buddha

evan mobley wins rookie of the year? next year he's on the lakers. cade cunningham develops into a star next year? the year afrer he's on the celtics. chet holmgren looks promising? signs straight away with the lakers. thats what europe is like. smaller clubs have almost no chance.

and youre talking about a scenario where a few nba guys decide they want to play on the same team so they end up in LA for the clips or lakers or philly or brooklyn or phoenix. there is only one team in germany that the best players go to, two (and a half) teams in spain, one in italy, one in france, and maybe four in england. thats it. and thats with hundreds of teams in every country, you have maybe 8 or 9 who get all the best players and they usually win the league every year. bayern have won 9 straight bundesligas. juve have won 9 of the last 10 scudettos. psg have won 7 of the last 9 ligue un titles. either barca or real have won 34 of the last 40 la liga titles. the english premier league has existed since 1992 and has been won by one of the top 4 big money clubs every year but two (and the first time by blackburn back before the billionaire money started). if you want the red sox, yankees and dodgers winning every year, look to europe.

much different system. most of the clubs in europe survive by developing players and selling them bigger clubs. there is no trading of players for other players (very rarely) like there is here. players over there are developed and then sold on for profits. the equivalent would be getting one or two years of mize and then selling him to the dodgers for $80 million. then using that money to get a bunch of kids from venezuela for pennies in order to sell them on in a few years too. the money is much less for most teams in europe and there isnt the income guarantee that there is here because there is no salary cap. half the teams in europe are near broke! its a totally different ballgame.

no reason for china to do that. and they didnt.

and all this talk of european soccer, im not sure any of you would really like that system here. everyone loves the idea of relegation and teams actually losing something when they lose, but european soccer is VERY top heavy. the same handful of teams win every year. and the only way to break into that club is to be bought by a multi-billionaire who just throws money at the team and buys the best managers and players. is that really what you want? people complain about the yankees but the yankees havent won anything in years. real madrid and barcelona and occasionally atletico win EVERY YEAR. everyone else is playing for third most seasons (covid upset that a bit, but madrid are still winning the league). that's what you get in a more free market system where there is no cap on salaries and players can go where they want. the tigers would simply become a feeder club for the yankees, red sox, and dodgers. unless jeff bezos or elon musk was a secret tigers' fan and wanted to buy them.

socialism would be if the government came in and ran major league baseball. you know, for the good of the fans.

good. cause it doesnt surprise me either. in fact, i wonder if this ever really happened, or if it did, it was because we knew what china would do so we did it just to release the information and make them look bad. i assume that's why we did it.

now that's hitting below the belt...

are you surprised?

ive seen too many to remember them all. saw the first game of the final three against toronto in 87. then sae them lose game 3 against the twins. think my first game was in 77. in contrast, i think ive seen 3 games at comerica park? maybe 4.

Hutch Willis is he's there, best receiver if he's not. receiver or safety linebacker (muma, asamoah) defensive line or cornerback. that's how i want the first three rounds to go.

she's the worst of the three to be nominated but she should get through on a party line vote. maybe pick collins off. they must know she'll get through with only dem votes because there isnt much chance she'll get more than one or two republicans at most. childs would have been a better pick and would have been an easier confirmation. this will make the left happier for sure.

they do like new mock drafts every other day and switch it up for no real reason other than to have something new to talk about.

what poster on the old board used the term "jap lives"?

that's click bait.

i think they'll get a better pick than that if they deal him. he's very good.

good. the season is too long and the playoffs should end before it starts snowing.

bad win. cade plays bad, killian is killian, bey shoots poorly and they get bailed out because garland and lavert dont play. need to lose these games, dammit.

honestly, i keep looking hopefully at box scores thinking that killian will actually figure out his shot one of these games.

he seems....a little off.

because they can get it, that's why. lol. you dont think their are smart teams out there that have figured out how to work the current system more efficiently? i certainly do. the playera will go to their death fighting against a "salary cap" so that the sotos on the scherzers of the world can make $40 million a year while the owners will turn around and squeeze the majority if the players who will never be that good. if the owners wanted to put the union in a real bind, they'd agree to increase the first three year salary but refuse to budge on lowering the tax ceiling.

would you trade the lions' third round pick for calvin ridley?

no interest. they're probably signing one receiver and drafting another. no reason to give up a draft pick for him because he's probably not going to play. unless you think he's actually good. we already traded two picks for trinity benson and slow ass ceeohus is coming back. how many underperforming receivers do we need?

they really need at least three more defensemen. dekyser was unolayable against a team with speed like colorado. they onlybhad one line that could get the puck and keep it. the rest of the team was flailing around almost all night.

sure. but if you want to play the "gotcha" game, the democrats have just as much to be "got" about when it comes to foreign policy. cause foreign policy is hard and not something we have complete control over. unless, of course, we do something like invade iraq to install a democracy...