This Aint Packers Talk v69

[ThatJerkDave]

9 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

Yes it certainly does but the Frozen Zoo has been collecting and storing sperm and eggs for years so there is some variability in the gene pool

Q: Do you know how they collect Rhino sperm ?

A: Interns

Rhino's in the wild and in captivity are given a mild sedative and then.... you just ring the bell

 

 

If your uncle, Jack, helped you off a horse...

[ThatJerkDave]

So, work sucked today.  I spent 6 hours trying to make a product that we never sell, so that the state of Illinois can sign off to say that we are certified for making this product, that I don't think the state of Illinois even uses.  I finally got it right on my 4th attempt.  And now it is time to go to sleep so I can go back to work and finish that project and all I can think about is how I want this 3 day weekend to be a 10 day weekend.  

[Bignutz]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 4:29 PM, JBURGE25 said:

Okay so I'm planning on going to Green Bay for a game this year... first live NFL experience. I've narrowed it down to 3 games.

Vikings
Bills
Cardinals

Pros and cons for Vikings - honestly the only con is that it's way more per ticket, so cost, and I guess the best team by far so we have a better chance of losing which would suck. Division rival, week 2 so hopefully limited injuries, great weather

Pros and cons for Bills - Still in September, so likely low injuries. Cost of the tickets is lower. Good weather. I can't see us losing to Josh Allen. But then again it's the Bills. I'm from Toronto and I don't even care about them

Pros and cons for Cardinals - Josh Rosen, simple as that. I am the biggest Rosen nose humper and would love to see him... but what if he isn't playing? Then I'm going to a December game at Lambeau. Cold. Higher likelihood of favourite players injured. Tickets are really cheap though

People who have gone to lots of games, does it really matter what team you see? People who have gone to one, did it matter for you? 

What should I do while in Green Bay? I've never been to the midwest

You will have a blast! There are a lot of venues right around Lambeau.

[Uffdaswede]

Ohhh... never mind. DavidatMizzou’s work sucking post reminded me if Scott Adams’ take on workplace futility. Phil, Prince of Insufficient Light offers Dilbert a terrible Faustian bargain only to find that Dilbert likes both nightmare scenarios better than what he presently has. 

Adams has his material locked up pretty tightly. He is, after all, an accomplished software engineer. 

Edited May 25, 2018 by blueswedeshoes

[JBURGE]

Thank you everyone for your answers. I just wish you all didn't say different things

[HyponGrey]

13 hours ago, DavidatMIZZOU said:

Mosquitoes are much better survivors than rhinoceroses.  They are more adaptable to a changing environment or invading threat.

We as humans have considered wiping mosquitoes off the earth several times. We had meetings to vote on whether or not to make mosquitoes extinct. We just can't find the heart to pass the vote.

[Uffdaswede]

47 minutes ago, HyponGrey said:

We as humans have considered wiping mosquitoes off the earth several times. We had meetings to vote on whether or not to make mosquitoes extinct. We just can't find the heart to pass the vote.

This is clearly a local law enforcement issue. It’s why we have SWAT teams. 

[HyponGrey]

8 hours ago, blueswedeshoes said:

This is clearly a local law enforcement issue. It’s why we have SWAT teams. 

A finance student once asked a five part question about the differences of PEST and SWOT. His professor replied that a PEST is someone who asks a five part question, and SWOT is what you do to them.

[wgbeethree]

I'm not really a fan of the NBA.

I'm really not a fan of Lebron James.

I REALLY can't imagine an argument for him not being the GOAT. He's SO much better than anyone else ever.

To have him to watch from afar and AR12 to watch up close... well it's a good time to be a fan of sports.  

[AlexGreen#20]

4 hours ago, wgbeethree said:

I'm not really a fan of the NBA.

I'm really not a fan of Lebron James.

I REALLY can't imagine an argument for him not being the GOAT. He's SO much better than anyone else ever.

To have him to watch from afar and AR12 to watch up close... well it's a good time to be a fan of sports.  

I've long held the opinion that only basketball hipsters do, that Kareem Abdul Jabbar was a more impactful player than Michael Jordan. His offensive impact was just huge. Led the league in volume scoring his first three years in the league with ridiculously good efficiency in years 2 and 3. All while playing all world defense. He could have continued with that, but chose to sacrifice numbers for team success. He led the league in blocks 4 of the first 7 years they kept track of the stat and in two of the years that he didn't lead the league, he played fewer than 66 games. Also was a dominant rebounder and averaged about 4.5 assists per game. Add on that his longevity is basically unmatched (pending what Lebron does in the next four years) and you've got my vote. Only real knock is that he didn't start winning championships until Magic Johnson made it to the Lakers, but there wasn't any talent on the Lakers before that because they traded it all for Kareem.

+++

Lebron vs. Jordan is an interesting debate. It's easier to compare them head to head because they started in the same era of basketball (and I know that Kareem and Jordan overlapped by 5 years but that's just because Kareem played literally forever and he was in his 36-41 year old seasons those years)

Just looking at playoff relevant years:

Jordan: 87-88 to 92-93 and 94-95 to 97-98 (10 years) vs. Lebron  05-06 to 17-18 (13 years) you're already starting to see Lebron's longevity starting to play out. Even scarier is that it looks like Lebron probably has three more years of all world play in him.

Looking at playoff production in that time frame:

Jordan was at 33/6/6/2/1 on 57%TS (Jordan has the advantage of starting at 24 rather than 21)

Lebron is at 29/9/7/2/1 on 58%TS 

Pace and Ease of scoring per era tell a different story than I expected. I've always heard that defenses were better in Jordan's era and that pace was slower. I'm a little skeptical of that looking at the numbers. Looks to me like things were very equal. With the caveat that I only pulled two single season sample sizes as representative.

91-92: 103.5 ppg/96 possessions per game/52.6%TS

95-96: 99.3 ppg/92 possessions per game/54.1% TS

12-13: 97.1 ppg/92 possessions per game/53.2% TS

15-16: 102.3 ppg/96 possessions per game/53.9% TS

+++

Lebron carries an edge defensively (don't tell me about Jordan's DPOY award, or either guy's All-Defensive Team numbers, neither one of these guys should have ever won any of those awards considering they spend most of the regular season hiding on the opponent's weakest 1-3 and in case of James that stretches out to 1-5 during some games.). Lebron's a bigger and more versatile defender and a better team coordinator as well. I think Jordan was arguably a better man up defender when he was locked in, but the margin is very slim and doesn't take away the other advantages that Lebron carries.

Jordan carries the team success argument over Lebron for now. His 6 rings are absurdly impressive coming in 2 3-peats (I've never used my ignore feature on this site, but if anybody brings up Jordan not losing in the finals as an argument, you're going to have earned it. How is losing in the first round as Jordan did in his sophomore season more impressive than losing in the finals like Lebron did in his sophomore season?)

If you're going to make the argument of team success for Lebron, much of it stems from the idea that he's had terrible teammates (relative to other chapionship winning superstars) basically his entire career with a brief two year period in Miami. The problem with that argument is that Lebron has acted essentially as his own GM for many years, he's the guy that basically demands not just certain types of players but even specific players. At some point you have to lay in the bed you made, and he's not a good GM. 

Ultimately I think it's Kareem/Lebron/Jordan, though as Lebron continues to play he'll erode much of Kareem's longevity advantage and continue to build up his own lead in that department. If he wins a few more championships, you can probably ice it. There really isn't much of an argument left unless people want to start discussing validity of rings.

Full list:

1. Kareem

2. Lebron

3. Jordan

4. Russell

5. Duncan

6. Wilt

7. Magic

8. Shaq

9. Hakeem

10. Bird

11. Garnett

12. Bryant

13. Oscar

14. K. Malone

15. Jerry West

[Leader]

39 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Full list:

1. Kareem

2. Lebron

3. Jordan

4. Russell

5. Duncan

6. Wilt

7. Magic

8. Shaq

9. Hakeem

10. Bird

11. Garnett

12. Bryant

13. Oscar

14. K. Malone

15. Jerry West

Good to see my LAL so well represented - and that you included Mr. Clutch on there. He wasnt as flashy as some, but he was damn good.

 

Edited May 26, 2018 by Leader

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, Leader said:

Good to see my LAL so well represented - and that you included Mr. Clutch on there. He wasnt as flashy as some, but he was damn good.

 

You're a Lakers and Packers fan?

[MacReady]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're a Lakers and Packers fan?

Lots of those around.  I used to be a Lakers fan until the NBA completely ruined all its credibility.  Lakers used to be in Minnesota before the Bucks, so lots of people picked the Packers and Lakers due to being raised that way.  I think most fans of teams are fans of those teams because their parents/grand parents/ great grand parents started following those teams and passed them down the line.  I'm just glad my grandpa lived in Wisconsin before moving to Minnesota and eventually North Dakota. 

[ThatJerkDave]

For basketball I was always a fan of players more than teams.  I really liked the Super Sonics, but tbh, I really liked Gary Payton and Shawn Kemp.  I flirted with the Bucks for a while too, but when they gave away Ray Allen that was the final straw.  Next year I will probably follow whichever teams have Michael and Jontay Porter.  I wish both had stayed in school, but I completely understand.

[CWood21]

31 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Lots of those around.  I used to be a Lakers fan until the NBA completely ruined all its credibility.  Lakers used to be in Minnesota before the Bucks, so lots of people picked the Packers and Lakers due to being raised that way.  I think most fans of teams are fans of those teams because their parents/grand parents/ great grand parents started following those teams and passed them down the line.  I'm just glad my grandpa lived in Wisconsin before moving to Minnesota and eventually North Dakota. 

The NBA became "broken" for me when these Super Teams formed.  I mean, the Miami Heat one wasn't good but the whole Durant joining the Warriors was really the last big straw for me.  When 90% of the high-end talent in the league is on 4-5 teams, you've already got a season that's pretty much expected.  I mean, how many people didn't think we'd have Houston and Golden State in the WFC and Cleveland and Boston in the ECF?  That shouldn't happen.  In a league that's star-driven, there isn't room for parity if only a few teams have the talent.