You think Carmelo Anthony is among the best players in the league? Not much of an advanced stats fan, are ya.

You are literally watching the best players play one another right now. Only instead of getting to see LeBron and scrubs vs. Tim Duncan and scrubs, you get to see LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Ray Allen, Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Leonard and the reanimated corpse of Boris Diaw playing the best team basketball this league has…

"The game." That nebulous little construct there? That's the problem, here.

I hated that Carmelo forced the awful trade to an awful Knicks team and is known as the best player on it. (He's not.) Generally I do not like him (the portrait of himself in his million-dollar NYC apartment is everything I hate about contemporary sports) and wish he'd never made it to the Knicks, who I follow.

Right. He's a fan who believes the NBA cartel should have more power than the labor that propels demand.

No, you're right. Because their skills are in high demand and short supply, we should treat them as if they're not laborers.

Competitive balance doesn't mean choosing a subset of "productive players" and creating rules to prevent them from managing their own risk (e.g. the opportunity cost of playing for a poorly-run franchise) and restricting their employment options.

You're not asking for competitive balance. If that were the case, you'd be calling for a revamp of the draft lottery, non-guaranteed contracts and a relegation system to punish franchises that operate with unsound principles year in year out.

Nice. I saw them the year before in Albany at SUNY. They played two songs from Green and the rest were from Blue/Pink. I think they even played "I Do."

Get Up Kids/Ozma tour?

Nice try, troll.

Maladroit has two good songs (Death and Destruction... okay, 1 good song) and The Green Album is the Weezer equivalent of a doctor's office's waiting room.

jhv

Stoner-science post, here:

Not to a seasoned vet — er, amateur like Manziel.

Playing 36 minutes per game is talking about volume, not rate. Is it really this hard to understand? He accrued a ton of minutes on a historically-bad team. In the opportunities he had, he played inefficiently. We're talking about points-per-shot, not points-per-game. You fail to understand this. It's on you.

You don't understand opportunity cost if you think that 16 PPG means anything without considering more data.

Correct. And I think your numbers are off w/r/t margin of error. Win Shares historically has a correlation of about 70%. The team adjustment is too large to give it any weight, either.

That's a false analogy. Sterling stills sells basketball competitions; he also is a racist.

Holy shit. +3"