Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 09:28 PM) Davis was probably a better prospect. It's hard to know if my memory is clouded though because of Davis' early dominance. My impression of his stock at the time was that he had huge upside (KG was thrown around as a comparison) if everything worked out but that his offense was still a work in progress and he needed to bulk up. I don't think most scouts were predicting him to average 20-10 in his second year. I also think he was a relatively safe prospect, meaning that at worst he'd still be an athletic big that starts in the league for like 10 years. I've seen about half a dozen Kansas games and watched the Draft Express scouting video of Embiid (those things are awesome). My impression is that he has the same type of upside as Davis, but he's not as safe. It's easy to see his potential if you just watch his highlights. He's huge, mobile and flashes some post moves that most NBA players don't have much less someone as inexperienced as Embiid. He also makes a lot of mistakes though. His shots out of the post aren't always pretty. He will throw up weak attempts in traffic, especially if there's contact. He also gets lost occasionally on defense, bites on a lot of fakes and makes some silly fouls. That stuff can be ironed out obviously, but I have a hard time seeing him play 30 quality minutes in the NBA right now. They're also very different players stylistically. Davis mostly uses his athleticism to find points in space (lobs, transition, pick-and-roll, putbacks, ect) while Embiid is more of a true post guy. Davis also started as a PG and then grew a foot, so he has better handles. Embiid has only been playing for what, 3-4 years? He shows flashes of Hakeem with his footwork. It's crazy how advanced he is for how little he's played. In that respect, as an offensive player in the post, I think he is way ahead of Davis. Davis, however, is a better defender and a better all around offensive player because he can hit a jumpshot.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 10:04 AM) I didn't say ESPN should do it, I'm just noting that if they did it would be the end of cable. Not sure if that's true either. A lot of people watch ESPN. But most people watch other things. For me at this point losing ESPN wouldn't be as damaging as losing CSN or BTN.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 09:48 AM) What neighboring state is going to have a fleet of snowplows that they're going to drive hundreds of miles that wouldn't be dealing with their own snow issues? Then strike a deal with those neighboring states that you'll pay part of the cost for X amount of vehicles with the understanding that on the off chance that Atlanta gets snow, you're driving down there to take care of it. The answer shouldn't be they have no answer and people have to sit in their cars for 18 hours.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 29, 2014 -> 09:50 AM) ESPN is more or less keeping the cable/satellite industry alive. If they ever decide to sell their product directly to consumers, it's the end of their industry. Nah, that would be suicide for them. They make more money charging every cable customer in the country $5 bucks. That's why the a la carte theory is never going to happen. Everyone involved - the cable companies, networks, studios, etc. - all make more money in the current system.

How do they not have a back up system ready though from a neighboring state? Pretty awful governance to basically throw up your hands and say "whelp! let's wait until it melts!"

My wife and I cut the cable cord the first year and a half living in the burbs. Lived off the internet, Netflix, Hulu, etc. Sports was the biggest loss. Being a huge Illinois fan I wasn't able to watch the majority of their basketball games. The Bulls/Sox/Hawks were out too unless they were on WCIU or WGN (on frequently, but not frequently enough). We also found that waiting for Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, etc. to come out sucked. So we finally went back and neither one of us regret it. Also, we had a kid in that time frame. My wife for sure enjoyed having some non-daytime talk show TV to watch during her maternity leave. And having channels like Disney Jr. and Sprout help as the kid grows and you need something to catch his attention for 10-15 while you get some work done.

Bwha ha ha. Such a perfect example of white guilt, right here: http://gawker.com/black-person-in-yoga-cla...isis-1510975100

Damn, 38-14 free throw advantage for Iowa.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:28 PM) Graduate student unions are already recognized and yet we haven't seen this slippery slope to "every student is an employee." See above. I think it's much easier to make the case that a grad student is an employee because you can pinpoint the service and the responding wage.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:23 PM) It depends on how that scholarship is earned, I would imagine. Most grad students and all athletes are clearly performing some sort of service to the university, whether it's TAing or outright teaching undergraduate courses or playing sports which can generate revenue and publicity/prestige for the school. That's not the same as someone who gets an academic scholarship for good grades but otherwise doesn't perform any services for the university. I think TA's or teaching courses is the best argument because you can clearly see the service being performed for a "wage." Not all players generate any money for the school or increase the publicity/prestige of the school.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2014 -> 01:19 PM) It's interesting, I think sensibly there is a line between an academic scholarship and an athletic scholarship. But I can see a court not wanting to tread that line and imply that all scholarships are considered employment and leave students with rights. And if they do that, then frankly every student should be considered an "employee" of someone - the school, the state, or the government - because nearly every student receives some kind of aid to go to school (scholarships, grants, internal school grants, or general financial aid).

I'm guessing this gets kicked out pretty quickly. The NLRA gives rights to "employees." I doubt the players can successfully argue that they are employees of the NCAA or universities under the law. I thought prior cases have held that players are students, not employees.

So this weekend AMC was playing the Godfather movies a bunch of times. I ended up watching about an hour of the 1st and 2nd movies as I was doing some things around the house. This morning I found this: http://www.scoutingny.com/the-godfather-th...s-then-and-now/ Pretty cool then and now of the 1st Godfather shooting locations.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 04:30 PM) Completely separate from whether Mackelmore should count for this genre or that genre is the fact that the Grammys are often pretty terrible and shouldn't be taken as a definitive statement of anything. True, although in a way I think its the best awards show because you have something to watch. The mash-up performances can be great.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 03:51 PM) I dunno, people don't really level that criticism at Eminem, do they? When you're brought up by Dre I don't think anyone in the rap community is going to complain. BTW, where was the "fauxrage" over Beyonce acting like a stripper with a thong on? I mean, I get it, Miley Cyrus is too in your face about stuff, but I really didn't see much difference in the two performances. Both were overly sexual and nearly inappropriate (get off my lawn!) for an awards show. Everyone praised Beyonce (and Jay-Z to the point of nausea), but people were all over Miley Cyrus. Wonder why. I've seen a couple stories on it. But not the mass media circus like before. Also, Willie Nelson needs to hang it up. Madonna too. Both were beyond terrible.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2014 -> 11:33 AM) Disagree strongly. You have zone defense now which stops guys from getting into the paint, not George or Iguodala. Allen would be a great defender in any era. But it's ridiculous how you can pack the paint and play the passing lanes all day long. It's how Larry Hughes made his money. He was an awful one on one defender. And Joakim Noah > Mourning? Really. That's a friggin joke. Zone + guys much more willing to take a charge these days. Thanks Coach K for that awful basketball innovation.

Using this as the general gun thread: Another possible SYG defense case: http://staugustine.com/news/florida-news/2...as#.UuZ16NLnZQK To me this is clearly not a SYG case. If he had shot him after a fight in his yard, maybe. But he chased after the guy and there's evidence he shot him in the back.

I enjoyed the first season of Orange is the New Black.

Well, these teams may meet again in the Final Four.....of the NIT.

Oof, I bet Ekey's girlfriend is a little worried.

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Jan 26, 2014 -> 03:23 PM) lol... #Illinifans Yeah, that's absolutely a complaint about the officiating. It has nothing to do with home/road, that's just failure to call the new rule consistently.

Bertrand hacked 4 times on the first or second play of the half near the paint. No call. Tate barely touches Ferrell on the perimeter. Call.

Terrible last possession. Not a surprise. Entertaining game but not great basketball on either side.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 26, 2014 -> 07:43 AM) First time ever in the TV Thread. Just looking for new shows to check out, I'm stuck in the apartment for two weeks over Chinese New Year's before I can fly to Indonesia. Here's my current list. Elementary Sons of Anarchy Breaking Bad NCIS NCIS/LA CSI/Las Vegas Modern Family Big Bang Theory Scandal House of Cards Hostages Marvel's Agents of SHIELD Entourage Larry David/Curb Your Enthusiasm I've heard some recommendations for Homefront, Boss (Kelsey Grammar), The Newsroom, The Blacklist and Betrayal. Someone else mentioned The Good Wife but I'm not much of a Juliana Margulies fan. Person of Interest, too. Any other great shows out there that are reminiscent of the ones on my list? Are you a big procedural fan?

Mine has been fine all afternoon