Buck the Trend: Milwaukee Will Get it Together

Just over a quarter of the season has passed, and the Eastern Conference is still a cluster of ‘what if/if only’ teams and three legit playoff teams that are playing amazing basketball (Chicago, Boston, and Miami).

Two perennial playoff teams are looking towards a better three quarters of the season. Orlando has put some pieces together that could become very dangerous come a month from now (Come on, you know that J-Rich, Gil, and Hedo are a better trio than Vince Carter, Rashard Lewis, and Marcin Gortat), and Atlanta has been the forgotten team this year as they have put together a nice stretch of games since Joe Johnson went down (and came back).

Side note: Everyone has forgotten that the Hawks made the least amount of big moves and don’t intend to. Name one other playoff hopeful team in the East that can say that besides Boston.

Kobe Bryant was ejected after being flustered by the Buck's defense in a recent home defeat.

The real question, though, is who are going to fill in the rest of the remaining three spots? Well, for starters, don’t overlook my boy’s, the Milwaukee Bucks, who have been coming together slowly throughout the first part of the season.

Yes, Brandon Jennings is out for 4-6 weeks after breaking a bone in his foot, and who knows when Carlos Delfino and Corey Maggette are coming back from their respective concussions, but remember that Scott Skiles is coaching this team with two of the better assistant coaches in the league, Kelvin Sampson and Jim Boylan. They have this team playing some of the best defense in the league, something that is often overlooked when looking father down the road in the season.

I remember many of my youth and high school coaches saying that as long as the defense is there, the offense will eventually come around. Milwaukee has been one of the worst teams offensively this season, but not because of a lack of offensive firepower. John Salmons and Drew Gooden are starting to come around after signing new contracts with the team this offseason, and Andrew Bogut has been one of the best centers in the league so far.

What this team really has going for it, though, is the versatility they have with their role players, as many of them can play multiple positions and have playing styles that compliment each other.

Ersan Ilyasova has started to play like the guy we saw at the World Championships this past summer, and guys like Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, Chris Douglas-Roberts and rookie Larry Sanders have chipped in some nice contributions on both ends of the court.

The Bucks still have a long ways to go if they want to surpass last season’s success, but unlike last year there is more depth and chemistry with this team. Brandon Jennings sitting out for a month may be a good thing for him, too. He’s by far one of the most passionate and competitive players from his draft class. Tag that along with more time breaking down game tapes and I think he will finish the season stronger than how he started it.

Believe me, I was not the biggest fan of the Buck’s offseason moves, but the core young guys from last year haven’t lost a step and seem to be high character guys (unlike Skile’s last team). With the playoff experience from last year, there’s no reason this team can’t make some noise come late in the season.

Fear the Deer? Fear the Beer.

Qatar World Cup Has Huge Question Marks

This has been an especially unusual week in the soccer world.

The aftermath of Qatar winning the 2022 World Cup has swirled some controversy, with FIFA president Sepp Blatter being the main culprit after his remarks about homosexuals keeping to themselves at the tournament when it comes around in twelve years.

Blatter's comments on the subject were ones of buffoonery because all fans should have the right to enjoy a live World Cup experience if they so please. No one should be excluded or made less of in something as beautiful and world-unifying as the World Cup, whether you're homosexual, bisexual, white, black, Muslim, Jewish, Christian, etc.

At the same time, though, his comments are kind of a 'word-to-the-wise.'

Qatar 2022 is/will be one of the riskiest World Cups FIFA has ever put together. The Middle East is a place where people from the western world need to know local customs and rules for their own safety. FIFA is asking a lot out of Qatar, a country with only one big city and airport, but also from the fans who make the tournament so magical.

There's always the fear of crime and violence at a World Cup, but what Qatar brings along with those things is uncertainty. Qatar has never held a sporting event anywhere near as large as the World Cup. South Africa has one of the largest crime rates in the world, but they had held large sporting events before the 2010 World Cup, giving the nation some credibility (It didn't hurt much to have Nelson Mandela around, too).

Qatar brings a laundry list of questions that have never been needed, like: 1) How will they help fans deal with the excruciating heat? 2) How will they keep everyone entertained and spread out with only one big city? 3) How will the locals interact with people of such different cultures? 4) How will they regulate their laws and customs with so many people from more lenient cultures? 5) How will they draw comparable numbers like in previous World Cups when alcohol is illegal?

It's a true test for FIFA. One that could defy all odds and finally shine a better light on the Middle East and bring better relations with one of the most misunderstood areas in the world... That's a huge task, though.

These are uncharted waters FIFA/Blatter/bribed old men of the World Cup committee, so you better know what you're doing because I for one was pulling for an Australian World Cup (Take a second and think about how awesome that would be. Plus, they've already held a very successful Olympics and have multiple big cities), not to mention that many Americans are still upset with you skipping North America when it would have been our turn in the continental cycle.

FIFA is gambling on this one. Let's hope the house isn't bottom dealing.

Hollinger Says D-Rose is Not Elite

In John Hollinger's latest story where he throws a bunch of ridiculous stats in to make an even more ridiculous point, he makes the asinine statement that Derrick Rose is not an elite point guard because he doesn't go to the free throw line enough... That's it, that's his only reason.

Let's put this in a more traditional statistical viewpoint, since Hollinger's made up stats would take days to fully explain their meaning: In per game averages for the entire league, Rose is fourth in scoring and ninth in assists. He can beat his defender at will, has one of the best pull-up jumpers in the league, and recently added a strong three point jumper to his arsenal. Lest we forget he jumps higher than anyone in the league, making him virtually impossible to block, and his body control while in the air is a thing of beauty (Hollinger did credit Rose for that attribute).

Adding it all up, Rose would seem to be one of the most dangerous players in the league (he is), but according to Hollinger, he is not elite because guys like this and this get to the line more than he does.

Hollinger also calls him out on his free throw attempts per field goal attempt (a ridiculous stat to measure a players status in the league), and his true shooting percentage (combined field goal percentage and free throw percentage average). Here's what the numbers cruncher had to say:

"As with the TS% above, 32 of the league's point guards outrank him in free throw attempts per field goal attempt. That list includes his backup (C.J. Watson, 0.28); jump-shooting specialists such as Cleveland's Daniel Gibson and Memphis' Mike Conley; and a whole host of players who aren't nearly as good."

Most of the league's best point guards are ranked ahead of him, including Russell Westbrook, Chris Paul, and Deron Williams. Want to know who's first in that category? Devin Harris, a very good player, but one who is nowhere near elite status. If players like Harris and the ones mentioned above are ahead of him, isn't it a fair conclusion that the statistic favors certain types of players? Think about it.

To wrap up my point, advanced statistics can be a load of garbage that favor players who play in up tempo offenses and players who play small roles on good teams, hence the reason why a guy like Shannon Brown puts up better advanced stats in some categories than Rose.

Watch a Bulls game and recognize how Rose leads his team and how he can take over the game at will. That's elite to me.

NBA: Bulls Keep Looking Better

It pains me to say this, being a Milwaukee Bucks fan and all, but the Chicago Bulls are looking good... REALLY good. So good, in fact, that they handily beat the defending champion Los Angeles Lakers last night in front of a sellout crowd at the United Center.

It's still early in the season, though, meaning anything is still possible.

One thing that is certain, though, is that Derrick Rose is a legit MVP candidate. His numbers are up across the board, and his ability to hit threes these days has to make him the most difficult player to guard in the league. Not many players can break ankles like a point guard, jump like a slasher, and finish like a savvy veteran. Tyreke Evans knows what I'm talking about.

The Bulls are more than just Rose, though.

Joakim Noah has started where he left off from last season, Taj Gibson is looking like an in-his-prime P.J. Brown, Loul Deng is playing with a fire we've haven't seen since his first few seasons, and most importantly, Carlos Boozer is doing exactly what everyone expected of him after signing with the team last summer.

While the players deserve a lot of the credit, don't overlook the job that Tom Thibodeau has done in his first season as an NBA head coach.

It was a fair assessment before the season to say that he had some question marks by his name: Can he lead an NBA team after being a lifetime assistant coach? Will his defensive genius get in the way of developing the offense? Is he the best the Bulls can get? Yes. No. Sure looks like it now.

The best part about the Bulls (and the saddening part for a die hard Bucks fan) is that they look like a team on a mission for years to come. That's right Chicago, no more wondering whether your team will reach it's full potential. They will, and it's scary to think of how high the ceiling is for D-Rose and company.

I have a feeling there will be a third Bulls statue outside the home that Jordan built, with the hometown kid flying high next to his childhood idol.

Andre Miller Thinks NBA Has Gone Soft

So, Andre Miller, you think the NBA is trying to protect it's young stars by handing you a one game suspension for the 'bump' you gave Blake Griffin... If I'm not mistaken, a 90-foot dash across the court to tackle one of the game's young stars in a fit of revenge is deserving of more than just one game off.

Miller had some words for the NBA front office, saying, "It just shows you how soft the league has gotten, protecting young players. It's not like it was when I came in this league."

Okay, I agree that NBA officiating can be suspect from time to time, but in this instance there's no question about it. Look at the video below, folks, and keep an eye on what's going on under both baskets:



I haven't seen Andre run that fast since... well he's never really been that fast, so I'll leave it at that, but look at the momentum he gathers before hitting Griffin. It's reminiscent of a mountain goat trying to take out an elk. Seriously, it's ridiculous that Miller was allowed to do this and NOT GET CALLED FOR A FOUL.

Don't get me wrong, I like Andre Miller. He's one of the best ally-oopers (I'm making it a word) the game has ever seen, and he's been a strong, veteran leader in the NBA for many years, but saying the league is getting soft for handing out only a one game suspension is tad absurd. Feel lucky that you didn't get more (or even a fine).

These types of plays have never been allowed in the NBA, even when hand-checking was allowed. The only difference between the hard fouls from the 80s and 90s and the one Miller laid on Griffin is that NBA front office officials won't allow players to get away with hard hits with just a flagrant foul anymore. It's family entertainment, whether you like it or not. Hopefully you'll remember this the next time you have the longest active playing streak.

FIFA World Cup: Uruguay vs. France

To end the inaugural day of this historic World Cup in South Africa, the goals were few, but the passion was there for both Uruguay and France. The two sides played strict, cohesive defense, making every opportunity all the more important in their 0-0 draw.

Les Bleues had the majority of scoring chances in this match, with the midfield play of Franck Ribéry, Jeremy Toulalan, and Abou Diaby displaying some nice one touch passing. The key to the game, though, was their inability to effectively use their strikers.

Nicolas Anelka was fighting for headers the whole match. That's not the type of game the French should be playing if they want to score goals. Anelka is effective when he's checking to and away from the ball and positioning himself for rebounds. The problem in this match was that France wasn't getting any shots on goal and resorted to crossing the ball. If he's standing around and the midfield are playing him balls in the air, don't expect to get world class results. Theirry Henry seemed to be caught behind his midfield the few times he touched the ball after coming on for Anelka in the 72nd minute. The French offense will need to sync up and keep the ball on the ground more often if they want to beat a tougher opponent like Mexico.

Uruguay has to be happy with the result considering Nicolás Lodeiro was shown the red card in the 81st minute after being on the pitch for only 18 minutes.

Diego Forlán had four of the team's seven shots, and two of the three that were on goal. Forlán is obviously the biggest scoring threat on the Uruguayan squad, but after him there didn't look to be any other players who seemed dangerous when they were on the attack.

The impressive thing about Uruguay was the hustle every player on the pitch showed. Throughout the match their midfielders and strikers pressured the French back line, making it difficult for the French midfielders to get the ball in dangerous positions. If their stout defense continues in their next two matches, expect the Uruguayans to be in the mix for a knockout round bid.

FIFA World Cup: South Africa vs. Mexico

I only caught the last thirty minutes (give me a break, I just finished up my third year of college and wanted to sleep in), but from what I saw, South Africa is no joke. Most host nations aren't (France '98, South Korea '02, Germany '06). I think their play was an indicator for what to expect in other matches involving African teams.

As for Mexico, they had some calls go against them, but I expected a lot more from them after their stellar play in the exhibitions leading up to today's match. One of the first things that caught my eye was the position they had Cuauhtemoc Blanco playing. I didn't like how they had him playing out wide on the right. I know his fitness isn't ideal for a World Cup center midfielder, but Mexico looked like they could have benefited from him getting more touches. His creative passing is too good to be on the flank, where his primary objective seemed to be crossing over the defense, which was difficult against South Africa's gigantic back line. In the middle of the field, Blanco can use his deft touch and precise ground passing skills, both short and long, to hit teammates in open position... Isn't that why he's a Mexican legend?

Overall, not a bad way to start the World Cup.

I'll be back with more after the France-Uruguay match.

A Closer Look at the 'Gateway' Drug

This an op-ed I wrote for The DePaulia comparing marijuana and its common assumptions, and comparing them to other harmful substances.

It’s illegal. It’s a gateway drug. It’ll negatively affect your judgment. It’s worse than cigarettes and alcohol… Don’t these sound outdated?

If you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m talking about marijuana. With the annual ‘holiday’ of 4/20 (essentially Marijuana Day) having passed recently, it feels right to discuss a few issues I have with the public perception of this ‘drug.

Throughout the twentieth-century, people scapegoated marijuana as a terrible drug that should be frowned upon. Why? What exactly is so terrible about it?

Since the rise of the Internet, common people have been seeing the true effects of marijuana on their own, not through cheesy public service announcements on television that portray it as a drug where one has no control. Trust me, you’d be better off driving after hitting a joint than after a couple drinks (Please don’t do either of these).

Yes, inhaling smoke will always be detrimental to your health, but some of the old allocations of marijuana and its effect on your health are not.

Take for instance the myth that it affects mental health. That is simply not true. Medical journals and newspapers such as the New England Journal of Medicine and the London Telegraph say there is no convincing scientific evidence that marijuana causes psychological damage or mental illness in either teenagers or adults. There have been numerous scientific journals from doctors all over the world that show that the drug has temporary mental effects, at best. You’d have a better chance with alcohol.

As for addictiveness… Well, there is none, so take that cigarettes!

In fact, if you look at the causes of death within the past decade in America on, marijuana is dead last with zero related deaths. ZERO! Compare that to the two of the top causes: tobacco and alcohol.

According to the website drugwarfacts.org, in the year 2000 alone, tobacco and alcohol accounted for more than 520,000 deaths. The next cause ahead of marijuana is anti-inflammatory drugs, and there were 7,600 deaths in that category.

The thing about marijuana is that you cannot overdose on it. If you keep smoking continuously within a brief timeframe, you’ll probably just fall asleep or eat an entire bag of Nacho Cheese Doritos.

In the comedy film Walk Hard, there is a scene where Tim Meadows’ character is trying to convince John C. Reilly’s character to not join them in smoking ‘reefer.’ Reilly’s character rolls out a list of questions about the drug since he’s never tried it. Meadows counters with answers like, “It doesn’t give you a hangover,” “it makes sex even better,” “it’s non-habit forming,” and “it’s the cheapest drug there is.” The best part of the whole scene is that everything Meadows says is true.

Ask any ‘stoner’ (I’m sure you know at least one), and they can attest to all of those answers, especially the hangover part because marijuana is often used as a hangover remedy.

The cheapness of the drug is probably one of the biggest appeals. In the Chicagoland area, an eighth of an ounce costs $40-60 depending on quality. A single gram of cocaine can cost nearly as much, and has worse repercussions with addictiveness and mental health. The same can be said for heroine, meth, and painkillers like oxycodon.

The fact that marijuana is illegal is not the problem. It’s the amount of arrests made for possessing small amounts of the drug with no intent on distributing. According to projectcensored.org, arrests for marijuana possession have increased in the past decade, while arrests for possession of cocaine and heroine have declined. That’s not surprising considering the openness that a lot of people have with marijuana, but the statistic that makes no sense is that marijuana possession arrests exceed arrests for all violent crimes COMBINED!

Remember that everyday people are driving home drunk, J-walking, and working without green cards or a visa. Yet, a 20-year-old will be arrested for possession because they ‘looked suspicious.” They’ll have marijuana on them, but they won’t be hurting anyone. At the same time, another criminal will get only a years probation for shooting someone. How is that just?

Look, I’m not the guy who’s lobbying for marijuana to be legalized. There will always be ways to obtain it, regardless of law. The point I’m trying to make is that marijuana is not nearly as harmful to your health as many legal substances are.

So, does it make sense to live in a world where the perception is the opposite of the truth? You be the judge.