Predicto

Not true, because injuries and other disruptions are a fact of life in the NBA. Beating the Warriors in a 7 game series when they are at full strength may be unlikely, but beating the Warriors if Steph gets hobbled again, or KD goes down, or Draymond gets suspended, or Klay gets busted with weed on a road trip to Indianapolis... that definitely is possible. You want to be the team that is ready to pounce if that opening presents itself. It's stupid to plan to wait for a dynasty to end.

Next on Fox and Friends: Our sources tell us that Senator Grassley was blocking the release of the transcript out of concern that it would show that the Democrats were colluding with someone or something. He wanted to protect them. Steve Doocy: "Why would Dianne Feinstein betray her own party like this? So weird."

The difference is who is moving and who is still. Green typically gets the ball at or above the top of the key, stands still for a moment and surveys all the moving shooters, and throws to the spot where one is just coming free for an open shot (or a backdoor cut). All the shooters are constantly moving - the passer is not. That is why the pass can come at any time. And if people leave Green open to double Steph, Green takes a jumper to keep them honest. Green typically scores only about ten points a game, but he leads the team in assists. Lebron, in contrast, sets himself up as the scoring thread. He is the one moving - he drives down the lane and forces the defense to make a decision because he rarely gets stopped one on one when he has a head of steam up. The shooters leak to the corners and stay there. If someone doubles Lebron's drive, he kicks to whichever of the shooters has been left open. That pass is always made at the same time - at the end of the drive. Both systems work, but they are very different. I'm not saying that Lebron could not be highly successful in the Warriors' system - he can pretty much do anything on a basketball court. But having Durant's outside shot is even more valuable, because it creates so much more space for everyone. Who do you stick with when Steph sets a screen for Durant? Now imagine if Lebron sets a screen for Steph. You know what to do. You stay outside with Steph and the other defender drops back into the lane to take away the drive from Lebron. Lebron can take the outside shot, you can live with that. Make sense?

The Warriors offensive style is based on constantly running around screens to get open first, which determines where the passes will go. Everyone is constantly moving, and the pass can come at any time. Klay and Steph run almost three miles per game weaving all over the place. Lebron's (or Giannis's) way is the opposite, and requires shooters to stand around in preset places. They have to be there and not move so then when Lebron drives, the defender has to make a decision and Lebron knows exactly where to throw the kick out. If the shooters are endlessly moving around like the Warriors do, there will be no way to make the correct pass in the split second that Lebron has to make that decision. You would have to rework the Warrior's offense entirely to take full advantage of Lebron or Giannis's offensive skills. You are correct, sir. There were more fights (because the penalties for fighting were less) but overall there was less contact (and less defense in general).

Nah. The reason Durant is so good for the Warriors is because he is so deadly from outside. Everything about the Warriors offensive dominance begins with them being able to score efficiently from anywhere on the court at any time. Leonard is the only one of those 4 that would be just as good for the Warriors as Durant because he is the only one that is superior from distance. Although Lebron sometimes gets hot from deep, his real unstoppable skill is power drives for a dunk or a kick out to shooters if the double comes. That's not Warriors basketball. The 90s was much more physical than the early and mid 80s. Those 80s Celtics and Lakers teams were running and passing and scoring easily. It wasn't until the Bad Boy Pistons at the end of the decade that everything got mucked up and slowed down.

Perhaps not, because Durant is a perfect fit for the Warriors. On the other hand, I think the Cavs are better with Lebron than they would be with Durant. And I think adding Lebron to almost every team in the NBA (certainly every team in the East) instantly gives that team a good shot to get to the finals. I don't think you can say that about Durant. Lebron is having the best season of his career. He's a cyborg and he's still the best player in the Association.

True. There are a lot of genuinely stupid front office people in the NBA. Ernie Grunfeld might be one of them.

You think you can get Anthony Davis for John Wall in a 1:1 trade? I'll have some of whatever you are smoking.

The house of representatives decides, using one vote per state. In other words, the Republican will win, because the GOP controls so many smaller, low population states. And by the next election, the third party will have had its ideas and voters absorbed by one of the existing parties, or it will be far down the road in the process of replacing that existing party. Bull Moose Party, anyone?

Both are weak points around here, to be honest.

The question is whether you punish a party that has gone insane and clearly needs a housecleaning, regardless of how you feel about their current stance on some issues. You don't have to become a Democrat. If you are "too centrist" do that, I think you have lost your way. Or you are not really a centrist, but just play one on TV. lol it was actually 33 years ago. And I know exactly what I am talking about on this particular subject.

30 years ago, I wrote my batchelor's thesis in part on this very subject. You can wishful think all you want for a third party option, but it isn't going to happen unless it replaces one of the other parties. You know what? If people truly want a new party option, the best way for that to happen would be for everyone to vote Democrat for a couple of elections. If the abomination that is the current GOP loses all political support, a replacement will rise up quickly from the ashes. We can't have multiple parties in our system, but the system won't let a single party dominate for too long either. The USA is like the Sith.

We would need a constitutional amendment. Our constitution is structured from top to bottom for 2 parties and only two parties. Sometimes, when things are dire enough, people have to get off of their centrist asses and vote against the scoundrels, so they will find it necessary to be less scoundrel-y in order to earn back your centrist vote..

These are not ordinary times. The current GOP is a rotten pumpkin. You have to throw in the compost for an election or two so that actual honest conservatives with actual honest conservative ideas can get back behind the wheel. This is not because the Democrats are without fault. It is because the GOP has utterly lost its way.

Yep - that is exactly how the Bush Tax cuts went. And people fell for it, including much of the Tailgate at the time. The explosion of the national debt in particular. Excessive tax cuts actually can cause a short term boom, but the long term effect of enormous deficits makes it harder and harder to sustain the economy as years go by. Saint Reagan said "deficits don't matter" and frankly, he was right - deficits don't matter when it comes to maintaining the GOP's popularity (and that's all that matters to them).

yep. They will just have a do-over.

What the? Reducing the corporate rate is not the most substantial part of this bill. Reducing the corporate rate was the cover for shoving through all the rest of the bill, the really damaging stuff.

I'm not sure you understand what Keynesism really is.

Umm, not seeing that at all. Bush Elder was the last of the responsible Republicans. Reagan was the one who proved you don't have to be responsible, just charismatic and populist. Reagan led directly to Trump.

Actually, Clinton rode the tech boom. Neither Clinton nor Bush deserves the credit for that one.

The GOP always passes off economic and fiscal pain into the future so that when Democrats get elected and try clean it up, they get blamed by the voters for the mess. They are INCREDIBLY good at that. Millions of voters think that Bush created a great economy, Obama messed it up, and it has just gotten good again because Trump was elected. The GOP understands and appeals to the ignorance of the typical voter in a way that the Democrats will never be able to.

Because the constitution provides the only means for removing sitting federal judges, and it takes precedence over everything else.