-10 spot … like no. 9 in 2003 (Mike Sweetney), no. 8 in 2005 (Channing Frye), no. 6 in 2008 (Danilo Gallinari), and, most painful of all, no. 8 in 2009 (Jordan Hill, taken one spot after Steph Curry).

I know Bill is trying to be positive, but the Knicks have a history of bad personnel moves, so why the confidence they will choose a good player in the top-5 of the lottery? Not to rub it in, but the Knicks didn't just fall into bad spots in the top-10, they missed on the picks they made. In 2003 they could have drafted Boris Diaw or David West. Heck, Nick Collison would have been a better pick than Sweetney. In 2005, they did hit on David Lee and could have drafted Danny Granger in that #8 spot. In 2009, instead of drafting Jordan Hill they could have had DeMar DeRozan, Jrue Holiday, Ty Lawson, or Jeff Teague. I don't bring this up to use hindsight, but to acknowledge the Knicks may have been unlucky in those drafts, but they also didn't draft well.

Once that’s settled, they can enjoy multiple Chad Ford mock drafts, dozens of Okafor-or-Towns conversations, the inevitable “Mudiay could own New York, should we just take him?” groundswell, some trade-up/trade-down scenarios,

Then they will draft Stanley Johnson in the #5 spot.

Minnesota T-Wolves (16-62)

If USC asked me to teach a college course called “How To Be An NBA GM,”

Which would be an extraordinarily stupid move considering Bill Simmons has never actually been an NBA GM other than in his head and on ESPN's trade machine, where he usually follows absurd trade ideas with "Who says 'no' to that?" as if the world will bend at his will.

If only the University of Virginia asked me to teach a college course called "How To Be A Rodeo Clown" then I'm sure I'd have great advice to give even though I know nothing about being a rodeo clown.

I’d split up my 12 weeks of seminars into two-hour, subject-specific classes like “Take Everything Billy King Did, Then Do The Exact Opposite,” “Jerry West’s Brilliant Summer of ’96” and “The Lessons of KAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHN!”

Bill would also do a seminar entitled, "I really have no idea what I'm doing because I've never been an NBA GM and my only knowledge on how to be a GM is that I like to criticize moves other GM's make."

Amazingly, “How The Hell Did Flip Saunders Become One Of The NBA’s Five Most Powerful Non-Owners?” wouldn’t be my Flip-related class; I’d much rather break down his amazing Love-for-Wiggins trade — maybe the only time an NBA franchise extracted more than 100 cents on the dollar for a perceived superstar. 

The key to that trade: Flip waited.

You mean sort of like how the Knicks are waiting to trade Carmelo Anthony and you think they should blow the team up now?

Usually, NBA teams want to finish reshaping their rosters in June and July; they fear uncertainty heading into the upcoming season.

Bill Simmons when discussing the Knicks just a few short paragraphs ago when discussing what Knicks fans have to look forward to:

my inevitable “Why wouldn’t the Knicks trade Melo and completely blow this up?” podcast with Zach Lowe, and then the draft telecast itself.

So Bill thinks the key is to wait, except in cases where this isn't good advice and the Knicks should just go ahead and trade Carmelo now? Or is it that sometimes when it ends up working out as a smart move, then an NBA team was smart to wait to trade a star player, but other times when it ends up not working out, that team should have waited? Or is that Bill Simmons is making things up as he goes along and only has an outcome-based opinion? Bill thinks the Knicks should trade Carmelo before the draft in June, but Bill also thinks teams make a mistake wanting to finish reshaping the roster in June and July. Of course he holds both of these opinions.

"Oh yeah, that worked. Other NBA teams should do that, except in cases where I say other NBA teams shouldn't do that."

Flip never wanted Boston’s pupu platter offer (the no. 6 pick in 2014, a Brooklyn pick, expirings and non-All-Stars), even if most teams would have panic-settled for it. He thought Golden State might budge on Klay Thompson and David Lee; they never blinked. So he waited for a miracle …

Wait and hope for a miracle! What could go wrong in just waiting for a miracle to happen? This is great advice from Bill Simmons in his class on how to be an NBA GM.

and then, suddenly, LeBron was thinking about a Cleveland return and the rest was history. Flip sold super-high on Love AND landed a superstar-in-waiting.

It's almost like waiting is a strategy that could go very right or terribly wrong, depending on the circumstances and whether a miracle occurs or not. Nevertheless, waiting seems like a great strategy to Bill, but only in cases where he can fast-forward to see the strategy paid off.

Flip can inhale the fumes of that Wiggins deal for years. Throw in this June’s top-five pick and things are looking up in Minnesota! We’ve almost reached the point when we can stop talking about the T-Wolves drafting two straight point guards directly in front of Stephen Curry. Almost.

But Bill, are we are the point where you were totally on board with the Timberwolves drafting Ricky Rubio but aren't going to mention that because you want to be able to criticize the T-Wolves for drafting him while ignoring your own opinion of Rubio because it might make you look a little bit less like a genius? No, we aren't at the point where you want to be honest with your lemming-like readers? Great, carry on then.

Philadelphia 76ers (18-61)

Then Bill rambles about how the 76ers are essentially running a Ponzi scheme on their fan base, despite the fact just a year or so ago Bill wrote that NBA teams who try to win games while rebuilding only end up drafting in the late lottery or barely making the playoffs, and that's not the way to rebuild a team. He advocated that teams who are going to lose need to try and lose. But since the 76ers are three years into the rebuild and haven't improved yet, Bill seems to be wondering if his own opinion is correct. More likely, he just wants to play both sides. He wants to advocate for a team going all-out to lose games, while also criticizing that team for screwing over the fan base.

It’s exceedingly logical. All of it. But if you’re asking me to find positives, it’s tough. The Sixers just became the first NBA team ever to say, unapologetically, “For two straight years and possibly three, we aren’t going to give a damn about the product we’re putting out … but by all means, please keep spending money on your seats.” Check out their season-ticket page: “THIS STARTS NOW” in all caps. What starts now? Giving a shit? You just stole money from your fans for two straight years. Are your season-ticket holders getting future credit for the two years they just threw away?

While I wouldn't necessarily disagree with Bill to an extent, was he aware of another way to rebuild so as to ensure the team isn't in the late lottery, while not screwing over season-ticket holders and taking money away from fans who bought tickets while the team was bad? The 76ers are avoiding the late lottery and outright stinking to get better draft picks. I can't think of a way this would not steal money from season-ticket holders other than the 76ers simply not charge them for tickets.

I shopped for season tickets on the 76ers website and found that, for the ludicrous price of more than $10,770, I could purchase two seasons in Row 13 of Section 113 (midcourt) for a team that just lost 120-plus games over the past two seasons and is probably headed for another 60 losses next season. No promise that it’s a fixed price for the rest of the decade, no incentive plan, nothing.

STEALING YOUR MONEY FOR A THIRD STRAIGHT YEAR — THIS STARTS NOW.

But again, Bill also writes:

Every move made sense on paper. If you’re gonna stink in the NBA, you might as well S-T-I-N-K. If you’re gonna lose 60-plus games for two straight years, you might as well cheap out. If Jrue Holiday and Michael Carter-Williams could never be one of the best two guys on a title team, you might as well flip them for three lottery picks and improve your odds to find a franchise guy … right?

It's difficult to figure out how a team can tank, make money and not screw over the fan base. It's nearly impossible and NBA teams won't stop trying to make money. The tank strategy equals screwing over a fan base.

Sixers fans need luck with (a) the 2015 and 2016 lotteries, (b) the health of Embiid and Noel, (c) the Lakers pick, and (d) Saric. They need to know whether Embiid and Noel can actually play together. 

Maybe the 76ers should just wait, because apparently that's the key to turning a team around quickly. Then a miracle will happen!

Either your NBA team will be good in two to three years, or this will become one of the five best 30 for 30s ever. There’s no third outcome. This starts now. Shut up and drink your Corona.

See? It all ties back in with the "Fast and the Furious" quote, just like the way Bill shoehorned it to be.

Only two destinations truly matter to NBA players: the Los Angeles Lakers and the Miami Heat (we’ll get to them). That’s it.

That's it. All 28 other NBA teams should just ahead and fold up operations now, while the Lakers and Heat play an 82 game schedule against each other. From the word of God/Bill, only two destinations matter to NBA players, the Lakers and the Heat. That explains why Dwight Howard signed with the Rockets instead of the Lakers and why LeBron James went back to Cleveland from Miami. Mike Miller went to Cleveland from Miami this past offseason as well. Only two destinations matter, which again, explains why Bill is certain that Kevin Love will sign in Boston. IT ALL MAKES SENSE!

Bonus positive no. 1: Kobe’s Expiring Contract!
 
Bonus positive no. 2: Cap space!!!!!
 
Bonus positive no. 3: Hollywood! Bel-Air! Beverly Hills! Malibu! 75 degrees! Hot women!

(I repeat: The Lakers will be fine, even if it is nice to see their fans suffer for a couple of years. Welcome to the real NBA world, you guys.)

(Bengoodfella laughs so hard at the irony of a Boston Celtics fan telling the Lakers fan base "Welcome to the real NBA world" and indicating that he knows suffering as a fan of the Celtics)

Maybe one day Lakers fans will know the suffering that Bill has gone through as a Celtics fan. Bill is so cursed! It's been a little over half a decade since the Celtics have won an NBA title, so don't tell Bill he doesn't know about the "real" NBA world.

Orlando Magic (25-53)
 
Tao of Dom: “A real driver knows exactly what’s in his car.”

Now there’s something you never could have said about Jacque Vaughn. 

These quotes really aren't as relevant as Bill wants them to be. As usual, they feel forced.

Here’s what you have: five keepers (Elfrid Payton, Victor Oladipo, Aaron Gordon, Nik Vucevic and Top-Seven Lottery Pick TBD), a buttload of cap space and, of course, the Chance To Follow Jacque Vaughn.

My dream scenario: Orlando nails that coaching hire (Billy Donovan?), 

What year is it? 2008?

drafts Duke’s swingman/stud/beast Justise Winslow (my favorite 2015 lottery pick/team fit, hands down) and finds a free-agent rim protector.

The Magic could do what the Cavs should have done, which is to acquire DeAndre Jordan.

God, I love the thought of Winslow on this team. That reminds me, is there a support group for sports fans who despised Duke for the past 20-plus years with a passion normally reserved for meter maids and traffic jams, only they thoroughly enjoyed watching the Blue Devils’ collection of 2015 players and even found themselves rooting for them a couple of times?

Not really, Bill. People still hate Duke even though you personally claim that you didn't dislike their 2015 version of the Duke Blue Devils team. Believe it or not, you don't speak for all college basketball fans. I know, it's a shock to hear, but it's true. Having a bunch of one-and-done players on the team doesn't mean Duke is now likeable.

Sacramento Kings (27-51)

I don’t mind the nucleus here: Boogie Cousins (a borderline first-team All-NBA center who couldn’t get it because his team stunk), Ben McLemore (blossomed in Year 2), Rudy Gay (shockingly solid this season), great and loyal fans, a top-eight lottery pick coming, Boogie a second time, and Boogie a third time.

Bill doesn't mind the nucleus the Kings have. I'm sure his blessing means a lot to the organization. and yes, Rudy Gay was shockingly solid this year. He's never not been solid, he's just not a superstar like he was being paid to be and was expected to be.

Still, there’s a certain honor in rooting for the strangest, goofiest, most inexplicably incompetent franchise in basketball. When everything turns around, it makes the whole thing feel even sweeter. Trust me, I’m a Patriots fan. We stunk for the first 30-plus years of my life, then, all of a sudden, we didn’t.

Bill is still trying to get mileage out of the whole "The Patriots only made two Super Bowls during the first 30 years of my life, so feel sorry for me" bullshit he dealt for so long. I feel so much sympathy for him. If anyone knows something about incompetent franchises then it has to be the guy whose favorite NFL team has gone to 8 Super bowls during the first 40+ years of his life with his team winning four of those Super Bowls. Sure, Bill is a fan of a team that stunk for a while, but as long as you ignore the fact the Patriots have been very, very good for the past 15 years then you know he understands how a team that hasn't made the NBA Finals since 1951 when they played in Rochester feels. But no Kings fans, BILL KNOWS EXACTLY HOW YOU FEEL! HERE, DROWN YOUR SORROWS BY DRINKING SOME WINE OUT OF THE FOUR SUPER BOWL TROPHIES THE PATRIOTS HAVE WON!

Bill is so far removed from the days when his favorite sports teams were terrible that it's always hilarious when he tries to relate to other fan bases. It's actually sort of sad that Bill wants to remember those times when his teams were so bad that he almost seems to cling to them. Bill wants to be the fan of underdog teams so he can pretend to relate, but that's just not true anymore.

There’s a really fun Ty Lawson summer deal coming. Maybe a three-way that sends Lawson and a second-rounder to Utah, Jrue Holiday and Utah’s 2015 lottery pick to Denver, and Rodney Hood and Trey Burke to New Orleans?

Who says "no" to this? All three teams would surely jump at this deal. Sometimes I wish Bill were a GM so I could listen to his conversations and hear other GM's tell him "no."

Maybe Lawson for Darren Collison, Sauce Castillo and the rights to Sacramento’s top-eight pick? Or Lawson back to Charlotte for Kemba Walker, Charlotte’s top-12 pick and one pick swap before 2020? 

I can't figure out why the Horncats would trade Walker and their draft pick for Ty Lawson when they seem perfectly happy with Walker on the roster and this seems like a high price to pay for Lawson. I love Lawson, but this isn't a trade I would make if I'm the Horncats.

The best thing the Nuggets have going for them other than that Lawson trade and 2015’s lottery pick: They have Portland’s 2016 pick (lottery-protected) and a juicy future Memphis pick (protected 1-5 and 15-30 in 2016, top-five protected in 2017 and 2018, unprotected in 2019), and they can swap first-rounders with the 2016 Knicks. Which raises an interesting dilemma.

Door A: Deal Kenneth Faried for a pick (he’s a classic buy-low candidate right now for any smart playoff team), deal the Gallinari and Wilson Chandler expirings before next February’s trade deadline, detonate their 10-minute car completely, then rebuild around their picks, buttloads of cap space and the future star of Taken 5, Jusuf Nurkic.

Yeah, but then what would the season ticket holders of the Nuggets think about these moves? Bill doesn't want Denver Nuggets fans to be cheering for a team that isn't very good over a couple of years does he? Because then the fans are getting screwed over. Is there a way to rebuild without actually rebuilding? The Celtics do it all the time. I'm sure Bill would use this as an example.

(Spoiler alert: He does.)

Door B: Turn Lawson into pieces that keep them competitive (the Holiday/Utah pick three-teamer is perfect), keep everyone else, make a run at a no. 7 seed and bank on that 2016 Knicks pick swap paying real dividends. 

And again, Bill has previously stated the worst position for NBA teams to be in is they are good enough to make the playoffs and get a pick from 13-18 in the NBA draft, but not be good enough to actually win a playoff series. I guess as long as NBA teams have permission from Bill to be good enough to make the playoffs or just miss the playoffs then it's okay.

Can you think of a better 21st-century asset than the sentence, “Next year, we get to swap first-round picks with the Knicks”? It’s neck-and-neck with Apple stock. I vote for Door B.

Even though Bill has previously said this is a shitty position for an NBA team to be in when they want to win a title, I guess it's better to just forget he said that and assume Bill always knows what he is talking about...even when he contradicts his old opinions (and of course I can't find the article where Bill states NBA teams shouldn't be stuck in that spot between barely making the playoffs and having a high lottery pick...trust me, it exists).

Detroit Pistons (30-48)

The SVG plan: Dump Josh Smith (done); let someone else overpay Greg Monroe (imminent); pay Reggie Jackson (just don’t overpay him, for god’s sake); build around Andre Drummond, Jackson and a Top-10 Lottery Pick X (in motion); spend smartly this summer on a stretch 4 and one more 3-point shooter (doable) … I mean, there hasn’t been a safer time to buy Pistons season tickets since Obama got elected.

Bill shows his GM skills by telling the Pistons to pay Reggie Jackson but don't overpay him. Find a number that the Pistons want to pay Jackson and tell him to sign the document or his brains will be on the paper instead of his signature. Because it's entirely possible to set the market for Jackson by simply wanting to resign him and this ensures the Pistons won't overpay. It's all possible in Bill's head.

Quick Pistons tangent: I graduated from college in 1992, the same year Chuck Daly left the Pistons. Do you know how many head coaches they’ve had since then? Fourteen! 

Not that the world revolves around Bill Simmons or anything of course.

Daly lasted for an entire decade (1983 through 1992); no other Pistons coach made it to the end of his fourth year. The Pistons have employed THIRTY-FIVE head coaches in all, compared to 27 for the Royals/Kings, 26 for the Knicks, 25 for the Lakers, 25 for the Warriors, 23 for the Bullets/Wizards and 17 for the Celtics. Just having a competent head coach is a huge, huge, huge victory for Pistons fans right now.

So what Bill is informing his readers is that, in fact, an NBA franchise that has stability and competency in head coaching will generally be a team that is better built for success? Is he sure about this? The next thing I know, Bill will be telling his readers that it's a huge victory for teams to have competent basketball players on the roster.

Charlotte Horbobnetcats (33-45)

It's the Horncats, not the Horbobnetcats.

Tao of Dom: “You’re gonna need more than that crotch rocket.”

We might have to rename that 35-40 wins/borderline no. 8-spot/late-lottery area “Charlotteland.”

It's catchy, but I doubt it will catch on because it's also stupid.

The poor Horbobnetcats never intended to land there again, 

You mean the Hornets didn't intend to be the 8th seed in the East or get a late lottery pick? This wasn't the long-term plan, to sign players good enough to barely make the playoffs or barely miss the playoffs? I don't believe it. I learn so much reading Bill's columns. He's such an NBA expert that it's nearly impossible not to learn something. Apparently the Charlotte Hornets weren't attempting to do better than the 8th seed in the East. I had no idea. What wonderful insight Bill provides to his readers. I wonder if the Hawks were intending on trying to have the best record in the East or not?

That would be fine except they’ve had a whopping 15 first-rounders since 2004. FIFTEEN! Do you realize they picked second in ’04; then fifth and 13th; third; eighth and 22nd; ninth and 20th; 12th; ninth and 19th; second; fourth; and ninth and 24th? Some sweet picks, right? Not if you took Brandan Wright, D.J. Augustin and Noah Vonleh one spot before Joakim Noah, Brook Lopez, and Elfrid Payton. Not if you were one spot away from Dwight Howard, LaMarcus Aldridge and Anthony Davis … and ended up with Emeka Okafor, Adam Morrison and Kidd-Gilchrist instead.

The Knicks kept landing in the wrong spot of the draft to get the players they wanted, while the Bobcats/Hornets blew the picks they had. Got it. The Knicks could have drafted Brook Lopez too and chose not to. I guess Bill's opinion on whether a team landed in the wrong spot in the lottery or chose poorly depends entirely on what point he is looking to prove at that moment.

Since the first incarnation of the franchise launched in 1988, Charlotte missed the playoffs 16 of 25 times, won just four playoff series and never advanced past Round 2. So what’s positive about any of this? If you look at the NBA’s 2014-15 attendance numbers, Charlotte ranked 19th at 17,227 fans per game — just behind the Hawks and Grizzlies and ahead of the Pelicans and Suns. They even raised ticket prices by 5 percent for next season! So that’s my positive for Charlotte: It’s a franchise blessed with loyal NBA fans who aren’t ashamed to admit that they love mediocre basketball and poor decision-making.

I guess the other positive could be that Bill thinks the Horncats could acquire Ty Lawson this offseason? Maybe not. Maybe that is just one of those one-sided "Who says 'no'?" trades that Bill believes would actually work in the NBA. Bill does have a tendency to do this type of thing. Earlier, Bill suggested the Horncats trade for Lawson, and yet, that's not one of his positives about the team. Weird.

Miami Heat (35-44)

You know how Knicks fans think their team will be fine because everyone always wants to play for a big market?

Actually Bill, I think it's more New York sportswriters who think the team can draw big stars because the Knicks play in a big market. Who am I to question Bill's ability to speak for the Knicks fan base though?

Actually, Miami is the Eastern Conference team with a 20-year track record of landing marquee players — Alonzo Mourning and Tim Hardaway (mid-1990s), then Juwan Howard (1996 for about 10 seconds before the NBA voided that deal), then Eddie Jones and Brian Grant (2000), then Shaquille O’Neal (2004), then LeBron and Bosh (2010), then Dragic (2015).

How many of those players were free agents again? Not Mourning, Hardaway, not Jones, not Shaq and not Dragic. So Bill has a point, but half of these players didn't choose to sign with the Heat. Instead, they were traded to the Heat.

Again, it’s the franchise that convinced LeBron to leave Ohio in his prime.

Yeah, but then LeBron left the Heat for Ohio in his prime just a few years later. So I'm not sure this is as good of a point as Bill thinks it is. 

For that and many other reasons, here’s your stealth Durant/2016 destination. Not Washington, not New York, not Los Angeles. Here. South Beach. They’ve done it before; they’ll do it again. Miami will ALWAYS be fine. That’s why Riley doesn’t care about giving up those future first-rounders. Ride or die — remember?

Yes, the stupid "Fast the Furious" quote tied right into what Bill was saying about the Heat. Now I'm completely convinced using quotes from these movies is not a contrivance. I am lying.

Utah Jazz (36-42)

Tao of Dom: “It starts with the eyes. She’s gotta have those kind of eyes that can look right through the bullshit, to the good in someone. Twenty percent angel, 80 percent devil. Down to earth. Ain’t afraid to get a little engine grease under her fingernails.”

I included this quote because it has absolutely nothing to do with the Utah Jazz. Nothing at all. I will print what Bill wrote about the Jazz and you can see how flimsy Bill's attempt at using quotes from the "Fast and the Furious" really is.

One of my favorite Dom quotes goes to my favorite NBA renaissance: In less than 12 months, the Jazz found a real coach (Quin Snyder), stumbled into a 22-year-old shot-blocker/rebounder (the Stifle Tower), watched Gordon Hayward and Derrick Favors blossom into legit pieces, created a genuine wrestling heel for their fans (Enes Kanter, Utah’s no. 1 enemy for the next 10 years)

So the Jazz are able to look through the bullshit and see the good in their players? (I actually could make a solid argument for this based on Snyder's coaching history and Favors' reputation in college for pouting when things get tough, but again, this isn't an argument Bill is making so it doesn't fit the quote he's using)

and struck oil with the best 18-year-old in the history of the NBA draft (Dante Exum). Fine, I made up the Exum part. But everything else happened. This summer, the Jazz need to either (a) sign an impact point guard,

Bill Simmons the GM says "sign an impact point guard" this summer, BUT DON'T OVERPAY! Sign one of the best point guards you can find on the market in a market not full of impact point guards, but don't offer him too much money. It sounds simple enough to a couch rosterbator like Bill.

or (b) turn their top-12 pick, Burke, Hood and/or one of their future first-rounders from G-State and OKC into an impact point guard like Lawson (as described above). 

Or just do that. Just do it. How hard can it be to force another NBA team to take these players and give up an impact point guard in return? You just make the offer and then smugly ask, "Who says 'no'?"

Whatever it takes. And yes, these guys would have stolen 2015’s hypothetical Entertaining As Hell Tournament and grabbed one of the no. 8 seeds.

So why are the Jazz twenty percent angel and eighty percent devil again? How are they afraid to get a little engine grease under their fingernails? I guess Bill couldn't find a better quote on IMDB from the "Fast the Furious" for the Jazz.

Brooklyn Nets (36-42)

Now Bill includes a fake quote from Dom in the "Fast and the Furious," which is typical Bill Simmons. He can't even see his contrivance all the way to the end. If it doesn't fit, he'll throw a little humor in there so his lemming readers won't figure out how out of original ideas he is at this point. He shoehorns in quotes that don't make sense in the context of what he's talking about for each NBA team and then he makes up quotes when he can't even shoehorn in a real quote.

Boston Celtics (36-42)

Dom’s greatest quote goes to the greatest on-the-fly rebuilding job in recent NBA history:

YOUR TEAM'S REBUILDING JOB ISN'T AS GOOD AS THE CELTICS REBUILDING JOB! IT'S BECAUSE THE CELTICS FANS CARE SO MUCH MORE ABOUT THE TEAM THAN YOUR TEAM'S FANS CARE ABOUT THE TEAM! DANNY AINGE DOESN'T WANT TO LET THE GREATEST FANS THAT HAVE EVER EXISTED (16th in the NBA in attendance) DOWN!

The Celtics have the greatest on-the-fly rebuilding job in recent NBA history. They got the 7th seed with a losing record in a weak Eastern Conference. It's historic brilliance at work.

I would be more shocked if Bill didn't call the rebuilding job by the Celtics the best in recent history.

2016 President-Elect Brad Stevens, a coach who’s so ridiculously good that the Celtics might grab a no. 7 seed during the same season in which they dealt their two best players and suited up 22 different players. I’ve never felt better/prouder/happier/giddier about a team that’s six games below .500. What a season.

Yes, Brad Stevens has done a great job in a weak conference to secure a playoff spot. There's no doubt about that. Perhaps just cool down on the hyperbole for a little bit though.

So, what happens going forward? Get a taste of the playoffs, show the rest of the NBA (and every free agent, as well as the agents of those free agents) that you happen to employ a coach who’s a freaking Jedi, keep mastering that pace-and-space/balls-to-the-wall style, and eventually, the Celts can land one or two difference-makers (either with their picks or with a package that comes for those picks).

Go find some difference makers! Go do it! This despite the fact Bill previously stated only two cities (Miami and Los Angeles) really matter to free agents, so why would difference makers come to Boston when they could play for the Lakers in one of the two cities that matter to them as free agents?

They just need (gulp) the franchise player. It’s like watching someone serve an absolutely perfect four-course dinner that doesn’t have an actual entrée yet. Well, that entrée is coming. One quarter-mile at a time, baby.

They could trade up in the draft using some of those picks they have and draft Jahlil Okafor, but watching him, Olynyk, and Zeller fail to protect the rim would murder me dead.

Milwaukee Bucks (38-40)

Allow me a quick Giannis Antetokounmpo tangent: 

You are writing the column. There is no way to stop you from going on this tangent. If I could stop you from going on tangents then I would have attempted to do so many years ago.

He’s been celebrated on the Internet for months if only because few things are more fun in 2015 than a freak NBA athlete with (a) a great nickname, (b) a ton of promise, and (c) a style that translates easily to Twitter, Vine and YouTube. Nobody knows where this is going. He’s only 20. But I’ve seen enough “Milwaukee clears out for Giannis because he’s feeling it” quarters to justify making the following comparison without feeling like a maniac:

Bill, the world's resident NBA expert, is making an official comparison. This is official and not a test, people. So consider it fact until Bill decides he wants you to forget he wrote this.

I attended a slew of Celtics games in the late 1990s because my father (who paid for our tickets) hated watching Rick Pitino and Antoine Walker and never wanted to go. I watched Young T-Mac on Toronto in person probably six or seven times. As a rookie, he looked totally lost. During Year 2 and the first half of Year 3, he looked like a safe bet to be the Robin to Vince’s Batman — the second banana, the defensive stopper, the guy who could carry your offense when Batman was out, Vince’s own personal Pippen.

Holy crap, I watched McGrady on television too and I remember these things too! It's weird how my experience of watching T-Mac on television translates to having as much experience to understand his development as Bill Simmons does by watching T-Mac in person.

But I remember leaving it thinking, Holy crap, T-Mac is gonna be ridiculously good. Suddenly he could handle the ball, shoot 3s, bounce off people in traffic, quick-jump over people for rebounds, defend anyone he wanted … I mean, you could just SEE it.

And other people, outside of you, did SEE it. You are not special in being one of the few who saw T-Mac's development. Sorry.

Here’s the point: T-Mac averaged only 15.4 points with 45-28-71 percent splits that season. His points-per-game for his next three years in Orlando: 26.8, 25.6, 32.1. Everyone knew we were headed for good things with T-Mac in Boston that night, but nobody knew we were headed for THAT.

This is another type of thing Bill likes to do in his columns. He makes a comparison and uses his experience as a Celtics fan watching something great occur, an experience that he thinks no one else saw because they weren't a Celtics fan in the arena watching this great thing occur, as proof this comparison is true. Bill saw T-Mac become great, so he alone has the ability to know when a player is becoming great, and now he'll compare T-Mac to Giannis.

I’m telling you, real stuff is happening here — glimpses, pieces, flashes, but real stuff. In his second year, Giannis isn’t even scoring 13 points a game. I bet that doubles within three years. I know they don’t sell Bucks stock, but buy it anyway.

So a young player is continuously improving and Bill thinks this player will continue to improve as he gets older and more experienced? I don't know, that seems like a risky opinion.

Phoenix Suns (39-40)

They turned Eric Bledsoe into a borderline max guy. They antagonized Goran Dragic by bringing in a third point guard, played him out of position for three months, took it personally when he bitched to the press, then panic-downgraded from Dragic (I voted him second-team All-NBA last season)

This is your yearly reminder from Bill's ego that he has an All-NBA vote. Bill has to swing his dick around a little bit to remind you of how important he is.

Oklahoma City Thunder (42-36)

Tao of Dom: “You’ve got the best crew in the world standing right in front of you. Give them a reason to stay.”

Very, very subtle. I should just feel lucky that Bill doesn't go into a "Why did the Thunder trade James Harden" rant again.

They made the Finals in 2012.

They lost in Round 2 in 2013.

They lost in Round 3 in 2014.

They probably aren’t making the playoffs in 2015.

Harden plays for Houston.

Durant’s contract expires in 2016.

Westbrook’s contract expires in 2017.

Oh Bill, why must you leave out relevant information as to why the Thunder lost in Round 2, lost in Round 3 and aren't making the playoffs this season? Very few other contending teams have faced the type of injuries over the last three years that the Thunder have faced. The Thunder have lost all three of their stars at some point for the playoffs over the last three years. They lost Westbrook in 2013, lost Ibaka in 2014 and now they don't have Kevin Durant in 2015. I would think the loss of Durant during the 2015 season may have a little to do with why the Thunder won't be making the playoffs.

I ask why Bill leaves this out and the answer is simple. Bill has a point he is looking to prove and he'll be damned if he is providing information that may topple his point in any way. Yes, Durant and Westbrook have expiring contracts in a few years, but the team isn't on the decline because they haven't made it back to the NBA Finals since 2012. Injuries (and yes, the trade of Harden) have a lot do with this as well.

(So, um … )

(Let’s just wrap the column up … )

(Thanks for reading … )

Yep, there's no hope for the Thunder. Bill has that right. I wonder if there is a Dom quote for being incredibly in love with yourself and believing your assertions are indeed facts?

0 comments Bleacher Report Puts "Yasiel Puig" and "Yankees" in the Title of a Column to Get Pageviews

Bleacher Report often has some useless articles posted on the site. This article for today is probably one of the most useless articles I have read on the site in a while. This article exists mainly for pageviews. The author says signing Yasiel Puig and other international players would have helped the Yankees. Of course Puig would have helped nearly every MLB team, but the author puts "Yasiel Puig" and "Yankees" in the title because that's what the Bleacher Report algorithm says will lead to the most hits and that's all some Bleacher Report writers care about. People will search for "Yasiel Puig" and then there is a Bleacher Report article they can read. It's like if I put "Bill Simmons" in the column title of my posts as much as possible. The author says the Yankees would be so much better (or "recharged" as he writes) if the Yankees had signed every foreign free agent over the last few years. Of course this isn't true for just the Yankees, but it's better to type "Yankees" in a column title for the obvious reasons of trolling for pageviews. So let's use some hindsight to find out how signing Puig and Yu Darvish would have helped the Yankees/every other MLB team.

And if you have any doubt pageviews is all that matters to Bleacher Report and their writers, then notice the author's bio where he brags about his number of pageviews. Bragging about pageviews tells me enough about the author and Bleacher Report's mission. They are confusing pageviews with quality content.

The Yankees upcoming nine-game homestand features games against the Dodgers and Rangers, who feature two of the top recent international imports in baseball in Yasiel Puig and Yu Darvish, as a recent ESPN article pointed out.

What do you know? Bleacher Report links another sports site's article as part of their original content. It's much like how you will see "Prominent athlete arrested" on Bleacher Report's site and then you click on the link and it goes to another sports site. I get that even when writing original content a sports site may end having to link another site's original content, but it seems like a lot of Bleacher Report's original content is piggybacking off another site's content. Remember that trade deadline article from last year? Nearly every trade deadline idea was taken from a suggested trade deadline idea Buster Olney had written about in a column.

It's all hypothetical at this point, but one can't help but wonder where the Yankees would be right now not with those guys on their roster.

One can't help but wonder where every MLB team might be right now if they had Darvish and Puig on their roster. One might also wonder how some MLB teams could afford to pay for both Darvish and Puig as well.

I like how the author writes "it's all hypothetical at this point" like he is resigned to the fact the Yankees can't sign every foreign free agent that comes available on the market.

"It's all hypothetical at this point, but one can't help but wonder if the Rays should have drafted the most successful player out of the last 10 MLB drafts."

This is what is called "rosterbating."

For that matter, if they had been more aggressive on the international market in general in recent years.

Here's the thing, the Yankees were more aggressive on the international market previous to this year and it didn't work out for them. Fans and columnists complained the team was expensive and old when the Yankees spent money on international players. So the Yankees try to not spend big money on posting fees and contracts for international free agents and fans and sportswriters complain the Yankees didn't have their ear to the market. It's simply a case of whatever ends up working, the Yankees should have done that.

Top prospect Gary Sanchez was signed out of the Dominican Republic, but for the most part the Yankees have stayed away from high-priced, big league ready international talent the past two years and they've missed out.

"but for the most part many MLB teams have stayed away from high-priced, big league ready international talent the past two years and they've missed out."

There, I fixed it. Most MLB teams have missed out on the high-priced international talent over the last two years. The Yankees aren't the only team to have missed out. The Yankees management has also made it clear they are trying to control payroll more, so that's probably part of the reason they missed out on this international talent.

Last offseason, Yoenis Cespedes signed a four-year, $36 million deal, and while there was a question as to how quickly he could make an impact in the big leagues,

Which given the fact Cespedes was signed for four years at $9 million per year, you could see why some teams didn't choose to try and sign Cesepedes. Cespedes' agent was demanding a lot of money for a player that many teams had not had an opportunity to see play. There were questions on whether Cesepedes could adapt to American life, American baseball and whether he was worth $9 million per year. Not to mention, where exactly in their outfield were the Yankees going to put Cespedes? Were they going to trade Brett Gardner, Curtis Granderson, or Nick Swisher in the hopes Cespedes could make an immediate impact in the most media-saturated market in the United States? Let's not forget Cespedes only played in 127 games last year and missed half of April this year, so he's not shown himself to be the most durable of players over his first two years in the majors.

Basically, to sign Cespedes the Yankees would have had to make a trade and then hope a Cuban-born player can adjust to the majors and American life in the toughest baseball market to do so. That's a lot of legwork and roster movement of proven players to sign a relatively unknown Cuban free agent who wants almost $10 million per year.

In another lower-cost signing, the Brewers added outfielder Norichika Aoki on a two-year, $2.5 million deal with the plan of making him the team's fourth outfielder.

Instead, the 30-year-old ended up seeing 520 at-bats and hit .288/.355/.433 with 10 home runs and 30 steals as an everyday player.

Yes, Aoki has played well. Why is the failure to sign Aoki only on the Yankees? Every other MLB team failed to sign him as well. That's what is so frustrating about this article, that everything the author says goes for the Yankees could go for most MLB teams.

When June rolled around, Cuban defectors Yasiel Puig (seven-year, $42 million) and Jorge Soler (nine-year, $30 million) both signed long-term deals with the Dodgers and Cubs, respectively.

Again, the Yankees claim to be wanting to cut payroll, not add payroll. I realize we are talking about the Yankees here, but a lot of teams would have benefited from signing these two players.

Puig has been the talk of baseball since being called up,

Jeff Francouer tore up baseball when he first got called up to the majors. Let's give Puig more time and see how he does when pitchers adjust to him.

while Soler looks like a future star down the line for the Cubs.

Soler is currently in high A-ball. He looks good. I don't know why the Yankees are the only team who made a mistake not signing him.

It's not just been position players that the Yankees have been missing out on in the international market though, as a handful of pitchers have made an immediate impact as well.

Why not just make a list of every draft pick that panned out in every round of the MLB Draft over the last 10 years and write a column about how the Yankees should have drafted these players? If you are going to use hindsight, go all out I say.

In Seattle, the Mariners took a chance on right-hander Hisashi Iwakuma with a one-year, $1 million deal. After opening the season in the bullpen, he moved to the rotation in the second half and went 8-4 with a 2.65 ERA over 16 starts.

The Yankees can't sign literally every international free agent available.

The Orioles signed Wei-Yin Chen to a three-year, $11.388 million deal out of Japan, and the Taiwanese-born left-hander was the Orioles most reliable starter going 12-11 with a 4.02 ERA over 32 starts.

Chen's last start was May 12 before he went on the DL. He came off the DL in July, after almost missing two months.

The real splash signing on the international market over the past two offseasons though has been the Rangers' signing of Yu Darvish.

You mean the guy who cost $100 million (contract plus posting fee) to sign? Yeah, why didn't the Yankees spend $100 million on an international pitcher? It's not like they have been open about wanting to cut payroll or anything. Why not spend $10 million per year on Darvish plus the posting fee of $50 million? After all, it's not like the Yankees are looking to get rid of bloated contracts so they can re-sign that All-Star middle-of-the-order currently on their roster. I know pleading poverty for why the Yankees don't sign international players sounds stupid, but the Yankees have stayed out of the international market and maybe they will reconsider this. It's just silly to go back and use hindsight to point out all the international players the Yankees should have signed.

It cost Texas a $51.7 million posting fee to negotiate with the right-hander, and they then signed him to a six-year, $56 million deal.

And prior to Darvish paying this posting fee and then giving a large contract to a Japanese pitcher had not worked out for teams. Look at Kenshin Kawakami (there was no posting fee for him, but he got a large contract), Daisuke Matsuzaka, and Kei Igawa. So it made sense to the Yankees that spending $100 million on a Japanese pitcher may not be the best utilization of their financial resources.

Perhaps it was the flop signing of Hideki Irabu to a four-year, $12.8 million deal back in 1997 that has turned the Yankees off of the international market.

Or the signing of Kei Igawa or the Red Sox signing of Matsuzaka or the realization that sometimes you are simply paying too much money for a player who has yet to perform at the major league level...

Or maybe it was watching the Red Sox throw down so much money on the signing of Daisuke Matsuzaka, only to see him struggle.

Exactly. That's part of it too. Obviously the Yankees shouldn't be gun-shy about going after an international player they believe in, but it's nonsense to write an entire column using hindsight to list all of the international players the Yankees should have signed. The fact the author has to use hindsight only further shows how ridiculous it is to second-guess any MLB team for not signing these international players. The author didn't write a column like this two years ago, because he had no idea if these international players could succeed in the majors or not. That's the point of why hindsight is silly. Who knew Aoki could be a starter-quality outfielder? Who knew $100 million for Darvish wouldn't seem silly? It could have easily swung the other way for these international players. These guys are essentially unknowns to many of these MLB teams, so it's hard to criticize them for not sinking millions into signing these unknowns. Hindsight always knows best.

Whatever their reservations stem from, given the current state of the franchise and the impressive flow of international talent over the past two seasons, it's probably time the Yankees get back to work on the foreign market.

Yeah right, wait until there have been international success stories which could result in the international market and players being overvalued. That's when the Yankees want to dip their toe back in the international player waters, after there have been several successful international players and these players may begin to become more overvalued. As teams see the success of international players, the agents of these international players may commend higher salaries.

If only the Yankees (and every other MLB team) could predict the future to know they should have signed these players. We are all so much smarter when our knowledge is based on hindsight.

4 comments Bill Simmons "Fixes" the Lakers Since He's the Best Candidate to Do This and All

Very reluctantly, and quite frankly because he hasn't written a column since June 18 and the SimmonsClones won't stand for their hero to stop writing despite Bill's desperate attempts to stop writing, Bill Simmons is going to help the Lakers fix themselves. Despite the fact the Lakers haven't ever really shown they need to be fixed, Bill volunteers himself for the job anyway. Hey, he's got a write a column again at some point and his brain isn't exactly kicking out new material at a fast pace, so this is what his readers get stuck with reading.

I know a Celtics fan should never try to help the Lakers. I know I should bite my tongue. I know I should hope Jimmy Buss keeps ruining his family's team,

And really, who else is intelligent and capable enough to help the Lakers other than Bill Simmons? Plus, if Bill focuses on the disaster that is the Lakers he won't have to focus on the Celtics blowing up their entire team and starting a 2-3 year (minimum) rebuilding process while drafting highly incapable big men like Colton Iverson and Fab Melo (wouldn't it have been easier to just forfeit a first round draft choice as opposed to drafting Melo?) to go along with the non-franchise cornerstone Jeff Green and the constantly disgruntled Rajon Rondo. Bill will do anything to keep our minds off the Celtics and on to another NBA team that may not have a bright immediate future ahead of them. Bill has to prepare for the post-Garnett/Allen/Pierce Celtics world, so don't be surprised if he becomes an NBA widow soon and starts talking about the Clippers more than the Celtics in his once a month columns.

But here's the problem …

You are the only one who considers yourself qualified to fix the Lakers?

I love making fake NBA trades, figuring out blueprints for franchises and determining the fastest, most efficient ways to save them. That's just who I am. I'm a weirdo.

This is why in his own head Bill would make such a great General Manager. Who says "no" to these fake NBA trades? You can't argue with the brain of Bill Simmons.

I found myself clicking on the Lakers' salary page just out of curiosity … but then my wheels started turning … and one thing led to another … and suddenly I found myself helping the Lakers.

You found yourself unnecessary italics helping the Lakers? But aren't they your sworn enemies as a Celtics fan? You must really love fake trades if you find yourself unnecessary italics helping the Lakers become a better NBA team.

In the NBA, you want to be either really good or really bad. You never want to land between those two "reallys" for long.

Tell that to the Raptors/Bobcats fans or fans of the Los Angeles Clippers who have been fans of the Clippers for longer than five years. Sometimes being really bad isn't a good thing.

You don't want to be squeezed into the no. 8 seed or keep finishing 12th or 13th in every lottery. Basically, you don't want to be the Milwaukee Bucks.

If you can't compete for the title, why not bottom out in the most flagrantly offensive way possible?

Other than it demoralizes your fan base, creates a losing culture around the team, the players on the current team become apathetic due to the organization's lack of concern for winning, and doesn't guarantee you will land the #1 overall pick due to the NBA's lottery system?

Of course, that's something the Lakers have never, ever done. They picked first in the 1979 and 1982 drafts (Magic and Worthy) by fleecing laughingstock franchises of their draft picks — not by being the laughingstock franchise.

Says the fan of the NBA team that dealt the first overall pick in 1980 for Robert Parish and Kevin McHale and had the #2 overall pick in 1986 fresh off winning an NBA title because they traded Gerald Henderson to Seattle. It's not often Boston is the laughingstock either. Just wanted to point this out.

They miraculously turned Vlade Divac, three cartons of Marlboro Reds and a pound of phlegm into a raw high schooler named Kobe Bryant.

To be fair, there wasn't a long track record of high school players skipping college and thriving in the pros at this point and the Lakers were taking a risk by trading a proven center for a late, late lottery pick (the 13th pick). Divac was coming off a season where he had put up 12 points, 8 rebounds, 3 assists, and 1.7 blocks as a 27 year old. These days a guy like that gets a multi-year contract for $10-$11 million per year. It's not like Bryant fell in the Lakers' laps, they took a chance to acquire him.

No professional sports franchise has been this consistently good for this long: not the Yankees, not the Canadiens, not the Steelers, not anybody.

Yes, but now they need fixing that only Bill Simmons can provide.

But desperate times call for desperate measures. Their best player is hitting Year 18 and rehabbing from the worst sports injury an older player can have. Their second-best player just ditched them.

Notice how Bill just wrote an entire column about how Dwight Howard has hit his peak and is declining as a player, but now he needs to make it seem like the Lakers are losing an important player, so he suddenly considers Howard more valuable than Pau Gasol. In Bill's 2012 Trade Value column he had Gasol at #17 (and bumped Gasol this year because he is underused) and Bill had Howard at #18 in his 2013 Trade Value column.

Their coach is realistically two years away from taking over the Minnesota Lynx or the Pepperdine Waves. And they need to sell the illusion of hope to their fans, which means they need to save as much cap space as possible for LeBron, which means they can't add ANY contracts that expire after next summer.

At least they didn't draft Fab Melo. That's gotta be some consolation.

Fact: This year's Lakers team will be undeniably worse than last year's Lakers team … a team that didn't make the playoffs until Game 82.

"Fact." Apparently Bill Simmons is trying to write like Dwight Schrute talked. If he mentions something about a beet farm, I'm done writing.

Fact: This is bleak. Really, really bleak.

Not really. The Lakers could conceivably cash in on some free agents in one year. It's already been conceded by Bill that the Lakers have a very, very attractive franchise and city to play and the Lakers will have $50 million in 2014 to improve their team through free agency. Struggling for one year isn't really, really, bleak. The Celtics went from owning the 5th pick in the draft to winning the NBA Title in the span of a year half a decade ago. Things don't look good in the short term for the Lakers, but struggling for one year and still being the Lakers isn't really, really bleak.

OK, so they have two inherent advantages. First, the Lakers have only one contract on their books for the 2014-15 season: Steve Nash for $9.7 million. They might be $50 million under the cap next summer — perfect timing for an all-you-can-eat buffet of free-agent stars headlined by LeBron, who's only (a) the best player since Michael Jordan, (b) someone who wants to be a "global icon," and (c) someone with an established track record of treating free agency like he's organizing a bank heist with his buddies.

So the first part of Bill's plan to fix the Lakers is to sign LeBron James. Where would we be without his insight into this matter? Maybe the Lakers could sign another really, really talented player who is a free agent and the Lakers could turn their team around while moving on from the Kobe Bryant-era and it would all be because of Bill Simmons' grand plan.

Famous basketball players gravitate to the Lakers because of their storied history, and because Los Angeles remains the easiest American city for any wealthy celebrity to live in.

It looks very bleak for the Lakers though, doesn't it? I hope Bill's plan of using $50 million in cap space to lure free agents to a storied franchise in a city where celebrities love to live works out. It seems pretty unlikely this risky plan will work.

Celebrities in L.A. can be around other celebrities all the time, and if there's one thing celebrities love, it's being around other celebrities. If they want to dabble in music or movies or any other ego-fueled creative project, or meet just about any heavy hitter business dude on the planet, they have those options here.

BUT HOW IS BILL GOING TO TURN THE LAKERS AROUND WITH ALL THIS CAP SPACE THE LAKERS WILL HAVE IN 2014?

As recently as three years ago, had you told any fan of the other 29 teams, "In 2014, the Lakers will have $50 million in cap space during a loaded summer for free agents," their reaction would have been, "We're all screwed." But when they're being run by someone who can successfully be compared to Tommy Boy?

Let's investigate the logic that Bill is using here. He believes the biggest thing holding the Lakers back is their idiot owner, yet part of Bill's plan to turn the Lakers around relies on their owner being smart and having a plan. Here's the problem...if we assume Jim Buss is smart enough to have a plan and follow the plan, then we could also assume Jim Buss is smart enough to realize his plan needs to revolve around having $50 million in cap space and luring free agents to Los Angeles. What I'm saying is that Bill poo-poos the whole "We have a shit-ton of money and now we just go after the free agents we want" plan because the owner isn't smart enough to realize he can do this, but then part of Bill's plan is for the Lakers to have a shit-ton of money and go after the free agents they want. Basically Bill muddies the water enough to where his less discerning readers won't realize Bill is proposing essentially the same plan he doesn't think Jim Buss is capable of pulling off.

Making matters worse, the Lakers lost their L.A. basketball monopoly.

This isn't a real thing.

They've been spending money in the most anti–Donald Sterling ways possible, building around the league's most expensive coach (Doc Rivers), a $107 million point guard (Chris Paul), a $95 million, high-flying power forward (Blake Griffin) and a slew of quality role players. It's almost like the Lakers and Clippers switched bodies. And actually, we can't rule this out.

Actually we can rule it out since the Lakers and Clippers don't have bodies because they are organizations not human beings.

So if we ever needed a "Save the Lakers" plan, it's right now. Here's how Wolf Pope Simmons would hypothetically save the Lakers in 10 hypothetical steps.

Bill has to use 10 steps to get where he is going to make his plan seem more complicated. I can sum up his plan in three steps.

1. Save the cap space during 2013 by not taking on large contracts.

2. Accept 2013 may be a tough year and know if the Lakers miss the playoffs then they have a lottery pick and a lot of cap space.

3. Use this cap space to lure attractive free agents to Los Angeles and hope they get a Top 5 pick in the third consecutive "loaded" draft that may not end up being all that loaded.

There. That's a plan and it could work. Of course if Bill limited his plan to three steps he wouldn't be rambling, his column would be shorter, and he couldn't try to desperately show off his ability to jump on the Andrew Wiggins bandwagon...while also looking at Scout.com's Top 100 2013 class to see that Jabari Parker and Julius Randle are also highly rated and they may leave for the NBA Draft next year so he will name-drop them to make it seem like he knows all about them outside of highlights he has seen on YouTube.

1. Don't be afraid to suck all kinds of suck for one season.

Two facts about the 2014 draft. First, if you were ranking the Can't-Miss NBA Prospects of the 21st Century, Kansas freshman Andrew Wiggins would rank behind LeBron, but would probably land right on that second tier with Durant, Oden and Carmelo. He's T-Mac 2.0 by all accounts.

Then Bill provides a YouTube link (what else would Bill provide?) to Andrew Wiggins' Hoop Mixtape, which if there is a better measure of a player's ability to play basketball then a YouTube Hoop Mixtape I certainly can't think of it.

There's a reason the Tankapalooza committee (I'm the chairman) is thinking about changing the name of Tankapalooza 2014 to Riggin' for Wiggins.

Bill is so pumped to see Wiggins play he may even watch a few Kentucky games this year to see how good Wiggins is at playing college-level competition. At least I'm betting Bill believes Wiggins is going to play for Kentucky this upcoming college basketball season.

Second, it's the rare NBA draft that's deep AND top-heavy.

By the way, the draft doesn't occur for another 11 months but Bill already knows every player that will declare for the 2014 NBA Draft. Incredibly impressive, isn't it?

ESPN draft guru and former The O.C. star Chad Ford pointed out that, in 2013, he broke the draft down by tiers — with Tier 1 being "potential franchise players," Tier 2 being "potential All-Stars," Tier 3 being "potential starters," and so on — and there wasn't a single 2013 draft prospect in Tier 1 or Tier 2. In 2014? Right now, we have eight guys in those top two tiers, and that's without factoring in the possibility of one or two more breakout stars.

So there are a lot of potential stars in Chad "Darko for President" Ford's arbitrarily selected tiers? Because these tiers are based on fact and zero speculation color me impressed.

There's also a chance that Kentucky power forward Julius Randle might turn "Wiggins vs. Randle" into a "Durant vs. Oden"–type debate, and that Duke's Jabari Parker might be looming as a Carmelo-like sleeper.

Except I would bet anything these two players are already in Chad Ford's Tier 1 or Tier 2, so they would not count as breakout stars and they would simply be moving around from Tier 1 to 2. Also, I would love to hear Bill's opinion of the potential breakout stars in the 2014 NBA Draft, simply for the sake of hilarity.

Why not take your lumps, Jimmy? Your fan base is more sophisticated than anyone realizes. They've had four generations of success.

It's hard to stereotype an entire fan base, but the Lakers have had a ton of success over the last 40 years so I'm not entirely sure how the fans would respond to a 30-52 season.

They'd be fine with throwing away ONE season. Just not two.

Bill speaks for the Lakers fan base now. He's "The Sports Guy" so of course he speaks for EVERY team's fan base...or at least he thinks he does.

2. Clear every dollar off your 2014-15 cap. Get to zero, or close.

Bill thinks the Lakers need to do the thing that he doesn't believe Jim Buss is smart enough to do. Again, if we assume Buss is smart enough to clear money off the cap and then spend $50 million in free agency then that's the obvious plan (as well as being the plan Bill is proposing here, just in a more complicated fashion to make it seem like it is an original plan).

On paper, the 2013-14 Lakers could take the 2009-10 Heat's game plan to another level by jettisoning every contract while also landing a top-five lottery pick. But they have to worsen this year's roster.

They are going to trade a first round pick for Fab Melo?

3. Trade Steve Nash to Toronto.

Admittedly, Nash doesn't have much market value right now. He's 39 years old, his body is breaking down in a variety of ways, he seemed a step and a half slow last season, he's a turnstile defensively, and he's making $9.3 million in 2014 and $9.7 million in 2015.

But who cares about logic? This isn't logic Bill is using. Bill is just pretending trades can be accepted by one side of the trade even if they don't make sense for both sides of the trade. It's really the only way he can make his plan work, by assuming the Raptors will take on Steve Nash's contract, even though the Raptors just dumped Andrea Bargnani and his contract.

Other than that, he's pretty enticing. But you know where he's still a hero? CANADA! What would be better than Nash finishing his career on Canada's only NBA team?

It doesn't make sense, but it fits Bill's agenda. He can make nonsensical moves if he wants to rosterbate and make himself feel like the NBA trade king. He's done it for most of his ESPN career. There's no way the Raptors would take on Nash's contract.

Now here's where you say, Wait a second, the Raptors just hired Masai Ujiri from Denver. That dude is a shrewd mf'er — he'd never trade for Nash. Au contraire! Thanks to Rudy Gay's onerously onerous deal, DeMar DeRozan's extension, the cap-clogging quartet of Landry Fields, Marcus Camby, Tyler Hansbrough and Steve Novak (nearly $20 million combined in 2014-15) and a few other commitments, Toronto can't become a free-agent player until the summer of 2015 ... right as Nash's deal is expiring. So why not bring him aboard as their feel-good Canadian basketball ambassador?

(Shakes head sadly) I don't know why Ujiri would spend $19 million to feel-good.

Do you realize trading for Nash would immediately become one of Canada's five greatest NBA moments ever?

Do you realize how incredibly irrelevant this is when it comes to whether the Raptors would choose to trade for Steve Nash or not?

Anyway, here's my offer: Nash for Linas Kleiza's expiring contract and Aaron Gray's expiring contract. I can't do better than that.

Generally rebuilding teams choose to trade away expiring contracts so they can use some of that precious cap space on players who are 40 years old and want a chance to play for an NBA Title. And oh yeah, in Bill's absolute genius GM move to trade Steve Nash to Toronto he left out the human part of this trade where Nash won't want to play for a non-contending team over the next two seasons. Who cares what Steve Nash wants though? It's not like he is a real person or a player's opinion on a trade could ever impact the Czar of the ESPN Trade Machine's brilliant ideas.

Bill consistently leaves out the human element of his proposed trades. Why would the Raptors take on salary when they want to get rid of salary? Why would Steve Nash choose to be traded to a non-contender when he signed with the Lakers (in a sign-and-trade) to win an NBA Title? In the middle of Bill's brilliant "who says 'no'?" trade ideas he tends to forget the human element of his rosterbation.

4. Trade Pau Gasol.

You know who's not helping us Riggin' for Wiggins? A future Hall of Famer playing for a new contract. I don't need Pau dropping 23 and 11 every night.

This still wouldn't guarantee the Lakers could get Wiggins, but whatever.

Destination No. 1: Hey, Cleveland, why roll the dice on Andrew Bynum's fusilli knee ligaments when you can rent Pau in a contract year? You know he'll be motivated. You know he's one of the league's best 25 players when healthy

Bill referred to Dwight Howard as the Lakers second-best player earlier in this column. So doesn't that mean he considers Howard to be among the league's best 25 players when healthy? Then what was this column all about? I don't think that column reads as one of the league's Top 25 players is a free agent, but reads as more of a cautionary tale about signing Howard. Yet, now Bill considers Howard to be the Lakers second-best player and considers the Lakers third-best player as a Top 25 guy when healthy. I think I'm confusing myself at this point.

Even better — this trade gives the Lakers a low-post combo of Chris Kaman (always gets hurt) and Varejao (always gets hurt). They could be the Twin Owww-ers. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

Simmonsites, this is your hero. Your daddy figure and role model who you live and die with when it comes to him answering one of your emails in a mailbag. "The Twin Oww-ers," that's what Bill writes.

Destination No. 2: Flip Gasol's expiring contract to Chicago for Luol Deng's and Kirk Hinrich's expiring contracts. Just a fascinating trade. The Bulls know Jimmy Butler can replace Deng's minutes,

Yeah, the Bulls know this. Sure, Butler may not be able to replace Deng's production, but replacing Deng's minutes is easy.

For the Lakers, they'd keep Deng for a couple of months before rerouting him to a contender for expiring deals and a pick. (You don't need Deng in a contract year making you slightly better than you need to be.)

This is typical Bill Simmons logic. Trade for Deng under the assumption you can trade him again for expiring deals and a pick. Again, let's forget the human element, such as what if there isn't a team willing to trade expiring contracts and a pick for Deng or the Lakers can get expiring contracts but not a pick? It doesn't matter because reality is only nitpicking to Bill when he is rosterbating.

The Lakers can't sign LeBron after he wins his third straight NBA title for the simple reason that, in the history of basketball, the best player on a championship team has NEVER subsequently ditched that team.

And we all know LeBron has no ego so he wouldn't want to prove he can win an NBA Title for the NBA's most storied franchise without Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade. It may not happen, but it is a possibility.

That's why the Lakers need to improve the Bulls — they can't get LeBron unless Chicago, Houston, Oklahoma City, Indiana or Golden State beats the Heat. And Chicago's the best bet of them all.

Let's look at Bill's logic here. He thinks the Lakers should improve the Bulls so the Bulls can beat the Heat in the 2014 NBA Playoffs 10 months from now, so then LeBron will feel okay about leaving the Heat in free agency to go to Los Angeles? There's only like 20 assumptions in this scenario to get to Bill's desired conclusion. Assumptions like:

The Bulls aren't trying to get LeBron after the 2014 season themselves so they would trade expiring deals.

The Bulls are going to be healthy enough 10 months from now to beat the Heat.

The Bulls will match up with the Heat in the 2014 NBA Playoffs and won't get knocked out earlier by Indiana.

LeBron James won't re-sign with the Heat by mid-season next year.

LeBron James won't leave Miami regardless of whether he wins another NBA Title, due to Wade starting to further decline.

Chicago really is the best bet to beat the Heat.

The Lakers think they can't get LeBron to sign with them regardless of whether he wins another title with the Heat.

There are more, but I'm growing bored...

6. Since you're sucking anyway, bring back as many popular former Lakers as possible.

I'd go further than that — I'd also bring back beloved veterans Derek Fisher and Luke Walton for the veteran's minimum, then keep my 15th roster spot open and spend the season signing old Lakers favorites (Robert Horry, Rick Fox, Michael Cooper, Sam Perkins, etc.) to a series of 10-day contracts.

Important note: Lakers fans would LOVE this.

Yes, I'm sure Lakers fans would love it if the organization further made a mockery of the 2013-2014 team, as well as ruined their memories of favorite Lakers players. I'm sure Kobe Bryant would be thrilled to play for a team that brings back 50 year olds to sit at the end of the bench out of nostalgia.

Then Bill suggest Jack Nicholson sits out the season and gives his seat to Phil Jackson. Obviously this would never happen, but I do actually enjoy this idea. Though by doing this it would further disappoint some Lakers fans when Jackson doesn't come back to coach the 2014-2015 team.

8. Keep Mike D'Antoni for the entire year.

When I was going over my tentative "Save the Lakers" plan last night with my friend Lewis (a Lakers nut who's onboard with everything you just read),

Bill's one Lakers fan friend think these are all good ideas and this means these are all good ideas! NO ONE DENIES THIS!

"Are you kidding?" Lewis yelped. "YOU KEEP HIM! YOU KEEP HIM THE WHOLE SEASON! WE WANT THE WORST COACH POSSIBLE!!!!! WHY WOULD YOU EVER FIRE D'ANTONI!"

I would be much more moved by the fact Lewis agrees with Bill if I didn't think Bill surrounded himself with "yes men" who helped massage his ego and make him feel like everything he does is right. I don't have faith Bill has friends who will challenge his ideas.

9. Delay Kobe's return for as long as possible.

I'm not gonna lie — this is the shakiest part of my rehab plan.

The shakiest part of the rehab plan is that you felt the need to use 10 steps when fewer steps are required. Oh, and you make a ton of assumptions like the Raptors will want to trade for Steve Nash and Lakers fans would be perfectly fine with a season where the team intentionally tanks and signs Sam Perkins to a 10-day contract.

Kobe cares about two things right now: Ring No. 6, and Kareem's record. In that order. We could talk him into playing for a historically lousy Lakers team for one season if Ring No. 6 (and maybe LeBron) was the carrot dangling on the other end.

I think Bill is correct about what Kobe cares about right now, but this is one of the few times I think Bill is correct when he pretends he knows what is going on inside a player/coach/organization's head. This is the exception to the rule.

So he's 6,770 points away. To put that in perspective, he scored 2,133 points in 78 games last season before his Achilles ripped. This is doable … you know, assuming he recovers from that devastating leg injury.

Kobe would essentially have to play three or slightly more than three full seasons to take over Kareem's record. And let's be honest, he is going to have to play longer than that if he teams up with LeBron because his shots are going to decline with LeBron on the roster. If Kobe wants LeBron and Kareem's record he may have to play another four full seasons.

10. When Kobe comes back, allow him to hog the ball to alarming degrees.

You know what the best part of that plan is? Kobe's quest to score 40 every night will inadvertently become one of the more entertaining subplots of the 2013-14 season. I'd flip over to every Lakers game just to see how many points he had. So would you.

Actually I really wouldn't do this at all. Watching a player score as many points while ignoring the competition of the game and the flow of the offense becomes tiresome to me after a while.

Of course, they'd still be hoping that Jimmy Buss hired the right coach, made the right lottery pick, lured LeBron, kept Kobe and spent $60 million in cap space in the best possible way …

No matter what plan is used to fix the Lakers this is a concern. Really this sentence Bill wrote is all that is needed to fix the Lakers. Hire the right people, spend money the right way and hope to hit it big in free agency. Of course Bill has to get an entire column out of the idea of fixing the Lakers so he diddles himself for 2000 words before getting to the point.

See, you need a strong owner or a front-office voice to execute a long-term plan — like what Miami had with Pat Riley and Micky Arison four years ago. These Lakers don't have that voice. Kobe will convince them to compete next season because he's nearing the end of his career, and he wants to shove it in Dwight Howard's face, and he probably believes that he and Pau can still battle anyone on any given night. That's what makes him Kobe. And that's why I didn't mind trying to "save" the Lakers. I know they won't do the right thing.

You know who they SHOULD be emulating, actually?

You are going to have to sit down before reading who the Lakers should be emulating because it is going to shock you. Bill Simmons, "The Boston Sports Guy" wants to tell you who the Lakers should emulate will change how you think about the world and be completely unexpected.

My beloved Celtics.

I'M SHOCKED! Bill Simmons thinks the Lakers should be like the Celtics. I can barely breathe I am so surprised.

In the span of five weeks, Boston mortally wounded next year's team by dealing Garnett and Pierce (improving their Riggin' for Wiggins chances);

You know every team can't get Wiggins and I can see a scenario where Jabari Parker stays at Duke for two years. My point is the 2014 NBA Draft may not be quite as loaded as anticipated. Just a thought.

Boston got back a terrible contract (Gerald Wallace) in the Nets trade so Bill is contradicting himself in a big way by saying the Lakers should emulate the Celtics. Bill suggests a strategy to fix the Lakers where they don't take on any long-term contracts and get their cap space as low to $0 as possible, but then says the Lakers should emulate the Celtics who took on a longer-term contract when trading Pierce and Garnett, as well have no immediate plans to trade Jeff Green or Brandon Bass, both of whom have relatively large cap figures. The Celtics are essentially rebuilding around some of their current players which is not at all the strategy that Bill is suggesting the Lakers use.

As always, he plays both sides so that eventually he can be right when/if the Lakers turn it around. Bill writes an entire column about how the Lakers need to clear as much cap space as possible in order to try and lure LeBron, but then says the Lakers should really emulate the Celtics, who are rebuilding around a core of players and not entirely blowing the team up. Of course both teams are in completely different rebuilding situations, but Bill's need to talk briefly about the Celtics has caused him to waffle on the intended plan in this column for the Lakers. Only Bill could write an entire column about a plan for the Lakers and then ruin his plan in the last paragraph and his readers would think nothing of it. They are just happy he writes because they adore him so much.

turned the roster over to Brad Stevens (the perfect guy for a rebuild);

How do you know Brad Stevens is the perfect guy for a rebuild? He's never coached in the NBA before. This is pure speculation.

That's a team that knows who it is, and where it is, and where it needs to be.

The Celtics still have to draft well with the first round draft picks they have acquired. Bill is proposing the Lakers rebuild through the 2014 draft and free agency, which seems to be different from the way the Celtics are rebuilding. The Celtics are looking more long-term for their rebuild. Not to mention, Bill warns against teams trying to be the 8th seed in the playoffs while rebuilding, and guess what, as the Celtics are currently constructed that's the playoff spot they could be in contention for next year. So Bill basically now thinks the Lakers should do the opposite of what he just suggested in this column by emulating the Celtics.

Can you say the same about the Lakers? My gut feeling is no … and that in April, we'll be watching Kobe and Pau fighting for a no. 8 seed.

Damn them and their inability to tank on the off-chance they land the #1 overall pick. Really the Lakers should do what Bill suggests they do in this column or what they should really do is emulate the Celtics...that is unless Bill's suggested plan in this column works out, then that's really what the Lakers should have done. Either way, if the Lakers succeed or fail in rebuilding Bill feels comfortable in knowing he has covered every scenario to where he can claim he was right. As long as he can claim he was right and feed his ego, that's all that matters to him.

8 comments Idiocy: A Bleacher Report Specialty

There is some good stuff on Bleacher Report, blah, blah, blah. I always disclaim that. There's also shit on the site. Today's article is an example of the shit that can be found on Bleacher Report. I'm not perfect when it comes to discussing sports, but there are several types of comments that baseball and football fans can make which irritates the shit out of me. These comments usually assume that sports are like video games or come from sports fans who just come off as annoyingly simplistic. Three of these comments are:

1. "Let's draft Quarterback X in the fifth round and develop him to where he can be the starter in a few years."

On it's face, this doesn't seem like an annoying comment at all. It is the assumptions behind this comment that annoys me. It's the speaker's assumption a team can draft a player and then start "developing him" to be the starter in a few years. It's as if a lack of talent or the mental makeup to play the quarterback position can be overcome with some TLC and teaching. It just doesn't work that way all the time. It's not simple to take a fifth round pick, teach him to be a quarterback and then spit out a starting quarterback in a few years. Yes, it can happen, but this statement and the assumption of some magical "developmental technique" that can take a 5th round pick and turn him into a starter in a matter of three years annoys me.

2. "With all these linebackers we have, what about running the 3-4 defense?"

Oh sure, let's just fucking turn the entire defensive system around today. That doesn't sound like it would be difficult or take any sort of preparation or change in personnel to do. I read this comment all the time and it never fails to annoy me. There is more required to run a 3-4 defense than to have four good linebackers. This type of comment always seems to assume a team would need no other position adjustment to run a 3-4 defense than having four good linebackers on the roster. A team needs 3-4 linebackers who can rush the passer, a nose guard who can hold down the middle and keep the offensive linemen off the linebackers, and 3-4 defensive ends who can rush the passer but also hold the end. It's a different set of skills required for defensive players and the fact a team has four quality linebackers doesn't make the move easy. Throw in the defensive coordinator for a team may not have experience running a 3-4 defense and the comment becomes more annoying. More NFL teams are running hybrid defenses, but to blindly suggest a team just magically switch to a 3-4 defense in training camp as the magical key that turns the team around is stupidity.

3. "Let's send Player X down to the minor leagues and teach him to play a different position."

Baseball isn't a video game. You can't just send a player down to the minor leagues and teach him to play a new position and then call him up a year later to see him playing extremely well at that position. It's rare for a player who has played his entire career at catcher can just become a second baseman in a year's time. Well, that is unless you write for Bleacher Report, in which case teaching a 6'4" 230 pound catcher to play second base is just a piece of cake. 

Dan Uggla's struggles are no secret for Atlanta Braves fans.

Uggla has been bad over his two years with the Braves, but he improved last year in terms of getting on-base and led the National League in walks. He's been bad in Spring Training again, but he has always struck out a lot and not hit for great average. It's not like he would improve as he got older. I'm still fine with him at second base and have faith he can at least continue to get on-base at the .348 clip with more power than he showed last year. I think Braves fans just tend to get in a panic sometimes.

Hitting .227 with 55 home runs and 160 RBI in his two years with the Braves, Uggla hasn't exactly lived up to his five-year, $62-million contract.

So the solution is to bench him or trade him? What could the Braves gain from having a non-contact hitter who is a poor defender on the bench? What could they possibly get through trade that would relieve them of Uggla's salary and make the team better? Those are my three questions that have no satisfactory answers.

With power throughout the Braves' order, fans aren't going to be patient if Uggla continues to struggle. And, let's face it, can you blame them?

Since Uggla is relied on for power, wouldn't it make more sense for Braves fans to be more patient since one of the biggest things Uggla provides (power) isn't in short supply on the Braves roster? They may not rely on him to hit home runs, so they can afford to be more patient with him.

Before you think this is an article intended to bash Uggla, here are some of the good things he's done for the Braves.

It's not an article to bash Uggla, but an article to bench Uggla and replace him with a catcher. That's so different from bashing him.

In 2012, Uggla batted .262 with runners in scoring position and .308 with runners in scoring position and two outs. So he can hit in the clutch.

Clutchiness is Uggla's thing. Who needs this in the everyday batting order? The Braves don't, that's for sure.

He brings power to the second base position, which is not seen much in MLB. Robinson Cano, Aaron Hill and Rickie Weeks come to mind.

Uggla had 19 home runs last year. That's good and one of the good reasons (his shockingly improved defense last year is another) to keep him in the lineup.

He also started and ended 2012 well, batting .271 in April and .280 in September.

Uggla has it in him to do well, but he seems unable to get things right in his head during the middle parts of the season.

Not entirely true. Uggla hit .293/.369/.586 during July 2011 and .340/.405/.670 during August 2011. For his career he has struggled the most in June, but he doesn't seem to consistently struggle during the middle of the baseball season over his career. He did struggle mightily in 2012, but I don't know if his middle season struggles are a trend or not.

Then there's the strikeouts.

He ranked fourth in the National League with 168 strikeouts, striking out 96 times with the bases empty.

Is it better to strikeout with the bases empty or better to strikeout with runners on-base? Uggla struck out a lot, but he also got on-base at a .348 clip and led the National League in walks.

Simply put, Uggla either just can't get the job done anymore or his brain is getting in the way of him hitting.

I'm glad we discussed this. Now what's the solution to this problem? Players making $39 million over the next three seasons generally just don't go away and it is hard for other teams to want to take on that salary for a declining player through trade.

Including this year, Uggla still has three years and $39 million left on his contract. But can the Braves afford another three years of Uggla's subpar performances?

These are the deep questions only the writers of Bleacher Report are willing to discuss. Can the Braves afford to pay a player $13 million when he doesn't play well? Can ANY MLB team afford to pay a player $13 million for a subpar performance? Probably not.

While there is nobody in the farm system that is ready to take over at second should Uggla continue to struggle, there are other possibilities.

Because any time an expensive player isn't performing up to snuff, it makes more sense to bench that player and then spend money and prospects to go find another player who can play that position.

Should the opportunity present itself before the trade deadline,

"Before the trade deadline," meaning before July 31st? If the Braves are going to replace Dan Uggla why would they potentially wait until July 31st to do so? This makes not of sense.

guys like Ben Zobrist and Omar Infante could be had for the right price.

So the idea is to replace .220/.348/.384 with 19 home runs, 78 RBI's, 94 walks, and 168 strikeouts with Omar Infante who hit .274/.300/.419 with 12 home runs, 53 RBI's, 21 walks and 65 strikeouts last year? How would this improve the team exactly? Presumably the Braves can't trade Uggla, or they would have to eat a lot of his contract, but they are free to take on $4 million more for Infante who at best is only a moderate upgrade and a free agent after the season? So how is the team improved for 2014 with Uggla one year older and still on the roster next year? So Uggla gets benched and then the Braves have the same issue next year. I don't think Infante is a solution.

Ben Zobrist would be an upgrade, but he also costs $5.5 million in 2013, $7 million in 2014, and $7.5 million in 2015. It's not very likely Zobrist could be had for cheap either. Assuming the Braves could trade Uggla, they would still have to eat at the very, very least half of his contract (which I doubt they could even get a team to cover that much). That means they would be investing $39.5 million in their second base position over the next three years at the absolute least, while giving up prospects for Zobrist. Interestingly, that's how much they currently have invested in Dan Uggla except they don't have to trade any prospects to get him.

So Zobrist would be an upgrade (which I would admit) at the cost of prospects and money during a three year span when the Braves will need to try to re-sign, sign, or pay through arbitration Brian McCann, Kris Medlen, Jason Heyward, Craig Kimbrel, Freddie Freeman, Andrelton Simmons. See the issue there? Uggla stinks, but the Braves can't afford to spend more money on the second base position over the next three years and expect to keep what they consider the core of their team.

With both slated to be free agents after this year, the Braves could put a decent package together to get one of the two during the stretch run.

Again, Zobrist isn't a free agent next year. There is a team option for 2014 and 2015. To trade prospects for Zobrist and not exercise these options would be stupid in my opinion. Meanwhile Omar Infante at this point doesn't seem like an upgrade. Plus, after the Braves have benched Dan Uggla should they just turn to him to be the starter in 2014? If you bench Uggla and replace him with Omar Infante then Uggla has to be traded, right? Who plays second base in 2014 for the Braves? Don't worry, the author has a really, really stupid suggestion for 2014.

Or the Braves could send Evan Gattis down to the minors to learn how to play second base.

Worst idea ever. Non-Braves fans have no idea who Evan Gattis is. That's fine. He has an interesting back story that is irrelevant for what I am going to write here. More importantly, he is a 26 year old catcher/outfielder who stands 6'4" and weighs 230 pounds. He crushes the baseball and the Braves are desperately trying to find a way for him to make the active roster, hence the move from catcher to left field. He is not quite the defensive catcher an MLB team would look for and he probably isn't the best full-time left fielder a team would look for either. But he mashes the baseball. A move to second base over the next year is not a good idea for Evan Gattis to make. Simply put, second base is not the place for a 6'4" 230 pound ex-catcher.

While there would be a major adjustment period for Gattis,

This adjustment period potentially being "his entire Major League career." When Dan Uggla is brought in as a defensive replacement, that's never good news. The funny part is the author wants to trade for Infante or Zobrist (he never tells us what will be done with Uggla, so I assume he will very covertly be murdered in order to be removed from the Braves payroll) and then put an ex-catcher at second base. Baseball is a video game apparently.

it could be beneficial for the Braves because he's hitting .438 with two home runs and 10 RBI during spring training.

So sending a player who is hitting the cover off of the ball down to AAA to learn a new position he has never played before would be beneficial to the Braves this year? How can that be beneficial to the Braves when Gattis wouldn't even be on the active roster? I have so many questions and no answers that can satisfy my curiosity as to where this bad idea came from.

If Gattis could learn how to play second base, that would solve two problems: 

If Jason Heyward could be cloned it would solve many problems as well. If Dan Uggla could find the fountain of youth that would solve a few issues. If we could teach birds to carry the heavy weight of a human being and train them to fly to a specific destination then we could rid ourselves of air travel costs. If dogs could speak then we wouldn't have to wonder why they are randomly barking at a wall. There are so many "ifs" and so few answers.

It would provide him with the opportunity to be in the lineup

So would carrying him on the roster as a backup left fielder/catcher/pinch hitter this year. Sending Gattis down to the minors to learn a new position, how exactly does this provide Gattis a chance to be in the lineup? If Uggla is struggling this year then shouldn't the idea to be to replace Uggla this year, not a year from now? There are much easier ways to get a player's bat in the lineup than send him down to the minors for a year to learn a new position. In fact, sending Gattis down to the minors is a specific effort to take his bat out of the lineup for this year when he is tearing the cover off the ball.

and it would solve the Uggla problem all in one.

No, it wouldn't solve the Uggla problem because Uggla would still be on the roster and still cost $13 million per year. Now if you have an idea on how to trade Uggla, get value for him in a trade, get most of his contract off the books and also find a quality second basemen, then that's a great suggestion. Suggesting the Braves move a 230 pound catcher to second base is not a real suggestion and this is just embarrassing for you to even suggest.