Monday, March 30, 2009

The Po-lice

I'm sure you all have heard of the recent incident involving Ryan Moats and Officer P, and officer with the Dallas Police Department. If you haven't, well, then you must live under a rock. As is typically the case in the media with pro athletes, authority, and race are involved in an issue, America is staunchly divided into the extremes: this guy is the worst cop in the history of the world, and is an example of why all police are bad to the bone, or this is another example of fine, outstanding police work and another crooked pro athlete/black guy is complaining after doing something wrong.

As I so frequently point out, my friends, the truth is in between.

On a quick aside, I write about that so often that I've decided if I didn't name my blog PJ's Place it would be named The Truth Is Somewhere In Between.

I would like to point out, for the record, that I do feel like I'm a good middle ground observer of this situation: I'm a fairly frequent speeder who gets pulled over once or twice a year, so I sympathize with any person who gets caught by The Man. I'm also the son of a cop, so I sympathize with the tough job the popos have to do.

So let's analyze the situation. First, let's completely throw out the fact that Ryan Moats is a football player. At no point did he play the "Do you know who I am/I'm rich biatch/I'm in the NFL" during the stop, and I think it's fairly safe to say that Officer P (we'll talk about why I won't say his name later) didn't know a backup running back for the Texans on sight. So yes, while that is why the media pounced on the issue, it really played no part in what happened.

So from the beginning, the Moats family (I realize it were his in-laws mostly, but for simplicity sake we will refer to them as such) had spent all weekend as their 45 year old mother was dying far too soon of breast cancer. They went home for a coupla hours of much needed sleep, but were then called at midnight and told to get back to the hospital ASAP to say goodbye. It was literally a matter of minutes.

The Moats family--Robert, his wife, his grandfather-in-law, and an aunt-in-law--all jumped into the car and headed out to the hospital. Robert was smart--he turned on his emergency flashers but obviously wanted to get there as quickly as possible.

He rolled through a red light after exiting the Tollway, but pointed out that there was only one car in any part of the area--I'm pretty sure this was a Sunday, and it was midnight--and that he made sure it was safe.

The Moats family was lit up by Officer P for running the red light, and they drove slowly the block or so to the hospital and parked there. The wife and Aunt immediately bailed out of the car and started to walk into the hospital as soon as the car stopped. Officer P then ordered the women back into the car, drew his service weapon when they didn't comply, and may or may not have pointed it at them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

We'll break here, as this is the first controversial point. Many people are upset that Officer P drew his gun and pointed it at the women, which in fairness to him he says he didn't point it at them. People, Officer P did nothing wrong by pulling this car over, nor by drawing his weapon.

The problem most civilians make when being pulled over by the police is assumption--especially when people do have a good reason for doing the wrong thing, like the Moats did. Look at it from the cop's perspective: he doesn't know who the Hell you are. He doesn't know you have a sick family member. He doesn't know you're a good upstanding family. You don't think drug dealers who might have product in the car with them have sick family members? Gang members with felony warrants outstanding never have to go to a hospital? Just plain crazy people never go to the hospital? People, police aren't clairvoyant. They don't know who the good guys and bad guys are by looking at their cars. Please believe me when I say that the absolute WORST thing you can do when get pulled over is to immediately hop out of the car and flee the scene. Just be patient for the 1-2 minutes it will take the cop to walk to the car, tell them what's going on, and 95% of the time he'll dismiss everyone but the driver, and probably dismiss the driver as well. However, if you just pop out of the car and run away, how else is he supposed to react? He's supposed to ASSUME "Oh, well they must have sick relatives?". That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. There's plenty of graves out there of officers who ASSUMED something perfectly logical on routine traffic stops. There's a reason we have so many cute phrases about assumption (it's the mother of all fuck ups; it makes an ass out of you and me); it's because anyone who does it is a fool. So yes, with all due respect to the Moats family, they were in the wrong here, and when Officer P drew his gun, he was simply following rule number 1 of any police officer: make it home alive.

Unfortunately for the situation, this was about the last thing that Officer P did correctly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Ryan Moats then approaches Officer P and then explains what is going on. Is he a little wired at first? Yes, he is, but obviously this is a very tense situation for him: he's tired, he's emotional over the death of a family member, and he's scared because a police officer is talking to him and his family with a drawn gun. Officer P then takes on the role of the hard ass cop. He proceeds to threaten Moats with arrest for traffic violations--which is ridiculous in and of itself--a coupla which could easily be called "trumped up" (his comment about ticketing/arresting him for parking incorrectly was especially ridiculous). Moats quickly regains his cool, and just asks Officer P to hurry up, ticket him for whatever he wants, and allow him to go inside and see his dying mother-in-law. He very quickly became reasonable, calm, and obviously a sincere man dealing with a difficult situation. Officer P decided to fuck him over, taking his sweet-ass time running searches on their records. Even when a nurse from the hospital came out and spoke to the Officer, informing him that yes, his mother-in-law was dying, and yes, it was happening any second now and he needed to let him go, Officer P still wanted to be Billy Bad Ass and took his time.

17 minutes later, Ryan Moats and his grandfather-in-law went upstairs, to find out that their mother-in-law and daughter had died without being able to see her.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Officer P is the perfect example of the difference between a good cop and a bad cop.

One of the hardest things for cops when it comes to dealing with civilians is the same problem civilians have: assumption. Far too often, police assume that people know how to react to them. This isn't the case. Police correctly see themselves as a good part of society, there to serve and protect civilians and make everyone's lives safer and better. Unfortunately, most of society doesn't respect/appreciate the police as they should, because the only times most civilians associate with police is during a negative situation. Being pulled over for traffic violations/stepping in during domestic or public disputes/investigating a robbery...all of these are extremely negative situations that, even when not being the police's fault, associates negative feelings about cops. For most civilians, any association with police has been when something bad has happened, so they are immediately scared and nervous. And people who are scared and nervous do dumb things. It's human nature.

Good cops realize that, and roll with the punches. Good cops are able to set civilians at ease, don't get offended by people being rude/argumentative/just plain acting a little weird because of human nature. Good cops also don't hold it against people when they make a stupid, potentially dangerous--but understandable once you are apprised of the situation--mistakes, like two women walking away from the car after being pulled over. Their civilians--they don't know any better.

A good cop would have talked to Ryan Moats, calmed him down quickly--which would have been easy, since Moats calmed down quickly even when dealing with a bad cop--sent the family on their way, checked on Moats and the car quickly to make sure he wasn't full of shit, and then quickly sent him on his way without a ticket but with a super quick, probably 30 second lecture of, "Look man, next time, think about how it looks to me when half the car bails out and runs off. Please make sure if this ever happens again you follow my instructions and we can take care of this a lot easier and faster. Best wishes with your mother."

A bad cop, however, lords over his power, and instead threatens and bullies his detainees. A bad cop goes "by the book" instead of using common sense. A bad cop uses the fear/nervousness that civilians have towards police to run up as many charges as he can--like threatening someone they pulled over with their parking (the next good, perfectly legal parking job I see on a traffic stop will be the first). A bad cop, unfortunately, reacts as Officer P did.

Officer P acted like an asshole, and was a disgrace to the force.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

So there you have it people. Officer P didn't do everything wrong, but his handling of the situation was very poor, and most disturbingly it was poor in the sense that he acted like a bully, which is about the worst complaint you can make of a police officer. He's obviously needs a major attitude adjustment and needs to learn a lot to be a functioning--forget about good--cop, and if there are any other major splotches on his record, I would have no problem with him losing his badge over this. Mistakes happen, and that I can live with, but bullying by the police in unacceptable. If his record indicates a history of that behavior (which the Zach Thomas incident with him seems to support, if that turns out to be true), then he doesn't deserve a badge.

There's one more thing we need to critique, though: that's the behavior of the media and Police Chief David Kunkle.

I was surprised at Kunkle's press conference of the incident, because Kunkle completely threw Officer P under the bus. As we're discussed, he did a lot of things wrong and deserved the sharp reprimand he got, but he wasn't completely in the wrong. Kunkle needs to be careful, because a chief who doesn't back his cops will quickly lose their support, and then be done. Officer P should have been supported for drawing his weapon, and I never heard anyone defend him for doing that.

Finally, what exactly is the media trying to do here, get this guy killed? That's the only conclusion I can see, since they released his full name, multiple photos, and even showed his fricking MySpace page on the news. Look, this was a bad situation from a guy who probably needs to leave the force. But he doesn't need to be harassed by the entire city, and he doesn't need to worry about violence against himself, which is EXACTLY what the media has set him up for. Once again, the media has acted irresponsibly by overly vilifying someone and then releasing far too personal information about the person. If any nut takes things too far and attacks this guy, that's on your head, media.

So in the end, it's a very sad situation. Hopefully we can all--civilians, the police, the Chief, the media--can learn from this situation, and not make the same mistakes again.

Labels:

Thursday, March 19, 2009

The Pure, Unadulterated Greatness of Demotivators

Friends,

We've all seen Demotivators. Some are disturbing. Some are gross. Some are damn near illegal. Unquestionably, though, they are fricking hilarious. I've collected some of my favorite Demotivators here for your viewing pleasure. If you have any favorites you'd like to share, please feel free to email them to me, or post a link to them in the Comments section. And please Jared...no more disgusting, 500 pound ones of naked people. There's a reason none of those made this list. There are days I worry about you ;-P

NOTE TO YOUNGER/SENSITIVE VIEWERS: I'm not going to post any with nudity, but I will post a couple that are...let's go with "racy". Those will be put at the bottom, in the "Racy" section. So if you don't want to see that kind of thing, well, then don't scroll down.

That being said...enjoy.

THE DESPAIR.COM GROUP


I'm not saying I've worked for a consulting company and this is dead on...but...yeah.


I'm not saying that some of my buddies at said consulting company made me laugh at this one, but...well...I love you guys!


This was my favorite from Despair.com, until they released...


The greatest despair.com Demotivator EVER! The expression on the bully's face...the look of defeat on the loser's face...this one never ceases to crack me up.

THE SPORTS/CREATED BY MY BUDDY GROUP


This one was created by my good friend, the outstanding artist Barry "The Ray" ****. It's certainly not because Tony Allen is actually any good. I also feel better about posting this after OSU beat OU in the Big 12 tournament, so we have a brief leg to stand on.

THE MILITARY GROUP


Coming from a long line of Marines and working for not one, but two defense contractors, I'm contractually required to have some good military Demotivators in here.


One of my all time favorites. I mean, look at that eagle. Would you fuck with that eagle? I wouldn't! I wish we were still as intimidating as that eagle is!


I believe my position on the French--and most especially their military--is pretty well documented. Ergo, it's no surprise that I love this one.

THE "WTF?!?" GROUP


Ask Kim: I go nuts when I see mohawks in public. I can't even imagine my reaction were I to ever see this in person.



One of Slammy Sammy Makavelli's all time favorites. While I'm not a huge fan of this one, even I must ask...seriously, WTF is that?

THE "I FEEL GUILTY, BUT THAT IS FRICKING HILARIOUS!" GROUP


I would say that most good Demotivators make you think, "Man, I'm going to Hell" as you crack up. In other words, be prepared for more guilty feelings as you laugh.


My friend...that's it.


The only way this one could be better is if he was dericively looking back at her with a, "Well...what's taking So long?!?" expression on his face.

THE ANNOYING PEOPLE GETTING THEIR JUST DESSERTS GROUP


Let's see: we've incorporated ninjas, drinking, and pulling gags on annoying PDA people. What else does a man need?


The Pondrom Family & Crew have gotten so much use out of this one we should give royalties to whoever made this. Nothing is better than informing some snotty SM...uh, wait, I can't make fun of them anymore...ummmm...PREPPIE, that's right, preppie kid in a bar with this line, and then seeing the confused look on their face. It's also fantastic when you actually see one of these morons (and I don't consider high school kids morons; you're supposed to do dumb, weird fasion things in high school. It's the idiot 25 year olds who we mock) with 2-3 shirts on, all popped, so you can go inform them that yes, they have been topped. Always good times.

THE RACY GROUP


This one actually isn't up here for the reason you would think. This one actually cracks me up because this is obviously not a Catholic school girl, but some 25 year old dressed up as one for Halloween. However, pervs--never missing a chance to fantasize about jailbait--decided to ignore that fact. This cracks me up.


This one, though? Well...ummmm...it's not JUST up here for the reason you think. The caption cracks me up, too. I could write more, but it would just be variations of "Greatest Demotivator ever!", so we'll just leave it at that.

----------------------------------------------------

So that's the list. I hope you enjoyed it. As I said, please feel free to send me your favorites. Enjoy!

Labels:

Thursday, March 12, 2009

New Addition to The SPiH List

Here's how I'm going to handle new editions to The SPiH--Special Place in Hell--list: I'll put the entire list up, but bold the newest additions at the bottom. Then I'll write a little bit about the newest entry.

It's been fricking pouring in Dallas all week, and as such I've had to tolerate the many fucking assholes who don't turn on their lights when it's raining. Here's what I don't understand: doesn't it bother them, as they're driving, when they can't see someone because they don't have their lights on? How does that not scare/annoy/anger them as they can't see other cars, and make them go, "Man, I shouldn't be like that, I need to turn my lights on!" How does this not occur to them?

Well, people who make the roads unsafe and cause countless wrecks, injuries, and deaths each year because you don't turn your lights on while it's raining, ENJOY YOUR SPECIAL PLACE IN HELL! NOW TURN YOUR FUCKING LIGHTS ON!

Labels:

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Coupla Sports Things...

* I've heard a lot about this article about Shane Battier. Basically, it's another article talking about how he's one of the most important players in the history of the league because he's a good guy and does the little things.

Shane Battier has been a hot point in the NBA literally since before he was drafted. Look, I don't doubt Shane Battier's value to an NBA team. Every great team has a guy who plays hard every night, plays good D, hits shots only when he has to, and is a good character guy. I don't doubt at all the immense value that these non-stat guys bring to teams.

Here's the problem I have with Shane Battier: he's not that good of a non-stat guy. Tayshaun Prince has filled that roll with the Pistons for years, and is much better than Shane Battier. James Posey has filled that role with two championship teams--Miami & Boston--and is much better than Shane Battier. One could make the same argument for Bruce Bowen (his free throw shooting hurts his cause, but his far superior three point shooting and defense make up for it).

Notice something about that list? Those are players from the past four NBA champions. So yes, you need a "glue guy", or whatever you want to call this type of player. However, let's stop worshiping Shane Battier as the King of these no-stat players, as not only hasn't he won a championship, HE HASN'T EVEN WON A FIRST ROUND PLAYOFF SERIES. If the most important stat of non-stat guys is winning, well, then Shane Battier is short in that statistic, too.

* Here's a non-football guy's assessment of a football position: Kickers don't get near the respect they deserve.

There's a--in my humble opinion--ridiculous amount of not just lack of respect, but downright disdain for the position that has the single most influence on the bottom line of the game: putting points on the board.

Think about it. No matter how good your QB is, he still needs receivers to catch the ball. Same with vice versa. Running backs need a good line to block for them and a good passing game to keep teams from just stacking up to stop them. Kickers, on the other hand, just need a halfway decent hold; it's just them versus the uprights and elements. How many touchdowns does the average offense score, two...maybe three a game if they're a good team? The kickers are responsible for the point after each of those, and figure there are at least two to three field goal attempts a game, right? And if you have a bad offensive team, the kicker is even more important, as he's going to be called upon even more frequently because your offense can't get the ball in the end zone.

Obviously the point differential makes up some of the difference, but basically, when it comes to the bottom line of putting points on the board, it's 7 or 8 guys counted on to score six points versus one and a half guys looking to score three. Do the math.

Like the Shane Battier argument above, I'm not saying that kickers are the MVP's of the league, and should be lauded over. But let's stop being fucking rude to the poor guys, and acknowledge that they play a VERY important role on every football team.

* The Sports Guy from espn.com wrote a fantastic article (Welcome To The No Benjamins Association) on espn.com. In it, he took a serious look at the financial standing of the NBA, and expounded a bit on the affects on the rest of the major professional sports (If you click on The Sports Guys link on the right, you'll find it easily). Here are my favorite points and my thoughts from his article:
1) The reliance on outside sponsorship--which everyone really takes for granted, except those rare moments when we make a remark about how ridiculous it is that there are so many company logos everywhere--was emphasized. Think about it people: you're going to get your wish; many, if not most, of the banners will be going away. The problem is they're going away because nobody can afford to sponsor the leagues any more. This is a huge problem for leagues that have guaranteed contracts for their players, or for golf tournaments that rely almost solely on said sponsorships to attract top players. Think your team needs just one more good player to win a championship/looking forward to your favorite pro showing up at your local event? Too bad, as your team just lost several assets while its liabilities stayed constant and can now not afford to go sign a new player/as your favorite pro is only going to show up at a tourney that offers Y amount of money, whereas your local tourney can now only afford X. It's going to be very frustrating for fans the next 2-3 years as this shakes out.
2) He speaks about the certainty of the 2011 lockout. I totally agree with Simmons on this; the only way I think we avoid a lockout is if the players simply cave to whatever Stern demands before we get to that point. Prepare to see the player friendly contract structure that veterans enjoy (the last lockout ended in a compromise: young players--as in players 3 to 4 years in the league--would get unfavorable deals in that the league set the structure up beforehand, depending on where they were drafted. That was the league's win. The player's win was the guaranteed contracts they all get after being able to test the open market after year 3 or 4, that was just showcased with Stephon Marbury continuing to make his $20mil salary even when the Knicks flat out told him not to show up for work.) Prepare to see contracts along the lines of the NFL's (sure, we'll sign you to a 7 year $100 mil deal, but we'll only guarantee half of that money, and we will keep the right to cut you at any time), along with several other wins for the league, as Simmons noted. The only thing I disagree with his assessment on is he thinks it will take a while. I expect the lockout to end quickly, because he's right: most players do live check to check, and with endorsement money drying up, the players will need their NBA checks then more than ever.
3) I thought his comments about contraction were really interesting. I totally agree that the NHL will lose at least 10 teams, if not go under completely. I think the MLB will lose a team or two (the Nats for sure, and possibly one other...Marlins? Royals?). I think the WNBA will finally fold in two years, and I think it's even possible that the NBA will end up losing a team. I guarantee you that the Hornets will move next year, I'd be shocked if the Kings are in Sacramento in two years (and if I had to pick a team to contract, it would be the Kings or the Grizz), and I think Memphis will be back to rooting for only college bball soon.

The one thing Simmons didn't address that I think is going to be REALLY interesting is the free agent summer of 2010. This, of course, is the glory summer that the NBA has been planning for for three years. It's when most of the best players in the game (Lebron, DWade, Dirk, Amare, Chris Bosh, Little Stevie Nash, etc.) all become unrestricted free agents. Up until now, teams have been clearing cap space for the summer of 2010 in order to try to sign as many of these elite players as possible. Now, though...how many of those teams who cleared space are going to just sit on the majority of that space because they're afraid of taking on too much cost? How many of those teams are going into that offseason counting on picking up two or three of those players, but because of the shrinking instead of rising salary cap find that they can only afford one or two, ruining their chances for the elite team they thought they could assemble? How many of those players who have some baggage (Amare=attitude/health, Steve & Dirk=age) will expect to sign top line, elite contracts, and instead find that they have to settle for second tier contracts instead? It's going to be fascinating, and now not just because so many players are probably going to move, but to see where they are forced to move to and for how much. The summer of 2010 isn't going to be the buying bonanza we thought it was going to be two years ago.

* I found this article on one of the greatest video games of all time on The Onion the other day. It's priceless. I've talked about the pure, unadulterated greatness of Mike Tyson's Punch Out! before, so I won't go into it again. Suffice to say that any NES fan will love this article.

* So the Cowboys have released TO. My thought: Thank God.

It's well documented that I am not a fan of football. However, I most certainly root for the Cowboys when I'm forced into a football situation, as it is also well documented that I'm a huge fan of my place of birth, the wonderful city of Dallas. The fact of the matter is, the people of Dallas are much happier when the Cowboys are good, so I'm all for a good Cowboys team.

Here's the problem with TO: the Cowboys weren't really good with him, and he is such an ass that no one wanted to root for him. It's a double whammy. It's why I'd never trade Dirk for Kobe, even though Kobe is a better player. I just can't stand the thought of rooting for Kobe.

This is a good move, too, because while chemistry is slightly overrated by the media, it is a necessary part for a championship team. TO was unquestionably horrible for a team that was visibly uninterested in playing by the end of the season. Chemistry leads to motivation, and this was an unmotivated team. It's as simple as that.

The other factor is performance, and make no mistake people: TO is not the elite receiver he once was. You can make all the noise you want about "the system" and Romo missing throws, but the fact of the matter is a wide receiver is not as good at 35 as he was at 28. This is a fact, no matter how good of shape you're in at 35. TO would be 36 by the end of the season, and no matter how much better the team played, his numbers would inevitably go one way: down. Look at the number of times the dude drops the ball alone, for God's sake. He's still a very good receiver...but he's no longer a great one, and all of his bullshit isn't worth it when you're talking about a very good receiver.

So good for Jerry Jones for cutting TO. It was a bold move, but was necessary if you truly want to sell the team on expecting a more professional, dedicated, and cooperative locker room for the coming season.

* Finally, some thoughts on the Mavs after their--shall we say--interesting week this week.

I watched the Mavs overtime win over OKC last Friday. I didn't see their humiliating loss to OKC Monday, but did see their win against the Spurs last night. A lot has been made about the team's inconsistent effort the last few days, from the media to the team's owner, Mark Cuban. Allow me to clearly point the blame at two men for the Mav's inconsistent effort (or perceived lack thereof):

Mark Cuban and Donnie Nelson.

First of all, let's stop questioning Dirk's effort. Fucking stop it people. Dirk has 28 against OKC, and yet somehow the loss is his fault? Somehow he's not focused enough? Somehow he's not the leader he should be? Listen you fuckers, I've had it up to hear with people bitching about Dirk. He is who he is. He's been the best player on this team for a decade, and is by far the best Maverick in team history. He's a good guy who goes out, competes, plays hard every night of his career, puts up great numbers, plays well in the clutch a Hell of a lot more often than he plays poorly, and has won lots of games in his career. Is he a great defender? No, but he's better than people give him credit for. Is he a vocal, Jordan like leader? No, he's not, but he's always done a great job leading by example, and inspiring those who want to be inspired. So no more fucking ridiculous columns like the shit I read in the Dallas Morning News from Jean-Jacque Taylor, talking about how Dirk needs to to step up and be a leader. It's been 10 years dude...Dirk is who he is. His pluses FAR outweigh his minuses. People of Dallas, it's time to accept this and move on. Let's face it: there isn't anyone in the world outside of MAYBE Jordan himself who could motivate Josh Howard and Erica Dampier.

Which brings us back to Cuban and Nelson, and how the lack of effort on this team is their fault. First of all, I think the effort aspect is overrated as a problem. Dirk, Jason Terry, and Antoine Wright bust their asses every night. I have no problems on the effort from those guys. I also think Jason Kidd puts in max effort every night, but the problem is he is so bad defensively that it looks like he's not putting up top effort. It may sound like I'm joking, people, and I wish I was, but sadly I'm not. Jason Kidd has always been FAST, but has never been QUICK (I've written about this before, too). Now that he's 35ish, he has gone from not being quick to slow. Any point guard with halfway decent speed can do whatever they want to against Jason Kidd. Have you noticed that Chris Paul, Devon Harris, and Tony Parker all have had HUGE games against the Mavs since he joined the team? Every time, and I mean HUGE? It's not a coincidence: Kidd can't guard smaller, faster points anymore. It's simple as that. If Rick Carlisle were smart, he'd have Terry guard the point guards and Kidd guard the two guards. Anyway, it's so easy for these guys to blow past Kidd that sometimes it looks like he's not trying, but sadly, I'm afraid he is.

That falls on the GM and owner who made that ridiculous trade for Kidd. The biggest issue, however, is the two biggest louts on the team: Erica Dampier and Josh Howard. When you talk about "lack of consistent effort", you're talking about those guys. It's as simple as that. Well guys, you were the ones who signed Erica to that ridiculous contract, and he's been playing this way his entire career here. And many people--including me--were begging you to trade Josh Howard in the offseason. I even went as far as to say I would take $.60 on the dollar for Howard, talent wise. You didn't want to do that, though, so you're stuck with your typical pothead with a job: he does just enough to keep his job, but is maddeningly frustrating and inconsistent.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Cuban shouldn't have called out the team. I'm just telling him to put his money where his mouth is: if he wants to change the effort on the team, lose Howard in the offseason, even if it's a short term loss for a long term gain. You'll never get rid of Dampier, so you're just going to have to live with that.

Look people. This team is 11 games over .500. They are overachieving, and most of the team plays hard all of the time. The problem is this: Elite teams don't lost to teams like OKC, but Above Average teams do.

We are what we are. For the time being, we're going to have to learn to accept it.

Labels: , ,