Bulls v. Heat

I said that the matchup at the end would be Heat vs. Thunder.

Lets break it down.

Derrick Rose v. Mario Chalmers
One is the league MVP the other is Mario Chalmers.

Advantage: Bulls

Dwayne Wade v. Bogans
One is the best player at his position, the other is Bogans

Advantage: Heat

Lebron James v. Luol Deng
I swear the lazy comparisons end here

Advantage: Heat

Joel Anthony v. Joakim Noah
Joel Anthony is a gambling defender much like LBJ and Wade. Noah is more the stay with your guy, help defense when needed type of player. In this series Noah is going to have the harder job, but i think he can handle his job better than Anthony will.

Advantage: Bulls

EDIT: When i first drafted this post I said the series would depend on who played better, Bosh or Boozer. Bomani Jones has already said this, apparently. So rather than present this as a fascinating take on the series, I'll settle for saying that I agree.

If Bosh plays well, and he has played well in the other series (Don't worry Chris, you're forgiven for game 3), the Heat will win. Boozer hasn't proven to me that he's ready for the limelight. This series could be the first of many classics between the two teams, I'm willing to believe that the Heat will draw first blood.

Advantage: Heat


Heat in 6.

From 718 to the 303... DLBinDenver?

If you told me 5 years ago that I would be moving to Colorado I'd have laughed at you. But here I am. Leaving SPG, headed to Boulder, to start a new life and go to law school. I don't know what I'm going to. I've only been there once and now I'm content to spend 3 years there. I know that I want it though.

My Goals.

- JD
- Exercise more
- Relax more
- Work harder in class

My side goals

- Watch an NFL game live
- Watch an NBA game live
- Watch an NHL game live
- Watch an MLB game live
- Catch em all (649)

I'm always asked "why do you want to leave NY"? It's so different there." That's the answer, its a more relaxed atmosphere. My dad always said I'd have a heart attack by 20. I haven't yet, but I do want to be more relaxed. Since I'm going through the stress of law school anyway, I may as well do so in an atmosphere where I'm not constantly stressed out.

Things I learned this weekend

NBA Playoffs now.

The Lakers are dead
The Celtics are on life support.
The Grizzlies are exhausted.
The Thunder are rejuvenated
The Bulls are a one man show
The Heat are a two man show
The Mavericks are sleeping
The Hawks don't matter.

To my friends who told me that Scott Brooks doesn't hate Nate Robinson, and that he merely hasn't had an opportunity to use him yet... They played a full 3 overtime game. Westbrook got in foul trouble. Nate rode the bench.

To those who said the Mavs would get crushed. As soon as everyone and their mother said the Blazers would win, that should have been a hint. The Mavs have been good. I'll still have the Thunder to beat them.

The Bulls will not win it all. The non-Rose portion of the team never shows up. They need more firepower. They need a shooting guard with no conscience like Westbrook. I'm sure you have J.R.smith's number.

The Lakers got swept. That doesn't mean the Mavs were that much better. That means the Mavs played better AND the Lakers played horribly.

The Heat might have enough to get the job done. James and Wade aren't batman and robin. They are equal to each other.

The Celtics are essentially dead. The Heat are on point. Ray Allen on the other hand has not been.

The Hawks are have done a great job of using the let one player do all the work technique. They are done after this round. They won't beat either Big 3. Celts or Heat

The Grizzlies are a decent team. Physical, versatile. Paint dwellers. I like them a lot. Shame they are playing the Thunder, or else I'd root for them.

Dallas's Draft a D minus?

Dallas
What I liked: In a big year for offensive lineman, the Cowboys picked up 20-year-old Tyron Smith, the highest-rated offensive tackle on most boards, with the No. 9 pick in Round 1. He's already talking about his Hall of Fame potential. Ah, the intoxicating elixir of the draft.
What I didn't like: The Cowboys fielded the worst defense in franchise history last year, surrendering 436 points. So what did they do? Doubled down on its prolific offense (29.1 PPG over eight weeks under Jason Garrett) while devoting just two of eight picks to defense. Very curious draft that appeared to ignore the team's most obvious needs.
It should have been a big day for defense. Instead, the Cowboys will likely take the field next year with a same old collection of big, but underachieving names on defense. Grade: D-

Read more:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/05/01/draft.grades/index.html#ixzz1LW9VJpsl

I'm sure that the writers at SI are smarter than this article. I didn't think their draft was great. Still don't. But it wasn't a D minus.

First, Dallas' biggest need was an O-line. Over the last years, the players got old, and they lacked depth at every position. It was the largest need. Remember that the Cowboys play in the same division as the Redskins and Giants who all have dominating D-line play. To keep up in this arms race they have to make sure their O-line isn't as porous next year, that way they have a chance of keeping Romo upright.

Second, the defense doesn't have big names, barring Ware and Ratliff, but the defense was often put into bad spots by the offense. They aren't going to compete with the Steelers or Ravens anytime soon, but their defense, when healthy, will get the job done. The corners were unusually bad last year, and I still have faith in Jenkins and Scandrick. They'll be better next year, it was an off year for them.

Giving them a D minus is a bit much. What the Cowboys did need to do was get a safety, which they haven't done, but its not enough to get them a D minus. For fixing their number one need the Cowboys get a B from me.

Affirmative Action

I'm always wary of talking about race. Period. I probably should start as many by saying my race/ethnicity, but it really shouldn't matter. Honestly, my opinions about race shouldn't be different just because I'm an African American male. There are other factors which I believe to be much more important to my opinions of race. For example, I'm 21. I don't remember the 1960's civil rights movement or slavery, because I wasn't there. Secondly, I'm from New York City. My opinions of race relations are colored by living in Queens County, which is both diverse and insanely segregated. If I lived in Texas or California, my opinions might be different. For example, tensions between blacks and hispanics are much higher in California than they are in New York.

The reason why I'm wary and weary of talking about race is that often we just don't know whether racism is a factor. When a white person wrongs a black person is it always racist? No. Racism wasn't (usually) the reason people didn't like me in high school, I was nerdy and standoffish. If a bank denies me a loan, is it race? Could be that the banker is racist, could be that the owner is racist, or it could be that the banks aren't giving loans to everybody, and I don't meet financial criteria. I share the concern that I get from white colleagues and friends who are wrongly accused of being racist. I understand the perspective of the person who doesn't want to be denied an opportunity due to racism.

Affirmative action seems to be the most interesting issue when it comes to race. Is it fair to use race as a factor? Chris Rock might have my favorite quote on the subject.

"I don't think I should get accepted to a school over a white person if I get a lower mark on a test. But if there's a tie? Fuck him!" (Never Scared, 2005)

I like the quote because, while it is was said in the context of a comedy special, it pretty much is the viewpoint of a lot of affirmative action suppporters. Usually when people say affirmative action, people think of people unqualified to go to college getting in to Harvard, which is stupid. If I got into Harvard Law School with my numbers (3.3 GPA, sub 170 lsat), I'd be offended. However, I'm sure that for at least one law school I got into, race was a factor in my admission. There aren't many AA males in law school. I've got good not great numbers. I'm fine and can hold my head up high if I get into a school that is a little bit better than what my numbers say. And I got into a few schools with scholarship money that way. If it means that I'm going to be "the diverse guy" in class, I'm okay with that. I need a J.D., they need the perspective, we're all better for it.

But if i get in, that means that someone didn't. Is it fair if a member of an overrepresented group, with similar numbers and socioeconomic background to me, doesn't get in because I did? Maybe. If the roles were reversed, would they feel bad about it? Maybe. I certainly would be upset if i were in their shoes.

I do believe that affirmative action and programs like it represent a larger problem. While i have no problem with a Law School taking me because I'm black, i do feel that the person who I'm benefiting from is not the person who didn't get in but my ancestors who were wronged and got no reparation for it. I'm actively benefiting from those people in the 1960's who fought for civil rights. I feel bad about the fact that while they were arrested, and hosed (literally) I'm the one who benefits, and they didn't. I'm sure they would be happy for me, and glad that their efforts alllowed an inner-city black male to go to law school, but it seems that I'm getting something that I don't deserve. That is one problem with affirmative action (and reprarations, for that matter). In concept, both have people benefiting from others who were wronged.

When I'm told that I didn't deserve to go to the law schools that I was admitted to, I usually just look and smile. I worked hard for my knowledge base, and if my numbers don't represent that knowledge base, I'm fine with it. I'm smart enough to get into Tier One law schools, so if I got into one, good for the school. They win. If another person has an issue with that, then it seems that their issue is not with me, it's with the school. I applied just as everyone else did.

The Hall of Fame

The third most important Hall of Fame announced its newest members. I'm only 21, so my knowledge of many of the members is quite limited. I have no idea who most of them are. Chris Mullin was a St. John's grad, but that it all I know about him. I don't really remember him as a player. Arvydas Sabonis is a player who I spoke about earlier this week as the best European center. (All due respect to Vlade Divac of course). The thing is, that there are no hall of famers yet who I can really say great things about. Most of the people who will be inducted into the hall will be people who I know mostly from reading about them. Rodman is a player who I only remember as a Chicago Bull. I "know" he was a Piston and won Championships there, but I don't remember them. Maybe thats a good thing, because I can look at these players objectively. However, sometimes you just have to be there. The true sports fans know that while numbers are important there are some things that just have to be seen.

Dennis Rodman in on my all time team. He is the best rebounder I have ever seen. Period. I can't judge what he was like before 1996 (when I was 7, mind you) but my memories of Rodman involve him jumping and diving and running everywhere to get rebounds. The numbers back up my memories as he not only led the league in rebounds, but he dominated the people he played against in that department. I've seen some hustlers (Kevin Love stands out as an obvious example) but Dennis Rodman had "in the gym range" for rebounds, something that I haven't seen from other players at the time or from anybody since.

Back from Colorado

"Uh huh you know what it is Colorado, Colorado, Colorado, Colorado"
- D Wiz Khalifa

Taken on the road from Denver to Boulder

Just came back from my first trip out west, where I visited University of Colorado Law School. The experience of being out west was completely foreign to me. I've never been in the area, or anywhere west of the Mississippi for that matter, so it was new to me. What I did find was that Denver has a small town feel but it is definitely a bustling city. Because the city isn't very large, everything you need is within walking distance. I have a feeling that if I lived there I would probably work out more, since excercise is valued heavily in the area. I loved the actual school as well. Since the law school is a new facility, the actual Wolf Law builiding is beautiful. By far (with all due respect to St. John's Law School which also has a great law school building) it was the best law school i have visited. The people are kind and were extremely helpful, especially BLSA (the Black Law Students Association) whose members definitely made sure I felt at home.

I'm still considering other law schools but Colorado definitely put their best foot forward in making sure I was comfortable there and they convinced me that spending my next 3 years there would be worthwhile.

Colorado is far and away the school I want to attend. Can't wait