The question has been brought up again as to what is the benefit of banding together to change 64425 into a PLUS league as opposed to each individual upgrading as they choose.
Previously I couldn't find the costs for the upgrades but now I have.
PLUS league: $124.95
StatTracker: $9.95
Other items that can be purchase seperately (but are included in the PLUS league) are the SportingNews.com Draft Kit, Weekly Newsletter and Wireless Access.
So if we have 14 people in the league and all of them pony up the cost for the PLUS league is $8.93 each.
Or, put another way, we save $1.02 if everything goes right.
Or, actually, we get the other three premium bits and save $1.02. Or pay $3.94 extra (at current count of 9 voting yes [a 10th voted yes provisionally but that provisio has not been met.])
So, yeah, I should've kept looking earlier and found the actual costs. And so should've all of y'all. But that for the most part can be put behind us.
But can someone tell me either from finding the info (I can't) or from experience (I don't have it) if StatTracker gotten via a PLUS league is useable for all of your other leagues? That is if I get ST via 64425 shifting to a PLUS then would I have to purchase ST seperately for my other non-PLUS leagues (assuming I join any, that is)?
QOTD "Jon Lieber will do some mound work on Monday to test his injured groin, though it is unclear how far up the mound he will go." --yankees.mlb.com via Dave Barry
"Okay, time to play 'If you know what I mean.' This is a game for Ryan, Colin, and Wayne. For you at home, this is a fun game, where Ryan, Colin, and Wayne will try to come up with as many good euphemisms as they can. Ryan and Colin, you're two competing shortstops playing for the same team in spring training; Wayne, you're a pitcher coming off of injury..."
[...]
"Yeah, I'm doing a little 'mound work,' if you know what I mean..."
"Gonna test my groin, if you know what I mean..."
"How far up the mound will you go..." [dead silence, goofy expression on Ryan's face, Colin pretends to drink coffee]
Wow, Z, that's hilarious, I just pointed out many of those same items on the current state of Arizona sports franchises to Billy in India cause I wasn't/aren't sure what he gets to see.
Yeah, it's great that Phoenix has 2 last-place teams in the big four sports and the Cardinals aren't in season!. The tally goes to 3 when you include the 1-2 Rattlers.
The Sting, however, are 4-4, good enough to put them in a tie for 3rd (of 7) in their division.
The good news to come from the Suns and the Coyotes being terrible? Scalpers are stuck with a choice between a worthless souvenir and selling good seats for half face (if that.) I need to start taking more advantage of this situation.
Matt's Bookshelf So I came thisclose to giving up blogging for Lent, then decided to claim to post only once a day. Well, here's where lawyer weasels come in: I'll only post once a day per weblog. Ha! So you guys get stuff I'd have otherwise just put on my own space.
Anyhow, bought two books last night, neither of which were what I was looking for but both of which demanded to be bought. Instead of BP 2004 and some book full of Jeopardy!-style trivia questions (I wouldn't have been too particular about the second one), I got True Believers: The Tragic Inner Life of Sports Fans (by Joe Queenan) and The Psychology of Poker.
On the latter, my self-analysis left me as a 7,7, or "loose aggressive," player. Sadly I sense myself devolving into a "calling station" instead of evolving into a "killer": Instead of realizing I play too many hands and playing fewer of them, I've just started betting marginally more conservatively. Two hopeful signs there, though:
1. My style is almost exactly right for the real reasons I play: Not money, but the challenge of facing the best possible competition and to a lesser extent either the social aspect or the thrill of risky play.
2. Your stereotypical loose aggressive player apparently comes off as a total asshole given what he wears, the kinds of table talk he makes, and so on. Not me: I have easily the meekest in-person demeanor of anyone I know in the "loose-aggressive" corner. Also I stack my chips anally and apparently your typical loose person tosses them around carelessly.
I would not consider democracy a goal. I would consider it a means to the goal of a reasonable, safe, productive and stable soceity.
I also don't see what's wrong with cherry-picking Federalism. Different situations and issues can require different approaches.
Lemme see a minute here... interesting, Kerry voted no on the Defense of Marriage Act. But it passed anyway and is currently in place. Challenge may render this law unconstitutional but barring that it could be a state issue. States are the entities that give out marriage licenses after all.
But that's not my point, I find it interesting to find out and discuss Kerry's views but I'm not Kerry, I don't agree with Kerry (on this issue atleast) and he's not here to explain anything so I'm going to move back.
Well, not too far because my main point was that I see no distaste, I do not see and have not seen him complaining; there is no problem to be fixed.
Also, to correct (slightly) a previous statement, allowing marriage (of any kind) does indirectly hurt those that aren't married - in areas such as tax burden, insurance coverage and rates, child custody and reduced pool of available singles (and others that aren't coming to mind right now.)
So technically it is incorrect to say "letting consenting adults - no matter what sex they are - marry hurts no one" but it is not incorrect to say that same-sex marriage hurts people only in the same sense that mixed-sex marriage hurts people.
Free Keith Ginter! I had some cogent thoughts about Super Millionaire (re Jason, Wiley Post is the one choice I knew was wrong because he died in the same plane crash that killed Will Rogers) and some cogent thoughts about gay marriage and/or federalism (that promptly slipped my mind anyway), but my real reason to post:
Unless they're planning some sort of Tony Phillips role for him, apparently the Milwaukee Brewers have no idea who their best infielder is. I can see handing a position to Junior Spivey, maybe (you ASU people would judge him better than I could), but for the love of pete, WES HELMS?!? Do bad teams just not even look at season stats anymore?
Keith Ginter, onetime Astros second base prospect, posted about a .440 on-base percentage in the New York-Penn League in 1998. (I was working for Howe Sportsdata that summer and we had to write a special NY-Penn roundup. Every time it was my turn to do the roundup, Ginter would happen to do something good and I'd noticed that he still led the league in both OBP and SLG by a wide margin.) He tailed off a bit in the Florida State League in '99, as all hitters do (very pitcher-friendly environment there), but then won the 2000 Texas League MVP at Round Rock. Of course, at the time the Astros had a pretty good on-base machine at second base already, leaving Ginter essentially blocked.
There was third base. There was the spring training where the job could have equally easily gone to Ginter, Morgan Ensberg, or some stiff. Namely this stiff (I had to look up Houston year-by-year pages to be sure). Then somehow Ginter ended up in Milwaukee for hardly any compensation at all. He should have won their 3B job a year ago but Wes Helms blah blah did they even look at Helms's MINOR LEAGUE record? Having been at Howe through Helms's "prospect" phase, I daresay not. And now this.
Somewhere Roberto Petagine smiles knowingly and ruefully.
There is a difference between believing something and forcing others to act according to your beliefs.
Kerry's statement [in response to Bush finally saying that he supports a constitutional ammendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman] says things like
"While I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, for 200 years, this has been a state issue"
and
"I believe the best way to protect gays and lesbians is through civil unions. I believe the issue of marriage should be left to the states"
That is, Kerry is saying that personally he believes one thing but he's not going to support something to force everyone to act according to his personal beliefs.
This I find reasonable. Attitudes like this allow people with different ideas (i.e. people) to live with each other.
And yes, I understand that a relaxed, tolerant attitude can be taken too far. You can't say "Yeah, I'd prefer that people don't murder each other or me but I'm gonna let them decide for themsevles."
What's the difference? Letting people murder hurts someone; letting consenting adults - no matter what sex they are - marry hurts no one.
Furthermore allowing people to murder destroys society; allowing consenting adults - no matter what sex they are - to marry builds society.
I don't agree with Kerry that marriage should be between a man and a woman but I do support the fact that he is opposed to this attempt to force this belief on others.
This one was born and grew up in Phoenix. This one, well, I'm not sure where she was born but it might've been Vegas. Which isn't Phoenix. But she did have several formative years living and DJing in Phoenix before moving on. "Legitimate entertainment star[s]?" You decide. That's what I've got offhand.
Well that's weird, Gel. League 64425 is not full (10 of 14 teams right now) so that's not it. The league is not in pre-draft mode so that's not it either. You probably got the same email the rest of us did so you should have the correct password.
I rented and saw 28 Days Later yesterday. It sucked. Sandra Bullock wasn't even in it [rimshot.] I'm kidding; I did watch it yesterday but I had seen it before - as those who've paid too close attention to my posts across various Down With leagues would remember - and I know/knew it had nothing to do with 28 Days [sorry, no link.]
I also got a computer so now I can see the baseball league site. And other stuff.
Who else is interested in seeing how a current league will affect this blog and vice versa? I'd like to not mention it so as to avoid making it conscious but I'm giddy.
Z, ~20 times is wow. I don't think I've seen anyone more than 4 times (for the Dandy Warhols, BRMC and soon for DT and Radiohead). But I might be able to catch BRMC at Coachella and locally the Budget Sinatra are playing twice in the next two weeks and a couple more times in the following month so I could easily reach 5 or 6; they're good enough for it too. But I will still have a ways to go.
Libertarian vs. Authoritarian I come out solidly libertarian on the party quiz below. On Orkut, Google's superior answer to Friendster, there's one multiple-choice question where you can identify your politics. One option actually is labeled "Authoritarian"; I can't imagine too many people clicking on it.
And yet... sometimes I try to think of my own political antipode. Near as I can tell it's someone who wants socialized medicine, socialized pretty-much-every-thing-else, but also wants to put an end to cultural filth. Whoever it is loves labor unions and hates free trade, in fact a bunch of "swing states" (Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania) are probably full of voters like this.
I resent them almost as much as I resent the old people (Florida) whose greed and voter clout are going to see to it that I probably won't ever get to see a damn thing from the part of my paycheck confiscated in the name of social security.
California Republicans: The Sad Truth ...is that there really aren't any, at least not high-profile. You've already mentioned McClintock. Then there's Arnold himself. Bill Simon automatically disqualified himself for anything above dog catcher by somehow finding a way to lose to Gray Davis in 2002 -- I could have beaten Gray Davis in 2002, even after his party machine started spending multi-millions on TV ads smearing me.
Richard Riordan is too old and too cranky, plus I'm still amazed he managed to lose a primary to Bill Simon.
I'm sure there's someone in Orange County I'm not thinking of, but that's the problem right there: Nobody has enough statewide recognition actually to deliver the California vote that you'd think would be the intent behind plucking a Californian.
Actually my favorite non-Arnold California politician was--and still is!--a Democrat, the mayor of San Francisco. I loved Gavin Newsom for daring to do something constructive about homelessness around here, especially since the usual suspects ended up just loathing him for it. After Willy Brown stepped aside, there was Newsom and then a whole bunch of other potential candidates who all hated him but also were fractured into interest groups themselves. Newsom still almost lost the runoff to a Green Party candidate.
Then this gay marriage thing came along and totally changed my image of Newsom (though apparently not my opinion of him). Where once local politicians loathed him for what they saw as an uncaring platform (read more about the ballot initiative here; it passed but a judge threw it out), now apparently some national Democrats hate him for being so incautious and possibly triggering a backlash down the road.
John McCain for VP So it says here Bush will stick with Dick Cheney but I really wish he wouldn't. Whether fairly or not, Cheney has become a lightning rod for all the knee-jerk anti-Halliburton people. It's just an issue we don't need to deal with--everyone would probably be better off if he gracefully stepped aside.
If he did... I'd still love to see Condi Rice (as would Glenn Reynolds), though maybe her lack of extensive elected-office experience might hurt her. Failing Rice, wouldn't McCain be an awesome choice?
Maybe you Arizonans have a perspective on him that I lack.
Scoresheet Opening Want to broaden your fantasy/roto horizons? This league has a sudden opening. Read more here about how Scoresheet works; write to me if you're interested and I'll hook you up w/the commish.
Note: You MUST be available for an on-line draft Saturday, March 27.
The Bush-NASCAR article was rather bereft of sports content; I would guess it only got filed there because it wasn't much for a political article either and it did possess some tangential NASCAR-related interest. Some.
I guess my point was that I didn't see it as being negative by pointing out political ramifications, it is an election year and I am more ready to expect commentary of this nature.
On the tangent on media bias I'd say that there are plenty of writers/reporters/editors with any kind of slant possible but I would find it silly for someone to say that the whole (or even the majority) of the media is biased against either Democrats or Republicans. [I'd say "liberal" or "conservative" but those terms don't mean much for me anymore, they're often just tied to Dem or Rep, and these political parties are simply coalitions of positions on issues that have ebbed and flowed and have no neccesity to them
Wrongheaded Basketball Columns Not that I'm much of an NBA fan but this Gregg Easterbrook post contains so many howlers that I have to at least attempt to set things straight. (Not really "set him straight" since it's not as though he'd find this blog, even if he Googled himself.)
First paragraph: He's actually right that the game's start time was a terrible idea. I was stunned to find the game starting that late when I flipped through channels.
Second paragraph: The Oscar Robertson article he quotes may be right, I don't know. A plurality of NBA games I've seen the past two seasons involve the Sacramento Kings. (How lucky are contrarian-sports people in these parts to have the A's and the Kings? Talk about outlier franchies...) Anyhow, Sac at least does strategize, pass the ball around, and so on.
Third paragraph: It does my heart good to see a LeBron James marketing campaign built around his "court vision" and crisp passes. Maybe that will start the counterrevolution a bit... The derogatory reference to Eastern Europeans is just asinine, at least the implicit assumption that they're inferior athletes.
(It's like the opposite of the racist assumption people supposedly make about white players having intelligence/hustle and black players having athletic ability.)
Howler #1: "Do you know anybody who would rather watch an NBA game than the NCAA men's college tournament [...]?"
Did you catch the dishonest parallel? Hint: Most people prefer the NCAA tournament over a regular season NBA game (or even playoff game, aside from Game 7), because--get this--the loser goes home! You might say there's a bit more riding on a game like that.
Howler #2: "Defense is ascendant because, unlike offense, it requires little cooperation."
Well, a zone defense does. He does mentions the "man-to-man defense that NBA teams play most of the time," but from my (admittedly non-scientific) viewing sample I've seen a lot of zone.
Even in man-to-man, if you don't cooperate, some team will master the art of pick-and-roll and just shred your "every man in his own world" defense. In fairness, I suppose that's exactly what the Utah Jazz did the past few years.
Howler #3: "The Lakers and Spurs have dominated the NBA recently in part because they have the league's two best players (Tim Duncan and Shaq) but in part because they are among the few NBA clubs that still run a coordinated, disciplined offense."
Whoa. I never thought I'd see the San Antonio Spurs held up as a paragon of virtue for their offense. Has Easterbrook even watched an NBA game this season? Spurs games are butt-ugly because they don't score much and rely on holding you to even fewer points. The only way Easterbrook's claim could make sense is if they have a super-low turnover rate. (Since I'm "typing on tilt," heaven forbid I actually look something up, I'll leave that lookup to the reader.)
As for the Lakers... they're good but "discplined" isn't the first thing I think of about their offense, at least not the connotation Easterbrook intends with "discipline." Somehow, funneling the ball to Daddy all day for him to muscle it in doesn't quite strike me as the right counterexample to the teams who freelance. Then again, maybe I'm deeply underestimating his passing skills. Surely when he gets triple-teamed, he has to dish the ball back out, no?
Blah. This whole post--this whole rant--really stems from both the idiotic NCAA tournament reference and his overlooking Sacramento (and also Dallas).
1st - Congrats on the upcoming closing on your house, Z. Too bad PJ aren't playing the 'que this weekend (tho RC & the Peacemakers are.) I hope to make it out sometime this year anyway to get chance to see the house and such.
2nd - Z, I don't read the Bush at NASCAR article as all that anti-Bush; it doesn't attack Bush, it presents his appearance as politically motivated or atleast politically beneficial. This is what incumbant presidents do in election years, they go into the public looking presidential. No where did this article say that Bush should stop acting like a president or anything like that. It also didn't tie this in to his pre-Super Bowl interview on CBS (which was a little odd considering CBS had turned down various commercials as being too political.) The article doesn't suggest that Bush wasn't genuinely interested in NASCAR. If this is the most anti-Bush article you've read....
3rd - I think 5 of my six keepers (right?) will be players previously kept. Then again I need to actually go and look at some projections and figure out what teams these players are on and such
Would've been nice to've seen Starsailor but I was seeing Mates of State in person; I'm happy with the decision (I didn't get to make).
This article on the Yankees pursuing A-Rod mentions that NY opens their spring training Tuesday. That kinda shocked me but it really is about that time.
D'oh, UofA Mens Basketball just started. Oh, and I might as well comment on the Stanford game (or did I already?): the last 6-8 minutes were engrossing, I wanted to do other things like what normally happens when I turn on a game but I couldn't get anything else done. Frye's 3 to tie, the put-back dunk right after; it was all very exciting. And the deep deep three at the buzzer to break the tie, I could've done without it but it was a nice shot, eh
I wrote this about the Cure elsewhere where people were complaining about their radio songs:
Their songs that sound poppy are amazing. I love that songs like "Just Like Heaven" and "Pictures of You" and "Friday, I'm In Love" get played all over and they're dark and depressing as hell. Superficially they're light and bouncy and happy; inside they're sick songs of obsession and loss, i.e. standard Cure material.
In other Cure notes, I think they're the only band I know that generates/fuels break-up rumors by releasing an album rather than not releasing one. I can't recall the last time that the release of a Cure album was not followed by Robert Smith and everybody else making comments/reporting that they were done with but it was probably the '80s
More Easterbook Read this rebuttal on NFL eligibility. Very well-crafted, I think. It's by David Nieporent, who used to post a lot to rec.sport.baseball.
Judge Frank(?) Easterbrook is the brother of Tuesday Morning Quarterback (and TNR columnist) Gregg Easterbrook.
In other news, is it anti-social to buy tickets to a bunch of sporing events, exactly one ticket per event? Giants single-game tix went on sale this morning and I short-sightedly and cheap-skatedly bought just one ticket per game for a handful of games. I've been single for a couple weeks now and unhappy enough about this to have been in denial for most of that time.
1. I can't add comments directly to your blog, Matt. The fault is not with you or your host but with my computer.
2. What I was going to post in response to your response to the Clarett ruling article is this: Maybe all my handwringing [here] was about how that sort of handwringing, semi-/pseudo-rational discourse and discussion is exactly the sort of thing that we can't expect in this situation. Legally the NFL/NBA/etc is probably safe because we are talking about athletes who are legally adults. But they're just barely so, and one can't expect the average 18 year old with millions dangling in front of their nose to act rationally, reasonably and prudently. We cannot expect the 22-30 year old to magnanimously accept being cut and left with no job, with no skills, we cannot expect these inviduals to be consoled by telling them that entering the system was their (dumb) choice. Or, rather, one cannot expect all or even most of them to respond this way. That is the more often the NFL/NBA/etc says "tough shit, dumbass", the more likely they're going to get punched in the face. "Tough shit" lessons work best when something can be learned, or better when that information can be passed on to those in a position to benefit from it. So maybe the answer is for the NFL/NBA/etc to have their own programs for educating high school students and helping out displaced players. Oh, wait, they do (well, atleast some.) But I can't figure out where this leaves me. I don't think the State needs to force the NFL to run these programs but I'd hope that they decide to do it on their own - but that's a side issue.
3. Blogging is weird. I shall, uncharacteristically, leave it at that
Interesting article on the Clarett ruling. I'll comment before perusing your comments.
One major disconnect I see here has to do with not recognizing (or accepting) the distinction between morality and legality, that is the difference between what is right and what is definable and therefore legislatable.
I may've started thinking in this sort of fashion after following some links from I think Adam's blog to discussions between various people on homosexual marriage; it had been brought up by the State of the Union address. Distilling, it was argued at one point that while there may be nothing wrong with homosexuality, homosexual relations and homosexuals living together in a marriage-like union, this is none of the government's business. That is the State sanctions marriage between a man and a woman because it benefits the State by increasing conservatism (someone with no-one else to worry about is generally going to be more radical than someone with a family to take care of) and because when a man and woman live together children tend to happen.
That is to say one could believe gay marriage to be moral but still be opposed to it being State sanctioned; these are distinct if not totally separate issues. Personally I find the argument (I wasn't trying to create a strawman) to be off - I think it would benefit the State (long-term even) to sanction homosexual marriage in the same ways it benefits the State to sanction heterosexual marriage - but I've already gotten way off topic.
Because what I'm saying there is not leaving the distinction I'm after crystal clear; there is also a difference between what benefits the State and what the State can reasonably support legally.
And that was one of the things I noticed in reading through the Roe decisions, even if I still haven't finished Blackmun's court opinion. The justices are not deciding what is right, they are deciding what the law says. Or, some would argue quite convincingly, justices decide what they think is right and then try to make it look like the law agrees. In some ways I find this terrible but I also think that there needs to be a check on the will of the people. That is I lack confidence in mobs, rabble and groups described using less biased terminology; sure, eventually problems will be dealt with and work themselves out, but I'd prefer to avoid the ugly periods if at all possible.
That is while I find Rehnquist's dissent reasonable, I find it a strikingly odd issue to confront in this manner. And this is a weird situation to find myself in; I expect, rather, to be the one reasoning dispassionately while horrible things are happening.
Working my way through this (really, I'm on my way to the Clarett bit, you'd forgotten, hadn't you), while I would prefer the entire nation to be unified - taking my stance (allowed unconditionally up through say 4 months, and thereafter only to save the mother [this statement thrown together on the spot, don't take it as all that rigorous]) of course - not everyone else would agree. And that's the whole fucking ballgame, isn't it. My personal version of morallity is immaterial to everyone else, just as everyone else's personal version is immaterial to me. So, I now conclude/understand, there may be some benefit to having the various states having their various laws. The various nations have their various laws but it takes quite a bit for people to really get up and change nations. Changing states is easier.
There still would be crusaders travelling around trying to stop horrible things (abortions happening or abortions being denied) and lots of rides out of state, but, well, we have that now, really.
Note: It's fun airing out your dirty laundry, isn't it. I'm merely semi-publically working my way through various issues and points of view with which I'm not familiar/etc. I'm not sure what purpose this has for y'all - I'm sure much of this sounds simplistic/ridiculous - but if it's not clear from years of message board posts and email that that is of little concern to me I'm not sure what I can do to shore that one up for you. For those truly troubled by this I suggest a long-winded drunkard's-walk style discourse on the state of the NFL, it's working well for me (but alas no, I am not the slightest bit intoxicated, I merely made the mistake of falling asleep at like 6pm, waking up at 11pm not feeling well and not being able to fall back asleep due to intestinal issues, reading a third of a Heinleinnovel and then turning on the computer to see what's new on, uhh, that thing I won't mention, what with tickets going on pre-sale today and tomorrow.)
I agree that KG and Labron are not harming the NBA. The article mentions Kwame which isn't a bad angle, but, well, the problem is not isolated individuals, as is suggested in various ways.
The problem is the pay jump from college sports to pro sports is enormous. College students are not paid. They may get free tuition and maybe room/board (I have no idea, exactly, what is allowed) but even the minimum salaries in the NFL and NBA are (a) more money per year, and (b) in currency. That is if you're not interested in attending classes free tuition is as worthless to you as a free salsa bar is to me (well sometimes I see an wonderful onion/cilantro mix in a salsa bar; but to keep the comment valid let's define "salsa bar" as only containing tomato and/or guacamole based offerings).
I like college sports. No, I love college sports. For me it goes NCAA Football, MLB, NFL, NCAA Basketball, NBA, NHL. [Ok, if I could watch more soccer that is shot (camera-wise) well, that would be ahead of the NBA and maybe even NCAA Basketball even with the Tournament. And the NHL could easily move past the NBA as well, it's just that my history is much more basketball oriented than hockey oriented.]
Ok, now that that's taken care of, allow me to start again: I love college sports. But the system is very troublesome. People are being exploited with the implication of future riches at a later level, on a further stage. Information on the huge cuts from high school to college and then college to the pros is available, and people aren't being forced to participate. But the future riches are being implied or atleast inferred and the problems are ignored. Unless or rather until you get cut.
Exploitation of the stupid and/or gullible and/or starry-eyed happens all the time; people who are pissed off at those that they see as exploiters are slowly collected. And in various ways comeuppance occurs.
To change my method of attack, I'm not sure it is reasonable to blame bad shooting in the NBA on immaturity, with that immaturity blamed on players leaving college early.
The article Matt linked says this "When the NBA began tapping high school, league management thought fans would be too stupid to notice the decline in quality of play. But everybody has noticed, which is why the NBA's popularity is falling."
This is even more ridiculous, the quality of play won't decline if you bring in better players sooner. Also, the Steelers are competing for the Rams fans (maybe bad examples, they're not mine), they just hope that too many teams don't go out of business. Similarly the NBA is competing with NCAA Basketball for fans - LaBron is drawing people to Cleveland games rather than college arenas - but the NBA doesn't want the NCAA to die.
MLB has it differently, there is college baseball but I follow it about as much as I follow minor league baseball. The focus is on the MLB, with the occasional flyer on those that are expected to make it big in the MLB.
The article also says: "Judge Scheindlin's decision dismisses quality of play as irrelevant: 'The NFL has not justified [Maurice] Clarett's exclusion by demonstrating that the [draft age] rule enhances competition.'"
Here is a nice legality/morality distinction. That quote does not mean that quality of play is irrelevant (to the case.) It means that the NFL has not demonstrated that quaility of play is relevant (to the case.)
It is ridiculous to say "The NFL continues to be the number-one sport by every measure ... foremost because quality of play is so high." I would not consider the quality of play in the NFL to be "so high." Higher than College, yes. But not objectively high. There is a lot of ugly, ugly football out there. In fact, much of football is ugly. It's just that occasionally there is the exciting play, an exciting final 2 (or 5) minutes of the half that makes up (or, doesn't make up) for the atrocious first 28 (or 25) minutes - missed field goals, more punts than first downs, etc.
What I'm avoiding - other than trying to sleep - is any overarching comment on Clarett being allowed in to the NFL, and those that would presumably follow.
One reason is that, well, I don't know, legally, what to think. And I don't care, really. Decay is an odd, very biased term. Rising and falling depends a lot on which dimensions your watching. And also those who run NFL teams have a lot invested in the status quo thus in this field they'll tend towards conservatism which should buffer changes and allow me to adjust slowly or drift away just as slowly. There's too much shit in this world worth consideration anyway.
And also I can't see huge masses of 18 year olds coming to the NFL; 18 year olds aren't all that massive.
So even if the author of that article was right that the NBA was falling apart at the seams because of 18 year olds (they're not, when something hits a huge peak [Magic, Bird, Jordan] it's going to stumble [the Pistons and Knicks playing bad basketball so well] and stumble [strike], or rather change and change and change. {But limiting the criteria to a single criterion: cash flow, the peak then stumble bit is reasonable}) I don't agree that this can be translated directly into football. It doesn't work that way in baseball (there are some young players in the majors, mainly pitchers that do real well their first season at 20 or 21 and then fall apart for a while and maybe come back and be ok or great, I mean, they're pitchers, it often appears random), most players [or hitters atleast] reach their peak at say 27-30. And, if we accept Gould [and we do, see this blog, Monday Jan 12] the level of play is getting increasingly better and thus fewer and fewer players not very near their peak will be able to do anything.)
I'm outta steam; I've only tangentially glanced socialism but I've hit most other recent topics.
Radiohead
The Pixies
Kraftwerk
Wilco
The (International) Noise Conspiracy
The Rapture
Desert Sessions
Hieroglyphics
Kinky
Stereolab
Future Sound of London
And you will know us by The Trail of Dead
Peretz
Death Cab for Cutie
Laurent Garnier
LCD Soundsystem
Living Legends
Sander Kleinenberg
Black Keys
The Sounds
Howie Day
Junior Senior
Mark Farina
Moving Units
Sahara Hotnights
Electric Six
The Stills
Seb Fontaine
22-20's
Juana Molina
Phantom Planet
Dios
Jem
Q and not U
Erase Errata
The Section Quartet
DJ Icon
Sunday May 2nd:
The Cure
The Flaming Lips
Air
Belle & Sebastian
Basement Jaxx
Paul Van Dyk
Bright Eyes
Atmosphere
Thursday
BRMC
Cursive
Le Tigre
The Crystal Method
Dizzee Rascal
Adam Freeland
Mogwai
Ash
2many Dj's
Antibalas Afrobeat Orchestra
Muse
Sidestepper
The Thrills
Broken Social Scene
The Sleepy Jackson
Ferry Corsten
Prefuse 73
!!!
The Cooper Temple Clause
Sage Francis
T. Raumschmiere
Stellastarr*
The Killers
Home Town Hero
The Section Quartet
I've seen 15 of these bands before; I've heard 17 more (quite extensively/fanatically in some cases); I know of 12; for the remaining 26 I am clueless.
This list has no Yeah Yeah Yeahs, no Sparta; no Neutral Milk Hotel (like I ever really thought that possible), no Velvet Underground; but, alas, it is glorious and already too packed.
I will stop posting about Coachella (unless questions are asked) for a while now unless there are late additions (which there will be, but it should be a while) of note. Until such time I will try to return to discussions of constitutional law and economic theory and shifts in the culture of sport
Players Who Declare Early Please to comment on this Easterbook entry about youngsters in the NFL and NBA.
I strongly disagree with him and just blew a whole bunch of words about it on my personal weblog.
What else to say... oh, whoever's ruining basketball, I really don't think it's Kevin Garnett or Kobe Bryant or LeBron James. The wannabes, who think they're as good as those three but really aren't, might be ruining the game, but their going into the league too early is just a symptom of the whole gotta-have-instant-gratification character flaw that turns out to be what really ruins them.
IMHO It's not that sticking things out through college gives you good character but that already having good character makes you wise enough to stick things out through college.
My Pick-A-Candidate Results 100% Bush
57% Clark
57% Edwards
55% Sharpton
55% Kerry
53% Dean
42% Kucinich
Apparently the Democratic field is all basically alike to me. The major problem with a web site like that is that there's no way to figure out character -- or reactions to character -- from survey results.
For example, after adjusting for my irrational belief that trial lawyers (at least contingency-fee plaintiff's lawyers) are among the lowest life forms on Earth, I do find that as trial lawyers go, John Edwards is a great guy. He gives a powerful stump speech and I deeply appreciate his upbeat message. He doesn't understand how economics works but still on some level he appreciates what makes America work.
By contrast I find Kerry's personality reprehensible and Clark strikes as the bad kind of crackpot.
(Dean is the good kind of crackpot: The people who support him do so for all the wrong reasons, and this leads him to say really idiotic things sometimes, but I think I'd really enjoy Dean as a person if I knew him. In some ways his off-kilterness resembles mine.)
Oh, and along with holding public office and serving in the military (I left both those blank, since I really don't care) there ought to be a checkbox to exclude people who incite murder by way of race riot.
I wish Bush weren't spending money like a drunken sailor. That makes it really hard to support him, except when I remember that the Democrats probably wouldn't be any better and then wonder who al Qaeda et al would rather see in office.
Getting back to the survey: I had much stronger opinions late in the test than early. Lots of wishy-washiness on abortion and education, two areas that the federal government isn't suited for anyway.
Yet more agreement here that Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. On the other hand, I have to oppose a federal ban on partial-birth abortion because it's inappropriate for the ban to be federal. Take it to the state legislatures...
Ok, hmm. That was just the opening statement of the case that didn't make a blind bit of sense; the actual opinion (and the dissent and the concurrance) are in much more standard prose [though still littered with references I don't get and don't have reasonable access to look up]
Note: This posting the URL and commentary is my free (unrequested) service for those interested, I find most discussions to be increasingly better off as information is increased.
Here is a site that may be useful/interesting. I have no idea who put this up; I am rather interested in knowing, however.
This site has the full text of the court opinion, Rehnquist's dissent and Stewart's concurrance. It also has 7 sets of "thought provoking scenarios." Finally it has links to a message board I have not bothered to look at.
I read a bit of Blackmun's court opinion; I learned that it isn't the sort of thing I can read through quickly or easily; I don't know the necessary legal history or terminology. [Precise jargon is absolutely necessary for conveying complex abstractions but it makes it difficult for the general individual to understand the specific.]
I read through and kind of answered the first 3 of the scenarios; they are interesting but I almost find them to be oddly constructed/selected.
I don't know, maybe I am being paranoid; the site overall seems very sparse and impartial - maybe too sparse and impartial. Or not.
Also, gotta give it to Cal, they made their free throws late and held on.
And, yeah, I know that link is to a story on the loss by the other PAC-10 team in my state to the other Bay Area PAC-10 team but that's all I could risk without killing my browser
Here we go. Pull stats: The Rockets scored 11 in the 1st, the Suns responded with 13 in the 2nd. The Rockets shot 57.7%. From the line, 35.8% from the field.
I like real percentages, they're more fun.
The next song up is Grace Under Pressure and I'm not listening to Rush.
In other news I took Billy to the airport this evening so he could leave for India. He meant to mention something here about being less in touch and less able to check here or Y! mail (work email'll be the best bet), etc., but, well let me put it this way: he was offered tickets for the Suns/Rockets game last night and passed.
I did go (ticket from a separate offer); the game was ugh-ly. But only about 10,000 people saw it (in the arena.) I'd offer links to summaries/box scores so you could see how terrible the shooting/etc was (especially in the first quarter) but last time I tried to get a site my browser crashed.
Apparently the Pixies are looking at a North American tour lead-up to the Coachella date.
Speaking of Coachella I don't mean to be pushy, I'm just excited. I'm going like I have the past three years and if others aren't as taken by the (potential) line-up, hey, it's your $165 to save (or say $90 for a single day)
Maybe they automatically give some a 100% score so you don't feel ripped off.
Kucinich 100%
Kerry 95%
Sharpton 94%
Dean 94%
Clark 85%
Edwards 84%
Lieberman 74%
Bush 12%
I'm rather surprised Sharpton is that high; I would've expected Lieberman to be that low. But the first of those didn't matter from the beginning and Lieberman has bowed out now. I still would like to see Dean come back and get the nomination but despite him not being that far behind and so few delegates actually out it doesn't look too likely.
I guess I might should read Roe before I comment much on overturning it, or, rather, not overturning it. Even if ideally it would be an issue decided in a different forum I wouldn't want that step back.
But there are other issues at work here, I feel, because I also am one of those who like the UN (or atleast the idea of a UN) and who would be rather happy about the EU if I lived in Europe.
At work we're interviewing people this week for some short-term data entry positions that will report to me.
Everyone has such impressive resumes! At least for their specific field, I think they're actually more qualified than I am.
Maybe that means I should go into management.
Oh yeah, my real point: Everyone wants to believe the economy is improving, as the numbers say it is. I myself have a job (went from October '02 to December '03 with only contract work), so that's a start. Still, you know the recovery isn't in full swing from just how overqualified the job applicants are and how many resumes any given position gets.
Many of the bands listed I don't know at all or very well. And while there aren't big names that I don't need/care to see (like last year's Beasties and RHCP) there are a few I'm not interested in.
But that doesn't matter, 23 hours of set time goes far too quickly, I'll still end up not being able to see several bands I'm looking forward too.
Especially now that two Scottish bands have been added: Mogwai and Belle & Sebastian (Still note that the bands I've mentioned are officially unofficial, that is band websites and/or major/reputable publications mention these bands as playing, the official Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival website says the line-up'll be announced next week. It'll certainly be before tickets go on sale (Valentine's) but I'll also point out that last year they were going to wait but stuff was getting out so they went ahead anyway. I only remember one drop from the initial official list last year (BRMC) but several were added (like Blur.))
Bands I'm excited about (culling from a more updated list):
Saturday Radiohead
The Pixies
Sahara Hotnights
The (International) Noise Conspiracy
...And You Will Know Us But the Trail of Dead
Sunday The Cure
Wilco
Belle & Sebastian
Mogwai
Unknownday The Flaming Lips
!!!
Yeah Yeah Yeahs
The Crystal Method
Paul van Dyk
Stellastar*
Others I could deal with Bright Eyes
Death Cab for Cutie
Air
Broken Social Scene
The Black Keys
And I'll be looking into most of the others. Also, interestingly, the list I'm going from now doesn't mention Sparta, who would be up on the excited about list.
Fantasy Basketball Second in a league of eight, hosted by BU alum Mike Hoey-Lukakis. It's a total points league where the entire points system is just Efficiency without the denominator. No games-played max, either, so sometimes I wonder if the best strategy would just be to cycle through a bunch of replacement-level players and always get the full ten games a day.
First place (took over from me three weeks ago after I'd previously led right out of the gate) has a scary-deep roster full of 20-per-game players. Then there's me with KG, Sam Cassell (FBA singlehandedly made me a big Wolves fan, at least this year), Yao, Carmelo, Vince Carter, Pau Gasol... and then enough marginal mediocrity that maybe I really should just start rotating through the daily pickups. Ugh.
Drafting Gilbert Arenas over LeBron is almost too shameful to admit. Geez, at this point even Yao over LeBron is debatable. Nothing debatable about KG, though, save for the two idiots who failed to draft him first or second.
The Tyranny of Tuesday Having TMQ and the new Onion come out on the same day just torpedoes early-afternoon productivity. The whole day I'll have both windows minimized on my toolbar, checking back every 15 minutes to read another couple paragraphs.
Volokh Conspiracy, even though Eugene Volokh himself is light years better than most of the co-conspirators (I do like Randy Barnett, partly because I had him as a professor, in a seminar no less--The Forgotten Constitution. I wrote my term paper on the ex post facto clause, specifically whether it really ought to apply to some civil cases as well as criminal).
The alphabetically superior quasi-celebrity blogs, A Small Victory and Amish Tech Support. (I blogrolled it as "A Small Victory" instead of "Small Victory, A" solely because Michele is so cool.)
After that it's hit-or-miss whether I click to a given site on a given day.
