niremetal

Hopefully that's enough and he didn't leave any surprises anywhere else. If this guy thinks he is The Joker, that's not a safe bet.

It may not be over yet. It sounds like the nutjob booby trapped his apartment with explosives. And that's just what we know about.

I don't see what's absurd about this. A parent's obligation to financially support his/her child should not (and does not) depend on whether the other parent has lots of money. Contributing money to support your child is something that everyone who becomes a parent should have to do; even if you don't believe in that as a moral imperative, you should believe in it for economic reasons (i.e. so that parents factor in the costs associated with raising a child before deciding whether to have a child). JJ will undoubtedly pay 99.9% of the child's expenses if he legally recognized as the child's father. The mother shouldn't be relieved of her obligation to contribute 0.1%. No parent should.

So everybody's celebratin'?

'10-11 was the best, but '08-'09 was close behind. That was Marvin's and Zaza's best year. I really think the FlipMo Squad bench, if properly utilized during the season, could have had our starters fresh enough to give Cleveland a bigger run for their money. The limiting factor was Woody - the bench was rarely used, and JJ, Marvin, and Bibby were all broken down by the time the playoffs started. The loss of Al during the Miami series was just the icing on the cake.That was the year I went from being a Woody critic to a firebreathing Woody basher. He ran the team into the ground.

Yeah, both of those incidents also illustrate how arbitrary the selection of the scapegoat can be. Bartman's play came in the 8th inning and Smith's flub came in the 3rd quarter. They were scapegoated because they helped "spark" a meltdown. Buckner is remembered because his error capped a meltdown (to say nothing of the fact that there was a whole 'nother game to play after his error...which the Red Sox lost 8-5). There's no historical consistency about whether the role of scapegoat is assigned to someone whose mess-up came at the beginning, middle, or end. It just seems arbitrary.

I've grown addicted to watching Ken Burns documentaries. Right now, I'm watching his 10-part documentary Baseball, specifically the 1986 World Series. After watching how that inning unfolded, I seriously can't fathom why Buckner became so infamous for his play. Yeah, it was a bad error. But it was the Red Sox pitchers (closer Calvin Schiraldi and setup man Bob Stanley) and their idiotic manager (John McNamara) that truly blew that game. Boston was up 2 runs going into the bottom of the tenth. But McNamara had sent Schiraldi out for a two inning save in the eighth. Schiraldi had been tagged for a run in the 8th but McNamara left him out there for the ninth. Alright, he's your closer so I get wanting to squeeze an extra inning out of him. But why leave him out there for a third inning? Schiraldi managed to get two outs on solidly hit fly balls (warning sign much?). Then the Mets get three straight base hits to get the game to 5-4, with the tying run at 3rd and the winning run at 1st. Only then does McNamara get Schiraldi out of there. I mean, really?? You make a reliever face sixteen batters before getting him out of there? So Bobby Cox style, McNamara makes his move an inning too late and brings in Stanley. Stanley immediately precedes to throw a wild pitch. Tying run is scored, winning run moves to third. At this point, frankly, the game basically is over. Even if the Red Sox make it out of the inning, the Mets have so much adrenaline and the Red Sox are so deflated that I don't see how they come back and win. In any case, only after the game got totally FUBARed did Buckner make his error. And frankly, even that is partly McNamara's responsibility too. Buckner was less than 2 months shy of 37 at this point and had two bad ankles. McNamara usually replaced him late in the game with the younger David Stapleton. But that night, he decided to leave Buckner out there for 10 innings. Big shock that he didn't move his feet quickly enough and crouch down low enough to field a fast-and-low grounder hit to his left. Anyway, in order of responsibility for the Sox blowing that game, I go with 1) McNamara; 2) Stanley (the game-tying wild pitch, I think, was when it really was all over); 3) Buckner; and 4) Schiraldi (I don't blame player for failing to take themselves out of a game when they tire). But whenever anyone thinks of that series, all they remember is Buckner and his error. Does that seem fair to you?

To answer the original question: Flip. I really don't think Lou Will will prove more significant than him.

Lou is alright as a Sixth Man. But he's like a way, way, way less impressive version of Allen Iverson. Can't defend the 2, can't play the 1.

The guy's career 3P% is .426 (5th among active players) and his career FT% is .897 (2nd among active players). That is great. He may not be a well-rounded player (or even a well-rounded scorer), but his stroke guarantees him a long career in the league.

I didn't know Russians were Nigerian.

Jamal Crawford is his best-case scenario. To me, he looks more like a Rashad McCants.

No.

Just to clarify...I was, in fact, referring to this kind of fishhooking. Unless I really am out of the loop, there's no legal maneuver called fishhooking.

I actually hate it when lawyers do the "answer the question - yes or no" thing in TV shows. It's not even allowed in real courtrooms. The witness must be given the opportunity to explain his/her answer. Here though, it's no lawyer holds barred. Except writs of quo warranto. And fishhooking.

So...yes?

Didn't you just bitch on another thread about Ferry failing to insist on 6'5 Marshon Brooks in the JJ trade?

Yeah. I'm really going to losing sleep over the fact that we didn't land a 6'5 SG who has no skills other than being an above-average scorer. I mean, it's not like there aren't a zillion other players who fit that description in the NBA and D-League.

If Dwight is averaging 25 points, his team is heading for no more than 25 wins.

Ties Sampras's record for Wimbledon titles. Will overtake Sampras for most weeks as the World No. 1. Extends his record for grand slam singles championships to 17. Oldest player to win Wimbledon since Arthur Ashe. In other words, GOAT. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/news/20120708/roger-federer-wimbledon-2012/

Major League > Major League II. But Major League II was funnier than the original. http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQArDMKdSVc

I would be mildly surprised if Harris were on our roster come opening night. I would be shocked if he were on our roster come the trade deadline.I don't see us re-signing Teague after next season.I don't see us making the playoffs unless the East is even worse than I think it is.So I guess my answer is: Does it matter?

You're not crazy. Bring Dwight here and you'd get two players who already have shown a tendency toward immaturity and poutiness having their own built-in enabler. They'd think they were bigger than the team. Oh, and also - who would score? It's not like either guy has the ability to dominate at the offensive end like a Tim Duncan or Shaq. I don't see those two as the core of anything resembling a championship team. Just a team that would make a lot of ESPN highlight reels only to get crushed in either the first or second round of the playoffs. Then go back to the GM at the end of the summer demanding trades because they blame everyone except themselves. Sorry, I want no part of Dwight here unless we get rid of Josh and bring in a perimeter scoring threat who can lead the team at the offensive end. And without Josh, he ain't coming.

Dude, no one is putting words in your mouth. Someone said that JJ is a top 3 SG in the league. In response, you said this: You clearly were listing players that you thought were, right now, better players than JJ. No one in the NBA world thinks that Jason Terry - who never made an All-Star Game even in his prime - is better than JJ. They aren't even in the same league. You justify it by giving JET handicaps for pace and minutes played. But I guess you're ignoring the fact that JJ is double-teamed every time he touches the ball whereas JET hasn't seen a double team in so long that he'd probably drop a deuce on the court if he saw one. Oh, and defense. Yeah, that half of the game. And about a billion other things that makes putting them in the same league absurd, and saying JET is better than JJ mindbogglingly laughable. Brandon Roy is not healthy. He will never be healthy again. He has no cartilage in his knees. It's bone on bone. Bringing a "healthy Brandon Roy" up as someone who is better than JJ is ridiculous because there will never, ever, ever be a healthy Brandon Roy unless someone invents a way to manufacture cartilage and implant it successfully in the human body. Which is about as likely to happen in the next year as someone inventing the transporters from Star Trek. No one's putting words in your mouth. Your post was absurd on its (lack of) merits, and it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. Sorry.