7 comments Bill Simmons Is Still Using His Opinion as Fact

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As always, these are actual emails from actual readers.

(Narrator) They were not.

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

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

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

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

How could we actually prove this?

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

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

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

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

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

Von Miller (’17) > John Randle (’97)

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

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

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

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

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

Bill is mailing in his mailed-in mailbags. 

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

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

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

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

… and it starts getting silly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is cancer as deadly as the Black Death? 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bill Simmons as a used car dealer:

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

(Customer) "That's not true."

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

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

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

(Customer) "I believe you!"

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

(Customer) "I don't believe you." 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Check out this email from Rez in Sacramento …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But culturally? NBA careers last twice as long 

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

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

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

Bill's HBO show was awful - an opinion

Bill's HBO show was canceled- a fact

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BS: I can’t think of a single reason.

As I said. 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anyway, Bill needs to bash ESPN real quick. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—Marc, Madison, Wis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What’s the most amazing thing about that list? 

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

I find all of those things amazing.

Deshaun Watson! Who knew?

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

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

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

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

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

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

—Britt 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

—Brendan, Perth, Australia

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

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

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

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

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

0 comments What A-Rod Has Wrong Today: He Participates in Unfunny Skits for ESPN

Lately A-Rod has made some serious missteps that the New York sports media has had a chance to jump all over. A-Rod hasn't helped the Yankees' ratings and then he failed to make the All-Star team. Those were two egregious errors that A-Rod made. Now Mike Lupica has made the vital discovery that A-Rod has in fact made another error in judgment. He participated in an unfunny skit at the ESPY's this year where he pretended to apologize for a variety of things. At this point, the New York media can't rip on A-Rod for his performance on the field, so they are having to reach in order to criticize him. Lupica says A-Rod "strikes out looking" (get it?) in taking part in the unfunny skit and takes joy in finally getting the chance to write about what an asshole A-Rod is. It's a glorious day for Mike Lupica. He's probably sitting on the edge of his seat talking over someone right now, gleefully happy that he finally can pile on A-Rod again.

Alex Rodriguez has made hardly any mistakes since he returned to the Yankees after serving a full-season suspension for Tony Bosch and for being up to his eyeballs in baseball’s case against Bosch’s Biogenesis clinic.

Ah, but now he has made a mistake that isn't really a mistake and Mike Lupica is all over it. He's on the edge of his seat, trying to seem as tall as possible and talking over anyone who dares to try to be in the same room as him. 

Mostly Rodriguez has hit, and reminded everybody that if you can still produce in sports, fans will find so much forgiveness in their hearts they’re afraid sometimes those hearts might burst like frozen pipes.

Yes, fans are so good at finding forgiveness when a player hits well. Being that Mike Lupica is unable to focus on anything that doesn't involve him, I wonder if he knows that A-Rod has gotten more favorable coverage from sportswriters as the 2015 season progresses. Why? Because A-Rod is producing. But yeah, fans are the fickle ones. 

He has said all the right things and attended charity events, and gotten himself straight, at least for the time being, 

But the fuck up is coming. Mike Lupica knows it. If it doesn't come, then Mike Lupica will blow a small thing out of proportion to make it seem like A-Rod has not gotten himself straight.

and barring any future problems with baseball drugs, with the commissioner and with Yankee ownership. He has, by all accounts, been a bedrock of good behavior in the Yankee clubhouse, especially with young players.

I don't know how many times Mike Lupica can write "A-Rod has been on his best behavior...so far" in this column without it seeming more and more repetitive. Yeah, he hasn't screwed up. Get to your point. 

the way he is covered these days, you can probably forgive him for wondering how Caitlyn Jenner beat him out for the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at the ESPY Awards — why he thought it was a good idea to stand in the spotlight at the ESPYs on Wednesday night and participate in a painfully lame and hideously unfunny apology skit with Joel McHale and Ken Jeong from “The Hangover” movies.

A-Rod screwed up because he participated in an unfunny skit at an awards show. This is where we are at now in trying to find things that A-Rod has done wrong. He was a part of a skit that wasn't funny, which apparently is the only reason needed for Mike Lupica to bring up the fact A-Rod used PED's again and criticize A-Rod for lacking funny. A-Rod didn't write the skit and he's not a comedian. He simply took part in the unfunny skit. 

Because even Rodriguez has to know that what he was accused of doing with Bosch and convicted of doing by arbitrator Fredric Horowitz isn’t funny, with or without penis gags. And isn’t ever going to be funny.

PED's are a life and death situation to Mike Lupica. This shit is very serious. If a player uses PED's to gain an advantage, then he should not make jokes about it. Sure, he could casually mention he used amphetamines in an interview 30 years after he retired as if he was taking Flintstones vitamins and not amphetamines, but that's not big deal because those baseball players from the 60's and 70's are heroes and everyone was doing. So that makes it fine. Don't joke about PED's. It's a super-serious subject. 

Just so you know: The set-up at the ESPYs was that Jeong would act as Rodriguez’s surrogate as he finally “apologized” to the whole wide world.

So Rodriguez stood there like a prop and kept handing pieces of paper to Jeong, while McHale stood on the other side of Jeong looking as flop-sweat desperate to get laughs as he had been since his opening monologue.

It wasn't funny. There's no doubt about that. Again, A-Rod didn't write the skit and this participation in the skit is just a way for Lupica to remind everyone that A-Rod is a cheater and find something to be angry with him over. 

Nobody expects big yuks from award shows, at least when Tina Fey and Amy Poehler aren’t hosting them these days.

Mike Lupica: "A-Rod took place in an awards show skit that wasn't funny. How dare he do this while making the crowd uncomfortable with the lack of hilarity."

Mike Lupica: "Award show skits aren't ever funny, so nobody expected the ESPY's to be funny anyway."

But somebody thought this material was funny, and Alex Rodriguez clearly signed off on it, so on they went. And on.

Yes, I'm sure A-Rod spent a few days vetting the script and then re-writing portions of it to better capture his personality. After that, his agent signed off on it, but only after a few of A-Rod's demands were met. 

There was some weird, nervous laughter from the crowd occasionally. There was even a shot of Derek Jeter laughing, though it was hard to tell whether he was doing that to be polite, or just reveling in Rodriguez making himself a part of the show like this on a night when Jeter received a Sports Icon Award.

The Jeter has to make an appearance as the anti-thesis of what A-Rod has become. The Jeter is the Batman to A-Rod's Joker, the Superman to A-Rod's Lex Luthor. The Jeter was not impressed with A-Rod's skit, merely only laughing at how Rodriguez was making an ass of himself. One would think the on-the-field performance comparison between The Jeter and A-Rod at the age of 40 might be made, but there's no need for that. Rest assured, if The Jeter had a line of .304/.363/.438 last year this would be something Lupica brings up. He didn't, so there's no need to compare the two hitters at the age of 40.

By the way: Here is a part of what Jeter said upon receiving that award:

This is especially relevant point in a column about A-Rod participating in an unfunny skit. 

“I’ve had a special relationship with the fans and my teammates over the last 20 years, but in retirement I’ve come to realize that being a part of the larger community of sports is a gift — and more importantly it’s an honor. You’ve inspired me for years, and you continue to inspire me.”

(Bengoodfella wakes up because this was a boring and very cliched, yet kind, statement from The Jeter)

So Jeter took one route to the stage on this night and the guy who used to play to his right at Yankee Stadium took another.

It always comes back to a comparison between The Jeter and A-Rod...that is unless the comparison isn't flattering to The Jeter, in which case no comparison should be made. It's lazy writing, but nothing more should be expected from Lupica. 

Maybe you could have given Rodriguez some props for being able to laugh at himself on this occasion, except there were no laughs here, about “Game of Thrones” or droughts or Greece or the Knicks or any of it.

Yeah well, as you just wrote, nobody expects big yucks from awards shows. So I'm not sure why you would expect this skit to be funny based on your own opinion of award show skits.

At the very end of it, after Jeong stopped reading, McHale asked Rodriguez if there was anything he wanted to say and Rodriguez said, “I’m good.” Before that, of course, we got this supposedly edgy material from Alex Rodriguez’s faux apology at the ESPYs:

It's not funny. Who cares? Why is this unfunny skit worthy of a column being written about it? 

Yeah. These are the jokes. By the time it all ended, you felt as if you’d had to sit through one of those old four-hour Yankees-Red Sox games out of the past.

Brilliant writing by Lupica here. This is as opposed to one of those old four-hour Yankees-Red Sox games from the future or the present? Yeah, if those games are old then they must be out of the past. Mike Lupica is one of those old writers from the past who thinks his written word is the gospel and shall not be questioned. These are the things that happen when you've had an entire career of smoke being blown up your butt and choose to ignore any criticism others may have of you.

Maybe Rodriguez thinks he can be the kind of performer that we’ve found out Peyton Manning can be.

Yes, I'm sure at the age of 40 A-Rod has decided he's going to try and become the type of performer that Peyton Manning can be. More likely, A-Rod just took part in the skit without a long-term plan or a single thought of spring boarding a career off the skit.

Maybe he’s already thinking about a post-playing career in broadcasting, when his Yankee contract finally runs out sometime in the next century. But if he is considering a future career in show business, he might want to take a closer look at the material next time.

We all know Derek Jeter wouldn't take part in an unfunny skit for the ESPY's. He would never do that.

He has hit better than perhaps even he himself thought he ever would again. He’s said and done all the right things. Then came the ESPY Awards.

Yes, one unfunny skit at an awards show has ruined all of Alex Rodriguez's accomplishments over the 2015 season. This is a true and logical statement.

His arbitration hearing was funnier. This is the first dumb thing he’s done since Bosch.

Imagine how Mike Lupica would respond if A-Rod actually did anything worse than show bad taste in jokes made on an awards show. The fact that Mike Lupica actually took A-Rod's participation in this skit, managed to bring Derek Jeter into the discussion, and tried to make all of this into something more than bad comedy shows a dedication to the A-Rod hating craft that he may someday try to perfect...while sitting on the edge of his seat, trying to be as tall as possible and talking over others, of course. 

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?