Haven't listened to that one yet but the Kerr interview was also excellent.
The Bill Simmons Thread
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Durant was great, he's a refreshing guy. But I don't believe for a second he gave absolutely no consideration to his title chances when he joined Golden State. How could he not? That would just be human nature, he was joining the best regular season team of all time.
I dunno man. I don't think it's black and white. I think they kick that fg in the first Giants SB with Vinatieri and he doesn't miss that XP against Denver in the AFCCG either.
It's definitely not black and white. And I agree they likely kick that FG if it's AV there instead of SG (even though they still should have).
That being said, with the exception of the last 20 games or so, SG was better over the last 11 seasons. He was cheap for a long time, allowing them to spend the money elsewhere. And he's never needed a kickoff specialist, allowing them to use that roster spot elsewhere.
AV has him on postseason kicks, but I think it's kind of a chicken and he egg type thing. The Pats really had no choice but to have AV kick the Snowbowl FGs. Or the Super Bowl winner. He hit them and a legend was born and his steely eyed rep was formed. But AV missed clutch kicks on his own (KC game, forget which season). He's also likely at least partially still in the league because he's kicked at least half his games in a dome the last eleven years.
Ghost has never really had a signature kick and certainly hadn't at that point. I still think they should have kicked it, but they weren't in a position they needed him to as make or break and I'm failing to think of one in his whole career in the postseason.
It's definitely a tough call. Ultimately I think BB made the right call, but it's very debatable.
The very real cost savings and the fact that Ghost had been generally phenomenal over the past decade (this year's issues aside) make it, if not an easy call, not one that can be classified as a clear mistake.
Vinatieri missed kicks. He missed kicks in Super Bowls. He's not perfect, and there's no way to know how/if he would have performed in New England since 2006. Saying it was a mistake to let him go requires a belief that he would have been not only better, but materially better than Ghost, and I just don't see that as anywhere close to a given, and in many years, how that would even be possible.
Vinatieri missed kicks. He missed kicks in Super Bowls. He's not perfect, and there's no way to know how/if he would have performed in New England since 2006. Saying it was a mistake to let him go requires a belief that he would have been not only better, but materially better than Ghost, and I just don't see that as anywhere close to a given, and in many years, how that would even be possible.
Last edited:
Let's not forget the kickoff aspect of this. Despite kicking indoors AV hasn't kicked off for like 10 years. Ghost has given the Patriots a TON of value in the kickoff game over the last 10 years.
Edit: this should probably be it's own topic in BBtL
Edit: this should probably be it's own topic in BBtL
Agreed, and I'd probably come out 65/35 in favor of Ghost, but it's definitely not as clear cut an issue as either of the initial posts seemed to make it out to be.
FootballOutsiders calculates Expected Points Added Above Average on FG/XP and Kickoffs, and Gostkowski has ranked ahead of Vinatieri 9/11 years, sometimes by very large margins (esp. when you consider the value added on KOs).
As for the playoffs, Vinatieri is 30/34 since he left and Gostkowski 31/33. Gostkowski has missed 3 XPs while Vinatieri hasn't missed any, but those XP misses are all since the rule change and the Colts haven't made the playoffs since the rule change, so their records aren't directly comparable.
Once you add in that Gostkowski has been cheaper over 2006-2016 and NE hasn't had to carry an extra guy to handle kickoffs, it actually is pretty clear cut.
The argument wouldn't be based on a straight stat comparison; it's whether you think they try the FG against the Giants with AV and make it (which I do) and whether you think AV makes the extra point against the Broncos (I do). That's arguably 2 Super Bowls you win with AV you don't win or make with Ghost. Would the debate be closer in your mind if they didn't hit the second 2 point conversion against the Falcons?
But if you're what-ifing you can't focus only on Gostkowski's negatives and not on his positives. Maybe with Vinatieri Atlanta is still in FG range even after the sack/holding penalty sequence because their drive started at the 25 instead of the 10 since they don't have Gostkowski's great KO placement anymore. Etc. There all kinds of possibilities like this, and cherry-picking two plays that might have gone differently from 11 years proves nothing.
I don't think you can wave aside a decade of performance and cost data with a single "what if" (and it's not even simply if they try for the kick, it's whether they try for it, he makes it, and a hobbled Brady is able to pull out the win) and claim both cases have anything close to the same amount of merit.
Add in the fact that it's only remotely arguable because AV has massively outperformed reasonable expectations--he stayed healthy and kicked very well despite his age.
Back on topic, Bill's next project is a doc on Andre the Giant.
Bill chimes in on Twitter...
Last edited:
He used to drink at my great grandfather's bar. All those stories about him drinking are true
Maybe if it handicapped by weight. Wade was a monster, but Andre was in another league.
From what I've heard, this is close to impossible. However, if it comes down to sheer volume over a limited amount of time, Andre would have an obvious advantage. I'd bet on Boggs to outlast him, though.
That is Andre holding a regular 12 oz can of beer. Each one is like a juice box to him. I think he could take Wade Boggs no problem. There are men, and then there are Giants.
I would watch the hell out of an Andre doc. The stories about him are never fail to deliver. And everyone who met him seems to have dozens of them.
I know very little about Andre the Giant but I do know that Samuel Backett drove Andrew to middle school every day when Andre was 12 (Andre was too big to fit in the school bus so his dad's drinking buddy gave him a ride).
http://www.openculture.com/2014/06/samuel-beckett-drives-andre-the-giant-to-school.html
It realy is one of modern history's oddest, pairings, especially because it's before Andre was famour and it's a relationship that took place in a cowtown where you wouldn't expect there to be even one celebrity.
http://www.openculture.com/2014/06/samuel-beckett-drives-andre-the-giant-to-school.html
It realy is one of modern history's oddest, pairings, especially because it's before Andre was famour and it's a relationship that took place in a cowtown where you wouldn't expect there to be even one celebrity.
If you have like Andre the Giant, read the graphic novel: "Andre the Giant: Life and Legend" by Box Brown. It's really well written and the art is amazing.
BTW, I thought that I read once that AtG regularly drank a case of wine. If that's true, Boggs would have gotten killed in a drinking competition with him.
BTW, I thought that I read once that AtG regularly drank a case of wine. If that's true, Boggs would have gotten killed in a drinking competition with him.
It really would have to be weight adjusted. That picture of Andre's hand holding a beer(juice box) is really amazing.
A good follow on Facebook is Chris Owens. He used to go by the "Andre Roussimoff Facebook Page", but had to change it to his own name. The pics and videos that he has posted are overwhelming. From the earliest days of his career to his final appearances in Japan.
I wrote a biographical feature on Andre last year as part of a larger https://www.google.com/amp/amp.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2016/0910/617372/the-50-greatest-wrestlers-of-the-last-50-years-who-is-15/?client=safari
Those are some great stories, and I don't doubt that most are true. But 108 beers in 45 minutes seems almost impossible. Two and a half beers a minute for 45 minutes? That's insane.
That's over 10 gallons of liquid in 45 minutes. That is really hard to believe. Even if he was a giant.
This is why we need a documentary to get to the bottom of these legends and find the truth!
I loved the Durant pod. The only thing that bothered me a little bit is that Durant and his agent both said they never really thought about how Golden State gave him a better situation to win a championship. That just seems like complete BS to me; it isn't a big deal it is what everyone already assumed anyway.
Reddick himself is pretty damn good in the podcast medium. I started listening to a bunch of old episodes from his podcast and really enjoyed them. My favorite was his discussion with Jason Day about the mental aspects of being a top athlete in your game. Amazing he was the little shit from Duke, but he seems like a normal enough guy now.
Not sure I follow. Douche on the court/field does not equal one off the court. Clippers have a roster full of decent guys despite the on court bitching
Woody throwing some shade. I think this is going to be the go to retort for quite some time.
Damien WoodyVerified account @damienwoody
Damien Woody Retweeted Bill Simmons
U discussing it on your HBO show or nah
Bill SimmonsVerified account @BillSimmons
Cutler to the Jets would be so incredibly Jetsy.
Damien WoodyVerified account @damienwoody
Damien Woody Retweeted Bill Simmons
U discussing it on your HBO show or nah
Bill SimmonsVerified account @BillSimmons
Cutler to the Jets would be so incredibly Jetsy.
It 's pretty weak. Woody going to dispute the Jets are bad generally ? So one can't comment on badness if they don't do well on TV ? Considering Collinsworth did the same retort way better Woody gets no points.
To be fair, the Jets are much, much bigger failures than Simmons. Plenty of people have failed on TV. The Jets have failed at almost everything.
I have to say, BS lost of bit a pop culture cred with me on a recent podcast where he was discussing John Wick 2, and somehow didn't realize that the character of Winston (the manager of the Continental hotel), portrayed by Ian McShane (awesomely, of course), had been also been played by McShane in the first John Wick. He went on and on about how awesome McShane was in JW2, and how much better he was than the dude who had the played the part in the first movie. Except, of course, that it was the exact same guy in the first movie. Seriously, how do you watch John Wick and not realize that Ian McShane played that character? And this from a guy who purports to be a huge Deadwood fan.
I haven't seen 2 yet, or listened to the podcast, but Lance Reddick (Charon) played the hotel manager. Ian McShane played some kind of boss in the first one. For like two minutes in the bar scene. I assume he took on a bigger role this time?
He took on a much bigger role in number 2 and he was barely in the first one. It was a blink and you miss it role. Where Simmons kind of looks shaky here is that he always says he re-watches John Wick 1 when it's on cable. And there was a point where it was on daily for like 4 months. If that is the case, how do you not remember McShane?
But it's a dumb, tiny thing. No pop culture cred points are gained or lost for forgetting McShane's 2 minute role in the first movie.
No, sorry he loses points. 1) McShane's role in 1 was smaller, but it was > 2 minutes, and certainly memorable 2) Simmons didn't forget the role/character; he remembered the character, and thought it had been played by someone else. And McShane is nothing if not a very distinctive actor. And again, Simmons claims to be a big Deadwood fan. Unforgivable. So sorry, I'm afraid I am going to have to deduct 3.5 Pop Culture Cred points from Bill's permanent record. The judge's ruling is final.
Charon isn't the manager, he's more like the concierge/front desk guy. Winston (McShane) is the manager.