Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


illinilaw08 last won the day on June 29 2018

illinilaw08 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

42 Interesting

About illinilaw08

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Denver, CO

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Sox Minor League Affiliate
    Charlotte Knights (AAA)

Recent Profile Visitors

562 profile views
  1. illinilaw08

    COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

    To me, it seems like you have to start over. Lock down again to get the current wave under control, pass a giant round of stimulus that allows non-essential workers to stay home and non-essential businesses to stay afloat while shuttered, and this time, instead of debating opening the economy vs. fighting the virus, use that time to set up the procedures other countries implemented to stay on top of the virus. Right now, in CO, test results are taking 5+ business days to come back (and I think that's consistent around the country) - you can't effectively contact trace if you have to wait 5 or more days to get your results. Once virus numbers are down to manageable levels, if the infrastructure is in place, you have a chance to trace the virus in the community and limit spread. There's no political will to do that, so it's never going to happen. But the above seems to be the only real option...
  2. illinilaw08

    COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

    I don't disagree with this. There are obviously companies and industries that are essential to people living. People have to eat, and the food comes from somewhere. Everyone in that supply chain is essential. The feds needed to intervene early to make those conditions safer, however. At least 8 workers at a meatpacking plant in Greeley, CO died from COVID. That's just unacceptable. Mask up the employees, enforce as much social distancing as you can, and furlough your at-risk employees who are taken care of by a beefed up unemployment system, and whose jobs are waiting for them when it's safe for them to return to work. The solution to this problem is not insulate the meatpacking plant from any liability for COVID deaths - it's make it safer for them to operate. We also have to come to terms with the fact that there are industries which are essential - like the food supply chain - and there are industries that are not essential, and in fact as designed are set up to be spreaders (looking at you bars and clubs). I love bars. I spend a lot of time at bars. But there isn't a safe way to sit at a barstool inside right now. Businesses shouldn't fail because of a pandemic - so how do you balance public health and the bar/restaurant industry? You get massive stimulus on a federal level. Long story short. We need to make working conditions as safe as possible for the industries that need to work for society to function. And we need to provide funding to the industries who are not essential to the functioning of society so that people don't lose their business because of a global pandemic.
  3. illinilaw08

    COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

    Colorado hasn't seen a huge spike - though we have seen an uptick - and Polis shut the bars (defined as no food) back down, a mere 12 days after they were reopened (still can do carryout and delivery). The feds have to step in with some serious additional stimulus. The choice should be the feds pay businesses to stay closed and workers to stay home (bmags stated it perfectly above) - not we lose businesses that equal 10% of GDP or we have constantly renewing outbreaks. Extend the $600 UI benefit indefinitely, target direct grants to businesses that have been shutdown, and let's have a national, across the board, strategy for containing the virus going forward. Because the first try at reopening... hasn't worked.
  4. illinilaw08

    COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

    I've been on the trails around Denver the last couple weekends. Getting to trailheads around 7, so we have the trails to ourselves early, and then pass crowds near the end of the hike. I'd say 50% mask usage? Most people with masks have bandannas or buffs they can pull up when you cross paths with somebody and back down when you are back by yourself.
  5. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    Saw Jordan live three times. Once a pre-season game against the Bucks at Chicago Stadium (1988 I think; I apparently talked about how many dunks Jordan had in the game incessantly - I was 5). SRO to win 53 (Bucks again!) during the '95-'96 season. And the home loss to Utah on Super Bowl Sunday in 1998 when my cousin won tickets.
  6. illinilaw08

    COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

    Also gave the green light to re-start the Bundesliga in less than 10 days. Germany has done a great job.
  7. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    What are you arguing here? Where have I said Shaq is the best big of all time? Or even a good passing big? I've argued consistently that if you took 2000 Shaq, gave him a guy like 2016 Cavs Kyrie, and surrounded him with shooters, that team would compete for a title. I used the 2000 assist stats to show that Shaq - under the right circumstances - was a willing passer (ie, he'd be willing to pass out of double teams to open shooters). For me, this is less a referendum on Shaq, and instead an argument about whether you can build a contender in 2020 around a dominant big who doesn't shoot threes.
  8. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    Did I say Shaq had to become the best passing big in NBA history? Edit: Also, calling Shaq a 50% shooter from 2 misstates the facts as well. He's shooting almost 60% from 2 in 2000 - not 50%. Also, if teams were comfortable giving up efficient looks at the rim in 2020, there would be no drive and kick game. Second edit: In 2000, Shaq averaged almost 4 assists a game (I was surprised to see that number). That's hardly a guy who wouldn't pass.
  9. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    I don't think we're that far apart. Shaq would be a great player in today's NBA. We agree on that. The idea I initially responded to was this "Shaq would eat...but like that's fine. Their volume and percentage of threes make up for it." That idea seems to be - you can't win a title with a star who doesn't make 3s. And I just don't think that's true. Yes, you can't win a title with a team who doesn't make 3s - that I agree with. But in the modern NBA, teams wants shots at the rim and 3s. Shaq would be great in today's NBA - without adapting his game - at getting shots at the rim. There's no reason to think his FG% would slump - he's probably still shooting at least 58% from the floor on volume. If you surrounded 2000 Shaq with a host of shooters (granted, Shaq would have to be a better passer), and a second scorer, why can't that team win a title? It wouldn't beat the Curry/Klay/Durant Warriors who might be the greatest team of all-time - sure. But why isn't that team in the conversation for the 2019 title?
  10. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    I'm not modernizing Shaq to today's game - I'm modernizing his teammates to today's game. Embiid averaged 18 attempts per game last year, and the Sixers were a Kawhi buzzer beater away from the Finals. I don't see why Shaq shooting 58% on 20 attempts/game (Shaq only averaged more than 20 attempts/game twice in his career) with a Kyrie type second guy (because you obviously can't win without a second guy), and the role players shooting 35% from 3 isn't a workable outcome offensively. But leaving that aside if Shaq modernized to today's game is shooting at a "much higher fg%"... is he shooting 68% from the floor on 15 shots/game)? How incredible is that guy? As far as the Nuggets go, I think you are underselling Jokic some. He's the best passing big the league has ever seen. His playoff numbers last year were great. He needs a second guy to be an All-NBA type to take some of the scoring load off of him (Murray making a leap is the most likely route, but MPJ could get there as well). Without that second guy, the Nuggets are the DRose Bulls at the moment. But Jokic can absolutely be the best guy on a team that wins the title.
  11. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    If 2000 Shaq was in the NBA today, wouldn't a team just build around him the same way the Bucks built around Giannis? The modern NBA wants shots at the rim and 3s. Shaq would get what he wanted at the rim, and if he's surrounded by shooters, the Warriors volume advantage isn't 12 to 4. If you teleported the 2000 Lakers here, sure, I'd agree with you that the 2018 Warriors run them off the floor. But I don't think that's responsive to Jack's premise that you can't win with a dominant center because teams only shoot 3s. Shaq might struggle more defensively now because he wouldn't be able to switch, and teams would scheme to put him in pick and rolls. Lakers would have to scheme defensively with Shaq the way the Nuggets do with Jokic. That's the biggest issue IMO - would the Warriors have to adapt to Shaq (ie, forcing them to play a more traditional big defensively) or would Shaq have to adapt to the Warriors?
  12. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    Draymond, clearly not Barkley. But he is an all-time great role player. Great defender (DPOY in 2016-17) who can guard pretty much every position. Really good passer which has been critical to making that Golden State offense go. His biggest downfall offensively is - 73 win season excluded - he hasn't been a great 3 point shooter, so he isn't much of a scorer. He's absolutely not Barkley - more of a Rodman, but more useful offensively. Great role player.
  13. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    Plenty of 7 foot centers. They are just different. Offense has evolved away from prioritizing post ups - so you don't see as many possessions where you dump the ball to the big on the block and let them figure it out - but they still happen. Embiid, for example, averages over 8 post touches a game. Jokic is a hair under 7 feet, but Jokic averages 15 shots a game, and only about 3.5 are threes. Gobert doesn't shoot any threes. Zion was awesome in his 19 games last year while taking less than a 3 a game. You want bigs to protect the rim and to be efficient around the rim offensively. If your offense is built around an elite creator - like Harden or Giannis - yeah, you want your bigs to make 3s because it gives your best guys the most space possible to operate. But if your team's best offensive player is a big, you build your offense around their strengths (watch how the Nuggets use Jokic or the Sixers use Embiid). What has changed is what you need your role playing 7 footer to be able to do. Mason Plumlee on the Nuggets (I'm a Nuggets season ticket holder so these are easy examples for me) is a 6'11" role playing big who blocks shots, rebounds, and is athletic enough to switch onto to smaller guys defensively. He is also a pretty effective secondary playmaker (good ball handler and passer). He doesn't get post up opportunities. His points come on putbacks and rolls off the pick and roll. Role playing centers are more athletic and versatile than they used to be. But they are still frequently 7 feet tall.
  14. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    If Kukoc was putting up 20/7/7 lines in his 25-30 seasons, he would have been a star. His defensive limitations would have made him one dimensional, sure. But there are plenty of examples of offensively gifted players being All-Stars, regardless of their limitations on the defensive end - both in the 90s and today. It's just an interesting alternative history where Kukoc lands on a team that wants him to be their primary creator offensively vs. landing on a team that needed him to be a spark off the bench. By the time Kukoc is out of Jordan and Pippen's shadows, he's 30.
  15. illinilaw08

    2019-2020 Official NBA Thread

    I feel like Kukoc would have been a star back then if he landed somewhere other than Chicago. He was a perfect role player for those Bulls teams, but he spent his prime as a 6th man behind Jordan and Pippen. In his age 30 season in '98-99, he averaged 18.8 points, 7 rebounds and 5.3 assists a game.