Be Kind to Ned

Dear Mr. Simmons, 

Binge Mode is a hit!  I’ve been ravenously scarfing down every episode.  Mallory Rubin nimbly guides us through the highs and lows of each episode in a Cliffs Notes sort of way.  Jason Concepcion chimes in with all of the intricate details while his impressions really push the whole thing over the top as an entertaining recap of everything we might have missed, forgotten, or wanted to relive about Game of Thrones.  I’ve been enjoying every minute...well, almost every minute.  Here’s my one beef... 

What the #$%^ did Ned Stark ever do to them?  They pounce relentlessly on Ned every chance they get.  It started with the season one recaps.  Ok fine.  I thought they were a little harsh on the guy, but considering the end result of his actions, I get the criticism.  If he had climbed down off his horse and sparred in the mud just a little bit maybe he’d be sitting on his throne up North to this day laughing with Rob and Arya as the Lannisters futilely tried to bust through Moat Cailin. Still, relax a little.  Ned had some redeeming qualities. Not the least of which being he was a good dude. Heaven forbid we cheer for that. 

Then, to throw a little salt in the wound, your crew specifically designed a feature in the show to honor the fallen characters.  Freaking Viserys Targaryen had the solemn bell chime to mark his death.  The whole time Rubin and Concepcion were thrashing Ned throughout the season one recaps I sat gritting my teeth, but I took a small amount of solace knowing episode S1E9 was coming and poor Ned could finally rest in peace.   Once last moment of healing closure for Eddard Stark.  All I wanted was that stupid little sound bite.  Low and behold, we came to it.  I relived Ice slicing through poor Ned’s neck and what did I get?  Silence!  C’mon, really?  Even freaking Ros got the bell to dong. Ok, no problem.  Easy mistake I guess.  Well at least the slandering was finished.  Nope! The Rubin and Concepcion bus kept right on rolling through season’s 2 and 3.  “Look Mallory, there’s Ned’s body!”  Forward! Reverse!  Forward!  Reverse! “Oh look what Rob did.  He wasn’t stupid like Ned.”  “Oops, Rob blew it.  Just like Ned.”  “Tyrion is so smart, unlike Ned.”  ALRIGHT ALREADY!   In the wise words of Nicholas Cage, why don’t you cut him SOME FREAKING SLACK!  “Oh Ned, after the war he just buried his head in the sand and hid up north and left Robert by himself.”  Okay, Maester Aemon was praised for taking himself off the chess board for personal reasons.  Yet Ned withdraws to the North to run his homeland with pride and dignity after fighting a war to overthrow the entire kingdom to avenge his family that had just been murdered and somehow he’s a coward?  Yes, he allows his sense of duty/loyalty to drag his family back into the snakepit that cost them all so dearly, but let’s think a little more about why he did what he did rather than continuously spitting on his grave. “He’s an honorable fool!”  Settle down Rubin, just listen for a minute!

Ned tells Cersei he knew about her imbred offspring when she still had time to react.  He could have ruthlessly waited to spring it on her at the most opportune time.  Instead he played his cards early and he got himself killed.  On the surface it was a dunderheaded blunder.  The assertion laid out by Rubin and Concepcion was that Ned’s lack of intelligence cost him his life.  His rigid ideals blinded him from seeing his impending doom.   It was Ned’s fatal flaw.  But to channel Tyrion to some extent, what is flaw and what is strength?  What would Ned have gained from being ruthless? A longer life? Less pain? Less suffering?  More land?   Titles, titles, titles?  Familial longevity?  Honor can sometimes be confused with arrogance when at its roots it is about what’s right and good.  If Ned had played the game he might have lived longer.  He could have lived that day.  Or he could have died the next day while sitting on a toilet with crossbow bolts in his gut.  Or he could have lived for decades.  What is the difference next to a weirwood tree that will live on centuries later?  Would it be better if they wrote songs about him?  Would it be better if they wrote books about him?  What are the views of living men in Westeros to a dead man?  Ned Stark prays to the haunted faces of ancient trees. 

Only the ladder is real.  The climb is all there is.  Ned disagrees.  How you climb is all there is.  Legacy is not tied up in the perceptions of those who live on.  All we have are the things we do. Adhering to that principal to the bitter end may be perilous, but it is a risk well worth the gamble.  Care about the rest and you’re just kidding yourself.  The trees see everything.  That is what Ned believes.  That is who he is.  He deserves at least a nod for what he did and how he did it.  So let’s hear a bell toll for Ned Stark.  RIP Ned.  You have been missed.  

That's all for now.  Long live Bill Simmons,

-a fan

OT Rules of Engagement

Dear Mr. Simmons,
Billy IIIIIICE!!  I'm back!  And it only took a week this time.  If I keep this up, I think I have a restraining order coming my way.

Alright, there's been a lot of discussion lately about NFL OT rules.  News that the league passed a rule change to shorten OT to 10 minutes made everyone shrug.  What exactly are they trying to accomplish?  Does 5 minutes really move the needle on player safety?

First of all, from a pure game experience standpoint there's nothing wrong with the current overtime rules.  The drama of sudden death is preserved while taking away the ability to win on a first possession field goal knocks the importance of the coin toss down a few pegs.  Some people champion the college system.  I don't get it.  For one thing, they'd have to figure out where they are going to start each possession so the scores and stats don't balloon like do in college OT periods.  Just imagine the carnage of heads spontaneously exploding between the fantasy stats nerds, gamblers, and GM's worried about contract incentives as a 3-possession OT racks up 5 touchdowns in 20 minutes. It would be slightly humorous,
 but cruel.  Even if we decide to ignore the practical debate, the concept still doesn't sit right with me. It's like eating fake butter.  It's just not natural.

Here's what I would do:
Keep the same rules for the playoffs, but limit regular season overtime periods to two possessions. Each team gets the ball once at their own 20 yard line.  Whichever team advances the ball farther on their drive wins the game.  Field goals are off the table, and two TD's ends the game in a tie.  Purists will whine that you should have to score to win the game.  I get that to some extent, but if you look past the stigma of it, two-possession OT actually serves up the best of both worlds:

1. There will still be some drama.  Imagine having that red line on the field on the T.V. broadcast that delineates the line to gain to win the game.  Essentially, they already do that with the field goal range line, but this would be a little more intense.

2. If they really want to limit the amount of extra play for player safety, is there any better solution than this?

3. We avoid the nonsensical stat buildup.

I think that's it.  Chalk it up as the best solution.  Let me know if the Sports Czar approves then we can go ahead and tell the owners to trash their 10 minute overtime gaffe.

That's all for now. Long live Bill Simmons.
later- a fan

Durant Gets It. Or does he?

Dear Mr. Simmons,
The NBA finals started tonight.  Perfect time for a super slo-mo reaction to your Kevin Durant podcasts.

It sounded like you got a lot of positive feedback on your sit-downs with Durant.  Here are three takes from my end... please don't be offended:

1.  Why do people do player interviews again?   ..I could spin myself into the ground on this one.  I'll have to explain myself later.  Stay tuned for the "Player interviews are boring as S."  blog post.  Look at me.  Four posts in four years and now I'm throwing out teases and everything.  Don't touch me.  I'm on fire.

2. Your first Durant podcast came out and I hesitated.  But who was I kidding?  You are like pizza.  There's no bad pizza right?  To your credit, I really had no interest in listening to it and you kept me on the line for the whole thing.  I heard several people comment on how fascinating the interview was because Durant was more open than he had ever been.  Yet, from the fan side of things, I came out of it spitting fire at Durant.  I felt affronted by it.  He said something to the effect of...

Who are you? Look at me, I've done more than you'll ever do.

My brain knew what he was trying to say.  Trolls that rag on him only want to spew hate for the sake of misery when in reality he has done a lot of great charitable things for a lot of people and he was just venting.  But my heart wasn't having any of it.  All it heard was:

Who are you to comment on me?  I'm better than you.  

All in all, (despite my irrational F-you reaction) my general takeaway was that he had put a lot of thought into his life and tried to reconcile his feelings and emotions. Still, it seemed like there was something he was missing.

3. Then the second podcast came out.  Aside from the weird chewing sounds at the end, I liked it better than the first.  Durant had been through the Oklahoma City conflagration, and he seemed like he had learned some lessons and taken some strides.  Here's what I think you guys were missing.  He talked about love from fans and how the venom he felt upon his return made him rethink that relationship and question whether it was actually real.

A team to a sports fan becomes family.  Durant gets that part.  His mistake is viewing  it like it is love from sibling or a parent. With a mother, love is unconditional regardless of what you do or who you decide to play for. A fan is more like a cousin, and switching teams is like changing families.  If Durant decided to change his name to join a new family to seek out a better life, his mom would be happy for him.  Cousin Joe on the other hand would be pissed,
"We're not good enough for you any more? Screw you buddy."

In this case, not only did Durant change families, but he joined the Kennedy's and the pain seared like a hot poker in an open wound.  Kevin Kennedy is living it up in San Fran.  Meanwhile, cousin Joe Durant is back in Oklahoma sitting at the Thanksgiving table burning holes staring at the empty chair across from him.  Durant seemed to accept the anger he received, but I'm not sure he quite understands it yet. A fan's love is real.  It just isn't unconditional.  

That's all for now.  Gotta go to bed.  Long live Bill Simmons.

later- a fan

  

More "Valuable" Discussion?

Dear Mr. Simmons,

Alright Simmons. You sports talk guys are killing me.  Why do we have to do this every four months?  A regular season ends and we have to hash through the same MVP debate every time.   

“What is the award?  What does it mean? What is the right criteria?”       

Who’s the best player?  That’s all it is. 

“But wait the award name is M-V-p.” 

Stop.

 “I don’t know though, it might be M-v-P. What does valuable ACTUALLY mean?” 

Stop. Stop. Stop.   

“It’s not player of the year.  It’s most VALUABLE player.  But maybe it should just be called player of the year. Should we change the name?” 

WHO CARES WHAT THEY CALL IT?  Who is the best player?  That’s what the award is.  What possible reason would it be anything else?  All of the leagues call it MVP because 50 or 100 years ago someone decided that it sounded cool and it stuck.  It doesn’t matter.  We don’t have to change the name.  That’s just what we call it.  The point of the award is to document the best player for the season.  It’s no different than All-pro or 1^st team All NBA.  They are historical references for who was the best player at each position for the year.  Selecting an MVP is taking the next step and anointing one of those guys the best for that year.

“Ok, but you have to factor in team performance.  If the team isn’t gyood, the player isn’t gyood”

Ah yes, we can’t have the stereotypical inane reoccurring nightmare MVP discussion without someone insisting that team success is essential to a MVP candidacy.  Yes, each player contributes to overall team performance.  On the flip side of that, EACH PLAYER contributes to overall team performance.  Using wins as an automatic qualifier assumes 100% of the success or failure is on the shoulders of one player.  What are we saying then, you have to have good teammates/coaches to win MVP?  But if you have all good teammates then you aren’t as “valuable” because the team wouldn’t be as bad if they lost their MVP candidate.  So you have to have some bad teammates but not all bad teammates.  ??$**$&#!! Who cares? Just decide who the best basketball player is and be done with it.   

 “But basketball is just 5 players.  Anyone who is good enough to be MVP should be good enough to drag their team to a winning record.”

When trying to understand stuff like this, it always helps me to think about the extremes.  What if Lebron James in his absolute prime played on a team where all of his teammates were fourth graders?  Would he have a winning record?  Maybe that’s a bad example.  James kind of did that on his first go around in Cleveland.  But actually, that’s the point here.  Isn’t that really what “the decision” was all about?  Not to mention, has anyone else besides James ever actually self-propelled their team to a top-five record in the league (because let’s be honest, it isn’t just a winning record that is your qualifier.  If anyone went 42-40, the “but where’s the team success??” zealots are going to eliminate him from contention). Debate about it.  That’s fine.  Make your case.  But don’t get too wrapped around the axle.  Who is the best player? That’s all you are trying to figure out.

     

“But if you actually did that, Lebron James would win every year.”

Would he?  Here is my criteria. Who would you draft? You’re in charge.  The league is redrafting. You have the number one pick. You know nothing other than what happened during the regular season. Contracts don’t matter.  You don’t know what happened last year.  You don’t have to worry about what will happen next year.  It doesn’t matter.  The world is going to end (See, trump is doing his best to put you in the right frame of mind to make this decision).  All you care about is drafting the best basketball team for a theoretical season where you are guaranteed the exact same health and skill level as the season that just happened for each player. You don’t know that Lebron James is Lebron James.  You only know whatever he showed us this season.  If he rested five games this year you only get him for 77 games in the fake season. His defensive and offensive capabilities are exactly what you saw during the 82 game season.  It isn’t about what he is capable of or how he might elevate his all-round game in the playoffs.  It’s about what he did.  If he slacked off on defense then that is who he is for this discussion. Is he still the MVP?  Maybe, maybe not.  But we have to stop hashing through the same talking points season after season after season about what the name of the award means and how that relates to how we are allowed to pick the player that wins the award.  Seriously, you are going to literally kill me if you keep doing it.  My blood pressure goes up every time I hear it.  

Who is the best player?  That’s all we need.  You have the number 1 pick.  Cast your vote.  Who do you take?             

Long Live Bill Simmons.  

Later,

-a fan

Murder at 1600

Dear Mr. Simmons,
I have to admit, I've never really paid much attention to politics. I've always felt a little guilty about it and I've wanted to learn more, but I've just never been able to take the plunge.  Then you came along with your southpaw boys on the Channel 33 feed. I've listened to the first five or six shows and I have to admit it's a pretty decent listen; even for someone who doesn't understand ass economics.

But as much as I've enjoyed 'Keepin' It 1600, I think your guys have missed the boat a little on the Republican Primary.  They've been relentless on Donald Trump's competitors, particularly John Kasich for staying in the race. I'll admit, despite my Ohio support to the guy who was the only marginally decent candidate from either party, I couldn't really disagree with your guys at the time.  Then both Cruz and Kasich dropped out and it hit me.  It made perfect sense to stick around.  In fact, I'm not so sure I wouldn't still advocate for him to remain in the race.  He essentially has no delegates.  There wasn't really any hope of him to win any more.  There's no real path for him to win the nomination and well... wait a minute, are we sure about that?  Everyone seems to be fixating on/ cringing at/ bracing for/ fainting with incredulity about Donald Trump's success, but I'm not sure anyone is asking the most interesting questions. I don't think it is a matter of if there is dirt on Trump filthy enough to render him un-nominateable (sorry, I'm going to pretend like that is a word) as a presidential candidate, it's a question of how much of the radioactive filth exists.  And then there's the follow-up (and one of my favorite questions that can be applied to almost any topic), where is the line?  How bad of a story has to surface  to crash the Donald's Greyhound bus of doom that is chugging relentlessly like a snowball of death rolling down a mountain towards the White House?  Some will argue there is no line.  Every day, the quotes and headlines get more ridiculous, but the momentum never stops or even slows down. Let's be clear, there is a line.  If Donald Trump were indicted on murder charges he would not be the Republican nominee.  Have a little faith in humanity, the line is there.  We can all agree murder crosses it.  Apparently being a terrible idiot does not.   So where is it then?  What if he wasn't really that rich and he wasn't really that good of a businessman? Wup, okay that isn't it.  What if he was caught on camera telling his girlfriend that he didn't like black people?  Hmm, getting warmer.  That will cost you your basketball team, but Trump is pretty slippery.  He might be able to weasel his way out of that one.   What if he owned slaves?  Score one more for the "Damn it Trump you've gone too far" category!  The truth is there is probably a large grey area in the middle with things that would cost Trump the election but not the nomination. Regardless, this is a fun topic more people should be discussing.

So leave poor Kasich alone.  He was just waiting for TMZ to do their job.  Probably, dropping out doesn't totally eliminate him if the Trump derailment happens, but there will be so many wolves that pounce if that happens, sticking in the race might have kept his foot in the door a little.   It's sad that that's what we have to cling onto. "Maybe the paparazzi will submarine one of the candidates so that another batch of political lunatics can have a deathmatch for the Republican nomination and maybe, just maybe the winner that emerges will be slightly better than the two dopes we have to pick from now."
Unfortunately, I think we're stuck with #NeverTrump vs. #NeverClinton. God help us all.

Who knows what will happen, but the carnage will be fun to watch.  And through it all, I am glad that I will have the 1600 boys there to narrate it for me.
Alright Billy Ice, take it easy.  Long live Bill Simmons.  Congrats on The Ringer.

Talk to you later,
a fan      

What the "V"?

Dear Mr. Simmons,
It's official, Stephen Curry is the unanimous MVP of the 2015-16 NBA Season.  Lebron James has blessed the notion.  I think.  As seems to now be second nature for the crotchety king, he couldn't resist  quickly following his acknowledgment of Curry's accomplishment by lobbing an enigmatic-awkward-sticky side quote onto the table for the entire sports media world to crawl all over and feast on.  James quipped that Curry definitely deserved the award, "But when you talk about most valuable then you can have a different conversation."

What is that?  He continues, "You know, that's not taking anything from anyone that's ever won the award.  It's just another thinly veiled dig at my teammates."  Oh... I think I added that last part.

 Here's the thing.  Regardless of whatever weird psychological game James is playing with himself or his teammates or the planet (no need to unravel that here.  I'm sure the all of the talking heads will do a fine job of that continuously over the next 3 days), the king has a point, the criteria for the award changes year to year. It is one of my biggest sports pet peeves. Every few months as the sports calendar cycles, the same MVP debate surfaces into sports media conversations. Who should it be, player X?  He's really good.  No, it can't be.  His team isn't good enough.  Player Y is pretty good too and HIS team is going to the playoffs.  By what about player Z?  He was unstoppable for 3/4 of the season before he got hurt.  Can he really be considered most valuable if he didn't play in all of the games? To James' point, sometimes player X gets anointed MVP and sometimes it's player Y.  But where I get wrapped around a tree is how every $%*# time we have to go back and forth about what's right and what's wrong and who deserves it more.

 Hey, it's just healthy debate right?  It's all part of the fun of sports fandom.

Right.  It's not healthy for me I'll tell you that. My blood pressure sky rockets every time I have to listen to everyone within reach of a microphone quibble over what the "V" actually means.  Everyone has their own slightly different prerequisites necessary to be a "V" player.

Bill Simmons, you have to do something about this!   Let's just decide what the award is for all sports.  Let's decide right now.  And by decide, I mean let's use my definition (because it's the right one), and we can all go on being happy sports fans.

 Who is the best player?  That's it.  That's the question we are trying to answer.  Football, baseball, and basketball all call it MVP, when they really mean player of the year.  There is no reason for it to be called anything different.  Why do we have to over-analyze the name of the award and twist around arguments about how much a guy adds to a team.  It doesn't matter.  Watch the games.  Who is the best player?

Here are the only necessary qualifiers (this is going to sound like a lot, but hang in there. It's really not that complicated):

- We are redrafting the entire league.
- You have the number one pick.
- The only frame of reference you have are the games played in the current regular season.
- You know nothing about prior seasons.
- You don't need to worry about future development or performance regression.
- Salary and contracts don't matter.
- You are building a team for one year only and you are guaranteed the output from each player equivalent to their respective output from the that season.

Who do you pick?

THAT is the best player.  That is what the award is for.  You've talked before about how the All-NBA team is best used as a historical reference to document the best players at each position each year.  MVP is just a subset of that.  Who was the best player for that year?  Not, "Who was the best player on the team that also had a really good year?"  You can look at the season's standing to figure out which teams were good.  Not, "Who is the best player that isn't a quarterback, because we're starting to feel guilty that a quarterback wins every year so we are going to start floating stupid ideas like J.J. Watt should win the MVP?"  (Quarterback value.  Another hot button issue inside my brain.  I'll save that one for another day).  If the word valuable really bothers people that much, maybe we should stop calling it MVP.  I vote.. Best Guy/Girl First Named By A Draft After Season, or...

 BGFNBADAS.

Slam dunk.  Make it happen Billy Ice.  There is too much information out there for us to have to keep weeding through crappy arguments like this.  That's all I have for now.  Long live Bill Simmons.
Talk to you Later,
-a fan
       

The Return

Dear Mr. Simmons,
I've been away for a while.  This little blog never got off the ground.  But now I'm back.  Plan on hearing from me more and more. I wanted to wish you belated congratulations on your new venture.  The sports landscape wasn't the same without you last year. And cleaning up the kitchen Monday nights at the start of football season this past year was a little lonely too.  But now all is well.  Your new digs suit you well.  Long Live Bill Simmons.  Stay tuned.
Talk to you later,
-a fan