Tag:Ask kmvenne anything
Posted on: May 1, 2009 11:16 am
Edited on: May 1, 2009 9:36 pm

Ask kmvenne anything! Session 2

Let's start a new session so we can keep my essays from breaking your scrool bar finger before you get to your question...

Here's how Ask kmvenne Anything (tm) works:

Step 1) You post a comment and ask me anything

Step 2) I reply on this post

Keep the good stuff coming. I'll be on and off all day, I got things to do, some of them work, some of them play, some of them will probably include drinking hard liquor. Which should be a bonus, who knows how I'll answer something after I've had a few. Have at it at your convience.

Message #1: mcgradykid134 asks..

What do you think about the Lakers/Rockets series? And do you think when T-Macs career is over, is he a HOF? I DO


I'm rooting for the Lakers in the series. The Rockets are 7-1 dogs at my sportsbook. I wouldn't take those odds. Rockets are a good team, but the Lake Show is a bad matchup for them. The Rockets are a good defensive team, but average on the offensive end all season, and play at a slow pace. The Lakers go on too many runs for a methodical team like Houston to counter. It's just asking too much of Houston to comtain L.A.'s explosiveness.

Anyone who denies that T-Mac is a HOFer when his career is over is stupid. McGrady is a lock, it's not close.

Message #2:MrRedSoxBaller asks...

Is this year's Bulls/Celtics series the best series ever?


Nope. Overtimes do not a great series make. Who is this suprised that the Celtics minus KG are equal to the Bulls? I bet the Bulls at 5 to 1, so I'm enjoying it, but seriously, this doesn't suprise me THAT MUCH.

Don't get me wrong, the games are fantastic, clutch plays left and right. But honestly, the level of basketball is lacking. These arn't elite teams. The Magic will spank the winner. The greatest series I ever saw was the Sonics/Jazz series in I think 1997. Those were two elite teams, granted MJ's Bulls would spank whoever won, but you talk about passion, great basketball for 40 minutes, and two teams that just didn't like each other, that was it.

The best 1st round series I ever saw was 1999 Knicks/Heat. That series was better then Bulls/C's.

Bulls/C's is one of the top about 6-8 series I've ever seen. But really, this is like a epic 4-5 first round matchup. How epic can it really be?

Message #3: D2Moo asks....
1.  How did you get so good at Joe's caption game?Laughing


The odd thing is, I've done some standup, and I like comedy in general. But I perform and listen to the really blue stuff (most the time). I think since I make mostly off-color jokes in real life, I get my clean comedy out on the caption game, and so far, so good.

2.  Odds that the Kings move back to KC if they don't get a new arena.


Pretty high from what I understand, but I am no expert on that subject. Simmons sure thinks so.

3.  Should we want them back? Surprised   At least we would get to see the other teams.


YES! Don't doubt the Kings ownership. They know not to spend when they have no shot, but they want to win, not make a buck. The Maloof's do it the right way. They have given some bad contracts out, but hey, nobodies perfect. I respect the Kings' brass, they would be an above average NBA team to have in your town over a 20 year stretch.

Message #4: GoCavs33 asks...

Are professional athletes over paid?


In my worldview, it is impossible to be overpaid. The free market sets your worth. If you maximize it, you are paid correctly. If you could make more elsewhere, you are underpaid. It's not my job to judge the market maker's ability to define player value, teams have a whole staff for that. I defer the judgement on the worth of a player to the experts in the field, which I am not, nor do I pretend to be.

NBA salaries are something like 53% of the NBA's net revenue. The NFL has a similar model. The idea of "here is the revenue pie, and players, you will always get x%" seems fair to me. MLB players can be harder to defend, but the MLB proved this year that it will pay market value, but adjust that for market conditions. The fact Adam Dunn and Bobby Abreu are only making $5 MM shows even MLB teams spend with some level of prudence.

It's a multi-billion dollar business. The showmen get a chunk both sides think is fair enough, a chunk reevaulated each collective bargining aggreement. I let those aggrements be the final word on athlete's salary in my world.

NOTE: Bad contracts (from my message to D2MOO) doesn't mean someone was overpaid (my point to GoCavs). It means the contract ended up not producing the value expected. No contract is bad when it is signed. We judge them with complete information, teams and players agree to them with incomplete information. It's this knowledge gap that makes some contracts seem awful.

Message #5: BucFan34 asks...

Which Eastern Conference 3 seed (obvious on purpose) beat the East's number 1 seed by 28 points? Why is this so overlooked when when people continue to pump up the 1 seed as the best team in the conference? 28 points seems like a large number to me.


BoDog sportsbook ran a promotion where you could bet $50 on any team to win the NBA finals to start the playoffs, and if the Lakers won, you get your money back. Most everyone said "It's like a free bet on the Cavs!".

I bet the Magic as soon as I saw the promo. The Magic are the one team you cannot beat if they bring their A+ game. You can't outshoot them, you can't defend them down low, you can't even cheat them with dropping your head, driving to the rim, getting 2 shots, and throwing chalk in Superman's eyes.

28 is a large number indeed. Hollinger teaches us all about margin of victory. Sleeping on the Magic is downright foolish.

Message #6: mcgradykid134 asks..

Bill Clinton was one of our best presidents ever? What was his downs and ups? and FDR?


Bill Clinton is generally considered by historians to be a slightly better then middle of the road President. roughly our 20th best overall. Honestly, not that much happened in his 8 years as far as policy goes of real significance. Clinton's leglislative successes include the line-item veto, which got shot down in courts, the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which did a lot good and bad for radio and TV, The Family and Medical Leave Act, which helps women who are pregnant keep their jobs with unpaid leave mandatory, a fine bill.

Clinton also raised taxes on the rich and on businesses, restricted gun rights, increased the number of crimes that can get the federal death penalty. increased the minimum wage, AmeriCorps, welfare reform and some other, lesser bills. Many of his top priorities, like health care and campaign finance reform, never got passed. Obviously Clinton's scandals were numerous. Lewinski, Paula Jones, Watergate, taking money from the Chinese in an effort for China to influence public policy, and Troopergate were all huge scandals.

The biggest mistake of all by Clinton was rejecting the Sudan governments' offer on THREE occasions, in 1996, 1998, and 2000, for the Sudanese to arrest Osama bin Laden and hand him to us. At the time we knew bin Laden had bombed two of our embassies, and he would later, of course, bomb the USS Cole ship and direct the events of 9/11. Cinton's failure to simply accept bin Laden was one of this countries biggest failures of all time.

FDR is considered one of our greatest presidents by historians. He is almost always top 3. Most of what he did was well known, and typical reaction to his presidency falls on party lines. He's far too expansive to tackle in full. Any specific questions on FDR?

Message #7: mcgradykid134 asks..

Yes, what did he do good? bad? Social SecuritY?


I'll give you my top two bad and good.

Bad: Economic policies/New Deal

The median joblessness rate throughout the New Deal was 17.2 percent and never went below 14 percent. In the book FDR's Follys, which I own, it is said the New Deal's problems including "doubling taxes, making it more expensive for employers to hire people, making it harder for entrepreneurs to raise capital, demonizing employers, destroying food...breaking up the strongest banks, forcing up the cost of living, channeling welfare away from the poorest people and enacting labor laws that hit poor African Americans especially hard." Most economists and historians in other countries believe the New Deal extended, not cured, the Great Depression. He also tried to take all gold held by private citizens for reasons I don't fully understand, it was illegal to own gold bouillon from the New Deal to the Ford administration.

Bad: Japanese interment camps/failure to save the Jews in WWII

FDR sent over 120,000 Japanese Americans to lockup camps called "War Relocation Camps" during WWII. Over 60% of them were American citizens. It was just a racist, unnecessary action and did nothing to stop spies. He also denied Jews safe harbor in the US before the US joined the war, and was slow to fight Hitler.

Good: FEMA

Hey, FEMA is a good idea, even if Bush forgot how to use it.

Good: Leadership during WWII

Goes without saying.

Social Security is what it is. Wealth distribution isn't something I'm totally against, I wish people were charitable enough in their community that we could take care of ourselves, but that is not the case. I can't believe 1 in 6 recipients rely on it as their only form of income, SS should be a bonus, not a lifeline.

I'm not a good enough amateur economist to know when SS will run out. The experts don't even know for sure. I support privatization of SS. The idea we are too dumb as a nation to have a degree of control of our SS account insults me. I believe even modest, safe investments would generate higher returns on our current SS accounts and save the US billions.

SS won't ever be a problem for this country as long as we make good economic decisions as a nation. If we stay the world leader, then our government paper issues will continue to be where the world flocks for save haven investments and we will be able to fund these social programs. If we make mistakes and a country like China surpasses us and our debt issues lose respect, we are in trouble, with SS and a host of other programs.

Message #8: BucFan34 asks...

Good answer to my question

Actually Orlando is 2-0 against LA too, but in a finals matchup, J.J. Redick would probally guard KobeFrown


Yes it was Laughing .

Lewis on Kobe, Hedo on Odom, Reddick on Azira. I like it...
Category: NBA
Posted on: April 30, 2009 8:30 pm
Edited on: April 30, 2009 10:27 pm

Ask kmvenne anything!

It's the offseason for the Knicks. So let's change the tune of this blog. Here's how Ask kmvenne Anything works:

Step 1) You post a comment and ask me anything

Step 2) I reply on this post

Some people seem to like my political insight about political history and international events, some people like to talk conspiracy, some people like talking poker, some people want to know why I have a soul patch. Nothing is off limits! Ask, and I shall tell you what I think. Hopefully, you enjoy.

Message #1: GoCavs33 asks...

Well Big will be happy to have all of your discussions off the ATMD thread.  You did a great job answering everything last night, I should have a couple of questions for you some time soon.


This isn't really a question Laughing . (I just did this so you guys know how it will work. If you hate this format, let me know and I'll change it)

Message #2: mcgradykid134 asks...

Hey kmvenne, What do you think about the years to come with Obama? What did you like about Ronald Reagen and what was the Iran-Contra?


In the years to come with Obama, I personally have my reservations. As much as I give him a thumbs up on his work with the financial sector, he wields a heavy governmental hand in the auto industry. His statements today about Chrysler lead me to believe he may weild his power into the free market more then my tastes would have him. His national health care ideas are miss and hit. His spending to computerize and update medical records I give 5 stars to, that is a huge problem, he is wise to tackle it, it will improve health care costs more then you'd think! But federal health care worries me, it's a system with limited success in foreign countries. I'd rather have seen a health care tax break. His stimulus spending on infrastructure is mostly wasteful to me, I'd like to have seen much less focus on our existing infrastructure and more on the magnet train he has planned. Magnetic train infrastructure going nationwide would be sweet, a good national system that I could get behind spending money on. I'd love to take a magnet train from my area to like Chicago! And as I said yesterday, he so far has appointed some radical judges, one of them once ruled that the courtroom couldn't open with a prayer about Jesus or God, but Allah was ok (he said as much!)

Reagan I liked because he was the Great Communicator. He was always optimistic and he loved America. He always talked about the future, and how we would get there. The greatness of Reagan was not that he was in America, but that America was inside of him. He talked more about issues than any presidential candidate had in years, building up the defense budget, cutting taxes and balancing the budget. He did a lot of this in action, too. But as importantly, at a crucial time in the Cold War, his unflappable presence helped end it. And most of all to me, he was a great speechmaker, and he listened. More then any other president, he cared how his speeches were received, and if they didn't go over, he'd change his style. He'd strive to speak in simple, straightforward terms, and he did so.

He was a great conservative, but he was more so a good person, caring, honest, and understanding. It showed through.

Iran-Contra is tough to explain. Short story is that a Lebanese Islamic group called Hezbollah (still around doing terror) had American hostages. To cut to the chase, people in the Reagan administration traded weapons for the release of these American hostages. We gave them anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles, all kinds of stuff. We all know that we don't negotiate with terrorists. We tried to get away with it by using Israel as the middle guy, but it didn't work to hide our actions. We kept going, and sold weapons to them in the end, and we used that money to fund a rebel group in Nicaragua who was fighting a Commie leader the US did not agree with.

Reagan said he didn't know but took full responsibility for what happened that he said he didn't know about (some think he knew more then he admitted). Lt. Col. Oliver North was man that testified that Reagan had no knowledge of what was going on, some view him as the fall guy who covered for Reagan. He's a hero of mine, a great conservative, so I will refrain from comment on this part.

People dislike Reagan for Iran-Contra because we sold those serious weapons to Iran/Lebonan and used them to fund the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. That's why it's called Iran-Contra. Being active in supporting a regime change in a foreign country is unpopular policy, and the story still gets mentioned today because Iran used those weapons for some of their evil actions.

At least we got the hostages back, I guess.

Message #3: Michigan Sports asks...

WHY is WCF taking so long to make his pick? Who do you think he's leaning towards taking or should take (or is that something we should keep confidential?)


Let's be honestly, WCF is a bit of a jerk Laughing . He's probably just laughing at us all at his monitor. I don't mean that in a bad way, I like WCF's style (honestly, I do), but he's cocky and I'd guess he's just milking his time. Maybe he's just drunk...hahaha.

My last two picks will be left field, so I don't mind giving my opinion at this point. Bernard King, Mookie Blaylock, and Tom Chambers make up a great bench for WCF. I love Benard King myself, man was he good before his injury. He has a ton of three point shooting and good post O and D as well on his overall team. Mookie is a good stopper for guards,  the rest of his guards can score, and his post play is very balanced. Honestly, he doesn't have too much in the way of needs. Maybe one more defensive guard? If I am him I probably take one more defensive stopper. It's an odd pick, but I might actually suggest he take AK-47. AK-47 can guard top players and do enough of the rest. Would he play well in this setting? I don't know. But I'd do it if I was him, because his rotation is pretty set, and AK-47 you can try out, see if he works with your team, and just cut him if he gets no love.

Message #4: BucFan34 writes:

KM, this may be the easiest question one will ask you. Who is the worst player in the NBA?

Hint 1) He abriviates his name
Hint 2) He thinks hes gods gift to earth
Hint 3) After being abused by Jameer Nelson, he claimed it to be a result of not making the All Star team. Jameer beat him out


Ed Curry? Laughing . DOWN WITH Mo Williams!

Message #5: mcgradykid134 asks...

You dont think thats it is kinda wierd how the mayans predicted the world to end in 2012 during a time of our first black president? I truly believe in this and i feel as if it is not dumb to believe. Also can you comment on the Space people not landing on the moon supposedly


I'm not a guy that believes in a lot. I believe way more in religious principals then I do religion itself. On the same token, I don't believe in seeing the future. As to the moon landing, It was one of those things where it was just so hard to believe it really happened at the time, so conspiracy theories were bound to happen. I don't have much to add on those, predictions and most mainstream conspriacies arn't my wheelhouse. But if you want to talk Roswell and aliens, I will post a link to the Hangar 18 video by Megadeth. Stripper aliens, rocking solos, alien torture, METAL!!!!

Message #6: MrRedSoxBaller asks...

Why does BigB have an unnatural hate for Steve Nash?  Sure he's overrated and may not have deserved his two MVPs, but the Canadian cowboy is one of the best passers I have seen, and may go down as the best shooting PG to ever play.  Any ideas where the hate comes from?


Nash didn't deserve either MVP, but the second was 100% defensible. His shooting season that year was insane, he led the league in TS% and eFG%, categories that centers usually win. Impressive!

I have a couple theories:

1) ESPN shoved Nash down every ones throat. Who doesn't hate when ESPN does this???
2) Nash's career averages look bad. A product of him being a bench guy for so long, but makes it harder to appreciate him.
3) The SSOL system has yet to win anything, hating Nash = hating the run and gun
4) Hating Nash is a great way to promote defense in the NBA. He is the poster child for all O now that AI is slipping.
5) Big B started hating Nash, found out he was really good at arguing against Nash, and it's snowballed into what we see today.

Message #5: mcgradykid134 asks...

Do you like the cathloic region? Meaning do you believe some things they do? Personally im to young to know what religion to choose and i am searching. Right not currently I do not believe in the god christians do. I dont think he is as powerful as they say, nor do i believe he created the earth. Im a young kid so many dumb question appear like, What was here before God? How was he created? If he is a man of all good why do we live in such a cruel world, and yes you can feed me the crap that he gives you a choice but honestly If i were in charge i would never make millions of children die of Aids, Or people starve to death in Africa. Whats your comment on all this?

I don't know if there is a God. Personally, I believe if I live a good life, and God exists, he'd like me a lot more then some ditzy blonde who goes to church 1 hour every Sunday and only cares about herself the rest of the week. I just try to be a good person, if He's around, He probably likes me

That said, Catholicism is the most logical religion IMO. I don't mean logical to follow. You can believe whatever. But if you asked someone from each religion any religious question you can think of, from "how does God affect us today?" to "How is his message sent to us?" to "Explain Satan to me", Catholics will give you the most answers that are spelled out in black and white in their dogma. No "you just gotta believe" or "some of us think...", Catholics literally have an answer and explanation for everything. I have a lot of respect for that. I was baptized Catholic and spent time in Catholic schools, but I have been to Methodist, Mormon, and other churches too, out of curiosity. Catholics have the most answers, even if I think some quarks of Catholicism are just silly.

I would suggest you read this...

It is an e-book written by the creator of Dilbert, Scott Adams. It is a fascinating look on God. It talks about all the ways God could be, like you said, is he that powerful? Their are a lot of religious theories out there about God. This book explores them all, but not in a boring way, in a fun way that is cool to read. I think you'd enjoy it more then anything more I had to say.

EDIT: I just re-read the first 3 chapters of this book as I watch the Bulls/C's. This is probably exactly what you were looking for, mcgrady. I can't recommend it enough.

As for my "religion", I just believe in Utilitarianism. You just based your actions in life as to what will bring good to people. Good could be happiness, pleasure, comfort, whatever. Just do positive things that won't make you yourself upset (You count in these calculations, too! Don't volunteer if you will just be miserable, what's the point in that?), and don't hurt people for a simple buzz of pleasure. Simple, but effective. It goes a little deeper, but not too much.

Category: NBA
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com