14 comments Bill Simmons Gives Up, Is Just Going to Publish Mailbags From Now On

Well, it had to happen. After a steady stream of NFL mailbags and a few weeks off during the Winter where Bill didn't write anything, Bill is now going to publish weekly mailbags about the NBA. So on one hand, it's depressing he can't churn out any columns more creative than a mailbag, but on the other hand, Bill is writing a weekly NBA mailbag. Now all I have to do is figure out for a way to get ESPN to hire Joe Morgan back and allow him to do weekly chats and all will be well in the world again. So this is the first (or Volume 1) of the NBA Mailbags, or as I will better know them, "Fuck It, I Give Up on Writing Original Material So Here's a Mailbag: Volume 1." This feels exciting (a guaranteed weekly Bill Simmons mailbag!) and a little sad (Bill is writing mailbags and his writing of columns is sure to drop off a cliff, sort of like a band going on tour but featuring only their hit songs without a new album) at the same time.

Q: Diehard T-Wolves fan here.

Again, if you have to say it, then there is a good chance you are insecure about it. Why be insecure about it if there isn't a reason to be? Of course, who would claim to be a diehard T-Wolves fan that is not a diehard T-Wolves fan?

Since everyone claims Love is leaving after next year, I am trying to come up with a trade that makes sense. Love for Thibs, Noah, Butler and a pick, who says no?
—Paul, San Francisco

I say "no" because you are being pathetic and using Bill's "Who says 'no'?" phrase in an effort to get into Bill's mailbag. Naturally it worked.

SG: Anyway, here’s the best case for keeping Love: We just watched what happened in Portland, when Unhappy LaMarcus Aldridge turned into Happy LaMarcus Aldridge as soon as the Blazers started winning.

(How appropriate is it that Bill's initials are "B.S."?)

So all the Timberwolves have to do is start winning game and Kevin Love will be happy! Why didn't they think about this before? It's so easy to do.

I think they have to trade him. Only four trades make sense.

ONLY four trades make sense and they just happen to all be trades that Bill Simmons has thought of. Imagine that. These are the only trades that make sense. Every other trade idea is shit.

Any Love trade should happen before June’s draft — one year before Love can opt out of his contract — and it can’t happen without his wink-wink consent.

I don't think there is any winking about it. Love isn't going to want to go to a team that isn't going to re-sign him and it doesn't seem like there is a team that would trade for him without some sort of promise he would seriously consider re-signing with that team. Also, this may come as a shock to you so just hold on tight, but Boston is one of the teams Bill suggests makes sense as a destination for Love. I know. I hope you didn't fall out of your chair out of shock at this turn of events.

Location No. 1: Phoenix
I gotta admit, the thought of Love playing run-and-gun in Jeff Hornacek’s entertaining offense with Dragic and Bledsoe is downright titillating. But this would be the ultimate quarters-and-dimes-for-a-two-dollar-bill trade:

THIS TRADE MAKES NO SENSE BUT IT MAKES TOTAL SENSE WHICH IS WHY BILL INCLUDED IT!

(By the way, these four trades that make sense are all a cover for the fourth trade that Bill thinks makes the most sense, which just happens to be the trade where the Celtics trade for Love. He would be called a homer if he just included that trade as his only suggestion, so Bill mixes in three other trades that he admits don't make sense to throw his readers off, but I'm on to him)

something like Alex Len (last year’s no. 5 pick), three 2014 first-rounders (from Indy, Washington and Phoenix, all top-12 protected at least) and a protected Minnesota first-rounder that Phoenix already owns (thanks, David Kahn!) for Love and J.J. Barea’s Expiring-in-2015 Contract. That’s about 60 cents on the dollar since there’s no lottery pick in the deal other than Len … and he might be the Ukrainian Meyers Leonard for all we know.

Oh no, Alex Len is probably going to find a way to be worse than Meyers Leonard. He's terrible and that's saying a lot considering Meyers Leonard is terrible too. For the record, I didn't like either of these draft picks. I have this thing against drafting tall guys on potential when those tall guys haven't shown much of this potential yet. I was very wrong about Andre Drummond, but in my defense, my issues with Drummond were more motivation-related than anything. He didn't seem to care at UConn.

I am lukecold. Odds of this happening: 12-to-1.

In summary, Bill is lukecold on his own trade idea that he claims makes sense. Bill's sense of logic is a roller coaster ride.

Location No. 2: Los Angeles
Love went to UCLA, dates an actress, lives here during the summers, the whole thing.

If you recall, Bill used similar reasoning as to why Dwight Howard should and would re-sign with the Lakers. Once he gets a taste of the Los Angeles life he wouldn't go back...then Howard signed with Houston once he became a free agent.

Only one scenario works: a three-teamer in which Memphis gets Pau Gasol (sign-and-trade to reunite the Gasol hermanos), Minnesota gets Zach Randolph (expires in 2015) and L.A.’s unprotected lottery picks in 2014 and 2017, and the Lakers get Love. That’s 80 cents on the dollar, especially if that Lakers pick falls in the 3-to-5 range.

I know Bill hates the Lakers, but that 2017 pick isn't going to be in the lottery if they trade for Kevin Love. The Lakers are good at acquiring superstars, so the Timberwolves would receive Zach Randolph (who, by the way, is the type of player who could shut down if he is in an unfavorable situation), a lottery pick, and a pick that I would presume would be in the 20's. That's not 80 cents on the dollar in my opinion. But what do I know, Bill is proposing another trade that "make sense" which he doesn't think will happen.

Problem No. 1: It’s too hard to pull off three-teamers.

Yet Bill thought the Clippers should have pulled off a three-teamer to acquire Spencer Hawes at the trade deadline this year. It's too hard to pull of a three-teamer in Bill's opinion, but that was his suggestion for the Clippers to acquire Spencer Hawes just a few weeks ago.

Problem No. 3: Because of the Stepien Rule, the Lakers can’t trade that 2014 pick right away because they already traded away their 2015 pick (to Phoenix). They’d have to make the 2014 pick, sign that player, THEN trade him. (Highly unrealistic.) And Problem No. 4: If you’re Love, why trade one mess for another? Why not wait a year? Don’t worry, Lakers fans, the NBA is rigging the 2014 lottery for you. You’ll be fine. Odds of this happening: 15-to-1.

But remember, this trade is one of the few that makes sense, even though it's clear from Bill's perspective it doesn't make sense.

Location No. 3: Chicago
Hmmmm … what about Taj Gibson, Charlotte’s 2014 first-rounder, their own 2014 first-rounder and the rights to Nikola Mirotic for Love? Even without a lottery pick, that’s 75 cents on the dollar for Minnesota.

Not 80 cents or 77 cents, but this is 75 cents on the dollar for Minnesota.

The problem: There’s no sexy piece in that trade for Minnesota. How do you sell that baby to your fans? “We replaced our franchise player with two non-lottery picks we’ll definitely screw up, an unknown foreigner and Taj Gibson! GET YOUR SEASON TICKETS NOW!”

But remember this is one of the trades for Kevin Love that makes sense to Bill, even though Bill doesn't think it makes sense. So it turns out the only trade that Bill really thinks makes sense is a trade where Love goes to...you guessed it...

Location No. 4: Boston

Yep, Bill really thinks the only trade for Love that makes sense is a trade of Love to Boston. But what about Kelly Olynyk and Colton Iverson? They are the future!

Like Love in Minnesota, Rondo can leave Boston in July 2015. And like Love, you can’t trade him unless it’s a team that (a) has assets to give back, and (b) could entice him into staying. Harder than you think. 

And Bill of course knows how hard I think this is to pull off. He can read minds.

So, what do you do? Well, aren’t you better off keeping Rondo — one of the league’s 15 to 20 best players when healthy — and finding him an All-Star teammate? Enter Kevin Love. They did it in 2007 with Paul Pierce and they could easily do it again: by paying a premium price for a second All-Star, suddenly it becomes MUCH easier to get that third All-Star.

We've gone from Bill evaluating the best trades for Rondo to Bill rosterbating like a fan boy to get the Celtics back on top without that pesky "rebuilding" that Danny Ainge is always talking about. Bill is at heart a fan boy.

OK, so what happens if Boston throws its shamrock-shaped Asset Penis on the table and trumps everybody? Let’s say the Celtics lose the 2014 lottery and end up with a pick between no. 3 and no. 5. They could send that pick to Minny along with Atlanta’s first-rounder (probably ending up in the 13-to-18 range) and their 2015 Clippers pick for Love.

Or they could keep that pick and get Jabari Parker so they can be happy forever. Then the Celtics could lure another free agent to Boston with the money they still have and build a team of Rondo, Parker, Free Agent X, and another quality starter. I'm rosterbating too, but there are other options back to the playoffs if the Celtics land the #3 pick.

You team up Love and Rondo and suddenly it’s 10 times easier to land that third All-Star. (You reading, Carmelo?) And yes, that deal could potentially net the Timberwolves three top-15 picks in a monster draft. Odds of it happening: 3-to-1.

I can't imagine what could go wrong when a point guard who loves to dribble around and control the ball is combined with a small forward who plays defense when he feels up to it and seems at his best when isolated with the ball to make plays. But hey, at least Kelly Olynyk could protect the rim, right?

But if this were a poker table, the Celtics would have the biggest stack of chips right now. If any current NBA player appreciates stuff like “Celtic Pride,” 

Two things:

1. Nobody who isn't a Celtics fan or hasn't played for the Celtics gives a shit about "Celtic Pride."

2. Bill just got done saying that Love would love enjoy playing in Los Angeles for a variety of reasons, but then submits the best choice is for Love to move 3,000 miles away from Los Angeles to Boston. So...the whole "Los Angeles is a draw" thing really isn't a thing?

“That’s a great organization that looks out for its dudes”

You know, as long as you aren't Ray Allen or Rajon Rondo (who appears in trade rumors ten times per year).

My best guess: I think Love rides it out in Minnesota, then jumps to the Lakers in 2015. But I wouldn’t rule out the Celtics. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

I had thought about this too, but I won't say you didn't warn me with your completely original idea that only you have thought of. I just enjoy how the Celtics are less than one year into a rebuilding situation and Bill Simmons so much can't stand the losing already that he is rosterbating to figure out a way to make the Celtics an NBA Finals contender immediately. You know, if the Celtics have two losing seasons in a row then Bill may become an NBA widow. He just couldn't handle being the fan of a rebuilding team. It would kill him. Well, it would most likely cause him to write at least five columns whining about the Celtics rebuilding at the very least. That's one way to get Bill to write columns again, if he has something regarding his favorite teams to complain about.

Q: I know it doesn’t fit your “Worst 30 Contracts” criteria necessarily (other than the title of the article) but doesn’t Kevin Love’s contract deserve a mention? Not signing him to that 5th year so you could save that hammer for Rubio was a monumentally bad decision that is likely to cost us a chance to resign him. Especially because the contract gave him an early out. Its unbelievably bad. It will keep the stench of Kahn on us for years to come …
—Steve, Coeur d’Alene

SG: You know what’s amazing about that one? That was an atrocious decision at the time … and that’s when we thought Ricky Rubio was good! Now that Rubio has established himself as the worst shooter in modern NBA history, it has to go down as David Kahn’s single worst decision. Yeah, even worse than taking two straight point guards in 2009 without making sure either of them was named “Stephen Curry.” What an abominable talent evaluation. Did anyone other than Kahn, at any point in the past three years, believe that Ricky Rubio had a higher ceiling as an NBA player than Kevin Love?

Interesting comments from Bill. I do enjoy some revisionist history. Bill didn't ever compare Rubio to Love in terms of their ceiling, but he had a very high opinion of Rubio for a few years, which he hopes his readers have forgotten about. I have not forgotten. Here are some of Bill's prior comments about Ricky Rubio, including of course the time he said the Thunder should have taken Rubio over James Harden.

October 2008: 

(Important note: If the Knicks land Ricky Rubio two years from now, the previous paragraph becomes moot and the Bill Walsh/Mike D. scenario immediately goes back into play. Hey, did the fact that I nearly set up a Google alert for Rubio last week make me a fan or a stalker? Since I held off, I say I'm still a fan. Although that might change when I move to whichever city drafts him. OK, I'm a semi-stalker.

Bill Simmons: International Scouting Expert

May 2009:

Bill Simmons: I have never been more torn about anything non-Celts related. On the one hand, Rubio, Durant, Green and Westbrook... wow. Those are four of my favorite incoming picks of the past 5 years, I sung all of their praises before the draft as much as anyone. All on the same team? 

Bill Simmons: I think this draft stinks. I like Griffin and Rubio, and after that, I like the 8-12 range where you might get Curry, Lawson or Flynn. I know those 5 guys are NBA starters. I don't know about anyone else. If I were the T-Wolves, I'd just draft Curry sixth. I don't have many certainties about the 2009 Draft, but here's one: Curry is going to make threes in the NBA and create shots for other guys.

To be fair, Bill was always a big Steph Curry fan. Mostly because Curry played well in the NCAA Tournament and that's the sum total of college basketball Bill watches on a yearly basis. But wow, Bill certainly has a high opinion of Rubio didn't he?

February 2010 in his trade value column: 

40. Ricky Rubio
If you have the No. 5 and No. 6 picks in what turned out to be a quality draft,

Rubio had the 40th ranking in Bill's trade value column.

29. O.J. Mayo
28. Kevin Love

I included this part to show you Bill had O.J. Mayo as having the 29th best trade value in 2010, right below Kevin Love.

June 2009:

If I had to bet my life on any 2009 prospect becoming a top-three player on a championship team, I'd bet on Blake Griffin, Ricky Rubio and Stephen Curry.

4. It took 21 minutes before someone (Fran Fraschilla) gushed about Rubio's once-in-a-generation passing, two-steps-ahead-of-everyone timing and incredible career (playing professionally since age 14). Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, is going to regret not being more excited about Ricky Rubio on June 25, 2009.

4:52: The Zombie Sonics take … James Harden. And thank God, I didn't want to turn on Seattle. I really didn't. "He's battled asthma since he was a child," Scott tells us. How does Rubio drop to No. 4? How?!? I feel like I'm gonna pass out. I like Harden as a glue-character guy and he definitely has a good porn name. But considering the Zombies have to worry about Durant fleeing in a couple of years, wasn't it in their best interests to find him an unselfish guard who's immensely fun to play with and was put on the earth to get Durant easy baskets? Big mistake.

(Sorry. I can't. Rubio is going to haunt you like Stevie Nicks haunts Lindsey Buckingham every time she sings "Silver Springs." He's gonna bulge his eyes at you and look crazy and vindictive just like Stevie as he's wearing a visiting uniform and throwing no-looks in a half-empty Verizon Center. You wait.)

So yeah, Bill was pretty excited about Ricky Rubio based on his vast knowledge of Rubio's game as seen through YouTube videos from overseas. These are the same YouTube videos that Bill knocks Chad Ford for watching when he is evaluating international prospects by the way. So my point is that Bill knocks the Timberwolves for talent evaluation while also ignoring he was over the moon for Ricky Rubio, a guy Bill knows "we" thought was good. Not him, but "we." I liked Rubio too, but Bill couldn't get enough of him. Now he's acting like he didn't think Rubio was the next coming of Steve Nash.

Speaking of Jermaine, there were four NBA certainties heading toward the 2014 trade deadline: (1) The Cavs would forget to deal Anderson Varejao before he got hurt (happened);

Other teams know Varejao gets injured a lot also. I've brought this up before, but for some reason Bill acts like the entire NBA isn't acting with complete information on Varejao's injury history.

(2) the Knicks would somehow make their fans deeply, profoundly unhappy (happened);

Knicks fans are conditioned to be unhappy.

Q: I’m sure you heard that the Washington Professional Basketball Team put Miami Heat fans on a “Bandwagon Cam” at the game in DC tonight. I cannot tell you how happy this made me. My question is simple: Why doesn’t every other arena in the NBA do this???
—Clark Gerber, Provo, UT

Because alienating and mocking ticket holders doesn't seem like the best way to guarantee fans will come to your games. Miami fans don't care if you call them bandwagon because their team is winning, and frankly, Washington Wizards fans at a game in no way have to worry about being called "bandwagon fans" so it's safe for the Wizards to do it. Otherwise, anybody who is buying tickets to a game (even to cheer on the other team) probably wouldn't like being publicly mocked. Of course, given how much people like attention I can see someone wearing a road team's jersey just to appear on the "Bandwagon Cam."

SG: I’m demanding it. People running the video screens for the other 28 teams — let’s get this done. You see Heat fans or Thunder fans at your arena in good seats, you throw them on the Bandwagon Cam during a timeout.

(coughs) The Celtics too.

Q: In your Worst Contracts column, how could you forgot one crucial point about the Knicks and their Billups amnesty?

Yeah, how could you forgot this one crucial point?

Q: Watching your B.S. Report with KD the other day, it occurred to me that he’s basically become mid ’90s Eddie Vedder. He got too popular and now he’s pushing back against the notoriety by being distant and trying to give himself the horribly faux humble nickname “The Servant.”

Yep, this comparison immediately doesn't hold up at all. Eddie Vedder was never comfortable with how popular Pearl Jam got and that's part of the reason Pearl Jam stopped making music videos after "Ten." So Eddie Vedder was always pushing back against notoriety and this comparison fails. I'm sorry.

Therefore, while he goes through this “uncomfortable in his own skin” phase, the only appropriate nickname for him is “Vitalogy”. Ah if only he was still in Seattle.
—Matt, Westminster, Colorado

Actually, "No Code" is where Vedder's songwriting started to veer off away from the sound of the first three albums and into more experimental and (what I would call) a self conscious direction. So maybe "No Code" is a better nickname for Durant, but that wouldn't be as (not) funny would it?

SG: With that said, if we wanted to extend Matt’s analogy just for shits and giggles, then Durant’s Sonics year was definitely Mother Love Bone, the first OKC year was Mookie Blaylock, the second OKC year was the name change to Pearl Jam (when the band finally knew what it was), Year 4 was the Ten album (when everything took off), Year 5 was the NBA Finals/Time magazine cover, Year 6 was Vs. (great follow-up album, some tension/discord/injuries), and now we’re slowly morphing into Vitalogy (greatness crossed with weariness and a general longing just to do great work without all the other bullshit that comes with it).

This is a forced comparison. "Vitalogy" had tension and weariness but was not an effort to be distant and move away from the fan base. That was more of what "No Code" was about. Also, Durant was a known quantity in his first NBA season, while Mother Love Bone wasn't a known quantity until after Pearl Jam became famous and the same goes for Mookie Blaylock. Move the comparison back to Durant in college and maybe I will buy in, but Durant was a known quantity and Pearl Jam was not when Vedder was in Mother Love Bone. Actually, Durant's only year in college is "Ten" because that's when he started to take off by winning "National Player of the Year" and going #2 in the draft.

This question is so inconsequential, I'm not even sure why I'm arguing it.

Then Bill criticizes Oklahoma City Thunder fans for not being angry enough with their team for trading James Harden. Because there's something wrong with enjoying your team and not bitching about every bad move that team makes.

What about just Durant straight up for Channing Frye? They’d definitely get mad at that, right? I’d love to know where the line is. Because it’s clearly not “We broke up a possible dynasty and replaced the best 2-guard in basketball with a backup shooting guard, an energy guy off the bench, a non-lottery pick and one year of Kevin Martin.”

Bill can't stand the idea of a fan base not being miserable and hating their team. If more fan bases weren't miserable and hated their team then how could Bill be popular? His schtick is whining about terrible moves his team makes and allowing readers to write in and whine about their favorite teams too. If more fan bases just enjoy seeing their favorite team play and don't whine, that's bad for business.

Q: I was at a bar last night with my girl friends from high school. On Tuesdays they play trivia and if you win, they cover your tab (obviously one of my friends is sleeping with the bartender, so we drink for free, anyway). 

Why would it be obvious one of your friends is sleeping with the bartender? And is the bartender a girl or a guy? Since this email is from a girl, I'll assume the friend is a girl. I'm not still not sure why it's obvious this reader's friend is sleeping with the bartender, unless it's supposed to be obvious from this pathetic attempt to get Bill's attention that this reader's friends are equally pathetic and need to use sex as a way to get attention from guys.

One of the rounds is “doctors” – we are the ONLY TEAM to correctly answer a question about Dr. Julius Erving. Should I pretend to know less? I think that I’ve officially become undateable.
—Rachel Z, New York

The fact that you took the time to tell this completely boring and pointless story to Bill Simmons is what makes you undateable.

SG: Yup, these are my readers.

(By the way, I’m about 200 words over. I need to work on this whole word-count thing.)

The word count was a self-imposed limit and you could have removed any one of these emails and this NBA mailbag wouldn't have been any better or worse. 

10 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Talks More Manziel (Hey! Pageviews!) and the N-Word Edition

Peter King announced in last week's MMQB that the Top 10 picks of the NFL Draft are set, he just doesn't know what order they will go in. I'm sure sometime in early May when the draft doesn't go exactly how Peter thought it would go he is going to announce how FREAKING UNPREDICTABLE THE NFL DRAFT IS! EVERYONE'S MIND IS BLOWN! SOMEONE NEEDS TO SUE THE NFL FOR THE CONCUSSION THEY CAUSED FROM THE BLATANT UNPREDICTABILITY OF THE DRAFT PROCESS!

Last week Peter also thought it was a good idea for the officials to start throwing penalty flags for racial slurs being thrown on the field. This seems like a terrible idea to me personally, because I can't imagine how the officials will be able to hear exactly what the players say and feel good about flagging a player for using the n-word. But hey, this will stop the use of racial slurs by athletes forever, right? This week Peter talks more about the potential banning of the n-word (I think he just likes typing "the n-word"), doesn't discuss the fact he criticized Jadeveon Clowney on Twitter this past week then admitted he hasn't watched one game that Clowney has played in and takes on the those people who dare to use too many towels at the gym. Only the brave men like Peter can take on the tough issues in life. Actually, I think Peter desperately wants to make his life like an episode of "Seinfeld" so that's why he loves to comment on what others around him are doing, while giving out nicknames like "Seven Towel Man." If Peter couldn't be Brett Favre in another life, then he would want a life exactly like Jerry Seinfeld's fictional life on television, only with Brett Favre taking the place of Kramer of course.

We seem to have a disagreement about Johnny Manziel, and the salary cap has exploded in a good way, and Brandin Cooks is trying to elbow his way up in the first round, and free agency is only eight days away, and the Eagles have done a bunch of good business.

Wow, that's a run-on sentence even I would like to avoid. That's four "and's" in the sentence when it very easily could have been one "and" and a compound sentence that lists something.

But first, about that n-word …

Boy, Peter does seem to enjoy discussing the n-word doesn't he? I think it's his liberal guilt that makes him want the NFL to ban the n-word and penalize those who use it. I wish the officials would penalize those who use the word "National Football League," rather than just say "NFL" when doing analysis on television. Or maybe just penalize Jon Gruden for loving everyone and everything. I digress...

The NFL Competition Committee has been meeting in Florida since Friday, and one of the items the eight men are debating is whether it should be a penalty if a player on the field uses the n-word. I am hearing it is unlikely a rule will be passed this year penalizing a player for using the n-word for the first time in a game.

Great, because it's a cumbersome idea that is difficult to enforce.

Three outcomes are possible:

1. The Competition Committee will urge that it be a point of emphasis for officials this year. When officials hear it, they would admonish players about it and do nothing else.

Man, I bet the players would fear a stern talking-to from the officials about using harsh language. If there is a way the NFL could require NFL players who use the n-word to wear dunce caps and sit in the corner for five minutes, they should try that too.

2. The committee will urge that offending players be warned if the word is used on the field during games. After a warning, a player with a second use could be penalized for using it, at the discretion of the officiating crew. I say “could be,” because the league could give officiating crews the option of throwing a flag, depending on the circumstances.

I think on the scale of bad ideas involved with the idea of legislating the n-word, this is one of the better ideas, but I still don't like legislating words said on the football field.

3. Nothing will change. Players will be allowed to use the word at will.

Fans don't hear it at the game or on television for the most part, so no one is harmed and the players aren't treated like children who need their mouth washed out with soap for saying a dirty word.

But understand that the eight-man Competition Committee is not a legislative body. It recommends new rules, and owners vote on them. So we won’t know anything about the outcome of the debate till the owners’ meetings in Orlando beginning March 23.

Over the weekend, I communicated with three African-American players about it.

Two things I want to bring up:

1. I like that a rule about whether NFL players can use a racial slur on the football field is going to be voted on by a bunch of old white men. That's perfect.

2. Why did Peter only talk to African-American players? Wouldn't non-African American players have an opinion on this word even if the word wasn't traditionally used to denigrate them? I think it's important to get the opinion of players who aren't African-American too.

Two of them were opposed to the word being banned. A third thought it was a good idea but would be hard to police.

There are a lot of great ideas out there. Yet if you can't enforce the idea then it's not such a great idea that is grounded in reality. 

“It’s an atrocious idea,” said Seattle cornerback Richard Sherman. “It’s almost racist, to me. It’s weird they’re targeting one specific word. Why wouldn’t all curse words be banned then?”

I recognize I don't have the Stanford education that Richard Sherman has, but I fail to see how banning an inherently racist word from being used and banning no other words that aren't inherently racist is racist in itself. I think Richard Sherman may just want to call something racist, because it's not racist to attempt to eliminate racist words from being used. Except in opposite world, which could be where Sherman is vacationing during the offseason.

Sherman emphasized that the n-word ending in “-er” is racist, but the n-word ending in “-a” is not, when used among African-American players.

Oh okay. I wonda about the reason fa that but now I know.

Free agent linebacker D’Qwell Jackson said, “Ultimately if the NFL can get it done, it’s great for our game. But I think refs have a hard enough time officiating the game now. Now they’d be asked to police language?”

Exactly. Why make the officials job harder than it has to be? Not banning the word from being used isn't condoning the use of the word. It's going to be difficult to get rid of the n-word on the football field.

One reliable league source told me the biggest problem he saw is very often during scrums, name-calling and foul language are exchanged by a group of players. What happens if an official thinks he heard the n-word from one player and it actually was another? The referee could call the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty/language foul, and if the offending player is white, it’s going to scar him for his career. What if the call is made on the wrong player?

Then he would have a very good season, people may forget about it and the Eagles would sign him to a large-ish contract when he's a free agent.

The Fritz Pollard Alliance has been loudly advocating the ban of the n-word this off-season. This is where the generation gap between the hierarchy of Pollard—chairman John Wooten, 77, and executive director Harry Carson, 60—and many current players comes into the picture.

Shocking to think there is a difference in opinion about what the n-word means between two generations, one who was called that word derisively and the other who was called that word by his friends as a somewhat affectionate-ish term. Who would have thought it true?

“I find it very disheartening that in our society today we’re having a debate about the n-words being used as a term of endearment,” Carson said Sunday. “If that’s a term of endearment, go up to your grandfather, or an elderly black person, and use it on them. See how they react. For those who use it, I say they have no sense of history.”

This is absolutely true. Regardless, the word is used a lot on football fields and it's nearly impossible to police it. Trying to do so is going to be like herding cats, and take it from someone who lives in his mom's attic with 15 cats, it's really hard to herd cats. 

“For someone who uses the n-word,” said Carson, “it dishonors Bill Willis, and it dishonors the sacrifices he and others have made for others in the future. I find it disheartening players can justify using the word in any form today, in 2014.”

But Peter never really gets into whether Harry Carson thinks it is a good idea to legislate the use of the n-word or not and how he would go about legislating this word.

No matter what the Rich McKay- and Jeff Fisher-led committee recommends, it will face ire from one of two sides: football traditionalists/respected veterans who see it as an issue of dignity, or many modern players who see it as an infringement of free speech.

I hope these middle-aged white men can make a good decision about whether an inherently racist word directed towards non-middle-aged men can be penalized or not. I wish Peter had just come out and asked this question.

Last week, former quarterbacks and current tape students Ron Jaworski and Phil Simms both came out as skeptics of Johnny Manziel. I liked it.

I've never Tweeted at (Tweeted towards?) Peter King in my life that I can recall, but I did when he stated he didn't understand the backlash at Jaws for saying he didn't like Manziel in the five games he watched. Peter misses the fundamental point about the backlash. The problem isn't what Jaws said, he's made these type of statements before that just provide fuel for the ESPN echo chamber. That's how it seemed to me, which is what I told Peter over Twitter. Of course, he responded which followed a lot of other people directing comments at me and missing the point too. I don't care about Jaws' opinion, but it's not his opinion that's the issue, it's that Ron Jaworski has made really bold statements (like Colin Kaepernick could end up being the best QB in the history of the NFL) before and it only provides fuel for ESPN to create their own news cycle. So the criticism of Jaws is that he believed this opinion, but was also creating a news cycle for ESPN based on his "controversial" comments that could be discussed on different shows on ESPN...which of course happened. So it's not about whether I like Jaws opinion or not, but his motivation behind the statement. Was it to get his opinion out there and create stories his employer could cover on their different programs?

If you’re an analyst and don’t voice your real opinion, what good are you?

Sort of like how Peter King stated on Twitter he didn't think Clowney gave a good effort in games and used Lawrence Taylor as an example of a player who was constantly double-teamed, so that's not an excuse he would accept. Then Peter admitted he had not watched one minute of tape on Clowney. Typical Peter.

Manziel was such a wild stallion as a quarterback at Texas A&M,

You know Peter got mildly aroused typing that sentence. Manziel is so Favreian.

What's interesting is that Peter is dead set on discussing Johnny Manziel as much as possible, but there is a chance Blake Bortles and Teddy Bridgewater could be drafted before Manziel, yet nary a word on either player. It's almost like Peter knows Manziel's name drives pageviews. 

But it is folly to say he hasn’t played well at times in the pocket; some of his best plays—though maybe not always with good footwork—came with traffic around him, and Manziel finding the receiver he needed to find. But Whitfield knows you don’t want to neuter all of his instincts and you don’t want him exposed to the number of hits he faced in college either.

Much like how I felt about Robert Griffin, I think staying healthy is going to be Manziel's biggest issue in the NFL. He's not going to be able to scramble around quite as much or be exposed to big hits at the NFL level and expect to stay healthy. He's not a big guy and I'm afraid he's going to have trouble staying healthy more than I'm afraid he can't throw from the pocket.

I find it interesting that Nick Saban didn’t emphasize keeping Manziel inside the tackle box (or if he did, it just didn’t work) the way LSU coach Les Miles did. Check out how Manziel did in his two meetings against LSU and Alabama. Saban, I would argue, is the biggest test for a quarterback in college football, given his track record on the pro and college levels.

I would argue that Peter King doesn't watch enough college football to make an argument on who the biggest test for Manziel is. I would also argue that the LSU defense is slightly closer to an NFL defense as compared to Alabama's defense. Again, it's my opinion, but I consider LSU to have a speedy NFL-type defense that likes to show different fronts and different blitzes to a quarterback. LSU also seems to rotate defensive linemen more than Alabama does, which means Manziel is facing slightly fresher pass rushers against LSU than Alabama. Again, I could be wrong, but I don't know if Peter has the experience in watching college football to be right.

“I understand he’s not for all 32 teams,” said Phil Savage, the color man on Alabama radio broadcasts, executive director of the Senior Bowl and former NFL GM with the Browns.

He's the former GM of the Browns who drafted such notables as Brady Quinn, Kamerion Wimbley, Braylon Edwards, and Brodney Pool, so you know he's good. 60% of the time he gets the pick right every time.

“But he’s so instinctive, such a playmaker and such a smart football player that I think there have to be a few teams that think, We can shape our offense around him and use his skills for what he does best. We can win with him.”

"Then we can watch his body slowly crumble because he's the type of quarterback who is prone to taking big hits while scrambling."

My guess, two-plus months out from the draft: Jacksonville, at number three, or Oakland, at five, make the most sense. If I’m Jags offensive coordinator Jedd Fisch, who is one of the most imaginative young coaches in the game, I’d love to get my hands on Manziel.

We know, Peter. We know you just want to get your hands on Manziel. But how would he respond? Does he like the comparison to Favre or would that cause Manziel to shy away at your touch? He's a wild stallion. There's no way he can be tamed. It's attractive and scary at the same time, but Peter can be imaginative too and there's a bear-skin rug at Peter's secret apartment in the woods of Mississippi that hasn't been used in years.

The salary cap has doubled in this century, and it has virtually quadrupled in its 20-year history.

If people treated Roger Goodell and Paul Tagliabue the way David Stern is treated then this is all that would be focused upon and all of Goodell's missteps would immediately be forgotten.

Collectively, teams have more than $700 million to spend when free agency begins a week from Tuesday. If I were a GM, I’d try to spend internally, the way the Eagles did last Thursday and Friday, signing four key offensive players to new deals, and eliminating the need to go outside the building for important positions like left tackle (Jason Peters, one of the best in the league, got re-signed) when there’s usually a reason why players are on the market in the first place.

Of course my favorite team did spend internally after the lockout ended and that's part of the reason the team is in the salary cap hell that it currently is in. So it's good to spend on current players, but make sure you are spending on the right currently players and maybe not giving $80 million to two running backs.

As I wrote about last week, NFL teams are going to have to spend the money on somebody, inside or outside the organization.

Sounds like somebody is getting overpaid.

Point is, teams now will be forced to spend to the minimums required by the 2011 collective bargaining agreement. That’s a good thing. And with the cap projected to increase by at least $10 million more in 2015, this should be a good time for players who thought they were being held back by a relatively flat cap to make up for lost time.

Who could strike it rich? Three projections:

These are "projections." Not to be confused with "guesses" because if these were "guesses" then that would mean Peter doesn't know for sure who will strike it rich. These are "projections" based on tons of data from past years that Peter didn't crunch in order to determine which players will strike it rich, and are based solely on Peter's opinion...which of course isn't a "guess."

1. Cleveland center Alex Mack (either with the Browns or elsewhere), a sturdy 28-year-old line leader and solid run blocker, should average $8 million a year, minimum.

Who really knows what's going on in Alex Mack's head though and how much he wants on the free agent market. He's so secretive. It seems there is a secret world of Alex Mack or something.

2. Miami defensive tackle Paul Soliai, 30 years old but relatively lightly used in his career, is the best run-stuffer on the market and should command at least $6 million a year.

Notice that Mack will "average" $8 million per year, while Soliai will "command" $6 million per year. Peter's projections also show how strongly each free agent will ask for a certain contractual amount per year. Ted Ginn is going to be "politely asking" for a multi-year deal, while "sternly suggesting" he gets $5 million guaranteed.

3. Tennessee cornerback Alterraun Verner, who just turned 25 and had his best season with the Titans. Cover corners and rushers will be the most lucrative positions on the market, and Tennessee, going against Andrew Luck and new quarterbacks due in Jacksonville and Houston, needs to do everything it can to keep Verner.

Because Peter's projections tell us that the Titans need to load up on corners to fact the yet-to-be-determined quarterback the Jaguars and Texans are going to be drafting. Apparently Peter has a projection that tells him for sure the Titans and Jaguars are going to be drafting quarterbacks that are going to succeed in the NFL and require teams in the AFC South to load up on cornerbacks. Oh that's right, I forgot the Top 10 of the NFL Draft is already set. 

I watched the Oregon State offensive snaps of three of his 2013 games—against Cal, Stanford and USC.

That's three more games than Peter watched Clowney play, but he KNOWS Clowney takes plays off.

It was the TV copy, and the wide receivers were out of the picture quite often, so I couldn’t get a good picture of him blocking downfield (though he did block aggressively in a scrum against Stanford for a fellow receiver).

Apparently Peter can't afford anything but bootlegged Oregon State tapes from overseas. I would imagine the tape Peter watched had subtitles and "Do Not Copy" written across the screen, along with Russian commercials.

And I can’t say I am confident about his route-running either, for a similar reason. 

Well great, I'm glad you watched the tapes then and can feel confident enough to waste our time talking about what you don't know regarding Brandin Cooks.

But I got a good feel for his physicality competing for balls and his hands and his speed around the edge. All very good. 

This is analysis people! Peter is about to use projections, so stand back!

I didn’t see the blow-the-top-off-the-defense speed I thought I’d see after his 4.33 40-time at the combine, but he clearly is plenty fast. Oregon State uses him on the Jet sweeps the way Seattle used Percy Harvin when healthy in 2013; he didn’t break many, but you don’t sneer at 6.8 yards per play on the sweeps.

Harvin was healthy for the Super Bowl and like one quarter of a regular season and playoff game. This is the best comparison Peter could come up with?

Cooks reminded me of the West Virginia all-purpose weapon, Tavon Austin, 

The brilliant future Hall of Fame receiver that the Rams stupendously selected in the first round of this past year's NFL Draft, while sneering at the idiot teams who weren't as smart as the Rams to recognize the talent Austin has. Speaking of those Rams, Peter's projections have their fortunes pointed upwards very soon.

The most impressive play I saw Cooks make came against Stanford. From the Cardinal 8-yard line, quarterback Sean Mannion looked for Cooks running a short post on the right side. Cooks caught it around the 4 and hurtled toward the end zone, with three Stanford defenders in the way. Cooks dove under safety Ed Reynolds, his main foe near the goal line, while defensive tackle David Parry and linebacker A.J. Tarpley tried to squeeze him from getting in for the score. Cooks barely made it. The physicality of the play was impressive; Cooks knew he’d get clobbered, but he went for it nonetheless—and he won.

And he’s a plucker of the ball; his hands dart out, grab the ball softly and bring it in.

And we all know that Peter loves it when an athlete plucks balls softly. If an athlete's hands can pluck balls quickly and softly, Peter's projections show that he's going to like that athlete.

This is a terrific receiver class—Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans and Marqise Lee are the more highly regarded and bigger receivers, and fast-riser Odell Beckham is another high-pick contender. The quantity and quality will likely push Cooks down to the second half of the first round; there’s a slight chance he’d fall to the second round, but with wideout-needy teams late in the first round (New England, Baltimore, Cleveland, Carolina, San Francisco), it’s highly unlikely he’ll make it out. Seeing as they have a huge need for a playmaker, the Jets, at 18, would be a great landing spot for Cooks.

It seems that Peter has all his bases covered here. He states Cooks will likely go in the second round, though he may go to one of the wideout-needy teams late in the first round, but Peter thinks Cooks would make perfect sense for the Jets at 18. So basically, anything could happen.

“Russell Wilson is more explosive. He’s naturally bigger and stronger than Johnny Manziel. They’re not even close in arm strength.”
—Phil Simms, to Adam Schein of SiriusXM’s Mad Dog Radio.

Not even close? Simms is a scientist of the position, and he has watched 1,000 hours of tape for every one I have watched. But did he see the Manziel strike, while off-balance, that traveled 44 yards in the air to Mike Evans against Alabama? Or the one that went 53 yards in the air downfield, also a strike, against Arkansas?
I suppose Wilson would win a throwing contest against Manziel. But it would be close.

Remember earlier in this column when Peter wrote:

Last week, former quarterbacks and current tape students Ron Jaworski and Phil Simms both came out as skeptics of Johnny Manziel. I liked it.

If you’re an analyst and don’t voice your real opinion, what good are you?

Apparently Peter doesn't like it when an analyst voices his real opinion if Peter doesn't agree with that opinion. Basically, Peter likes Ron Jaworski and doesn't want his friends to be criticized, even though Peter doesn't really understand why there was criticism of Jaworski.

Comparing the Eagles’ Dream Team (Vince Young’s words, not mine) acquisitions of 2011 to the signings of their own last week:

But...but...those are your words because you just typed "Dream Team" in this column and could have referred to the 2011 Eagles by any other term you chose to without your audience losing the meaning of what you wanted to discuss (which was a comparison of the money spent on the 2011 and 2014 free agent class by the Eagles).

So, the Eagles, with an estimated $21 million in cap room, should be able to address their needs and get their own players re-signed in the early days of free agency. If I were GM Howie Roseman, I’d be watching tape of Titans corner Alterraun Verner.

(Peter checks his non-existent projections sheet) YES! Peter does project that Howie Roseman will be watching tape of Alterraun Verner, who will be demanding $9 million per season, while asking for a five year deal, but reluctantly submitting to a four year deal.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week
 
Not a travel note, really, but a slice-of-non-green-life note from New York City:

Or as I should start calling it, the "I Want My Life to be Like 'Seinfeld' Travel Note of the Week."

I observed The Seven-Towel Man on Saturday at my gym in Manhattan, while on parallel schedules with the man.

See? He gives cutesy nicknames to people like characters on "Seinfeld" used to do.

Three towels for the steam room—one to wrap around his waist, one as a cape around his shoulder, one to hold in his hands to wipe his brow. After a short steam, he deposited the three towels in the hamper.

Here's the thing...this guy probably knows what Peter King looks like. So now this guy knows that Peter King is somewhat mocking him in his public column about the NFL. If Peter gets punched in the face or accosted by this guy for writing this note, then I'm completely on the side of Seven-Towel Man. If you don't want to get punched in the face, don't stare at a person in public and then comment to hundreds of thousands of readers what his steam room routine is.

He took two for the shower—one to dry himself and one as a mat for the floor when he left the shower. He dropped those in the hamper. The Seven-Towel-Man then took two for post-showering, and I did not see what he did with those.

Let's not overlook the fact Peter King is staring at a man who is in the steam room, staring at a man as he enters the shower and then staring at this same man as he exits the shower. Perhaps, and this is just a suggestion, Peter should mind his own fucking business and stop staring at people when they are in various states of undress? What's more weird, using seven towels or staring at someone as they steam off, shower and then get out of the shower?

One man, 25 minutes, seven towels. Life is plush.

Says the man who belongs to a health club that has a steam room.

“Woman just dropped her scarf in hotel lobby. ‘Excuse me. You dropped this,’ says man, leaning down to give her scarf. The man? Allen Iverson”
 
—@MrMichaelLee, Michael Lee, Wizards beat man for the Washington Post, on Saturday in Philadelphia, where Allen Iverson had his number retired by the Sixers that evening.

Oh my God, this was Allen Iverson? Isn't he a huge thug who only cares about smacking bitches and getting tattoos? That's the narrative isn't it? And here I thought Iverson would rather shank this woman as opposed to politely giving her the scarf back.

Ten Things I Think I Think

2. I think there’s no way I’m giving up two first-round picks and $12 million a year for a tight end, particularly one I’m not sure is going to be great consistently against physical defenses. That’s not a knock on Jimmy Graham.

No, this is literally a direct knock against Jimmy Graham. He would cost two first round picks and $10 million plus per year to any team that wants to trade for him and then try to sign him. Peter is talking about Jimmy Graham here, so this is a knock against Jimmy Graham directly since Peter is specifically referring to Graham not being consistently great against physical defenses. Considering Eric Decker was held to one catch in the Super Bowl against a physical defense, I wonder what Peter thinks about his value as a free agent?

But two ones and 9% of your cap? Nope. Really good player. Not worth that.

But again, this is not a knock against Jimmy Graham. He's just not worth $12 million per year and two first round picks.

4. I think a De Smith-Sean Gilbert battle would be interesting, if only for this issue: Smith is adamantly opposed to an 18-game schedule, and Gilbert’s on record saying he’d be willing to give the owners 18 games in the regular season in exchange for a three-year path to free agency.

And I definitely think the players should elect a person who sat out a year because God told him to do so. That person clearly seems sane, plus he seems willing to trade the player's health for a faster path to money. I'm sure that sounds good to some players, but otherwise, it seems his idea is to trade health for money. Go figure, Sean Gilbert is chasing money even after his retirement.

5. I think I cannot see a majority of players agreeing with Gilbert. I just can’t.

What if God says the players should agree with Gilbert? What then, Peter?

7. I think we all want to know: Jerry Jones, what were you doing at the Oscars last night?

I mean, you really have to ask Peter? I would ask why Jerry Jones chose not to attend the Oscars. It seems like something he would do.

9. I think the biggest sign that Greg Schiano will someday work with Bill Belichick in New England, and the most interesting personnel result from the last week, is this: New England could start three Rutgers Scarlet Knights in the secondary this fall: free safety Devin McCourty (round one, 2010), strong safety Duron Harmon (round three, 2013) and cornerback Logan Ryan (round three, 2013).

Peter has a small obsession with Greg Schiano. He thought Schiano was a wonderful head coach for the Bucs and likes that Schiano is connected to Belichick. Otherwise, no one outside of Patriots fans give a shit if a fired NFL coach is going to be hired at another job. Where's the Jim Schwartz update at? What about the Leslie Frazier update on what's he doing now? That's right, those aren't coaches that Peter King personally likes.

10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:

a. Lupita Nyong’o. Awesome.

She's definitely no Phillip Seymour Hoffman or a gem like Meryl Streep, but she'll do for Peter. She's good enough, at least until she dies, at which point Peter will proclaim her the best actress of her generation out of the blue.

d. Great job, U2.

They suck, Peter. Please just admit this. They were good 20 years ago and have coasted on their name and similar-sounding singles since then.

g. Who can forget this line from the Ramis classic, from the long-lost and forgotten insurance man, Ned Ryerson: “Ned! Ryerson! Needle-Nose Ned! Ned the Head! Ned Ryerson! Come on buddy! Case Western High! I did the whistling belly-button trick at the high school talent show! Bing! Ned Ryerson. Got the shingles real bad senior year, almost didn’t graduate! Bing, again! Ned Ryerson, I dated your sister Mary Pat a couple times till you told me not to anymore. Well?” Just watch it.
h. The look Bill Murray gives Ned … one of the greatest in Murray history.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman would have rocked this look too. The depth he would have shown. He was like a wild stallion as an actor. The Manziel-before-Manziel of Hollywood actors.

i. Wow. What a putt by Paula Creamer.

Which specific punt was this again? I know it's easy to see what Peter is talking about when he talks in such generalities but it would be easier if he just told us exactly which putt he was referring to.

k. Beernerdness: Thanks to my friends at the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and especially Joe Horrigan, for taking us out to a place that served Great Lakes Brewing’s Burning River Pale Ale. Fresh and with a good bite, this ale reminded me of the San Diego pale ale, Ballast Point. Both have a touch of pine.

Gregg Easterbrook would wonder how Peter knows what pine tastes like. Or would Gregg not make fun of a fellow pretentious, lofty upper-class buddy?

The Adieu Haiku
Commercials. Which has
more—Oscars or Super Bowl?
Brick through the TV.

Then don't watch the Oscars. If you watch the Oscars then you deserve to be annoyed by the commercials.

8 comments Since Zach Lowe Works for Bill Simmons I Guess He Has to Indulge Him with a Trade Deadline Diary

I like Zach Lowe. He knows his NBA basketball pretty well and can be insightful when writing. As a person who has an eye for writing talent, Bill Simmons is pretty good himself. He has pulled together a pretty good team of writers at Grantland and Lowe is one of those writers. The problem is that Lowe essentially works for Bill Simmons, so he has to interact with Simmons to do something silly like a rambling trade diary. The NBA trade deadline has already become sort of boring due to the lack of trades and interest in NBA GM's to make trades that would significantly affect the playoff race. This year we have Evan Turner for Danny Granger as the big trade when it's really basically a trade of the Pacers saying "Well, maybe we should get a more versatile small forward" versus the 76ers saying, "We are not signing Evan Turner and we are not signing Danny Granger. Maybe Granger will want to be bought out." And yet, Bill Simmons thought the trade deadline deserved a diary of his fake "Who says 'no'?" trades, a ton of YouTube clips and quick changes of the subject when he is wrong about something.

Editor’s note: Every time there’s an NBA trade deadline, Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons like to trade emails about the relative nonaction while secretly hoping that something huge will happen. It never does. Every February, they gamely press on. Here are today’s emails from coast to coast, as they appeared in real time, as our boys killed time until the 3 p.m. ET trade deadline.

And why wouldn't anyone want to read Zach Lowe and Bill Simmons killing time? Sadly, this column probably gets a bunch of pageviews simply because Bill's name is attached to it and his lemming readers will immediately read anything that he writes (or doesn't write as it seems to be of late).

Zach Lowe (10:08 AM EST) 
So, I was about to ask for your thoughts on why the deadline is so quiet at this point — whether it’s the new CBA in effect, general managers getting smarter, some sort of overcautious groupthink, or something else. But Spencer Hawes just got traded to Cleveland for two second-round picks!!

Philly will receive two second-rounders, which is decent return for a mediocre unrestricted free agent who has regressed defensively this season.

Yes, but Spencer Hawes is tall, not uncoordinated and can shoot the three-point shot. Basically he's a 5 year $50 million contract waiting to happen. There's no such thing as a mediocre seven-foot tall free agent who is in his mid-20's and can score in double figures while shooting the three-point shot. He's getting overpaid. The only question left is by whom?

Bill Simmons (10:21 AM EST)
So, to recap — Jordan Crawford was worth more than Spencer Hawes in an NBA trade this season. I love the NBA. Never change, NBA!

This is part of the problem with Bill when he does a diary with another individual. Bill tries so hard to make jokes that sometimes really obvious analysis misses him completely. For example:

Zach Lowe (10:22 AM EST)
Well, Crawford is much cheaper, which will come into play as we discuss Hawes deals that didn’t happen. I can see the thinking here for Cleveland, I guess.

Exactly, Jordan Crawford is much cheaper than Spencer Hawes. That's why he is worth more.

Bill Simmons (10:22 AM EST)
That sentence hasn’t been written in four years.

I'm not sure if Bill is trying to have an actual discussion or just crack as many jokes as possible to kill time. Probably a little of both. I think this sentence has been written in the last four years, namely when the Cavs drafted Kyrie Irving.

Zach Lowe (10:22 AM EST)
Anyway, they want to make the playoffs, they’re on a nice six-game winning streak against mostly very bad teams, and Hawes gives them a big man who can shoot 3s. The Cavs suffer from spacing issues, in part because none of their bigs can really shoot beyond 15 feet or so on the pick-and-pop/pick-and-roll — which is just about all the Cavs run,

There's the analysis that Bill gives us in his columns where he basically dicks around and tries to think of as many "Who says 'no'?" trade ideas, while determining that a team is going to do well in the playoffs because they exchange a lot of high-fives. Then there is analysis like Zach Lowe gives here, you know, actual analysis that shows why/why not Hawes will fit in with the Cavaliers. Basically there are NBA experts and then there are guys who like to talk about the NBA. I think Bill is good at talking about the NBA as long as he can make shit up and think of fake trades.

Bill Simmons (10:24 AM EST)
On NBA Countdown last night, we discussed how the two most exciting types of people at the trade deadline are new owners and restless owners. I totally forgot about screaming-and-restless-owners-who-want-to-win.

It's really the same thing, but whatever. The reason restless and screaming owners have those characteristics is because they want to win.

Any sane person running the Cavs would be thinking two things. First, missing the best lottery in six years just so the Cavs can get annihilated by Miami or Indiana in Round 1 sounds like the dumbest plan since “We have a young and impressionable team … let’s bring in Andrew Bynum as a mentor for everyone.”

This is typical Bill Simmons. He's right about the Cavs, but Andrew Bynum was brought in to fill the center position for the Cavs, not to be a mentor. Bill is right, but he has to stretch the truth just a little bit to make himself seem more right.

Bill Simmons (10:36 AM EST)
One of my favorite underrated traditions: when a healthy Anderson Varejao plays well for three or four weeks, then the Cavs forget to trade him before he gets hurt … and then he gets hurt.

Here is another typical Bill Simmons comment. He wants to be the GM of an NBA team, but he can't quite divorce himself from being a video game GM. Bill criticizes the Cavs for not trading Varejao before he gets injured again, but Varejao's injuries are something every other NBA GM is aware of as well. So that probably affects the trade market for Varejao's services. Yet Bill just sees it as, "Oh, the Cavs failed to trade Varejao again," as if getting very little for Varejao is better than having him on the roster and occasionally healthy.

Bill Simmons (10:41 AM EST)
But they have to please Kyrie — he doesn’t make his teammates better, thrives in pickup games when there’s no defense, and has lost over 60 percent of the NBA games he’s played.

I'm a huge fan of Kyrie Irving, so take my comments with a grain of salt if you choose to, but since when it is bad that Irving plays well in pickup games where there is no defense? It seems he has thrived in the NBA so far, have no teams guarded him over his three year career? Also, what teammates does Irving have to make better and how can Irving be blamed for losing 60% of his career games at this point? Bill can't talk about what a disaster the Cavaliers draft picks/free agent signings have been and then criticize Kyrie Irving for not making these teammates better and losing games. It doesn't work that way.

Here’s my question, Zach — where the hell were the Clippers on Hawes??? If the price was two second-rounders, they couldn’t have topped that? They have Ryan Hollins, Byron Mullens, Hedo Turkoglu, Keith Closs Jr., Mike Golic, Stan Verrett and Snoop Dogg as their backup bigs right now. Hawes REALLY would have helped. Explain this to me.

That was Bill's not-so-subtle reminder that he coached one of the celebrity basketball teams during All-Star weekend. He names celebrities and ex-athletes who played in that game as a reminder he got to coach one of the teams. Subtle he is not.

This is another instance where Bill can't divorce himself from being a video game GM. Yeah Zach Lowe, why wouldn't the Clippers trade for Hawes?

Zach Lowe (10:45 EST)
As for the Clips, well, Hawes is making $6.6 million this season, and the Clips are $2 million over the tax. So that’s hard to swallow, even though this is a freaking potential title contender in obvious need of a third quality big man.

Oh yes, "reality" is the reason the Clippers won't trade for Spencer Hawes. Bill thinks about trades in a vacuum and doesn't seem entirely capable of understanding the full picture of why one of his "Who says 'no'?" trades wouldn't work out. There is a human element Bill consistently fails to account for when charting out trades on paper. The Clippers don't want to go further over the tax. There's your reason. NBA GM's aren't always incompetent, sometimes they have to work within the salary parameters they are given.

Bill Simmons (10:49 AM EST)
Is it OK if I don’t break out my violin for the Clippers — playing in America’s second-biggest market, filling Staples every night, charging Hollywood prices and trotting out two of the NBA’s most marketable players — because they might creep into the luxury tax this season? Especially when the league is about to double its media revenue with its next media deal? And especially when 29 of the 30 NBA teams aren’t for sale right now because the league has quietly turned into a cash cow?

Don't break out the violin, but it's reality. That's why the Clippers didn't go after Spencer Hawes because the NBA is a business and Donald Sterling likes making money.

Zach Lowe (10:58 AM EST)
In any case, the Clips also don’t have great pieces to sell in a direct two-team trade with the Sixers, since they need Jamal Crawford (given J.J. Redick’s injuries) and Jared Dudley has long-term money the Hinkster won’t want. Now you’re starting to talk about cobbling together a three-team deal when the Clips might actually want to duck the tax so they can reap the Brooklyn bonanza payout only non-tax teams can get.

Oh, and Bill, there is another reason the Clippers didn't go after Spencer Hawes. So other than financial reasons and the fact it would take a three-team deal to get it done, it was a brilliant idea for the Clippers to go after Spencer Hawes.

Bill Simmons (11:02 AM EST)
Here was my dream 2014 trade deadline deal that died an hour ago: Thaddeus Young and Willie Green to Phoenix; Hawes to the Clippers; then Philly gets Jared Dudley, Byron Mullens, Emeka Okafor’s expiring contract, Byron Mullens’s expiring basketball career, the highest of Phoenix’s 2014 first-rounders and a super-duper-ultra-protected future first-rounder from the Clips. Everyone would have been a winner. Alas.

Again, Jared Dudley has long-term money that the 76ers don't want. What part of "rebuilding" is hard to understand? I'm not sure Jared Dudley should be a centerpiece of the Sixers rebuilding plan, but hey, Bill has proclaimed all teams as "winners" in this trade he thought of so it can't be so bad. It's not a bad trade other than the fact Zach Lowe has given three good reasons why this trade could never happen and I'm not sure what Phoenix gets out of it besides rebuilding and then taking on two more seasons of a non-franchise player like Thaddeus Young.

Zach Lowe (11:10 AM EST)
That’s not bad. Young is an interesting trade piece. There hasn’t been much noise about him. He’s due about $19 million combined over 2014-15 and 2015-16, and that kind of price tag is scaring teams right now — even when it is attached to a good player. 

Zach Lowe can't poop on this trade idea even though he has already stated why it won't work. He doesn't want to piss his employer off. 

And that gets back to the overcautious thing I mentioned earlier.

Bill Simmons has had enough of your reality and attempts to point out the human part of his obsession with the NBA Trade Machine.

Bill Simmons (11:19 AM EST)
You just laid out Cuban’s zigzag theory: If a growing cluster of NBA teams are trying to execute the same strategy (in this case, keeping their cap unclogged, avoiding that no-man’s-land range of 39-45 wins, stockpiling picks and maybe even semi-sabotaging their current team for ping-pong balls), then common sense says it’s better to zag the other way because you’ll find inefficiencies just by thinking differently.

Of course Bill (as usual) neglects to mention the Rockets hung in the "no-man's land" of 39-45 wins since the 2009-2010 season, sabotaged their chances of a lottery pick and yet Bill lauded Daryl Morey for essentially doing this. So Bill's idea of what an NBA team should avoid is true unless it's proven untrue.

Bill Simmons (11:38 AM EST)
Why isn’t Phoenix trying to parlay one or more of those four first-rounders, Okafor’s expiring and/or Alex Len into a major trade piece? What are they waiting for? That’s a dangerous playoff team with one more quality perimeter guy; they remind me of some of those explosive Western Conference teams from the early ’90s (KJ’s Suns, the Run TMC Warriors, etc.) — potentially, anyway. But it seems like the new wave of GMs are afraid to make in-season moves unless it’s absolutely the perfect move. Do you think GMs are getting too smart and too risk-averse? I would hate this. I need stupid contract extension, crazy trades and insane free-agent overpays, Zach

What kind of major trade piece are we talking about Bill? What player? We won't find out because Bill just uses the generic term of "a major trade piece" without actually telling us who the Suns should be focused on acquiring. And also, Bill loves to criticize GM's for dumb extensions, crazy trades and insane free agent overpays because those are easy to criticize. It's low hanging fruit.

It seems interesting to me that Bill would criticize NBA GM's for making bad moves, but he encourages more of these impulsive moves that aren't the perfect in-season move. It's like he wants to see bad decisions made so he can criticize these decisions. Well, GM's are getting smarter possibly (though doubtful) and they know there's no point to making a move if it isn't a smart move.

Bill Simmons (11:59 AM EST)
Quick interjection: Imagine how much more fun this trade deadline would be if teams could trade their amnesties (remember, 10 teams have amnesties left) and teams could trade back-to-back first-rounders? Remember, the NBA created that first-rounder rule because of the immortal Ted Stepien, who recklessly traded so many first-rounders that the NBA actually had to give Cleveland’s next owner LOTTERY PICK REPARATIONS to quell some of the damage. 

Whenever Bill does a chat/conversation with a guy like Zach Lowe, Bill Barnwell, or Jonah Keri it really shows how over his head Bill can be when discussing a specific sport in-depth. When these chats/conversations happen I want to tell Bill to pipe down with his juvenile "How cool would that be!" ideas and let the adults talk. Zach Lowe is having a real discussion about why first round picks aren't being traded and Bill changes the subject because he has absolutely nothing to add to the conversation.

Zach Lowe (12:05 PM EST)
I actually wrote during the lockout that teams should be able to trade amnesties. It rewarded teams who had done dumb stuff, but did not offer any similar reward to teams with no real amnesty candidate.

Bill Simmons (12:05 PM EST)
Yeah, if I had been an NBA owner who didn’t have an amnesty candidate, I would have gone nuts about that. Thrown a drink across the room, flipped over a chair, stormed out of the room, the whole thing. You shouldn’t be able to make massive mistakes and then get mulligans on them.

But allowing teams to trade amnesties would also be rewarding teams who made a big mistake, because a team could conceivably amnesty one candidate and then go and trade for another amnesty candidate. So allowing teams to trade amnesties would probably reward stupid teams more than not allowing these amnesty candidates to be traded would.

Bill Simmons (12:12 PM EST)
And also — the cap keeps going up as long as revenue keeps going up. Everyone forgets this part.

Absolutely nobody forgets this part. The reason NBA teams want more revenue is because they realize if revenue increases then they may have more money to play with. Of course if teams have more money to play with then agents and players know this and more players will want more of this money. So it seems like a cycle. EVERYONE forgets this part.

Zach Lowe (12:20 PM EST)
I also agree with the theory that GMs are just getting smarter. A lot of guys have looked at the Atlanta-Brooklyn Joe Johnson deal and told me, basically, “Every team trying to make a big trade wants a lopsided return like Atlanta got.” And there are just fewer guys who can get hoodwinked now. The specter of Kevin Durant’s free agency is affecting some teams, too. They want those post-2016 books as clean as possible.

Bill Simmons (12:24 PM EST)
Yup.

Oh yeah, Bill was going to say that too, but he just didn't get a chance between ranting about how NBA teams are like that guy in your fantasy league who wants to clean up on value players and then overspends on these value players and talking about how cool it would be if teams could trade amnesties. But yeah, Bill totally thought about Durant's impending free agency in 2016.

Zach Lowe (12:29 PM EST)
All this said, I know for a fact there are big names and big contracts being talked about right now — and not just teams begging other teams to swallow some unpleasant deal. There are real discussions about teams taking on some large contracts, and giving up stuff to do it. Those deals probably won’t happen, but teams are considering them, at least.

Oh...so Bill's "NBA teams are afraid to spend" mantra may not be entirely true? There's a shock.

Bill Simmons (12:35 PM EST)
Here’s a theory for you: If you’re a GM, what’s the best way to make sure you’ll stay employed for four to five years? The answer: Blow everything up, bottom out, build around young players/cap space/lottery picks, make a bunch of first-round picks, and sell the “illusion of hope” to your fans.

Okay Bill, the big boys are talking now.

What the new wave of young GMs like Sam Hinkie, Ryan McDonough and Rob Hennigan are doing is extremely smart — both from a basketball standpoint and a self-preservation standpoint — because it’s hard for anyone to say “YOU FAILED!” when you’re executing a multiyear plan that can’t be judged until 2016 or 2017 at the earliest.

You mean executing the multiyear plan that Danny Ainge is executing and Bill Simmons appears to be completely behind? Also, these GM's can get fired if the team doesn't progress as quickly as the owner thinks the team should progress. So it isn't like an owner will wait until 2018 to say, "Oh, the plan didn't work so I had better fire the GM now." If the 76ers don't win more than each year 30 games over the next two seasons and there isn't talent accumulating on the roster then Sam Hinkie could very well be gone. He can't just sit back and know his job is safe until 2018. So bottoming out is a smart move, but there isn't a lot of patience among NBA owners and owners like to see progress.

I’d like to see people in other professions try this. For instance, the guy who runs ABC right now, Paul Lee, is mired in a two-year mega-slump.

Oh my God, I wish Bill could stay on point for just a few minutes without running off on a tangent to show how clever and smart he is.

I think he’s launched 23 shows in the past two years and only two of them have had even mild success. Last week, Kimmel’s 11:35 late-night show outrated ABC’s 10 p.m. prime-time show on three different nights. That’s almost impossible.

Of course Bill has to pimp out Jimmy Kimmel's show. Did you know Bill used to write for Jimmy Kimmel? Did you know that? He did. Since Bill is so connected to the Hollywood scene I am sure he is also aware of two things:

1. The Winter Olympics were on, so CBS, ABC, and FOX changed their programming to re-runs so as not to go up against the Olympics.

2. The Olympic coverage ended every night at 11pm, which means Jimmy Kimmel wasn't competing against the Olympics.

So yes, Jimmy Kimmel has outrated re-runs of ABC shows that went up against the Olympics while he was showing new shows that didn't have to go up against the Olympics. There's a little perspective that Bill fails to provide while bragging about Jimmy Kimmel's success at 11:35pm. This is some perspective that you won't find from Bill for two reasons.

1. He wants to make Jimmy Kimmel look good because they are friends. Bill knows famous people you know.

2. His idea wouldn't seem as smart or clever if the reader knew the 10pm ABC programming was predominantly re-runs going against the Winter Olympics.

OK, so let’s say Paul Lee started thinking like an NBA GM. What would happen? He’d tell everybody, “Look, we fell into the bad habit here of throwing up 10 to 12 shows every year just because we had to have new shows for our schedule. I gotta be honest, I knew most of these shows wouldn’t work. But we needed to put SOMETHING on. So next year, I’m swinging the other way — I have only two new shows that I like, so we’re launching those and that’s it. Instead of wasting your time with the other eight to 10 shows that won’t work, I’m filling those spots with the cheapest reality shows possible, then long-term, I’m using the extra money we saved on failed pilots and lousy pilots to develop better shows with more accomplished showrunners. We’re going to be really good … in 2016!”

So basically ABC should do what FOX announced they were doing back in January? I like how Bill is trying to not only pass this off as HIS original idea, but pass it off as an original idea that a major network hasn't already had. Brilliant plan.

You know what would happen if Paul Lee announced that? He’d get fired within five minutes. But in the NBA, everyone accepts that mind-set and even encourages it. Hey, fans — who’s ready to bottom out? Who wants to hinge their hopes to a bunch of maybes and might-bes? Totally bizarre. 

This is bizarre if you are a mentally incompetent person who believes that a television show and a human being who plays sports are totally comparable to each other...which of course Bill does.

I find it hard to believe that every Phoenix fan would rather use those four first-rounders over parlaying one or two of them into players who would make this season’s already-fun Suns team even more fun.

Hey Bill, guess what? Phoenix Suns fans don't run the team, Ryan McDonough does. So what the fans think or want is totally irrelevant.

Zach Lowe (12:45 PM EST)
There is truth in that. Job preservation is a bigger driver of transactions than a lot of fans realize, and teardowns can fall under that category. But in some of the cases you mention, and maybe all of them, the GMs are new and came in with a mandate from ownership to rebuild/tear down. So they are not changing course in order to save their jobs.

Sad face for Bill. It turns out these GM's aren't just saving their job by rebuilding but are actually doing their job by rebuilding at the request of the owner. There goes that theory. Actually, I wish there were always someone to debunk all of Bill's crazy ideas in his columns.

Should Phoenix trade real assets for, say, Pau Gasol, just because? Why? He’s an awkward fit, he’s old, his defense is in serious decline, and he doesn’t move the needle much. On the other hand, I pitched on Twitter a potentially less costly deal that upgrades a position of greater need: Okafor’s contract and one first-rounder to Cleveland for Luol Deng. He’s an easier salary to fit, might cost a tad less in terms of which pick Phoenix would have to send, and can take minutes from several players who aren’t as good as he is.

This is a polite way of saying, "Bill, it doesn't make sense for the Suns to go after a big name player just for the sake of doing so." What's Bill's response? He changes the freaking subject to avoid the reality that his ideas probably aren't very good.

I understand I'm constantly on Bill's ass for his writing deficiencies, but until he starts speaking with someone who actually knows what he's talking about it is really hard to see sometimes how Bill's ideas and theories really aren't that good.

Bill Simmons (12:52 PM EST)
Come on, Zach — the Cavaliers can’t make that trade! Don’t you realize they’re trying to win the 2014 title? They’re in this thing!

Yeah, make a joke after your idea that the Suns should have gone after "a major trade piece" (again, whatever the hell that is) is nixed by someone smarter than you.

Bill Simmons (1:15 PM EST)
“Next on When GMs Totally Outsmart Themselves, we’ll talk to Sam Hinkie — who mistakenly accumulated 38 second-round picks over a three-year span when you’re allowed to carry only 15 players at the same time! And coming up later — more of our interview with Chris Grant!”

I like the idea of accumulating second round draft picks and spending them on undervalued college players (which I think there will be quite a few of this year) or overseas guys who need a few more years. There is a difference in Chris Grant and Sam Hinkie. Chris Grant wanted to compete now while accumulating talent while Sam Hinkie is clearly looking to build a contender in 2016.

Zach Lowe (1:27 PM EST)
Maybe Charlotte could have gotten Neal for less, though they don’t have quite the right tradable asset, or a trade exception. Also, they probably avoided Evan Turner by making this trade! They could still pull the trigger, in theory, but it’s a good idea to pass on dealing a first-round pick for Turner and then coughing up the inevitable four-year, $40 million instant albatross on him in the summer. Yay!

Bill Simmons (1:37 PM EST)
Or as it’s more commonly known, “The John Hammond.”

Bill is still a little bitter his "fake" campaign to be the Milwaukee Bucks' GM didn't work out. Of course Bill just got done saying the Bucks got the better end of the Sesssions-Neal deal, but perhaps he believes this doesn't count since the trade was with the Bobcats/Hornets/Desperate Attempt to Recall the Past.

Bill Simmons (2:11 PM EST)
Yup, we’re at the point of the day when you’re spending two paragraphs on an Aaron Brooks–Jordan Hamilton trade and I’m juggling texts on my BlackBerry from league insiders

Bill is just absolutely shameless when it comes to name-dropping and letting his readers know that he has sources in the NBA. This is just a hilarious effort to let his readers know that knows league insiders. Of course none of these league insiders can seem to pass information to Bill telling him that these NBA teams who are tanking are doing so on orders from the owner and this isn't a ploy by the GM's of these teams to stay employed.

Bill is just shameless at times with his starfucking and name-dropping. I wonder if his loyal readers have caught on to this and just don't care?

Then Bill and Zach take a 30 minute break and Zach Lowe clearly had to be talked back into continuing with this charade because it took him 45 minutes to come back.

Bill Simmons (2:52 PM EST)
Shelburne: “Sounds like Jordan Hill discussions are dying or dead, per sources on both sides.”
 
(I like how this is open-ended — it can be discussions about trades, Hill’s career as a whole, whatever you want.)

Zach Lowe (2:55 PM EST)
Jordan Hill is a pretty good two-way big man, and especially a rebounder!

Bill Simmons (2:57 PM EST)
Just looked up Hill’s stats — had no idea he was throwing up 8.5 points and 7.0 rebounds in less than 20 minutes a game. That’s impressive! If he were doing that on the Celtics, I’d be demanding two first-round picks for him.

Oh, so Bill is throwing out jokes now and then turning out to be completely wrong. Remember, he hosts ESPN/ABC's NBA pregame show and takes great pains to let us know he knows NBA insiders, but he can't be bothered with looking up a player's stats before making a joke about that player.

Bill Simmons (3:08 PM EST)
Did the fork in Jamison’s back count against the Clippers’ luxury tax? If so, good trade. Two things …

1. No Knicks trade! Any time you can keep your roster intact when you’re 21-33 and might lose your superstar in four months for nothing, you have to do it.

But if the Knicks traded Carmelo Anthony for a shitty return then what purpose would that serve? Other than to give Bill Simmons a chance to dust off his several years old jokes about James Dolan.

2. No significant Lakers trade, either. The Celtics and Lakers are standing pat. It’s a race to the top level of the lottery. It’s like the mid-’80s in reverse. Kris Humphries and Chris Kaman are Bizarro Bird and Bizarro Magic. 

And of course everything comes back to the Celtics at some point.

Bill Simmons (3:24 PM EST)
2. I don’t think the Clips care about falling under the tax. They’re clearly a buyout guy waiting to happen. My guess: Jason Thompson. 

Zach Lowe (3:31 PM EST)
The Clips have only 12 guys on their roster, so they’re not going to duck the tax after all; they need to add someone. You listed all the good candidates, including Jason Collins, who is based in L.A. and has played for Doc before. That would be a nice story. Thompson would be an awfully expensive buyout, with three years left on his deal after this one.

Don't contradict Bill! He's right and to prove this Bill will elicit his own opinion showing how right he is.

Bill Simmons (3:33 PM EST)
If I’m Thompson, I’m asking the Kings to buy me out for 40 percent of my deal, then I sign with a contender, hope I impress other teams this spring … and make up that lost money this summer. But that might be too logical.

Jason Thompson is due $19.2 million over the next three years. Bill Simmons thinks it is logical to forgo $11.5 million of this money in order to be a free agent. Let's see, Thompson can get a guaranteed $19.2 million or he can choose to become a free agent and enter the free agent market and hope to make up the money he gave away.

So, keeping $19.2 million guaranteed or offering to give up $11.5 million and taking a chance on the free agent market. Which move is "too logical" again?

By the way, Doc Rivers loved Collins in Boston and claimed that Collins was one of the best people he ever coached. Also, Collins defended Dwight Howard as well as just about anyone. 

Well not really. I have shown before the playoff series where Collins is credited as defending Howard well was the same series where Dwight Howard had his highest playoff averages in his career. Whatever though, I don't want to ruin the perception.

Bill Simmons (3:39 PM EST)
What a shocker — wait, the Thunder cheaped out, avoided the luxury tax and decided to “go with what they had?” Who saw that coming? Keep rakin’ in that money, Clay Bennett. And keep looking the other way, everyone who lives in Oklahoma City.

Yeah, fans of Oklahoma City. You should be livid that the Thunder have been one of the best teams in the NBA over the last five seasons and that the Thunder are putting a product on the court that has been in contention for the best record in the NBA during the 2013-2014. Storm the castle, this isn't right!

Just got this email from Friend of Grantland Alan Sepinwall:

Hey, I'm Bill Simmons! I'm going to name-drop real quick, okay? Cool. I just did it.

“Please mock the Knicks as much as possible for the worst of all possible trade deadline worlds: didn’t face reality and blow it up by trading Chandler and/or Melo, didn’t do anything to improve chances of the team making the playoffs (in a season with ZERO draft picks), and didn’t fire Woodson (who has ruined Shumpert and refuses to play the optimal lineup except when injuries leave him no choice).” The natives are restless!

And how could a television critic's criticism of an NBA team ever be wrong? Just blow up the Knicks team. Who cares what you get back in the trade? Just do it!

Then Bill Simmons embeds a Celtics YouTube video because he doesn't know how to write without mentioning the Celtics or embedding a YouTube video.

Then Bill embeds a 15 minute Larry Bird YouTube video because if you keep doing the same thing over and over again it gets funnier and more creative.

Zach Lowe (3:52 EST)
Put broadly: Turner is just not that good an NBA player, and the things he does well require him having the basketball. Well, Lance Stephenson has already turned into the ball-handling captain of the second unit, even pushing C.J. Watson, a nominal point guard, mostly off the ball. Stephenson’s a good enough 3-point shooter to spot up around Turner-centric plays, but that would represent a large rejiggering of Indy’s second-unit offense late in the game. Turner isn’t providing much spacing as a spot-up guy around Stephenson, and he’s probably a defensive downgrade even from a hobbled Granger. And those bench units have survived based upon very stingy defense.

Bill Simmons (4:04 EST)
I concede all of those points. But Granger looks done to me – we just watched a 24-game sample size of someone who couldn’t shoot anymore and lost his brakes. You lose your brakes in the NBA, you’re done.

Yeah Zach, you forgot to mention whether Granger had lost his brakes or not in your analysis. Once those brakes are gone, a player is done. Great point, Bill.

Turner offers the following things: creates his own shot, played in big games (college and pro)

You know I'm jumping all over any mention by Bill Simmons of college basketball. When did Evan Turner play in big games in college? I guess playing in the NIT Championship or the Sweet Sixteen counts as playing in big games. It sounds like Bill is just sort of making things up though in an effort to pretend he's doing real analysis.

a little fearless (irrationally so), can play either guard position, provides an extra set of young legs … oh, and remember his 26-point game on Opening Night when Philly shocked the defending champs? I’d rather take my chances with Turner than Granger in Round 3.

See Zach Lowe, you forgot about how fearless Evan Turner is, how young he is and that one time he scored 26 points against the Heat in a regular season game. Plus, you didn't even talk about how Granger has lost his brakes. Boy, I bet you feel stupid now.

Bill Simmons (4:11 EST)
Plus, I’m excited for how Grantland’s Mark Titus handles this one – his hometown Pacers acquiring his archenemy from his college days (the man Titus nicknamed “The Villain”), then going into battle against Miami and his good buddy Greg Oden in Round 3? Can you say “conflict of interest?”

Can you say, "Why am I involved in a discussion with an expert on the NBA when I clearly don't have much to offer in the way of analysis, outside of rarely funny comments and quick changes of the subject when my thoughts are shown to be wrong?"

Philly’s over/under for wins in Vegas was 16½. Right now, they’re 15-40. And they’re trotting out the likes of Byron Mullens, Eric Maynor, Tony Wroten and a sobbing Thad the rest of the way. They might not get to 17 wins! That would be an amazing “under” cover. As for Indiana, let’s all agree that “The Villain” makes the Heat-Pacers playoff series a little more fun.

Yeah, I'm not using the nickname Mark Titus uses to refer to Evan Turner.

We may have blown the Celeb Game on Friday thanks to six straight missed free throws and a little too much Kevin Hart, but hey, we’ll always have the 2014 Trade Deadline column.

This is another reminder that Bill Simmons coached one of the celebrity teams that played at the All-Star break. It might just save time if Bill wrote, "Will people ask me questions for my next mailbag about what it's like to coach a celebrity basketball team at All-Star Weekend? Just ask me, I'm dying to answer questions about it in my next mailbag so I can remind myself of how much of a celebrity I am."

4 comments Mike Klis Is Not Taking the Broncos Super Bowl Loss Very Well

Mike Klis has taken to a message board to complain about how the Seattle Seahawks didn't beat the Broncos "A" team in the Super Bowl. Klis rants and generally acts like a spoiled fanboy who refuses to accept his favorite team lost. On this message board---wait, this isn't a message board? Mike Klis wrote an entire column, published it and still acted like a spoiled child who refuses to accept losing...then "The Denver Post" printed it? I'm not sure why they would do that, but it seems they did. The last time we heard from Mike Klis had data (data dammit!) that the key to winning a Super Bowl is losing football games. I'm just surprised Klis didn't state the Broncos lost the Super Bowl because they won too many games this year. So here is Mike Klis giving the Seahawks very little credit and writing a column that's on par with a message board rant. 

If the Seattle Seahawks played the Super Bowl without left tackle Russell Okung, cornerback and best defensive player Richard Sherman, safety Earl Thomas, defensive end/tackle Michael Bennett, defensive ends Cliff Avril and Chris Clemons and center Max Unger, would they have beat the Broncos?

Quite possibly, but that was a nice beat down the Seahawks gave the Broncos. The Seahawks were without Russell Okung from September 23 to November 16 of this year. They lost their second-best receiver, Sidney Rice, on October 30 and played without their best receiver, Percy Harvin all season. If Peyton Manning didn't have Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas was playing his first full game all season in the Super Bowl would the Broncos have beaten the Seahawks if Seattle was missing all of these other players Klis just listed? Of course, Mike Klis won't look at it that way.

Because that’s essentially what the Broncos had to do as they played without left tackle Ryan Clady, top defensive back Chris Harris, safety Rahim Moore, best pass rusher Von Miller, defensive end/tackle Derek Wolfe, defensive tackle Kevin Vickerson and center Dan Koppen/J.D. Walton.

Well, except for the fact Sherman and Thomas are better players than Chris Harris and Rahim Moore. Clady and Okung are a fair trade off in my opinion, Unger is better than Koppen/Walton, and otherwise I think the defensive players have different responsibilities and play different positions. So it's hard to say whether this is a good comparison or not. I would submit it isn't a comparable scenario, but either way, it didn't happen so stop crying about it.

The Seahawks also didn't have their second-best cornerback, Brandon Browner, due to a suspension. They were somehow able to move past this and win the Super Bowl. I could see Klis' point of view if the Super Bowl was close, but it wasn't even close to being close. It was a blowout.

Maybe the Seahawks still win. 

I don't know if injuries can explain a 35-point swing. That's a lot of points to make up and blame on injuries. Injuries happen and that's why you have backups. The Seahawks backup wide receivers (going into the season) played well enough to beat the Broncos defense handily. Stop whining.

But do they have to be so cocky about it?

They had just won the Super Bowl. They had a right to feel cocky. Besides, the only people who complain about the cockiness of the opposing team are the fans of the team that lose...or the beat writers of the team that loses as the case may be. The Seahawks celebrated and they had a chip on their shoulder about winning. They are able to do that because they won. If the Broncos don't like it, they should have beaten the Seahawks, and if Mike Klis doesn't like it then he should cheer for someone to beat the Seahawks next year in the playoffs. Until then, Seattle has a right to be a little cocky.

Sherman pops off incessantly.

How is stating that he picked up Manning's audibles "popping off"? Sherman seems to stating what is a fact. Here is what Sherman says in the article and you decide for yourself if this is him "popping off."

"We knew what route concepts they liked on different downs, so we jumped all the routes," Sherman told Robert Klemko of Monday Morning Quarterback (mmqb.com). "Then we figured out the hand signals for a few of the route audibles in the first half."

And John Fox was astounded that Sherman would pop off like this after the Super Bowl victory. So much so that he stated, 

Broncos coach John Fox acknowledged Tuesday the Seahawks may have been on to something but downplayed the impact the in-game intelligence Seattle may have deciphered.

"You know, it looked like it," Fox said. "But I think it's more they have very good players. I don't know that there are any mystery things. I think it was more about them executing and playing very well than any other stuff."

Boy, Foxy is hot under the collar. Sherman has popped off one too many times now. 

Seriously, Klis is being an even bigger fanboy than I thought he could be by getting worked up that Richard Sherman noted the Seahawks knew the Broncos audibles. It's sour grapes. 

Pete Carroll brags.

When a coach wins the Super Bowl, he has a right to brag a little bit. 

KJ Wright says the Seahawks beat the Broncos 90 times out of 100.

I mean, I don't know...that certainly seems like it would be true based on the Seahawks 35-point victory in the Super Bowl. 

I had spent the past week giving Seattle full credit as the physically superior team and ripping the Broncos for their dismal performance.

But now is the time for sour grapes and claiming the Seahawks didn't beat the Broncos "A" team, which doesn't sound like an excuse more than anything else. Not at all. Mike Klis stating that he previously gave the Seahawks credit, but will stop doing that because they are celebrating their Super Bowl victory is a position an irrational fan of the Broncos may take. I can't imagine why a professional sportswriter would take this position. 

But these Seahawks won’t stop popping off about how great they are and how much better they were/are than the Broncos.

So Mike Klis has to hit back with excuses as to why Denver lost the Super Bowl. Way to get them back, Mike! You really told them with your poor excuses for why the Broncos lost that ignored the Seahawks made it to the Super Bowl without their two top receivers and second-best cornerback! Nobody likes excuses.

Come on, Seattle. You beat up Peyton Manning and a bunch of B teamers.

Fine, the Broncos had excuses. I will grant Mike Klis that. What he doesn't explain is how the Broncos "B" offense that was missing two starters at the offensive line (yet these two backup offensive linemen were fantastic in the previous two playoff games, which Klis fails to mention) only scored eight points against the Seahawks defense. Basically, the Broncos offense was their "A" team and not their "B" team. If the score of the game was 45-38 then I could see Klis' point about the injuries to the Broncos defense, but the Broncos were pretty close to full strength on offense and could only muster eight points. He has no point calling the Broncos "Peyton Manning and a bunch of B teamers." 

Take your Lombardi Trophy — and quiet down.

Even the Broncos message boards would dismiss this rant as just the ravings of a bitter, angered fan who can't accept the reality that Denver lost. Mike Klis, accept the Broncos lost---and quiet down.