Bringin' The Stupid: Chris Mannix Edition

I have been a faithful viewer of Jim Rome is Burning for quite some time. For the most part, the guests on The Panel aren't all that intelligent. There are a couple notable exceptions (Ray Ratto! and Matt "Money" Smith) but most of them are nitwits like Jeff Chadiha.

I used to think Terence Moore - former writer for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution was the standard bearer for stupidity on that show but, this week, Chris Mannix of Sports Illustrated has upped the ante.

Let me state my case:

Example One:

Jim Rome asks who wins the NFC East?

Mannix Answers: I like the Giants... outside of Aaron Rodgers, I think (Eli Manning) might be the best quarterback in the entire NFL.

WHAT!?!?!!? I was like Barbara Walters when Herman Cain said he wanted to lead the Department of Defense! That is absolutely insane. Has he heard of Tom Brady? Drew Brees? Ben Roethlisberger? As of this writing date, all three have a better QB rating than Eli Manning this season - let alone the better all around resume (and obviously better team records with each of their teams being 10-3 compared to the 7-6 Giants).

I was wondering if such a statement blew up the twittersphere?

EXAMPLE TWO:

Jim Rome asks Does the punishment (the suspension of James Harrison) fit the crime?

Mannix answers: I think it absolutely fits the crime and it's the right thing to do.

BULLSHIT!!! Sorry, that is pretty much all I can say for that one. He is entitled to his opinion... and he is wrong. Next.

EXAMPLE THREE:

Mannix predicts: DeAndre Jordan is probably going to average 13-14 points per game (in 2011-12).

Can I take the under on this? I might have some Chinese yuan I'd like to wager on that. In fact, Mannix himself predicted that Jordan was going to be another Tyson Chandler. Does he not realize that Chandler has been in the league for ten seasons, has averaged over 10 points per game twice with a career best of 11.8? Oh well, it's still a better prediction than the infamous prediction of Amy K. Nelson!

EXAMPLE FOUR:

Mannix says (regarding the Chris Paul trade): The Timberwolves pick is being viewed as manna from heaven - yet the Timberwolves got Rick Adelman, they got Ricky Rubio, J.J. Barea, (and) Derrick Williams. They're going to be a bad team but they're not going to be so bad that it's a top 2-3 pick... you're going to end up in the 8-12 range.

We'll see. I wouldn't be surprised if they split the difference (end up in 4-6). I will watch this with interest though; Ricky Rubio is probably the Spanish Sebastian Telfair. I like Derrick Williams - but he is probably going take time to develop a la LaMarcus Alridge. Point is that the T-Wolves are still going to suck.

EXAMPLE FIVE:

Mannix claims: In the 2007-08 and 2008-09 seasons, Chris Paul was by far and away the best point guard in the entire league.

Come on! The key phrase, in this case, is "far and away". I don't doubt that Chris Paul was the best point guard in the league in those two seasons, but it's completely revisionist history to claim he was "far and away" better than Deron Williams. I have some empirical evidence to present on this one: consider the 2008 U.S. Mens Olympic Basketball Team. Paul and Williams were both on that team. The minutes played per game in that tournament was Paul at 21.9 and Williams at 19.0. That hardly seems like the spread where one player far outclassed the other (in the eyes of the US coaches).

BS Watch Update: Amy K. Nelson

In what was one of the most trafficked posts in the history of the Furriners blog, on March 2nd, I called out Amy K. Nelson for saying on Jim Rome Is Burning that the New York Yankees had "no shot" at the postseason.

Well, we are at the 3/4 poll here on August 16th. Let's review the standings:

On winning percentage, the best team in baseball is the Philadelphia Phillies (.655).

The best team in the American League is the Boston Red Sox (.617).

The New York Yankees, whom Ms. Nelson claimed had "no shot" at the playoffs, have the third best record (.613). They are a 1/2 game behind the Red Sox in the A.L. East. Perhaps more relevant is if you look at the Wild Card Standings (which will actually determine if they make the playoffs), the Yankees have a 9.5 game lead over their nearest competitor!!! In other words, it would take a Jason Dufner-esque collapse for the Yankees to NOT make the playoffs.

Nice call, Amy!!

(I told you so)

Bomani Jones & His Strawman Argument

Don't we all hate strawman arguments? It seems like it's the stock-n-trade argument of the GOP. But this is not about those loons.

This is about Bomani Jones, ESPN.com columnist and guest panelist this week on Jim Rome is Burning. Yesterday, they were discussing the draft prospects of Cam Newton and Mr. Jones said this:

Look at the names you're going to hear come out (about being the) #1 pick. You're gonna hear some talk probably about A.J. Green by the time it's all over. A wide receiver. Somebody will bring this up before it's all over. If we have a draft where you can consider taking a wide receiver at #1, that tells you there is no guy out there that's just this can't miss definite star player.

Now, technically, he may be correct. Somebody probably will bring up A.J. Green. This person will not be a credible person (for example: see this and this). Are you supposed to factor in every crackpot with an opinion when evaluating this draft?

By the way, Bomani also said:

The only quarterback in this draft that has#1 pick potential is Cam Newton just because of what the upside could possibly be.

Of course, Mel Kiper released Mock Draft 3.0 this week with Missouri quarterback Blaine Gabbert as the #1 pick. I am going to say Kiper is a more reliable source - although this a guy who seemed to advocate teams using a Top 10 pick on Jimmy Clausen, so I am willing to concede that Mr. Kiper's opinion is not the least bit infallible.

Another dissenting opinion comes from New York Giant defensive lineman Justin Tuck. He said:

Would I take (Newton) at #1? Absolutely not. In this league, the athletic quarterbacks don't last long. It's the quarterbacks that can sit in the pocket and take the picture of whatever defense we're in. It's those guys that teams are looking for and I don't think Cam is that player yet.

I like... I like. Sounds like a better evaluator of talent than Matt Millen for sure. And I don't mean that to damn him with faint praise - I mean, quite frankly, who isn't better than Matt Millen?

All that said, I admit I don't know what make of Newton at the NFL level. It really could go either way. (Consider that my CYA addendum so some a-hole with a blog won't link to this in three years if Cam Newton does turn out to be good!)

I Call B.S. - Amy K. Nelson Edition

To be perfectly honest, this post probably does not really belong in the "I Call B.S." catalogue. This is more of a potentially shitty prediction from Jim Rome is Burning that I wanted to call attention to. And I guess I could add this to the B.S. Watch List on the right of your monitor.

Here we go:

Jim Rome: The Yankees. Nevermind a World Championship, with their pitching staff the way it is right now, do they even have enough to make the post-season?

Amy K. Nelson: I say 'no shot'... I see them having a lot of problems.

Jim Rome: They need something. They need somebody to help them win. The way they're set up right now, it's not enough.

Now as much as I want this to be true. I think one is WAY over-stepping to say "no shot". Do we not expect the Devil Rays (not a mistake - to me they are the Devil Rays... and University of Hawaii are still the Rainbow Warriors... if you change your name for a stupid reason, I will ignore you) to take a step back? You're telling me that the Yankees have 'no shot' at even a wild card?!?

I'm gonna dog-ear this one.

Justice Not Served

I am a lazy blogger. I know it. You know it. The American people know it.

That is why it is good that I have a co-blogger who has three things. One being many opinions with a common theme: Republicans Suck. Two being the desire to share those opinions with a mass (or non-existent) audience. (Third thing? Non-transferable membership in the Justin Bieber Fan Club which doesn't actually help this blog).

Anyway, a couple days ago it was announced that Derek Jeter won a Gold Glove. This rather perturbed me as someone who follows baseball and knows what a travesty this is.

So I made a mental note that I needed to do a blog post about this injustice. I trust it would have been clever. Derek Anderson would have been mentioned. A good time would be had by all those who read it. There would have been a public outcry and Derek Jeter would have been forced to return the award because of the shame.

Alas, I do not have to write about this because Jim Rome did a "burn" on this topic that trumped me. So allow me to turn over the floor to Mr. Rome - while perhaps violating copyright law in the process? If I do so, I promise we will temporarily turn over the Furriners revenue stream to Disney (parent company of ESPN).

Take it away, Mr. Rome:

You know I'm sure Derek Jeter isn't about to give back that Gold Glove that he just won. He should. He doesn't deserve it - even he has to know that. How does one of the worst defensive shortstops in the league win an award that is supposed to go to the best defensive player at his position?

I mean what is that? Does baseball have a meaningful award with less discernible voting criteria than the Gold Glove? Exactly how did he win that thing? Based on what? That he committed just six errors? Let's not confuse a lack of range with excellent defensive play. The only reason he doesn't get more errors is that he doesn't get to more balls.

And guys who often win the Gold Glove do so based on the way they swing the bat - but that's not the case either as Jeter just had the worst year of his career at the plate. There has to be a better reason to give this guy the award than "he's the guy we usually give it to, he plays the game the right way, and he's a class act." It's like the managers and coaches who vote for it are saying you have to beat the defending champ convincingly to rip his belt. Yeah, well, the champ is lying on his back after a first round knockout and if that guy is going to get that award this year, it is time to re-think the voting criteria. Or better yet, actually create some. Or rip the vote and give it to people who actually do give it some thought and have an open mind because Jeter was not only NOT the best shortstop in the league, he wasn't even in the top 10.

UPDATE (11/12): I checked out Buster Olney's column today (was checking to see his thoughts on the possibility of the Tigers going after Carl Crawford). In it, he said this:

I thought (Gold Glove voters) were reasonable in their choices -- other than the fact that Derek Jeter was given the Gold Glove for shortstops.

Bringing The Stupid - Jemelle Hill Edition

Okay, all our loyal readers know how this works by now.

This comes from yesterday's Jim Rome Is Burning where the discussion concerned Randy Moss's departure from New England.

Jemelle Hill was essentially defending Randy Moss's right to not try since he wasn't given a contract extension by the Patriots. That is pretty stupid but not what this is about. She went on to say:

Tom Brady wasn't in the conversation to be the greatest ever. People were still weren't sold about... they thought he was a system QB... he gets that guy (Moss) - all of a sudden people are like 'Top 5' instantly. So, of course, he brings a level of legitimacy to the table.

Honestly, I am fine with Randy Moss. Ironically enough, earlier this week I was telling my Justin Bieber-loving colleague how I thought Randy Moss was the second best receiver of all time. Hands down. So I am not a hater.

But let's not be stupid about this. The legacy of Tom Brady is built upon his three Super Bowl rings (twice being the game MVP). Just so we're clear: Randy Moss was not on any of those three teams! Moss was on the 16-0 team that lost in the Super Bowl to the N.Y. Giants.

Was Brady in the conversation as the best ever before Moss arrived? Perhaps not... but he had played six years in the league! I know stats and milestones mean a lot more in baseball than football but you have to at least some longevity. That is why most people think Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders, Walter Payton, and Jim Brown as the best running backs ever and not Earl Campbell (or Bo Jackson).

To continue, did Moss' arrival somehow provide a "level of legitimacy" that Brady previously lacked? Of course not! That is obnoxiously stupid! What is true is that Randy Moss (and his 23 touchdowns) greatly contributed to the perfect 2007 regular season in which Tom Brady set the single season TD pass record with 50.

To conclude:

Randy Moss? Great player. Will be just fine without Tom Brady.
Tom Brady? Great player. Will be just fine without Randy Moss.

Maybe Just Happy

I think Jim Rome is dumb. Well, maybe not. But this is pretty dumb:

On Jim Rome is Burning yesterday, Mr. Rome was discussing the recent success of Mike Vick. He said:

You can't play as well as he is consistently unless you're making the right choices both on and off the field and, for now, he appears to be.

I'm sure, for example, New York Giants fans are happy to read that Lawrence Taylor wasn't such a bad guy after all. All those rumors of drug abuse were apparently false. Same thing goes for Michael Irvin and well, fill in your own favorite troubled superstar. Tiger Woods anyone?

The Married...With Children Rule

I admit it... that is a terrible name for the premise of this post but bare with me.

The idea is that, if I recall correctly, Al Bundy would rather mercilessly tease and insult Peggy - but if someone else were to go too far in insulting Peggy, Al could get quite protective of his better(?) half.

This is not unique to that show, of course (which is why it's a terribly named rule); I'm sure that is common to many relationships (for example: adolescent siblings where the older sibling is protective of the younger).

I bring this up because of the comments of Petros Papadakis (a USC grad) regarding University of Michigan football on Jim Rome is Burning yesterday. I like Papadakis; he is one of the more enjoyable guests that Mr. Rome has on his (now one-person) panel. However, yesterday he earned a nomination for the Furriners BS Watch List.

Here are quotes from Mr. Papadakis on the subject of U of M v. Notre Dame:

Michigan needs this game worse than Notre Dame and, no, they're not going to get it.

What happened to Notre Dame under Charlie Weis is what happened to Michigan under Rich Rodriguez. They lost their identity. They're no longer a physical, angry football team.

It's too much of a culture change. You can run a spread and still be physical. Brian Kelly has proven that at Notre Dame (Really? After one game?). Rich Rod has not proven that. Too much of a change for the people of Michigan.

As a Michigan alum, I say 'go fuck yourself, Petros'. While I reserve the right to complain about our unarguably disasterous run under Rich Rodriguez, I don't need you telling me it's "too much of a culture change". I can handle the culture change. I just can't handle going 0-2 against Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue, AND Illinois. That's the problem, big boy.


Needless to say, the stakes are very, very high for tomorrows game.

Run, Denard, run.

It's okay with me.

Jim Rome Is Bullshitting

A couple real whoppers from Monday's JRIB show. One from the host and one from a panelist:

"(MSU) may not be best of the remaining four but no one is hotter and that's not a coincidence because Izzo always has them playing their best when it matters most"

Fact-check:

Duke won the ACC Tournament.

West Virginia won the Big East Tournament.

Butler has not lost since December 22nd. That is a 24 game win streak.

Michigan State LOST IN THE FIRST ROUND of the Big 10 Tournament.

So, I don't know what the basis is for claming they are the "hottest" team in the tournament?

Here is the other comment which seems to lack any basis in reality:

"Butler did not necessarily advance through tough competition. They had the easiest road to the Final Four than anyone else had." --- Vincent Thomas (of NBA.Com & Slam Magazine)

Fact check:

Butler beat the #1 and #2 seeds (Syracuse and Kansas State) in their bracket!

Michigan State, on the other hand, has beaten nothing higher than a #4 seed (Maryland).

So, how does that argument hold up!?!!? (Let alone the frontal assault on grammar!)