BraunsBoyfriend

SUV's are modern station wagons. Only dorks drive them. People buy them because they are scared of driving and feel safe in them because of their high seats and raised bumpers. It's all part of our hyper neurotic society. The funny thing is, they are generally more dangerous than most cars. And now they're under powering them to make it appear they are better with gas.

The Spurs tanked to get Duncan. Robinson was indeed hurt, but they weren't nearly as bad as their record and really just did nothing on purpose the second half of the year. Everyone knew Duncan was going to be a basketball God. So the Spurs tanked and it worked out really, really well for them. The Spurs are notoriously one of the dirtier franchises, especially in the Popovich era. They were one of the first notable tankers (and benefited from it validating the concept), they took flopping to a whole new level and they groomed Bowen into one of the dirtiest players ever to play a professional sport not named hockey. It's hard to blame them though with all the success they've had. Seriously though, it's hardly worth watching the NBA for your team until they win a future HOF player in the draft or pick one up via FA, which the Bucks will probably never do.

It's Memorial Day weekend. This weekend and Labor day will always have insane prices from now on.

You mean to tell me you didn't get chills the first time you walked out into Lambeau and everything opened up? I remember walking out and things getting bigger and bigger and then there it is. The field looked smaller than I thought it would be with the goal posts moving slightly in the wind. The ring of names with all the legendary Packers, in a very subdued font going around the green wall around the top of the field. And then all the little things. The PA announcer, the crowd chants and everything. The seating bowl is what makes it the best though! No other football stadium is arranged like that. Places like Camp Randall are these huge mega stadiums and don't have anywhere near the intimacy that a place like Lambeau has. Not that Camp Randall isn't an experience in its own right... The tail gating is different. It's not in one big parking lot. It's all over the place in peoples houses surrounding the place. We always park at a guys house on Holmgren and Lombardi. He has a grill all ready for anyone to use and everyone who parks and tailgates there sits around and talks, etc. It's fun. I've been to a few NFL stadiums (want to get to KC bad) and Lambeau feels so much different than all the behemoths out there. It's not nearly as corporate as the others, they don't have stupid gimmicks going on all the time, the PA announcers and music people have it down pat and the crowd is fun.

Of course they know about all our young talent. They plan on signing half of it down the road.

I like the idea of sack races. Each owner or GM gets an official BA issued team sack. The lottery teams then compete in a sack race in Madison Square Garden. I think sack races are probably the way to go. They should at least be considered.

Bah FTJ, you're trolling now. The tavern laws, nearly impossible to enforce BTW, are for people are that are so noticeably drunk that any reasonable person would say this person is seriously drunk. Bars can be busy and it's impossible for a bar tender to keep up. They will not be found guilty of anything. He wasn't sleeping and had control of himself. Plus, in defending his BAC the taverns would simply ask to prove he didn't drink anything between the tavern and his car. As for the tow truck, you might be right that what I said wouldn't be a valid defense. The courts don't care if he would have hit someone else necessarily. But that he hit you. But, it would be easy to assume he would have hit and maybe killed the guy in the stalled car. Devils advocate is fun, so I can't blame you. But they are only starting this to help them when they get their balls sued off in a few months.

I love this part: "Authorities said the 29-year pitcher had a blood content of nearly twice the legal limit for alcohol in his system when he crashed into the back of the tow truck. He was also speeding, using a cell phone and wasn't wearing a seat belt, Police Chief Joe Mokwa said after the accident. Marijuana also was found in the SUV." Yeah, you have a real strong case there. And then this part. Notice the slimy use of the word "handed": ""It's understood that for the entire 31/2 hours that Josh Hancock was there that he was handed drinks," Keith Kantack, a lawyer for Dean Hancock, said. "It's our understanding that from the moment Josh Hancock entered Mike Shannon's that night that he was never without a drink."" Handed drinks, huh? I guess they have to hand them to you after you order them. Also, what does it matter that he was never without a drink? You could have 1 drink HANDED to you and consume it for 3 hours. This fits the criteria for being handed a drink and never being without a drink. And then this silly point: ""Were the police contacted?" Kantack asked. "Why weren't flares put out? Why was the tow truck there for an exorbitant amount of time?"" OK, if the tow truck wasn't there then Hancock would have slammed into the next thing: The guys stalled car. A mechanical failure likely happened with this guy as a police report says he was cut off and spun out. So, does it even matter if a tow truck was there? Hancock would have crashed into a car then, that would probably have a person in it and maybe killed him. And since he wasn't wearing a seatbelt and was drunk and speeding, I don't see how he would have avoided this and not a tow truck. Thank God that Tow truck was there to protect the guy whose car broke down. But we get this gem at the end "Dean Hancock said in a statement that the "facts and circumstances" of Josh's death "have caused great pain to all of Josh's family." As administrator of his son's estate, Dean Hancock said he has an obligation to represent the family on all issues, "including any legal actions necessary against those who contributed to the untimely and unnecessary death."" This almost verifies my earlier suspicions that this guy is doing what's "best" for his kids estate. That is, to take legal action before they can take action on you. This is an old trick. They don't intend to win anything. What they are trying to do is limit Josh's liability in this case. If they somehow get a favorable decision it can be used when they inevitably get sued by these people they are suing. It gives them, in effect, 2 trials to defend Josh. With this one they get to play from the position of power by being a plaintiff and make these people defend themselves from whatever evidence they might bring up. This can then be used later when they get sued. This might protect some of Josh Hancock's estate.

hawing, if you got any kind of considerable money you'd be better off not paying off your mortgage with it. Your mortgages interest rate is probably less that what you could if you had a couple hundred thousand from a lawsuit. Your best bet would be to find a reasonably high yield fund to put your money into and watch the magic of compound interest delight you. Usually any time you get a decent chunk of money, paying things off is the last thing you should do. You're almost always better off investing it.

Like I put in my edit, this is probably a preemptive lawsuit to soften the blow when the other people whose lives were put in danger sue the estate of Josh Hancock for endangering their lives, damaging their vehicles, etc. I'd sue Josh Hancocks balls off if I was in their position.

He made the decesion he was going to get drunkl get high and drive around (to another bar no less!). He made these choices sober. This guy had a problem with alcohol and drugs and was even late to games because of it. This is the kind of thing all his teammates probably saw coming after the fact. TheBawz: We don't need to know all the facts to judge this guy. We aren't a court of law. The bill of rights only says that a court of law has to do this. The court of public perception says this guys a loser who had it all and blew it. That this guy made the choice to do these things and paid the ultimate price for it. That his father wants to sue someone when its obvious his son is an idiot. So you're right, the courts will view the evidence. But we know enough facts to form a valid opinion. He got drunk and high. He drove his car. He crashed into someone. And he endangered their lives....but now they're at fault?! Gimmie a break. I don't care why this guys car was on the highway stalled. It happens all the time. I'll let the courts figure it out. But I hope Mr. Hancock knows it was his son that did this to himself and to stop the self pity. His son is a selfish jerk who endangered the lives of many that night. We should only be thankful he killed himself and not anyone else. His father should be apologizing to the people he almost killed. I'm going to guess this lawsuit is happening to counter the inevitable lawsuit that the tow truck and the stalled guy will bring against Hancock's estate. Hancock endangered their lives and probably created great trauma or some crap that will play in a court real nice. This lawsuit only exists to help their defence when Josh gets sued post mortem.

Expanding on this idea of a ranking system, should it take into account a teams potential? That is, not weigh every game equally. This way teams can play young players late in the season and not taint the true results of how good or bad they are. Maybe bell curve it to some time in the season? Teams could exploit this bell curve of course. I'd imagine weighing all the variables you take into account with a teams potential would be the best. This is similar to how handicaps work in golf. They aren't based on your average, but rather your best games....or your potential one could say.. So teams that have good players that get injured and end up stinking don't artificially get high draft picks because of this turn of "luck". So basically take into account how your team did at its best, how they did at their worst and how they did the rest and weight the algorithms variables this way. This kills tanking, unless you intent to start tanking in December. It would definitely be interesting and have to be open and would kill any idea of a conspiracy. It would also have to be tested over the results of the last 50 years and people would have to generally agree it's fair.

I think comparing the NBA to other sports doesn't work in this regard BigReed. In the NBA 1 player can change everything. Look at Cleveland. Perennially basement team that is now in the conference finals. Same goes for many teams. Denver has been a playoff team since they obtained Carmelo. In football and baseball, 1 player isn't going to make or break a teams fate. Basketball is a game dominated by a couple guys on each team with everyone else role playing. It's 5 games per team at a time with a player playing both offense and defense. So the benefits to tanking are so great. It makes sense to try and get that player that can change the face of your franchise for years. The payoff is immense. In baseball its actually kind of the opposite. The way the farm and draft systems work now, smart teams can sustain good play for years. This is of course because of having to give up draft picks when you sign a teams FA's. So teams like the Brewers, who have a lot of young talent, will potentially be getting lost of good draft picks down the road to keep the farm going as they lose todays players to FA down the road. In basketball, your teams fortunes can be changed dramatically if you get the #1 and not the #2 pick. It is because of this the NBA needs a lottery system. The bottom 6 teams are really the only ones with any real chance of winning the top pick. And the difference between these teams is usually very little. For instance the Bucks and Celtics this year weren't nearly as bad as their records and tanking isn't the only reason. Both teams suffered so many injuries this year and under performed by a wide margin. Both teams are probably better than Seattle and Portland to be honest. Memphis is a pretty bad team but they still have the fourth pick. Atlanta with the third pick....well, they've been in the top of the draft for years anyways and haven't gotten better. I think this year is proof that not only is the lottery needed (not because it stops teams form tanking, but doesn't guarantee the tanking teams get anything for it) but that it works. Without it a lot more teams would have been tanking because it would be guaranteed they got the picks. If anything, drop the lottery and develop an algorithm that ranks teams and awards teams draft picks based on their power. Don't ask me what to use. I'm guessing their is some kind of RPI out there they could use. Take all types of variables into account so by the time the last quarter of the season rolls around it would be impossible to tank so bad as to break the system. This is maybe the best way to do it. But invariably this method will pick the "worst" team and lots of people will disagree and complain about how it's stupid, etc, like in footballs BCS rankings. I'd also imagine it would have to weight conferences and divisions. Because the bad teams in the West would probably look worse than teams that might be worse than them but play in the East where the competition is worse. This would prevent a clumping, or off balanced drafting system where one conference gets stronger and stronger while another gets weaker and weaker. It would be interesting to figure out a system that is fair. What variables would go into play? Would you mix an algorithm with an independent lobbies poll also? Could you trust humans to be impartial?

The lottery is run by an independent group actually. There's a few articles out there by guys who have been witness to the lotto. They've all mentioned an independent company that makes and operates these machines. They even bring a backup in case the machine breaks down. They also have a contingency plan if the machines don't work that amounts to basically drawing names out of a hat. I can see your theory. And assigning a single number to the teams you don't want to win and then making sure that ball doesn't come up is a good idea. But I really just doubt this happens. The owners all have a vested interest in winning the lottery and they would never let this happen. It would be risking so much to the integrity of the sport and actually be illegal. A rookie contract is only 4 years and then they are restricted in which they can take a 1 year tender and be unrestricted after 5 years. At this point they can go to the big market the league points them in ala Shaq. Plus, if a ball was weighted you would notice it not floating around in the hopper like the others and this would draw suspicion form at least one of the 20 or so people in the room. Teams get accused of tanking every year. Cleveland and Denver were accused of it the year LeBron and 'Melo came out. Cleveland won the lottery after a masterful tank job that started in November. This year none of the bottom 3 won a spot. It's certainly possible. Do a mock draft at ESPN.com. I've had none of those teams come up after running 20 trials more than once. One way to look at it is add up the probabilities of the bottom 3 teams getting each pick. For each one, 1-3 they add up to less than 65%. So if you treat the rest of the teams as a single entity (the not a bottom 3 entity) you see this entity has almost as good a chance to be selected. Out of the pool of 1001 numbers, the "rest of the teams" have about half. So since it's a lottery, with replacement, it's not that too crazy to think that one of the bottom 3 teams wouldn't win. And as it gets closer to the 3 spot, the odds of the bottom 3 get less, down to about 55% So imagine they have a 65% chance at #1, 60% chance at #2 and a 55% chance at #3. For instance, it's not too bizarre to believe you could flip a coin 4 times and have it come up tails every time. These are about the same odds.

Is there any way we could "forget" to bring Graffy on the bus and leave him in LA?

Tito Horford was a garbage NBA player. Granted this doesn't mean Al will be one. Just sayin'.

Big Reed, your theory is great except you take great liberty with the facts. Every ball is "inspected" before it is put into the case. OK, not good enough, I understand... After the first 4 balls are selected and the team that has those numbers is identified (which is public to all in the room) they are put back into the machine. So with your theory, the same 4 balls would come up every time. But it's obvious they don't. And if they don't what's the point?

We have plenty of time. Our offense can come back from anything. We have over 20 outs to make something happen here.

Giants up 2-0 on the Astros. Cubs winning 1-0.

It should be obvious that Cappy and not Sheets, is the ace of this team.

pitchleague, Google is your friend. Learn it, use it, love it. The first result on a query of "nba lottery rules": Under the system, 14 ping-pong balls numbered 1 through 14 are placed in a drum. There are 1,001 possible combinations when four balls are drawn out of 14, without regard to their order of selection. Prior to the Lottery, 1,000 combinations are assigned to the Lottery teams based on their order of finish during the regular season. Four balls are drawn to the top to determine a four-digit combination. The team that has been assigned that combination will receive the number one pick. The four balls are placed back in the drum and the process is repeated to determine the number two and three picks. (Note: If the one unassigned combination is drawn, the balls are drawn to the top again.)

It's not fixed and last night was proof the system works. Everyone was freaking out that Memphis, Boston and Milwaukee were tanking and going to run away with the top pick. But not a single one of those teams had a 50% chance or better of getting the 1 OR 2 pick. the worst team had around a 45% chance of getting a 1 or 2. Is it rare that the top 3 would fall out? Yeah, it's pretty unusual and the first time it has happened. But it's not a mathematical impossibility. It sucks but it happens. Also, the top 3 teams I believe all share at least a number in the hopper. There are 14 balls in it the hopper. If that one single numbers isn't drawn, they all will lose out. So if they all have #1 in their 4 number sequence and #1 doesn't pop out, none of them will make it. Other leagues don't have a lotto because 1 players can't change a teams fortunes like it can in the NBA. In the NBA you have 5 total players playing offense AND defense. A single players contributes a lot to a teams outcome. More than any other major sport with drafts. Therefore, there is much more incentive for teams to come in last place by throwing a season to ensure they get this elite player, like LeBron, Oden/Durant, Duncan, etc. The lotto probably isn't needed every year because there aren't always elite players coming out. The previous 2 years with Bargnanni and Bogut are good examples. Yeah, they were good players and better than most in the draft, but nothing you would tank for. But then yeas like this come around where it makes just too much sense to tank for greatness. So the lottery has to be in effect every year because who decides if the top player(s) are elite enough to lotto over? In the end 3 really bad teams won the top 3 spots in the lotto. The top 2 teams are bad teams....were bad teams. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif The system works. Tanking doesn't guarantee anything. Changing the system would be knee jerk at best considering it could be argued it worked better and for its intended purpose this year better than ever. Good for them, sucks for us.

I'd take Julian Wright over Green. I'm still depressed we didn't get a 1 or 2 and that if we didn't tank we probably would have won the 31 or so games needed to be the 6 seed and win this lottery. I still agree with tanking as it does give you the best odds. But a lessons was learned in a big way this year (and many others) that tanking doesn't give you anything but disillusioned fans and a little bit better mathematical chance of getting the top pick. I think the NBA system works. Everyone was up in arms that the bottom 3 teams tanked their way there, which they probably did, but none of them got anything for it. Portland though, 2 years in a row. They "won" the lottery last year in terms of getting the best player (which doesn't say much, Roy wasn't too impressive anyways), the guy with the most potential (Aldridge) and then winning a guarnteed franchise player for the next 12 years in Oden. Larry Harris....the guyy really is a slick, snake oil salesman....and it keeps blowing up in his face (Mason trade, Ford trade so far, tanking this season away...). I like LH still but I'm definitly not in his rah-rah camp. I just can't get past thinking the Bucks are doomed for at least 6 years unless this pick really works out.

Sad, sad night. We really needed this to work out to be anywhere near relevant the next few years. At least no one in the East got the top 2 and especially the hated Celtics. Going forward I don't know what to do. Trade it? Trade up? Use it? Ideally, I want Corey Brewer. He's 6'8", great defender, can shoot reasonably well (and will get better with NBA trainers), is athletic and a winner. What's not to like about this guy? I think he'll be the guy that really breaks out and a year from now everyone will slap their head at not drafting him and muse about how obvious it was he was going to be a good player. He can play the 3 and the 2 as well, providing for a nice rotation. I also think with the 6th pick we will get the best player available. He needs to add some bulk and you would imagine with time he will. But I love his tenacity, energy and overall abilities. He can become the stopper for your team and become a valuable role players around Redd, Bogut and ?. I'm guessing Williams, if resigned. Plus his last name is Brewer, the Brewers are doing very well this year so it just makes sense. Williams/? Redd/Brewer Simmons/Brewer CV/Skinner Bogut/Gadz God, looking at that roster makes me sad. We have no chance no matter what unless whoever we draft becomes an NBA God...

Yeah, she's really dumb. My feeling is she never saw a baseball game before all this in her life. She tries hard it appears but shes just not talented or all too pretty for that matter. She seems so proud when she gets her lines correct. I guess I kind of feel good for her too when this happens. I don't watch that post game crap anyways too much. It's cool they have it though.