Predicto

Perhaps. Maybe my analysis is too simple, but the way I see it, the league lacks dominant centers these days (probably because everyone is so much bigger). Hibbert is second only to Howard in my center list, and guys like that are rare. As a fan of a team that desperately needed even a halfway decent center for about 30 years straight, I may be overvaluing the position. In contrast, there are a lot of good 3's out there, and as good as George is getting, he isn't at LeBron or Durant levels yet. Or maybe he is. I'm not sure you aren't right, the more I think about it. George is turning into a monster.

George is the best player on that team, a superstar in the making and a legit MVP candidate. However, Hibbert is still the most important player on that team, because they are a defensive team built around him in the middle. Losing Hibbert would hurt them more. IMO.

Nobody ever did it better or more reliably than Tim Hardaway, IMO.

And Shaw is an absolute idiot for even considering it. Denver has the best natural home court advantage in the NBA. They would have the best home court advantage if they played in an empty arena. The thin air at that altitude just kills the stamina of visiting teams, who can't adjust to it in just one or two days visiting. Any Denver coach who doesn't have his team run like mad to wear down the opponent is wasting that natural advantage.

Warriors are the definition of basketball fun right now. Look at this: http://hardwoodparoxysm.com/gifs/IGGYBEHINDTHEBACKWHATTHEWHAT_1.gif

Bet the over

Iguodala also gets nailed for it. I hear Asik is not happy and wants the heck out of there.

The Warriors were having so much fun last night it was almost criminal.

I didn't think it was possible to love a TV sports talking head as much as I love Charles Barkley. The entire TNT crew and show is fantastic.

My Warriors have been terrible in the preseason. Here's hoping that they were just loafing and working on some stuff, because they do not look ready to compete in the West right now.

Tell that to the Indy Colts Amazing how all this defensive talent just appeared in Indy the year after they tanked.

Oh, skinsmarydu is correct. All three of those couples on Hannity turned out to be full of crap. http://www.salon.com/2013/10/18/inside_the_fox_news_lie_machine_i_fact_checked_sean_hannity_on_obamacare/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYplvwBvGA4

Westbrook had to go back under the knife because his knee surgery had complications. The problem is supposed to be minor, but it means that he will miss the first month of the season at least, and its hard to see how he will be in game shape when he gets back.

They aren't (and neither is Denver, Memphis, and probably the Clippers and OKC)

I'll bite. The East looks possible, but your West is nutty (to me). Why would you have Denver ahead of San Antonio or Golden State? Denver just gutted the team, losing its coach, its GM and its best player (Igoudala), and Galinari will miss most of the season. Denver will always win a lot at home because of the high altitude, so their record is always a little inflated, but not that much. San Antonio was a single shot away from winning a ring a few months ago. Yes, they are going to all get old and retire one day, but it hasn't happened yet. Smartest, best coached team in the league. And why would Utah be on the list at all? They lost Jefferson and Millsap and Mo WIlliams, and are completely young and untested. They will struggle to win 30 games this year, but the future is very good. Minnesota and Dallas will both be much better than Utah this year. Going out on a limb myself, I might look for Portland to jump onto that list, somethere between 5 and 8. I'll go with 1) San Antonio 2) Houston 3) Clippers 4) OKC (Westbrook's new injury is devastating and they are not deep) 5) Memphis 6) GS 7) Portland 8) Minnesota (ok, maybe Denver)

Portraits of Great Leader and Dear Leader, of course.

We are pretty darn sure they have nukes, albeit primitive ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction We know thny can't put them on a long range missile at get them to the USA, but that isn't much help to the South Koreans. North Korea could get it to the outskirts of Seoul on a freaking catapult - that's how close Seoul is to the border. In additiion, they have literally thousands of conventional artillery launchers and crappy but operative multiple launch missiles trained on Seoul as well. Most of them are out of date and cannot be moved, and would be sitting ducks for counter attacks, but that doesn't mean that each of them couldn't get a few shots in before they were blown up, and it would take a long time to silence them all. Even conservative estimates are that they could lob up to 20,000 shells per hour into downtown Seoul in the first few days. It is also thought that NK has have chemical weapons (which probably are not that effective) and biological weapons (which theoretically could be very deadly, if useless from a military strategy standpoint.)

Because the North Koreans actually DO have weapons of mass destruction. They have nukes. And they have Seoul, a city of 20 million civilians, just 30 miles away from the border as their hostage. There is no question we could defeat the North Korean military in a couple of weeks. But millions of South Korean civilians would be dead. I read that whole story, and frankly, I came away completely unconvinced that the missing guy was abducted by the North Koreans. No question that they do those sorts of things, but huge questions about whether it happened this particular time.

Deep dark rich burgundy. Metallic gold. And white only if we have to and the minimum we have to use. Enough of this red and yellow bull****. We ain't the damn 49ers and we ain't the damn Chiefs.

How Bout them Cowboys! **** 'em.

Isolation and sanctions never seem to work until they suddenly do. There are no guarantees, of course, but it is hard to tell from the outside what effect things like that really are having. But of course you are correct. This is a horrible cluster**** and it has been a horrible cluster**** pretty much since 1953.

Nope. we try to break them with sanctions and embargos, and we work on the Chinese to get them to accept that they would be better off without the crazy Kim dynasty dragging them down. Unilateral military action is the last thing we should do when they have 20 million hostages.

Fair enough. I'm glad I'm not in power too. I'd be dead from the stress.

There are no easy solutions to this, but some choices seem to be more obviously worse than others.