Slow Sports Day Recap

and by then I’d heard some of the jokes Minnesotans tell about Iowans.

Is there any team you ever rooted for and then abandoned? I don’t follow the Oakland Raiders anymore, but that’s because I gave up on the NFL, not the Raiders.

for avoiding 20 comment chains where someone feels the need to defend against an accusation that was, in fact, sarcastic in nature instead of accusatory. There’s too much ‘well you always say this’ with ‘well you’re dumb and not listening because I actually said this, not that’ followed up by ‘well semantics aside the straight facts are blah blah blah’ and you know what? It’s a complete waste of time for most of the rest of us.

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t mind the % to help clue people in to not take things so seriously because sometimes there’s a joke to be made and that’s it – you’re not trying to challenge someone to a mano a mano CH blogger deathmatch by text, know what I mean?

There’s also nothing worse than clicking on a fanpost because you see that there’s 20 or 30 new comments and getting excited because maybe people have put in some great observations and there’s a cool discussion goin’ on, only to find out (as an example) it’s Ming spouting off about what’s his name, the other great white PG in Europe and other people jumping on his case about it, etc etc.

Occasional use when necessary to avoid sounding like a total dick is appropriate. I made a comment on the thread about the public scrimmage after someone said that they would bet a lot of money on the black team that would have been completely inappropriate if not for the % indicating I was being sarcastic. And I still feel like apologizing to ChuckD for what I said even though I was just trying to get a laugh.

Carmelo is an even better example. He and Kobe both, career wise, have averaged essentially the same minutes and same number of FGAs. As for percentages:
Kobe – .557 TS%, .488 efg%, .340 from three
Melo – .544 TS%, .478 efg%, .308 from three

Bryant also distributes the ball a lot more (incorporates his teammates more) than Melo does:
Kobe – 4.7 assists, 23.6 AST%, 31.3 USG%
Melo – 3.1 assists, 15.7 AST%, 31.1 USG%

Getting back to Beasley, I think we need to give him some time to learn when the offense will do it for him and when he needs to create for himself.

and win all those championships. What an overrated player. Terrible.

He’s a big-time post-up threat who doesn’t get to the line as much as one might expect. It’s another of the few ways in which he aligns, more or less, with Zach Randolph.

The per-36 number you mention seems at first like only a moderate difference, but when we’re looking at that we have to keep in mind that Al’s done it while putting up more shots. He’s been the focal point of an offense, and even before that with Boston he was putting up a lot of shots in his bench role.

Two years ago, for example, Al’s “usage” was 28.9%. He was the 8th-most ball-dominant player in the league that way. If you look at the list of players up that high, he, Charlie Villanueva, and Zach Randolph are the only ones with so few FTAs. Dirk Nowitski gets to the line more.

Dwight Howard’s kind of the antithesis of Al, offensively. His moves have no refinement, and he gets fouled a lot.

(Carl Landry would be another Jefferson analog in this way.)

to be writing a similar paragraph to your final one, about Love, in the next year or so. If the Wolves struggle this year (and despite a strong start to the pre-season, I expect this to happen) they will look (as they always do) to improve their starting lineup, in the draft.

They won’t look to point guard, with Rubio’s situation. They won’t look to the wing, if Wes Johnson and Michael Beasley have decent years as new TWolves. Next year’s draft is power forward-heavy in the Top 6. If the BPA is a power forward, and Love’s 3 years have averaged 20 or so wins, I won’t be surprised if things go in a different direction, there. This is particularly likely when you factor in his obvious frustration with this franchise, evidenced in many of his public remarks.