NBA WHO SAYS NO Rankings - Part 4 of 5

Before we get started, let me just remind you that ESPN and its incessant NFL draft coverage can go piss up a rope and die of AIDS.  And also OMYGOD as I type this, the NFL schedule is being released.  I know everyone is on pins and needles like I am: is my team going to play six divisional games, four games against the NFC division we last played in 2011, four games against the AFC division we last played in 2012, and finally two additional games against the two teams in the other two AFC divisions that finished in the same place in the division that we did last year?  There's really no way to tell--I should probably tune into ESPN to watch this big reveal.  God, fuck the NFL.  Moving on.

GROUP A: “Completely and Utterly Untouchable”

5. Russell Westbrook
4. James Harden
3. Stephen Curry

For the first time in the history of my Sports Guy column, 

You're going to provide analysis that isn't self-important, isn't full of idiotic pop culture references, and most of all isn't terrible?

we’re dusting off the old Dr. Jack Breakdown gimmick and turning it into a threesome. 

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I’m gonna throw my Eyes Wide Shut mask on, take a half-Viagra, throw down two glasses of wine and really get into this. 

Hey, that's kind of a funny "pop" (term used loosely here) culture reference with the Eyes Wide Shut thing.  It's also very self-important and I'm sure it will be terrible, but one out of three isn't bad.

Please, I implore you, for your own safety, don’t try this at home. I’m a professional. 

Go fuck an elephant.

Anyway …

SALARIES: Harden (signed through 2017-18) and Westbrook (signed through 2016-17) are max guys earning $16 million to $17 million per season … a paltry number in two summers when the NBA salary cap starts taking steroids and HGH, 

LIKE KOBE AMIRITE????????????????

but still. Meanwhile, Golden State has Curry locked down for $10.63 million (this season), $11.37 million (2015-16), and $12.1 million (2016-17). He won’t make as much money over those three years as Marcin Gortat. Anytime someone can make $11 million per year and you feel bad for them, you know they’re a bargain. ADVANTAGE: CURRY.

Curry signed that deal just before the start of the 2012-2013 season.  He had been injured for much of the lockout-shortened 2011-2012 season, playing in just 26 games and averaging a paltry 14 and 5.  Looks like one of those "it makes sense for both sides" contracts, really, since Curry would have been wise to take some guaranteed money, and the Warriors were paying him, at the very worst, to be a three point specialist.  Whelp, guess it worked out for the Warriors.  As a Nuggets fan I hate them, but I do love parity and fresh blood in the winner's circle so I wouldn't mind seeing them win a title this year.  JUST this year.  After that, fuck them.  Every important player on that team besides Curry and Bogut is a flaming cuntrag.  Also, if they pull it off, it'll be just the fifth title since 1991 (exceptions: that goofy 2004 Pistons team, the 2006 Heat team that had Shaq and Wade and every call in the Finals, THE FAWKIN' 2008 UBUNTUS, and the magical LeBron-defeating 2011 Mavericks) won by a team that didn't have Jordan, Olajuwon, Kobe, LeBron or Duncan.  And if Jordan hadn't gone to play baseball (IT WAS A SECRET GAMBLING SUSPENSION WHO SAYS NO????) we might be able to take Olajuwon off that list.  The more you know.

BEST GIMMICK: 

Oh yeah, this is crucial.  So glad we made it here after hitting all the important categories like "Salaries" and "nothing else."  BUT WHICH ONE OF THEM WOULD YOU WANT TO WATCH CASTAWAY WITH?

Sorry, fellas, you’re not topping Harden’s beard. Greatest NBA facial hair of all time in no particular order: 

Oh no you don't, buddy.  No cutting corners here.  I expect these lists to have a set order upon which any basketball worth a damn would definitely agree.

Wilt’s goatee; Bird’s wispy almost-mustache; [rest of list deleted]

I'm just going to stop you right there.  Thanks so much for your time.

SHEER AWESOMENESS OF THEIR CONVENTIONAL 2014-15 NUMBERS:Spectacular all the way around. Through Sunday’s games …

Westbrook 27.5 ppg 8.3 apg 7.2 rpg 2.1 spg 43-30-84% 9.4 FTA 3.7 3FGA
Harden 26.9 ppg 7.1 apg 5.8 rpg 1.9 spg 44-38-87% 9.8 FTA 6.7 3FGA
Curry 23.6 ppg 7.8 apg 4.4 rpg 2.2 spg 48-42-90% 4.3 FTA 8.0 3FGA

And Westbrook finished even hotter than that.  I hate him, he's a dick, I've definitely written here before that he is overrated, but damn.  Not sure I am going to ever write that again.

Some highlights: Westbrook working on the third 27-8-7 with a 30-plus PER in NBA history (the other two: 1989 MJ and 2013 LeBron) … 

He ended up just missing, with a 29.1 PER.

Steph knocking on the door of the 50-40-90 Club while jacking up a staggering EIGHT 3s per game (good luck ever seeing that again) … 

Just missed, shooting 48.7% from the floor.  But Steve Nash pulled off 50-40-90 twice while shooting between 4 and 5 threes per game.  I don't think it's some kind of Cy Young's win total unbreakable record.

Harden trying to become the first lefty 

OK, for fuck's sake, I appreciate that this breakdown category isn't dedicated to something as inane as facial hair, but this isn't baseball.  Who gives a flying sloppy fuck about basketball player handedness when it comes to statistical achievements?

to average 27, 7 and 6 

Just missed--only 5.7 boards.

while also trying to become the third player (after Kobe Bryant and Gilbert Arenas) to attempt 500 3s AND 750 free throws (the 500/750 Club!) … 

He got there easily.  Man, that guy gets to the line.  I thought there was a chance Curry was close to this as well, but not even.  He only attempted 337 FTs.

did I mention that Westbrook is a guard and he’s averaging eight freaking rebounds per 36 minutes? … my God, look at that Westbrook season!!!!!! Are those numbers real? Can we check the math again? ADVANTAGE: WESTBROOK.

I'm going with Curry, given that he did what he did on a team that had plenty of other good players, while Westbrook, minus Durant and Ibaka for chunks of time, was really the only guy on the Thunder capable of scoring or assisting.  But there's probably no wrong answer here.  WHAT IF WESTBROOK WAS LEFT HANDED THOUGH, CAN YOU EVEN IMAGE?!?!?!?!!

SHEER AWESOMENESS OF THEIR ADVANCED 2014-15 NUMBERS: Some of this stuff is bat-shit crazy. Through Sunday’s games
…

Westbrook 29.7 PER 38.4 usage 53.9% TS 6.6 RPM 8.4 WS; .234 WS/48
Harden 26.6 PER 30.9 usage 60.8% TS 8.51 RPM 13.2 WS .265 WS/48
Curry 27.8 PER 28.7 usage 62.9% TS 8.55 RPM 12.4 WS .286 WS/48

Some highlights: Steph’s WS/48 will be top 20 all time … 

He ended at .2881, 19th all time.

we’ve had only 17 30-plus PER seasons and 86 27-plus PER seasons (and Westbrook is knocking on the door), as well as just three guards who have cracked 30 PER (MJ, Wade and T-Mac) … 

Westbrook didn't make it, but Anthony Davis (who finishes at #1 in these rankings, deservedly so) did.  Make that eighteen 30+ PER seasons.

only Kevin Johnson (in 1997) ever averaged 20 points and eight assists with a 63 percent true shooting percentage … 

OK, you're starting to really reach now.  Also, as the three ball becomes more and more popular and players shoot it better and better, TS% league wide among guards should continue to increase.

West, Magic, Jordan, Oscar and CP3 are the only guards to ever finish a season with 16 win shares … 

Ah, the coveted 16 win share cutoff point.  Both Harden and Chris Paul made it this year.

and if we want to get super-fancy, Harden leads the NBA in points per game on drives and has assisted on more made 3s than anyone … 

I think I also wrote on this blog several times back in 2012 that contrary to what Simmons said, the Thunder didn't commit some kind of sin against humanity when they traded Harden.  I'm not going to take that back, because in-the-moment analysis is in-the-moment analysis and I stand by the idea that the trade was justifiable at the time, but wow.  Harden is really, really good, and the Thunder traded him for really, really nothing.

and Westbrook’s usage rate is threatening to break 2006 Kobe’s all-time NBA record (not necessarily a positive). 

He came up juuuuuuuuuust short, 38.7 to 38.4.  That Kobe team made the playoffs, though, which proves something, but I'm really not sure what.  So I'll just go ahead and remind you that Simmons is a fucktard.

I give Curry’s season a slight edge for its unselfish efficiency and efficient unselfishness. SLIGHT ADVANTAGE: CURRY.

Really awesome wordplay there, Kerouac.  Knocked that one out of the park.

MOST MANAGEABLE GLARING WEAKNESS: Golden State hides Curry on D as much as possible, but he’s a better and smarter defender than people realize. (Maybe he’s not Chris Paul on that end, but he’s not Damian Lillard either.) 

Ooooooooh. Cold blooded.  Lillard had basically the same defensive advanced metrics (defensive rating per 100 possessions and defensive win shares) as Westbrook this year, and was only slightly worse than Curry and Harden.

Westbrook plays with so much confidence/swagger/ferocity that he can’t stop going into 2006 Kobe mode, especially late in games, which is the best and the worst thing about him. 

More top-notch writing from this guy who gets paid to use words to express ideas.  Klosterman probably thinks that sentence is nectar from the Gods.

(I mean, are YOU gonna tell Westbrook not to shoot every time? I didn’t think so.) 

Aw snap!  In your face, readers!

And Harden’s night-to-night defense used to be somewhere between “reprehensible” and “he’s trolling us,” but he took enough guff that he actually started trying on both ends this season. Great for the Rockets; terrible for everyone who loved reading 1,200-post NBA Reddit threads centered on GIFs of Harden standing in cement as his man darted by him for a layup. He’s the most well rounded of the three. ADVANTAGE: HARDEN.

Indeed, the metrics bear it out.  Harden had more defensive win shares than the other two guys.

BEST NICKNAME: I enjoy “The Beard” and like “The Splash Brothers” a tiny bit more. 

Both of those are terrible, especially since one is a reference to a video game that was most popular ten years ago.

But you know how you’d never call Liam Neeson “Liam” or “Neeson,” or nickname him, like, “Li” or “The Angry Irishman”? He’s just “Liam Neeson,” right? Same for Russell Westbrook. He’s too cool for a nickname. He’s transcended nicknames.

That's simply untrue.  I have heard many commentators and dozens of NBA fans call him "Russ" this season.  You're making stuff up again, Bill.

Damn, I’m at capacity for Liam Neeson references in this column already. ADVANTAGE: WESTBROOK.

You've been at capacity for references to anything other than sports since 2002.

ONE-MAN-WRECKING-CREWNESS: 

Pretty dumb category (not that most of the rest of these aren't).

Um, Westbrook threw up 40-13-11, 39-14-11, 49-15-10, 30-11-17, 36-11-6 and 48-9-11 just in the past five weeks. Curry and Harden can eviscerate opposing defenses — and have — but only Westbrook makes you feel like you’re watching Lia— whoops, 

HIGH FIVE!

like you’re watching a WWE star sprint into a crowded Royal Rumble ring 

Yes, basketball is wrestling is basketball is Taken.  Couldn't agree more.

and immediately start clearing it out. He doesn’t need a nickname, but he might need his own entrance music. ADVANTAGE: WESTBROOK.

Topping off the wrestling motif there, with another wrestling reference.  Great stuff.

BEST QUALITY AS A TEAMMATE: Harden is a famously fun off-the-court guy — the kind of star who seems like he’d stay out with a new teammate until 6 a.m. and, um, show him around. 

He's not going to be your friend, Bill.  Let it go.

Westbrook would fight for any teammate or coach on and off the court; he even holds grudges on the level of, Even though Grantland has thrown more love my way than toward Kanye and Drake combined, I’m not appearing on the All-Star Break B.S. Report because Simmons is the asshole who keeps bringing up the Harden trade and saying that Scott Brooks isn’t good enough. (By the way — guilty!)

YOU'RE NOT THE CENTER OF THE FUCKING UNIVERSE YOU NAVEL-GAZING DIPSHIT!  JESUS CHRIST ON A FUCKING TRICYCLE

But Curry is turning into this generation’s Tim Duncan — an unselfish superstar who doesn’t want to be an alpha dog, 

I like Curry just fine, and I don't think this is a bad thing to say about him, but he most definitely wants to be an alpha dog.

pulls for everyone else at all times, 

That's what 99% of all pro athletes do.

has an infectious personality 

Duncan has an infectious personality?

and lacks any semblance of an ego. 

Yeah, those walk-away-before-the-ball-reaches-the-rim threes really scream "quiet guy who just wants to get the job done."  Again, not that that's a bad thing.  If I shot 48% from three, I'd do it too.  But what in the holy hell is Bill talking about?

I loved that he loved Klay Thompson’s 37-point Über–Heat Check quarter more than anyone. 

Who, among every player in the NBA, wouldn't have loved that if Thompson was their teammate?  What is this garbage?

He’s the best player on a team with phenomenal chemistry. That matters. SLIGHT ADVANTAGE: CURRY.

Excellent paragraph.  Full of sound, fury, and nothingness.

NIGHT-TO-NIGHT YOUTUBE/GIF/MEME/VINE POTENTIAL:

All of them.  Who gives a flying fuck?  It's 2015.  We all can watch all of their highlights every night.  It's not like there's limited space on the internet for them.

DEFENSE/REBOUNDING/STEALS: Good place to save some words. ADVANTAGE: WESTBROOK.

"Good place to admit that I actually don't know that much about basketball."

DURABILITY: Here, too. ADVANTAGE: HARDEN.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THEIR GIRLFRIENDS?  WHOSE IS HOTTEST?  WHY AM I READING THIS IF I DON'T GET TO SEE THEIR PICTURES?

POPULARITY: 

Yahtzee!

Big year for Curry — not only did he fetch the most All-Star votes, but LeBron’s departure from Miami allowed Golden State to become the NBA’s biggest bandwagon team. If your child is under 10 and searching for a hoops team that not-so-coincidentally might have a chance to win multiple titles, or you’re one of those secretly shady NBA fans-for-hire who drifts around from contender to contender because “I just root for players I like,” or you’re a casual fan who just likes watching dunks and 3s and that’s it, or you grew up in the Bay Area and wore a Warriors hat for 10 minutes when you were 8 years old back in the 1990s, then we have the bandwagon contender just for you! 

And there's your one place in the whole column where Bill actually says something funny.  Drink it up, people.

And yes, my daughter jumped on the Warriors bandwagon a few months ago. They’re irresistable. They’re bandwagon catnip. ADVANTAGE: CURRY.

Fuck those GSW fans.  They're horrible.  Even the long-suffering mainstays.  Fuck 'em all.

MEDIA SAVVY: You’d think Curry would win this in a landslide. 

You'd think, wouldn't you?  Finally, something fans really need to read more about.

But what about Westbrook’s tough-love strategy? 

YES, WHAT OF IT?  THIS IS FASCINATING.

I kind of dig it. Total dick for a week, goes generic for a week, becomes nice and thoughtful the next week. He’s like the arrogant, hard-to-get ladies’ man in a rom-com who keeps playing the frazzled-but-successful woman in his office who’s way too cute not to have a boyfriend (only she’s all about her work and her home life is a mess). 

That's how you think of yourself, isn't it?

Russell thanked us today! What does this mean? Does he like me? I love Russell Westbrook. 

Barf

If he punched me in the face the next time I saw him, I’d probably justify it by saying, “I probably deserved that.” Wait … don’t actually do that, Russell. SLIGHT ADVANTAGE: WESTBROOK.

No one cares.

MOST ANNOYING QUALITY:

Tie among all three of them, for being discussed extensively in this article.  Done and done.

BEST “WHAT IF?” BACKSTORY: 

WHAT WILL WE THINK ABOUT THESE POTENTIAL BACKSTORIES IN TEN YEARS WHEN THEY HAVE BECOME NON-STORIES?

Curry almost got traded to the Suns during the 2010 draft; nearly got dealt to Milwaukee for Andrew Bogut; and could have ended up in Minnesota had David Kahn not taken Ricky Rubio and Jonny Flynn over him. Westbrook trumps Curry with the whole “What if OKC never traded James Harden?” question lingering over his entire OKC tenure like a pungent fart on an airplane. 

I agree with the very mild intrigue of the Curry stuff.  The Westbrook stuff: sorry Bill, but the Harden trade isn't about Westbrook.  It's about Harden.  Let's see if he can get there...

And James Harden IS the James Harden from the previous sentence. ADVANTAGE: HARDEN.

He made it!  Go Bill go!

SWAGGER WHILE WALKING DOWN A RUNWAY BEFORE AN ESPN GAME DURING THOSE LUDICROUSLY LONG CAMERA SHOTS THAT

Don't care, we're skipping this category, you're not funny.

UNIQUENESS FACTOR: Brutal category. 

Totally brutal.  Oh wait, who gives a fucking runny shit?

Westbrook is basically Jim Brown 50 years later with basketball shorts on. 

Basically like literally OMG that's so what he is I can't even

And I just compared him to Teen Wolf 

Check that spot on your bingo cards, people.

and a poisoned movie character who uses so much of her brain that she becomes a robot, then turns invisible. 

I lost whatever reference he was making in copying and pasting this over to Blogger and removing the formatting--I can't guess it, and don't even want to know.

Somehow, I have him ranked third. 

He's a great athlete, who plays like another great athlete from a while ago, and a fictional great athlete from a bad movie.  So unique.

Curry is the greatest shooter I have ever seen in my life; he’s like Maravich reincarnated crossed with Steve Nash crossed with some sports movie character that hasn’t been invented yet. Somehow, I have him ranked second. 

He's a basketball player who is good at shooting basketballs into basketball hoops.  So unique.

And Harden is a true original – I’m half-convinced that Dork Elvis, Goldsberry and Hollinger wanted to see if there could be a superior and much more durable American version of Manu Ginobili, so they created Harden in an MIT lab in 2007 during the first-ever Sloan Conference. A left-handed scorer/creator who cares only about getting to the rim, getting fouled or shooting 3s?

He's just like this other guy who is about ten years older and also plays in the NBA.  So unique.

Important note:

No.  Moving on.

“SEEING THEM IN PERSON” FACTOR: Christ. This one isn’t fair, especially with Westbrook in Jim Brown/Bo Jackson/Young LeBron/Lucymode right now. But I saw Curry in Brooklyn earlier this month, and lemme tell you something: 

Hey, let us tell you something: most of us don't just travel around watching basketball as part of our jobs.  If we can make it to the arena nearest where we live when the Rockets, Thunder or Warriors are in town: great.  If not: we'll watch them on TV like everyone else.  You out of touch stereotype of an asshole journalist.

There is nothing — repeat, nothing — more exciting as an NBA fan right now than being in the house when Steph Curry is feeling it. Bird had the same quality, by the way. 

IT AWWWWWWL COMES BACK TO THE FACKIN' C'S!  I BET YOU THOUGHT IT WOULDN'T!  FACK YOU!

And these Curry shots are SWISHING. That’s the other thing. 

Not as SWISHINGLY as LEGEND'S, but they're still SWISHING.

When it starts happening, the energy in the building actually shifts and becomes something else. 

More exemplary use of the English language.  This guy knows how to paint a beautiful piece of shit with words.

It’s tangible. His teammates rise from their bench. 

Something unseen anywhere else in pro sports!

The fans start buzzing like they’re waiting for a band to make a Coachella entrance or something. 

MAYBE YOU HAVEN'T HEARD BUT BILL LIVES IN SOCAL NOW

Everyone stands because you simply have to stand. 

No, everyone stands because it's exciting, which happens all the time in every sport.

And all the limits of the sport we thought we understood get briefly removed. 

Barf

It’s amazing. Utterly, completely amazing. 

Barf barf

If you have the money and the Warriors are passing through your city, go see Steph Curry. 

Oh, you can't see them in person whenever you want?  Pity.  Perhaps you need a more connected family to get your media career off the ground.

You want to be there if he starts feeling it. Trust me. 

"You wouldn't know from watching on TV, peasant."

ADVANTAGE: CURRY.

I'm not even finishing this fucking segment of this shitstain of an article.  Here are the categories you missed, and the correct picks each:

NIGHT-TO-NIGHT COMPETITIVENESS: 

All of them, regardless of the fact that Westbrook looks meaner than the other two.

GUY YOU’D MOST WANT FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS: 

All of them.

MOST VALUABLE RIGHT NOW:

Curry, I'd guess, but you can't pick wrong.

MEANING TO THEIR CITY:

NONE OF THEM, BECAUSE NONE OF THEM PLAY IN BEANTOWN AND THEY-AHFO-AH, NONE OF THEM AHHHH PROPAHLY APPRECIATED!

I'll wrap it up with LeBron and Anthony Davis in the next post.  Seriously, fuck Bill Simmons and fuck anyone who reads him for any reason other than to complain about him.

I'm sorry I've said many times that Bill knows the NBA, I was completely wrong (part 1)

Here's Bill's ode to Carmelo Anthony, penned shortly after Melo re-upped with the Knicks. Full disclosure: I am a Nuggets fan, and definitely hold a small grudge against Carmelo for the way he demanded the trade that sent him out of town. (I say small grudge, because three years later, the anger I initially felt is heavily tempered by the fact that the Nuggets probably won that trade.  At the very least it's quasi-semi-even-ish.)  Anyways, in case you didn't know it, Bill is a big Carmelo fan.  I'm not sure why--maybe he saw Darko and Melo walking down a hallway a few months before the 2003 draft, decided Darko was a sure bust and Melo was a sure 25,000+ point scorer, and is still riding high on that prediction.  If you have a brain, you can look at what Melo has accomplished in the NBA: tons of points, not enough anything else (although to his credit, his assist and rebounding percentages have improved ever so slightly in New York; he's also maintained his true shooting percentage despite an increased usage rate), and probably most importantly, a terrible playoff record.  You can then conclude that Melo is a good player who isn't capable of winning a championship without help from some other stars.  Bill, unsurprisingly, does not take this route.

I'm not trying to spout lava-hot taeks along the lines of WINNING IS ALL THAT MATTERS IN THE NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION JUST ASK MIKEL JORDAN QED.  But moreso than in the NFL, NHL or MLB, a star player needs to prove his worth by doing well in the postseason.  It's up to him to carry his team, because he can carry it, in a way that no other major sport athlete can.  Quarterbacks and goalies CAN have huge impacts, but those don't measure up to the impact an NBA star SHOULD have on nearly every playoff series in which they participate.  Sure, a goalie can steal a couple game or even a series; but no goalie, not even the best of the best, is going to be able to do that year in and year out for the entire playoff stretch.  Same for QBs.  But an NBA superstar who is capable of leading a team to a championship should almost always be "on" in the playoffs.

So how has Melo been in April and May, eleven years into his career?  Well, before looking at that, let's at least give him credit for having BEEN to the playoffs ten of eleven possible times.  And the Knicks missing the party this past season is hardly Melo's fault, after he put up 10.7 win shares and 27/8/3 while shooting 45%/40%/85%.  But that's pretty much where the compliments can stop.  Melo has gotten his teams out of the first round just twice in his ten playoff appearances--to the conference finals on a stacked Denver team in 2009, and to the second round in 2013 on a not particularly stacked Knicks team.  That's not a WINNING WINNER in my book.

Eight out of ten times, it's been one series and done for Melo's teams--and sometimes with him playing like garbage.  Most of his career averages are roughly equivalent in the regular season and in the playoffs, except for one very important one: his FG% drops from 45.5 to 41.7, and his TS% drops from 54.7 to 51.1.  Other stars--both current stars and retired stars he's often compared to, like Bernard King and Alex English--don't have this problem.  As for the good performance/bad performance divide, he was an absolute mess in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2011 playoffs.  Three of those were tough matchups (top seeded Timberwolves in 2004 while he was a rookie, eventual champ Spurs in 2005, and eventual conference champ Lakers in 2008), but you'd think he would have shown up for ONE of those series, rather than average 19 points while shooting well under 40% and winning just a single game in all three series combined.  Two more of those bad performances came against less tough matchups (the mediocre 2006 Clippers and aging 2011 Celtics) and he couldn't hit the ocean from the beach against either, shooting 33% and 38% respectively.  Put a different way, in ten career playoff appearances, a guy who is a sure thing to finish his career in the league's all time top 25 in points, and has a good shot at the top 10, has shown up and played well during the playoffs in just half of his career appearances.  In just those five good performances, he has won three total series (two in 2009, one in 2013) and has guided his teams to a 20-24 record.  In the GOOD performances.  In the bad performances, his teams are a combined 2-20.

I think that's more than enough prologue.  I wanted to lay that out there because I'll be referencing those numbers throughout this series of posts.  If you tl;dr'ed over those last three paragraphs, which is fine (you short attention span having cretin), all you need to know is this: Melo is an awesome scorer, but he has a shitty playoff record that does not befit his reputation as a star, and Bill thinks you can win a title if Melo is your best player, which is fucking idiotic. No, really, he thinks that.  Here:

This wasn’t one of our happier years at the “You Can Absolutely Win a Title If Carmelo Anthony Is Your Best Player” Fan Club headquarters. 

Like I said.  With just two exceptions (the 2004 Pistons and the 2011 Mavericks), in order to win a title in the past 20ish (actually 23) years, you've needed to have one of these guys on your team: Jordan, Olajuwon, Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, KG, LeBron.  If you didn't have one of those guys, your title chances were sparse.  They've been hogging all the titles since before the internet existed.  Look at the names who aren't on that list--Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Durant.  But at least each of those I just named have played for a title.  Melo hasn't even done that.  And somehow you "absolutely" can win a title with him as your best player?  Particularly now that he's on the wrong side of 30?  Go fuck yourself.

Our man missed the 2014 playoffs in the rancid Eastern Conference, 

All it took to make the playoffs in the east last season was going 38-44.  In a division where the other four teams besides the Knicks were a combined 76 games below .500, the Knicks couldn't pull that off.

then received a rude comeuppance from his new Knicks boss, Phil Jackson, who lobbied him publicly to stick around at a discount price. 

What does Phil Jackson know about putting together a winning team?  Obviously giving Melo a max extension and continuing to surround him with mediocre teammates is the fast track to titletown.

The Bulls couldn’t carve out enough cap space for him. 

Slash didn't want to.

The Lakers couldn’t offer a good enough supporting cast. 

Fortunately he'll still have Andrea Bargnani and Iman Shumpert around next year!

The Rockets never gained momentum, for whatever reason. 

Because they already have James Harden filling the "scores a lot, not great at anything else, you probably don't want him to be your best player" role, and filling it better than Anthony does in New York.

Carmelo ended up re-signing for $122 million for five years, pretending that was the plan all along … even though it wasn’t.

Based on the circumstances that brought him to NYC, i.e., he demanded a trade there because his wife told him to demand a trade there, I wouldn't be too surprised if that was the plan all along.

You know what really shocked me? Hearing Knicks fans and Lakers fans wonder whether it was a smart idea to splurge on Carmelo at all. Where are you REALLY going if he’s your best player?, they kept asking. 

The answer is in those three paragraphs at the top of the post.  You're going to the second round, if you're really lucky and everything comes together, and otherwise you're going to the golf course.

Take my friend Lewis, a lifelong Southern California guy, one of those complicated superfans who’s nutty enough to grow a beard for the entire NHL playoffs, only he’s rational enough to freak out over Kobe’s cap-crippling two-year extension, but he’s also irrational enough to still believe the Lakers could eventually sign Kevin Love AND Kevin Durant. You can always count on him for a rationally irrational reaction, if that makes sense.

It doesn't, because you're a god-fucking-awful writer who learned from another mostly god-fucking-awful writer (Klosterman) that it's useful to readers to describe people/things with contradicting terms and then just say "if that makes sense" and move on.  Sounds to me like Lewis is a non-complicated fan.  He likes his teams and is optimistic about them, but also acknowledges when they do stupid stuff.

When news broke two weekends ago that the Lakers had become serious Carmelo contenders, I couldn’t wait for Lewis’s reaction. 

We're all just as fascinated by your friends as you are, definitely.

After all, he reacted to last March’s Marian Gaborik trade as if his Kings had just acquired Gretzky again — I figured Carmelo would rank highly on the Gaborik Reaction Scale. 

Turns out, Lewis isn't a fucking dunce.

Instead, here’s the email exchange we had.

FASCINATING.

Me: Are u officially in Carmelo mode?
Lewis: God no. Hope he goes to the Knicks.

Isn't this what you want from your sportswriters, everyone?  Word for word transcriptions of completely unremarkable emails containing no original or entertaining ideas about stuff happening in the world of sports?

Wait a second … my rationally irrational Lakers buddy didn’t want Carmelo?

SURE LOOKS THAT WAY.  Holy shit, this is horrendous and we're not even halfway through my first post about it, which will probably be one of four or five by the time I'm done.

Me: You don’t mean that.
Lewis: It’s a bandaid on a broken arm. It locks them up with no flexibility for two years until Kobe goes.

Why is Lewis friends with Bill?  He's too smart for that.

He didn’t want Carmelo Anthony??? On the Lakers???

MORE REPEATED PUNCTUATION PLEASE!  I LIKE MY SPORTSWRITING TO LOOK LIKE IT WAS DRAFTED BY A 12 YEAR OLD GIRL!!!!!!!

I surfed a few Lakers blogs and message boards and found similar ambivalence. Some fans wanted him, others didn’t understand the point. Many felt like the rationally irrational Lewis — they wanted the Lakers to land a top-five lottery pick (if it’s lower than that, it goes to Phoenix), wipe Nash’s expiring contract off their cap, then make a run at the Kevins (Love in 2015, Durant in 2016). 

They'd rather take that very sensible path, than sign a guy who hasn't won shit in his career, plays the same kind of game Kobe does, and is on the wrong side of 30?  Those lunatics!

That’s a smart plan, except (a) they could easily stink and STILL lose that 2015 lottery pick, 

Definitely a reason not to tank.  Like Bill always says: you never want to tank in the NBA, you always want to be mediocre.  Definitely don't do what you can to win the lottery, because it's way too risky to try that.

(b) Love will probably get traded this season (and might like his new team), 

I "love" (lol!) the spin here.  Love is a free agent after this season, which is why Laker fans are hoping their team can sign him.  Bill's counterargument: 1) Love will probably get traded this season, which has nearly fuck-all to do with his impending offseason, and 2) assuming he does get traded, which isn't a certainty, he might want to sign an extension with his new team.  GAME, SET, MATCH.  NICE TRY, DUMMIES.  YOUR PLAN HAS BEEN POTENTIALLY MAYBE RUINED.

(c) nobody knows what Durant wants to do, 

Somehow dumber than the Love analysis.

and (d) nobody knows if the post–Dr. Buss Lakers are still a destination franchise.

Yeah, who would want to go play for the Lakers anymore?  Now that they've moved to Fargo, forfeited all their championships and history, and are owned by a mill worker who is forced to pay them their salaries in grain rather than dollars, let's face facts: it's over for that so-called "franchise."

What a fucking diptard.

And it’s not like the Lakers are loaded with assets; they have Julius Randle, the promise of future cap space, the allure of Los Angeles and that’s about it. 

MAY NOT EVEN BE A DESTINATION FRANCHISE ANYMORE.

They’re owned by Jimmy Boy Buss. They owe Kobe $23.5 million this season and $25 million next season — nearly 40 percent of their cap — without even knowing if he can play at a high level anymore. 

Say he can't.  What's the consequence to a 2015 free agent?  You spend one season on a team that features an HOFer in his final season, and then you free up some cap room to go after more good players in the summer of 2016.  What a frightening prospect.  Clearly, signing 30 year old Carmelo is a much better idea.

The best asset on that side of Staples Center is probably Ramona Shelburne’s reporting for ESPN.com; she’s better than anyone on their actual team. The Lakers may have switched bodies with the Clippers two years ago and we just haven’t realized it yet.

Seems unlikely.

Knowing that, how could any Lakers fan not want one of the best scoring forwards in NBA history? 

For all the fifty reasons we've been over so far?

Why weren’t Knicks fans freaking out that they might lose their franchise player for nothing? 

Because they've watched him do a whole lot of scoring and a whole lot of nothing else in three seasons, including going 7-14 in the playoffs in the much weaker of the two conferences?

Why were so many Bulls fans (and I know three of them) 

I DON'T HATE THE BULLS!  I HAVE THREE BULLS FAN FRIENDS!

saying things like “I’d love to get Melo, but I hate the thought of giving up Taj [Gibson] for him”?

Because Gibson is 3/4ths the player Melo is for 1/3rd the price, and the Bulls already added a scorer in Paul Gasol?

How did Carmelo Anthony, only 30 years old and still in his prime, 

We don't need to split hairs here, but at best, I would argue that he's "very late" in his prime.

become the NBA’s most underappreciated and misunderstood player?

Probably by being an incomplete player who has won three playoff series in eleven years.

The problems start here: Carmelo Anthony is definitely better than your typical All-Star, but he’s not quite a superstar. You know what that makes him? 

What direction do you think Bill is going to take this?  If you had to guess, what kind of analogy is he going to construct?

An almost-but-not-quite-superstar. He’s not Leo DiCaprio or Will Smith — he can’t open a movie by himself. He’s more like Seth Rogen or Channing Tatum — he can open the right movie by himself. There’s a big difference.

Please stop banging your head on your keyboard/tablet.  I'm just as embarrassed for Bill as you are, but we need to finish this.

Here’s something I wrote on July 8, 2010, the day that LeBron took his talents to South Beach.

I need my NBA superstar to sell tickets, generate interest locally and nationally, single-handedly guarantee an average supporting cast 45-50 wins, and potentially be the best player on a Finals team if the other pieces are in place, which means only LeBron, Wade, Howard, Durant and Kobe qualify. There’s a level just a shade below (the Almost-But-Not-Quite-Superstar) with Steve Nash, Dirk Nowitzki, Carmelo Anthony, Brandon Roy, Chris Paul and Deron Williams. (Note: I think Derrick Rose gets there next season.) Then you have elite guys like Bosh, Pau Gasol and Amar’e Stoudemire who need good teammates to help them thrive … and if they don’t have them, you’re heading to the lottery. You know what we call these people? All-Stars.

Sorry, Portland fans — I made a mistake not telling you to take a deep breath before you read that paragraph. My bad. 

Oh man, the guy who was their team's best player back then ended up getting hurt and retiring!  I bet that was really hard for them to read about!

But exactly four years later, those levels look like this.

Superstars: LeBron, Durant.

Almost-But-Not-Quite-Superstars: Blake Griffin, Dwight Howard, Anthony Davis, Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Love, Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Paul George.

Watch out: super hot Paul George taeks can be read here.  REALLY, HE'S MORE LIKE JEREMY RENNER THAN CHANNING TATUM.  I'M SURE WE CAN AGREE ON THAT.

All-Stars: Stephen Curry, James Harden, LaMarcus Aldridge, Damian Lillard, Tony Parker, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki, Joakim Noah, Chris Bosh, Derrick Rose (if healthy), Rajon Rondo (if healthy), Kobe Bryant (???).

A few semi-stunned notes about that revised list. 

Quasi-mystified!

First, two true superstars 

Are those like True Yankees?

is the NBA’s lowest number since 1979, the season before Bird and Magic showed up. 

That bullshit list, and Bill's serious analysis of the bullshit list that he just bullshitted out, is even more bullshitty than bullshit.  Anyone who dares repeat this analysis in conversation with you ("Hey, did you know the NBA only has two True Superstars right now, its lowest number since 1979?") should be immediately kicked in the balls.

Second, Anthony Davis is our only superstar in waiting right now … well, unless you feel like bending the rules and counting Joel Embiid If He Stays Healthy or my illegitimate Australian son, Ben Simmons (a frighteningly gifted high schooler who looks likeBenji Wilson 2.0).

You like Anthony Davis.  We get it.  I hope you (the readers this time, not Bill) realize that if Davis continues to get better and becomes an All Star for years to come, which seems pretty likely at this point, Bill is going to talk about how he knew Davis would be good in every fucking column for the next decade?  So fun.  I'm really looking forward to it.  Only a basketball savant like Bill could tell that a five star recruit, turned NCAA tournament Most Outstanding Player, turned #1 overall draft pick would be a star.  Good for Bill.  Someone give him a condescending pat on the head for me.

Third, we’re in the middle of an under-30 talent boom that’s as loaded as any run since the early ’90s, and yet we dipped from 11 superstars and almost-but-not-quite-superstars in 2010 to 10 of those guys in 2014.

PRETTY CRAZY.  LET'S GET A ROUNDTABLE WITH COUSIN SAL, MALCOLM GLADWELL AND ZACH LOWE GOING AND MAYBE WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHY THIS DEFINITELY EXISTING AND NOT AT ALL RIDICULOUS, POINTLESS AND MADE UP TREND IS HAPPENING.

Six dropped out and five jumped in, not including Rose, who briefly careered into the superstar group in 2011 and 2012. 

NO ONE DENIES THIS!

(You also could have talked me into putting Curry, Harden and Aldridge on the Almost-But-Not-Quite-Superstar list after enough drinks.) 

But only then!  Unless you pump him full of Mike's Hard Lemonade, Bill's analysis of the True Superstar tiers remains solid and unimpeachable.

I didn’t expect that much turnover. 

Neither did anyone, because no one gives a flying donkey cunt about your list.

Four years doesn’t seem like that long of a time, right?

In the context of writing this blog and watching bad sportswriting stay bad sportswriting, let me assure you: it feels like fucking eons.

And fourth, Carmelo’s 2014 level was a tougher call than everyone else’s combined. After all, he’s made one conference finals and zero Finals. He’s never won more than 54 regular-season games or made an All-NBA first team, although he did finish third in 2013’s MVP voting (no small feat). 

ESPECIALLY FOR A NON-TRUE SUPERSTAR!

He’s made only seven All-Star teams in 11 years (two fewer than Chris Bosh). Most damning, Carmelo has lost nearly twice as many playoff games as he has won: 23 wins, 44 losses. 

It's 22 wins, 44 losses.  Really not that hard to check the "GP" column on basketballreference.com and see whether your numbers add up.

You can’t even use the whole “Look, Carmelo can drag any mediocre team to 44 wins and the playoffs!” argument anymore — not after last season.

Exactly.  Although he was very awesome last year, it wasn't even enough to MAKE the playoffs in a putrid division in a putrid conference--and you think that with the right team, that includes no one who's better than him, you're winning a title?  Keep fucking dreaming.

So what’s left? Can’t we downgrade him to All-Star and be done with it? Isn’t 11 years enough time to know — to truly, unequivocally know — whether it’s with television shows, music groups, girlfriends, quarterbacks or basketball players?

The first two: who the fuck knows, and why are we talking about them?  The third: I certainly hope so.  The fourth: eh, probably, although there is Kurt Warner.  The fifth: fucking DEFINITELY.

For me, it keeps coming back to one question: Can you win the NBA championship if Carmelo Anthony is your best player?

The short answer: Yes.

You can.

One sentence paragraphs.

No one does them quite like Bill Plaschke.

Who is a fucking moron.

Like Bill.

More later.

And this is why I should never credit Simmons for his NBA analysis, part 3 (of 3)

In my Simmons mailbag post, I made a crack about how he never writes anymore.  While I stand by that, I have to give him credit--in the past week, he has started his annual NBA trade value series (Didn't he used to do that during the summer, after the playoffs ended?  Greggggggggg says CREEP ALERT!!!!) and written an article on the Quentin/Greinke fight which I have not yet read, but of which the Grantland editor who writes the little mini summaries says:

You can call it a donnybrook or a fracas. Bill Simmons calls it one of the best things that can happen at a baseball game.

Of course, because Simmons doesn't actually care about baseball, unless it's October and the Red Sox are still playing.  Don't get me wrong, I love a good brawl, but I also like baseball a lot even when there are no brawls.  Whatever.  Let's get to the rest of the garbage he wrote about the Heat's streak.

LOSER: Kobe Bryant, Chris Paul, Carmelo Anthony …

And everyone else who briefly thought they had a chance to own the 2012-13 NBA season. Thanks for coming, guys.

No one who matters gives a fuck about who "owns" the season.  This is an incredibly stupid narrative that dipwads like Bill invent.  Players care about winning games, winning end of season awards and winning statistical titles like leading the league in scoring.  They do not sit around with their friends or their agent and say "You know, I wish more people thought I owned that season.  How can I change that?"

WINNER: The 1972 Lakers

Not just because they kept their streak, but because Miami's run pushed people to start considering the magnitude of that 33-gamer again. 

They would not have been "losers" had the Heat won 34 straight.  People would have considered the magnitude of the Lakers' streak and realized how awesome it was no matter what.  But enough of me taking Bill's arguments seriously.

Was that streak underrated, overrated or properly rated? 

Oh dear God, who gives a flying fucking rat's ass?

The case for each …

THE STREAK WAS OVERRATED BECAUSE …

CHUCK KLOSTERMAN TOLD ME IT WAS SECRETLY UNDEROVERRATED!

THE STREAK WAS UNDERRATED BECAUSE …

And I didn't even mention the NBA's brutal schedule back then. Early on in their streak, the '72 Lakers played eight games in 10 days — in five different cities — including consecutive Friday-Saturday-Sunday back-to-back-to-backers. Later in the streak, they played five games in six days in Los Angeles, Phoenix, Los Angeles, Buffalo and Baltimore (and won all five). 

That's pretty fucking nuts, actually.

THE STREAK WAS PROPERLY RATED BECAUSE …

WHO

GIVES

A

FUCK

It's funny that Bill has sparred with his bosses with increasing regularity over the years (most recently regarding the Richard Sherman/Skip Bayless scuffle, which, come on Richard, don't play my man Skip like that).  As time passes each caters less and less to sports fans and more and more to people who sort of like sports and want to be able to talk about them in the same way others talk about celebrity gossip.  OMG WAIT UNTIL YOU HEAR WHAT LEBRON SAID ABOUT TONY ROMO.  IT'S SOOOOOO JUICY.

WINNER: Jerry West

Not just for keeping his streak, but for being so damned magnanimous during Miami's run. When I interviewed him for NBA Countdown last week …

And this turns into a 600 word tangent about how great Bill Russell was and how Simmons has talked to Magic Johnson about Russell's greatness a lot.  Because Bill is just a regular old sports guy, just like you and me.

LOSER: The 2013 Eastern Conference playoffs

Has anyone caught more breaks than Miami these past 12 months? 

THEY AHHHHHH THE LUCKIEST FACKIN NAWN-FRANCHISE EVAH TO EXIST!  

The luck the Celtics buttfucked their way into between May 2007 and June 2008 was astonishing.  Of course, that's the case with a lot of title winning teams (2011 Mavs for sure, and it's not hard to make a case for the 2010 Lakers).  They were ONE of the best in the league, but not definitely THE best, and then they caught some breaks at the right time.  In the case of the 2007-2008 Celtics, it wasn't just in-season breaks, or winning game 7s in the first three rounds of the playoffs--it was the way Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett fell into their laps.  I'm not saying it wasn't also some shrewd work by their front office to make those moves happen, but at the same time, to get both of those guys via trade in the same offseason is pretty lucky.  Usually there isn't even one guy as good as either of them available for trade in any given year.  Anyways, you know what recent title winner I wouldn't put on the "lucky" list?  The 2012 Heat, who were just flat out too fucking good for everyone.  And I don't think the 2013 Heat, should they win the the title, are going to belong on that list either.  But let's let Bill make his case.

Just in their own conference, Chicago decides not to make a run because of Derrick Rose's injury, then Rose decides not to come back. 

A superstar player getting hurt is not "luck" for the Heat, this shit happens all the time.  Even if it were lucky for the Heat, it would also be lucky for 28 other teams, making it a pretty poor candidate for a list of things that make the Heat the luckiest team in the league.  It isn't "lucky" for the Heat anymore than it's "lucky" for the Pacers.  You would have to be stupid to think that. 

Boston loses Rondo for the year. Same for Indiana and Granger, Philly and Bynum 

Philly was maybe going to be the 5th best team in the East if Bynum had played 82 games.

and (probably) New York and Amar'e. 

Amar'e is maybe the 100th best player in the league if he's healthy.

Orlando deals Howard out of the conference. 

This may be news to some, but HOWARD IS STILL PLAYING ELSEWHERE IN THE NBA, meaning the Heat still might have to get through his team to win it all.  (Extremely unlikely, HAW HAW LAKERS FANS BLOW IT OUT YOUR ASSES, but possible.)  Maybe, if instead of being traded, he had played for the Magic this year, the Magic might stolen a single regular season game from the Heat instead of going 0-for, which then in the big picture amounts to.... nothing.  This is not "luck" for the Heat or for any other team.  You would have to be stupid to think that.

Brooklyn deals the Damian Lillard pick for The Artist Formerly Known As Gerald Wallace, killing its chance to trade for one more blue-chip veteran last month. 

Because everyone knew Damiam Lillard would blow up this year!  That's why he was taken 6th overall, a pick after a guy who has already been traded.  This is still not luck, in no small part because the Nets were not going to be that good anyways.  I know they had a nice season and got the 4 seed, but have you seen their record broken down between playoff teams and non-playoff teams?  It's ghastly.  They're not good against good teams.  I predict the Rose-less Bulls take care of them in 6.

On the other side, the Lakers imploded faster than Amanda Bynes's Twitter account; 

After trading for Dwight Howard, a guy whose departure from the East is supposedly a stroke of luck for the Heat.  Also, I would agree that it is a "good thing" for other teams that the Lakers have struggled this year, but this is still not "luck," and you would be stupid to think that.

Oklahoma City dealt James Harden a year too early for 50 cents on the dollar; 

This is the first item on the list that I would call lucky for the rest of the league, because 1) it was not a move the Thunder had to make (unlike the Howard trade which the Magic were essentially forced into) and 2) it made a good team worse (unlike the Howard trade which in theory, should have made a good team better). Luckily for Bill, because it involved the team most likely to challenge the Heat for the title this year, it goes a good distance towards validating his "the Heat got lucky" thesis.  But by good distance, I mean not really all that far, and he's still got all these other idiotic points floating around.

Memphis salary-dumped Rudy Gay; 

For Tayshaun Prince, and promptly ripped off a 12-2 (or something) streak.

and the Clippers decided against running an offense this season. 

I assume that is more of a joke than a piece of serious analysis, but either way, it's dumb.

At the rate we're going, Ty Lawson and Tony Parker are going to collide during a Spurs-Nuggets game and knock each other unconscious until July. Congratulations on the 2013 title, Miami. Just plan the parade already.

IT'S A PATENTED REVAHSE DOUBLE-JANX!  BILLY S. RULES!

WINNER: Pat Riley

Riley didn't just build the team that won 27 straight games, he spent the past three decades setting the stage for this specific season. 

That's the stupidest line in this entire column, which is saying a lot.

LOSER: Everyone who hates that Miami stacked the deck in 2010

We have been "losers" in that regard for almost three years now, numbnuts.  This streak had nothing to do with it.

Remember when LeBron, Wade and Bosh joined forces in Miami and we threw the biggest collective hissy fit in recent memory? How can those losers try to game the system like that? Why would LeBron rather play with his biggest rival over trying to beat his ass? Whatever happened to competitiveness? Whatever happened to earning a title? Then this happened …

And nothing changed.

… and that pushed our venom to another level. Quite simply, we declared war on the Heat. 

No.

We booed them in every arena, ripped them to shreds on the Internet, lambasted them on radio shows, dangled a heat lamp over them and turned it to high. 

Before the streak, everyone was really coming around to liking them!

We liked having a villain again. 

Oh my God.  You have the attention span of a goldfish if you think this streak turned the Heat into villains "again."

WINNER: The 2013 Miami Heat

Thank you for the insight.

The '66 Celtics went back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back. The '72 Lakers rolled off 33 straight. The '96 Bulls won 87 of 100 games. The '86 Celtics finished 50-1 at home. The '01 Lakers finished 15-1 in the playoffs. I always believed that, if you wanted to make history — real history — you had to beat one of those five teams. 

That would be difficult, though, because none of them play in the NBA anymore and in many cases, the players are either way too old to play basketball anymore or are dead.  The other way to make history--real history--is to be notably good at basketball in a way that is talked about for a long time.  Without manufacturing a stupid list of the teams they have to "beat" to fulfill that criterion, I think we can agree that if the Heat win the title this year, they'll probably have done that, and would have done it even if they went 21-6 during those 27 games.  We can also agree that the degree to which they'll have made "real history" can't really be determined until years down the road, of course, and since we're not people who sit around saying HOW WILL THIS EVENT BE LOOKED BACK ON IN FIFTEEN YEARS?  I KNOW THE ANSWER FOR SURE, SO LET ME TELL YOU, we'll agree to wait it out.  The reason we can agree on all of this is that we're not complete zilcheroos like Bill is.  

You had to win nine straight titles or 34 straight games. You had to win 88 of 100 games in one season, you had to sweep your home games, or you had to sweep the playoffs. Those were your five tickets to immortality.

Shut up.

But the Heat may have forged their way into that previous paragraph anyway. 

Wow!  It's almost like this ridiculous made up bullshit was just ridiculous made up bullshit all along!

LOSER: The 2013 Miami Heat*

What's the asterisk for? Because they have to win the title now … or the streak loses about 50 percent of its ultimate meaning. 

Gregggggggggg approves of Bill's refusal to use a hyperspecific number for that figure.

WINNER: David Stern and Adam Silver

With every NBA season that reaches its conclusion without a repeat of the Pistons/Pacers brawl at Auburn Hills or a similar debacle that makes mainstream America turn up its nose at the NBA because NBA players are THUGGISH THUGS WHO WEAR BAGGY PANTS AND LISTEN TO RAP MUSIC, these two guys are enormous winners.  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

And this one dates back to The Decision in 2010, an allegedly horrific public-relations disaster 

No, not "allegedly."  It was.

that, of course, ended up secretly reinvigorating the NBA, 

SECRETLY AN UNDERRATED OVERRATED FACTOR in an NBA "reinvigoration" that just might have had something to do with the Celtics and Lakers winning the three previous titles before The Decision took place.

In four years, LeBron went from being a savior to a villain to a hero to a legend. You couldn't have scripted it better.

I said it before and I'll say it again: SPORTS EXIST TO FOLLOW AND IMITATE THE CLICHED NARRATIVES I HAVE SEEN REPEATEDLY IN MOVIES AND ON TV! NO ONE DENIES THIS!

WINNER: LeBron James

I did a podcast on Monday with the great Bob Ryan, who's the closest thing we have to an NBA savant right now. 

What?  To appropriate a classic dan-bob label, Bob Ryan has hot dogs for brains.

Ryan was the one who created the Alien Game — if aliens landed on Earth and challenged us to one game for the future of the planet, and you could pick any five guys from any point in history to defend us, who would you pick? 

Look, I appreciate that he wants to make this thought exercise a little ZANY AND WACKY by adding the alien angle, but this is not some awesome, novel invention.  It is a game more commonly known as "Who are the best players of all time at their positions?" and it has been played by a billion NBA fans a billion times in the last fifty or so years.

You would have to be a moron to have the team without LeBron James. Give me 1986 Bird, 1987 Magic, 1992 Jordan and 2013 LeBron and I don't care who's playing center. For the record, I'd pick 1977 Walton as my center just in case the aliens had a 7-foot-6 monster or something, but really, you could give me Russell, Kareem, Parish, Mutombo, Ewing … I don't care. I'm beating the aliens with those other four guys. They would figure out how to win. They would.

I feel like I end posts with a line similar to this way too often these days, but seriously, you're a fucking dipshit.

Bill Simmons revisits one of the stupidest things he's ever written, somehow makes it even stupider, part 1

I spent quite a bit of time this weekend on this long, meandering, whining post about Justin Upton, home/road splits and park factors.  I probably got 75% of the way through it, re-read it, decided it sucked, and didn't publish it.  Maybe I will try to rework it and publish it later this week.  Long story short, Upton has spent his whole career in a very good hitter's park and has very extreme home/road splits (.250/.325/.406 lifetime on the road).  Of course many hitters have significant home/road splits, but those road numbers are flat out shitty.  And the reason I wanted to rant about it on this far-reaching platform is that pretty much no one brought this up while he was on the block or after he was traded to Atlanta.

This doesn't bother me in and of itself--it just bothers me because I'm a Rockies fan (yes, I know you don't give a shit), and any time a Rockies hitter is up for a postseason award, or is on the trading block (as Carlos Gonzalez was rumored to be last season), the immediate response from every baseball writer and casual fan in the fucking country is LOL COORZ FIELD THIS GUY ACTUALLY SUX HE WOULD HIT .100 WITH 2 HRS AT SEE LEVEL.  And God that just makes me want to commit arson.  Especially when a guy like Upton, who hits like an AAAA player anywhere not called Chase Field, is crowned biggest acquisition of the offseason coming off a year in which he accumulated 2 rWAR and OPSed .670 on the road.  You can see how turning that into a 2000 word post might get very tedious, and for considering posting a much longer version of this tripe, I am a true shitdick.  I apologize for making you read even this much about it.  In summary, my life is very difficult and I deserve a medal for getting out of bed every morning.

Anyways, on to something you might actually want to read about.

The Ewing Theory is completely and totally fucking idiotic.  It's at or near the top of the list of most idiotic things ever to come from the brain of one of sports media's biggest idiots.  For every example of a time when a team lost a star player and then played great the rest of the season/the next season, there are like four hundred examples of teams losing star players and then not being nearly as good the rest of the season/the next season.  It's so basic in its stupidity that I feel like I am patronizing you just by explaining what's wrong with it.  Nevertheless, it continues to be referenced by Bill and the mouthbreathers who adore him like it's deserving of serious attention and reflection, because Bill and his mouthbreathers have the critical thinking skills of goldfish.  And now that the Celtics have played pretty well for nine games after losing Rajon Rondo, he's revisiting his theory in what I can only guess is an attempt to make my brain explode.  Game on.  (My posting volume is way down lately, not that you noticed or cared.  In an effort to jumpstart my blogging, I'll try going after this article in a bunch of smaller pieces.  In theory this is part 1 of many.)


When we learned about Rajon Rondo's season-ending injury during ABC's Heat-Celtics game on January 27, every Celtics fan had the same reaction: 

STEVE NASH WOULDA NEVAH LET US DOWN LIKE THIS!  FIE-AH UP THE TRADE MACHINE AND CRANK UP THE GAWDSMACK!  (/writes royalties check to Drew Magary)

So long, Puncher's Chance At Making The Eastern Finals.

You misspelled "so long, puncher's chance at getting out of the first round."

We zipped through the seven stages of grief in about 45 minutes, barely noticing that the Celtics were playing better without Rondo. 

No, you barely noticed or mourned because the Celtics weren't playing well at the time and you're a bunch of frontrunners.  Besides, PITCHAHS AND CATCHAHS!  

For once, they looked like a vintage Garnett-Pierce era Celtics team again. 

Except for the fact that they were missing the point guard who was the catalyst for all of those teams.

No more mailing in quarters, no more rolling over defensively, 

The Celtics, with Rajon "Patrick Ewing" Rondo in the lineup, were 7th in the league in defensive efficiency at the time he got hurt.  To be fair, since then they are 1st in defensive efficiency, although their schedule has featured a bunch of cupcakes as well as a Bulls team not known for offensive prowess.  I do have to hand it to them for their victories over the Nuggets and Clippers, those are legit offensive teams.  The Celtics are certainly playing better defense than they were, but it was already pretty good before the injury and it's certainly a little early to say Rondo's departure is the reason for the improvement.

no more 22-second possessions followed by ghastly 20-footers. 

OK, I watch enough nationally televised Celtics game to know that this happens from time to time.  Just like it does with all teams who have a ball-dominant PG.

They fended off LeBron and the LeBronettes in double overtime with help from a rollicking, old-school Boston crowd 

The next time he forgets to mention THE LEGENDARY BEANTOWN FAITHFUL while describing an important Celtics win at home will the first.  His self-obsession (extended to include people who like the same teams as him--I'm using the term loosely and somewhat incorrectly but you know what I mean) is just... so... draining.

that learned about the severity of Rondo's injury through tweets and texts. 

NO OTHAH FAN BASE WOULD HAVE HANDLED THE NEWS SO WELL!

And somewhere along the line, more than a few Celtics fans e-mailed me or tweeted me the same two words.
Ewing Theory???

All of these people should be thrown down a mine shaft.

Could it be? 

No, it couldn't be.  You goddamn fools.  They are 8-1 since his injury, but only two of those wins have come on the road (in Toronto and Charlotte, two places where there were probably more Celtics fans than home team fans in the arena).  Four of the wins have come against playoff teams, but by a combined 10 points.  Winning close games isn't exactly all luck and no skill, but even the best teams don't consistently win a huge percentage of the one possession games they end up in.  What has happened is not that the Celtics are better without one of the game's 20 best players--rather, they lost him right as they hit a soft spot in the schedule and also eked out a bunch of close wins at home over the good teams that they did play.  They have 9 of their next 11 on the road, including games in Denver, Utah, Portland, Indiana and Oklahoma City, all nasty places to play.  Just watch: they will go like 4-7 or 5-6 over that span, fall back into the 8th spot in the East, and Bill will be saying I ALWAYS TOLD YOU RONDO WAS THE HAHHHHHT AND SOUL OF THIS TEAM.  I CANNOT WATCH ANYMO-AH THIS SEASON, IT'S SIMPLY TOO HAHD WITH HIM OUT.  And then the Heat will eventually sweep them 4-0 in the first round, and I will laugh.  But sorry, back to what you were saying, captain confirmation bias.

We started picking apart Rondo's game in our heads, even if most of us absolutely loved the guy.  And believe me — I love the guy. Had I gotten another dog between 2010 and 2012, 

Please, God yes.  Tell us more about your fucking dogs and your family.  We're already a whole 100 words into this column--how have they not come up yet?

I absolutely would have named him "Rondo." That's my dude. Other than Larry Legend, he's the most original basketball player I have ever watched on a day-to-day basis. 

I'd accuse him of using "original" as a backhanded compliment with racial undertones, but he preempted me with the Bird thing.  Damn.

There will never be a Rondo 2.0. Unfortunately, there will always be Basic Cable Rondo and National TV Rondo.

Ooh, an UNDERAPPRECIATED (/writes royalties check to Klosterman) Simmons staple: the meaningless "tale of two players" nicknames that you're supposed to think are super insightful.

Basic Cable Rondo gets bored easily. He pads his assist totals just to see if he can. 

This is not a thing that happens with pro athletes.  This is the basketball equivalent of accusing a baseball player of hitting selfish home runs when the game is already out of reach.

He goes entire games without ever driving to the hoop or drawing a foul. He shoots 3s even though he should never, ever, EVER be shooting 3s. He pounds the ball 25 feet away from the basket for no good reason, 

OK, I'm legitimately sensing the racial undertones there.

frowns a little too often, 

If only he were more like Tony Romo, leading the league in smiles!

only makes teammates better on his terms. 

Awful.

He cheats passing lanes and gambles for steals too much. 

That's, like, 70% of all point guards in the NBA.

He pretends to lead without really leading. 

Never, in a trillion years, could you accurately make that assessment as a fan.  Never.  Never ever.  I hate Rondo and yet I feel bad for him after reading that.  Just a brutal driveby on his character with zero substantiation.  I hope Bill gets shingles.

He's on hyperfocused cruise control, basically. 

That means nothing, basically, and you should never end a sentence basically.  You are a shitty writer.

The worst thing about Basic Cable Rondo? You know when he shows up. Right away. Within three minutes of the opening tip.

BECAUSE YOU AHHHHH SMAHTAH THAN THE AVERAGE FAN!  YOU KNOW THINGS ABOUT PEOPLE THAT EVEN THEIR TEAMMATES COULD NEVAH POSSIBLY KNOW!  YOU ARE A GENIUS!  NOW TWEET A HORRIBLE JOKE!

But National TV Rondo? Sweet Jesus do I love that guy. 

He plays the game the right way!  He is a lunchpail guy!  He doesn't depend on his athleticism too much!  He plays smart!  Am I using enough coded language yet?

He's a walking triple-double. He's a beast. He's one of the best eight or nine players alive. You could give National TV Rondo four mediocre teammates and he could hang with any contender. Shit, that's practically what happened in the Eastern finals last spring — Garnett and Pierce were worn down from the shortened season, so was Ray Allen, and nobody else on the team was worth a damn except Brandon Bass. The Celtics came within one victory of beating LeBron in his prime. That's why you put up with Basic Cable Rondo — because National TV Rondo knocks your team's ceiling up a couple floors.

Let me tell you how much I hate Bill Simmons.  I hate him so much than when sports journalism's biggest fucking asshole (a difficult title to hold, to be sure) Mike Wilbon routinely and unfairly abuses Simmons on ESPN's NBA pregame show, I actually take Wilbon's side.  And I DESPISE Wilbon.  If you've never seen what I'm talking about, check it out this Friday.  Wilbon talks to Simmons like Simmons is a 2nd grader who just learned the rules of basketball and can only name a handful of NBA players.  It's really rude.  And I'm totally cool with it.  Party on, Mike Wilbon.  May you only be fired and sent the way of Jay Mariotti once you're done embarrassing Simmons on national TV.

Part 2 soon.

Maybe You Expected Me To Pick On Chas MacGonaghcle Of The Des Moines Globe

The number of posts I'm able to make is a bit limited these days. As for which writers I should cover in the process of formulating these posts, there's a part of me that says I should use this opportunity to diversify and find real pieces of garbage from lesser-known sources. With two or three days to find something before taking the time to write about it, after all, I should have some sort of "pick" of some sort of "litter" compared to back when I was putting up something new every night. On the other hand, though, there's a part of me that just wants to continue my mindless bitching about Bill Simmons. Let's just say that internal debate was settled easily.

This is the conclusion to a two part column in which Bill ranked a large handful of NBA players in terms of value this season, all the way from Stephon Marbury at No. 450 to, holy fucking shitballs this is a surprise, Kevin Garnett at No. 1. I don't really have huge problems with 90% of the column(s). I know there are plenty of NBA fans out there that are tortured by his often-shitty analysis, but I can't help but consider most of what he says about "The League" to be not that bad when you compare it to his NFL and (particularly) MLB work. So in general, the whole rankings thing comes off OK. Until, of course, we arrive at KG and Bill's reasoning for choosing him as MVP.

This is not journalism. This is horrid, pathetic, and embarrassing. This is an insult to Mike Celzic and anything he could ever write about Derek Jeter. It's an insult to Bill Plaschke and anything he could ever write about Juan Pierre. It's an insult to anything that has ever been written about David Eckstein or Darin Erstad. This is so bad, I honestly don't know how to begin picking it apart. Fortunately, Simmons breaks the ice for me with a hilarious opening clause.

1. Kevin Garnett

Let's get the bad stuff out of the way so you don't think this is a homer vote:

Oh. Ahhhhh. OK, so it's not a homer vote. Say no more. I was thinking to myself, "During a year in which pretty much everyone and his parole officer has agreed that Kobe is the MVP pick, if a huge Celtics fan makes a case for Garnett it's probably because he's being a homer." But then you come along and tell me that that's not the case at all! I really appreciate the clarification.

This is like your friend trying to convince you that his bitch of a girlfriend is actually a nice person. "Dude, I know you're going to think I'm only saying this because I'm dating her, but hear me out." Of course, when you're in a situation like that, your friend eventually breaks up with the girl and admits she was a cunt. Bill will take his blind and clueless homerism to his grave.

I don't think Garnett is the most talented player in the league;

No one has thought this since 2005.

I don't trust him at the end of games because he gets too wound up; it drives me crazy that he relies on his fall-away so much (especially in fourth quarters);

Fair enough.

and I'd rather have Tim Duncan for a playoff series if my life depended on it.

I like how this is phrased as a reluctant concession to Duncan fans. One of those players has four motherfucking rings (all but one obtained as the best player on his team). The other has one has two motherfucking playoff series wins. If your life really depended on it, and you racked your brain for hours over the decision, you might decide that Duncan is the better bet? Good.

Of course, none of that stuff matters in an MVP discussion.

The first and last items on that list do not. The second and third though, about late game performance? Well, two of Bill's own criteria for picking an MVP (which I don't necessarily agree with, but I'm willing to consider as starting points) are:

Question No. 2: In a giant pickup game with every NBA player waiting to play, and two fans forced to pick sides with their lives depending on the outcome of the game (I think this is how the annual Rucker League tournament works, by the way), who would be the first player picked based on the way everyone played that season? Question No. 3: If you replaced every MVP candidate with a decent player at their position for the entire season, what would be the effect on their teams' records?

If only Bill weren't so popular, and such a catastrophic pile of asshole, I bet he would take the time to answer an email inquiring as to how this list and the above claim about late game performance are compatible. Alas, since he'd obviously never reply to that email, you'll have to try to quilt an answer together on your own. Good luck. I got nothin'.

He's the one guy everyone will remember from this regular season (sorry, Kobe);

"Everyone" in this case meaning, of course, Celtics fans. Don't get me wrong; plenty of people will remember Garnett changing teams, because that's a cool and relevant story. But the actual performance on the court is a different story, in this non-Celtic non-Laker fan's opinion. There's a chance it's only because my favorite team is in the West, but I would definitely say that Kobe's overall performance was more "rememberable" this year.

and he was worth a 30-win swing to the Celtics this season.

Interesting. My paperwork here says he was only worth 26 wins, but I guess you could be right. That would mean the combined sum of adding Ray Allen and James Posey and having several young contributors (Rondo, Perkins, Powe) get another season under their belts was worth 11 wins. As in, this Celtics team minus Garnett and plus Al Jefferson wins 35 games and misses the playoffs. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmbullshit.

In other words, he's the first choice for two of my three MVP questions.

In other words, he's the choice for your first MVP question (not listed by me, but it's about that remembrance bullshit) and you offer absolutely no evidence as to how he fulfills the other two.

But that's not why I'm picking him. On May 22, professional basketball was effectively murdered in Boston.

Christ on a crutch. Holy fish sticks. You. Fucking. Crybaby. Someone call the whaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for Bill, because he's got his ovaries all twisted up. The history of the NBA draft is fucking littered with teams that expected to get a top 3 pick and were denied by some cruel bounce of a ping pong ball. It happens all the stinking time. Guess what? It happened to Boston last year. Guess what else? That doesn't mean you can write a sentence like that. Ray Lewis didn't drive up to Boston, find a physical manifestation of the nebulous concept of basketball, and murder it like a Super Bowl partier. A professional sport is "effectively murdered" in a town when a team moves away, a one-of-a-kind-once-in-a-generation superstar leaves as a free agent, or someone prominently involved with a team actually dies. Losing the lottery and picking 5th when your record indicated you should be picking 2nd IS NOT ON THAT LIST OR ANYWHERE NEAR IT.

Sorry about that. Here comes the Ecksteiny part.

Garnett transformed every single facet of the franchise upon his arrival, from playing for the Celtics to coaching them to following them to owning them to working for them. What he did can't be measured by statistics; it can't even be measured in a few paragraphs like the section you're reading right now. It would belittle what he did.

Offensive.

He transformed the culture of the team. He taught everyone to care about defense, to care about practice, to care about being a professional, to care about leaving everything they had on the court, to stop caring about stats and start caring about wins.

More offensive.

He single-handedly transformed the careers of three young players (Rajon Rondo, Leon Powe, and Kendrick Perkins), one veteran (Pierce) and one coach (Doc Rivers), all five of whom could have gone the other way. He played every exhibition game like it was the seventh game of the Finals. During blowouts, he stood on the sidelines and cheered on his teammates like it was a tight game; because of that, the bench guys did the same thing for the starters and basically turned into a bunch of giddy scrubs on a 14-seed in a March Madness upset during every game.

Most offensive. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone: this was not a homer pick. OK? Got it? None of this is being written because Bill loves the Celtics. The analysis is all 100% objective. Just thought I'd keep that in your brain as you wade through this.

The best word for him would either be "contagious" or "selfless." By Thanksgiving, the entire team was emulating him. Every time a young player got carried away with himself during a game -- like the time Perkins started going for his own stats, or the time Rondo snapped at his coach --

Who could forget!

KG was there to set him straight and scare the living hell out him. Every time one of his teammates was intimidated, KG had his back. Every time one of his teammates got knocked down, KG rushed over to pick him up; eventually, four teammates were rushing over to help that fifth guy up, and that's just the way it goes with the team now. Every time an opponent kept going for a shot after a whistle, KG defiantly blocked the shot just out of principle, and eventually, everyone started doing it. No shots after the whistle against the Celtics. That was the rule.

Boy, sounds frightening. They're so badass that they don't let you take shots that don't count. I bet that saves them zero points a game! If I captained a baseball team and wanted to develop a similar rule about how my guys would intimidate opponents, it would be: no running through first base on a groundout. You will be hit by the right fielder, and hit hard.

A couple of umbrella statements, really quickly: first, remember again that this opinion has nothing to do with Bill's Celtic fandom. And also keep in mind that we are being asked to believe that an aircraft carrier full of anecdotal bullshit is why Garnett a) would be picked first if two fans had every player available and wanted to draft teams to get a game going and b) is more irreplaceable than Kobe or LeBron.

It was a series of little things, baby steps if you will, but they added up to something much bigger.

Stolen from a St. Louis Post-Dispatch piece about Eckstein, 10/30/2006. Also, time for another reminder- Bill is not saying any of this because he's a Celtics fan.

You can't measure Garnett's impact with individual statistics, but these numbers seem pretty relevant: 24 (number of '07 Celtics wins); 16 (number of '08 Celtics losses); four (number of useful free agents who signed with Boston after the KG trade);

Apparently P.J. Brown and Scot Pollard are now considered "useful." Also, clearly, those guys (plus Posey and Sam Cassell) came to the Celtics strictly because of KG's "contagious" and "selfless" personality and specifically not because they wanted to be a part of one of the best overall teams in the league. If KG had the same talent but the disposition of Shaq? Forget about it. No Scot Pollard and his 1.8 points per game for you, Boston.

0 (number of useful free agents who signed with Boston in the 15 years before that);

I don't know or care enough about the Celtics to research that, but I'm going to guess that it's patently false. Particularly if Pollard and Brown are "useful." (He is talking about those two, right? If he's not, feel free to punch me in the face for being an ass next time we see each other in person.)

10.2 (Boston's point differential this season, and by the way, that's a historic number);

Historic how? I guess we'll just have to leave that unqualified. It's just... historic. Hey, Atlanta's differential was a historic -1.8. They've never recorded it before. Therefore, historic.

three (number of Texas teams they beat on the road in a four-day span, as well as their total number of double-digit defeats this season);

Whoop-de-fuck on both counts, especially when trying to determine an MVP.

4,753 (estimated number of Teammate Hugs during games this season, shattering the record of the '84 Lakers); 42 (field-goal percentage for Boston opponents this season); 41 (number of home sellouts this season); and 3-to-2 (their odds to win the 2008 title).

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Also consider: sine July 2, 2007, more than 150,000 Garnett jerseys have been sold in Boston.

OK, I made that up.

Look at the Celtics last year and look at them this year. Does any of the good stuff happen without Garnett? Any of it?

Is.... is that rhetorical? You mean, like, if they still traded for Ray Allen, still kept the same core of young players, and added Al Jefferson back into the mix in place of Garnett? Unless "the good stuff" is defined as having a guy that looks like a space alien sign late in the season as a backup point guard and winning 65 games instead of 61, the answer is: yes. All of it.

Maybe his MVP campaign lost some stream when he missed 10 games earlier in the season, and I have to admit, even I shifted my attention toward Kobe, Paul and LeBron these past two months.

Thanks for bringing that up- not only did he miss those games, but he wasn't at 100% for at least 5 games after he made his comeback. So he missed 20% of the season, basically. But hey- he made people care, man. He made them care. He hustled and gristled and scooted and gritted. You can't put a value on that, unless it's a made-up value related to winning an MVP bestowed on a player by a huge fan of his team.

During a conversation with my father last weekend, I mentioned the MVP "argument" and he quickly responded with a fired-up rant that was very unlike my Pops. I'll do my best to paraphrase it:

Here we go. This will finally settle the MVP debate, once and for all. I won't lie- even though Bill promised at the beginning of this segment that he wasn't picking Garnett for homerish reasons, I've been a little unsure as to whether or not that was really the case. But I'm confident that as soon as we add his father's objective opinion to the mix, the doubt will finally leave my mind and I will be sure that these gentlemen are expressing their opinions on this matter without any regard to personal bias. I can't wait.

"Argument? There's no argument, it's Garnett.

Sold. You had me from "no." As in, "no way do this man and his son hold this opinion because they're Celtics fans! That's being a homer, and this choice (it said so at the beginning!) is not a homer choice."

I went to almost every home game. He's standing on the bench screaming for his teammates when we're up 30 points. He's a maniac! A few weeks ago, I couldn't go to a Wednesday night game so I put my tickets online and they sold in four minutes. Four minutes!

Who says the buyer wasn't actually going to see someone else, like Brian Scalabrine? These are Boston fans we're talking about here. What are the odds a black player was directly responsible for their desire to shell out big bucks to attend a sporting event? In other words, how about that Wes Welkah? Fachkin' amazin' what that guy dahs on the fayuld.

Last year, I would have been walking around my office asking if anyone wanted to go, and I would have probably ended up eating the tickets.

Because the Celtics blew last year, stupid. Obviously Garnett is partially responsible for their turnaround and deserves credit for that, but really? All 41 games worth? Or even 30? Dubious.

This year? Four minutes. Who did more for a team in one year? We lost 18 straight games last season. We were nothing. Didn't you watch the games? How could anyone be more valuable than KG was this season?"

Well, if you ask Bill, by 1) being more rememberable, 2) being the first overall pick in an imaginary pick-up game draft, and 3) being less replaceable. For item 1, I'll call it a toss up between Kobe and Garnett. For item 2, I'm going Kobe, then LeBron, then Garnett. For item 3, I'll go LeBron, then Kobe, then Garnett. So although that's a bunch of bullshit, it's based on your son's bullshit and answers your question.

It's a great question, and since I couldn't answer it without sounding like a fool, Kevin Garnett gets my MVP vote for 2008. Just remember, the "V" stands for "valuable."

Yes. It does. Good. There's nothing clever about that, and everyone already knows it. Being reminded of it does nothing for anyone because it's an incredibly nebulous concept. Thanks for ending your column with something that resembles a poorly conceptualized corporate slogan. ESPN: Just remember, the "P" stands for "programming."

I would like to add that Matt Holliday was fucking robbed of the NL MVP last year, and I'm not at all saying that because I'm a Rockies fan.