So I'm a little hurt. Trevor assembled his "top notch" superpower debate panel and I wasn't invited. I acknowledge the fact that I probably have spent a substantially less amount of time with my nose in a comic book or my eyes fixated on orcs than some, but hey, I can make a free throw. Ok, that was a low-blow. My bad. Either way, I think I could have added some jewiness to the discussion. Every complete panel needs that, right? And no, I do not think the best superpower would be the ability to create a recession-proof, high yield savings account.
I like the suggestions the aforementioned panel suggested. To read more about them, click here. Although I concur that time travel would be sweet, it should be noted that consensus has nearly been reached on the dangers of time travel. The ripple effect it may create could way heavily on the mind of the time traveler, much like the conscience "sterility touch". There is also great danger found in possessing such a powerful power. If you can time travel, you can change the past and that is something many powerful people are interested in doing. If you can fly, it is cool and may invite some odd requests, but I do not think it would lead down the same danky paths as time travel would.
May I suggest a great power that is often overlooked: huge cajones. I do not want this to be misinterpreted, so please read on. I am not suggesting anything in the literal sense, but am proposing that the gall to consistently do something that borders on insane is truly a superpower. Think of Batman or Iron Man. Both are normal, mortal men. Sure they have absurd amounts of green backs, but physically speaking, they are average joes. (Except for their bellies which are full of high quality eats prepared by their personal chefs. In turn, this leads to higher energy levels and longer life expectancies. They also have personal trainers and massage therapists which allow them to stay in peak physical shape while being relatively pain free. But besides that stuff...) But these cats are different in some way, right? (No, the difference is not found in the fact that they are fictional) If someone were to give you a few billion, would you decide to consistently put your physical, social, emotional, and mental life on the line to help a bunch of schmoes you have never met? Sounds like a typical, altruistic billionaire attitude, doesn't it? I think they do have a superpower and it is their gargantuan cajones.
Now some may say this doesn't qualify as a superpower. They may say that it doesn't qualify because there are actually people that demonstrate this ability. To this I respond you cannot prove that people do not demonstrate the others. However unlikely, it is impossible to truly know. Secondly, isn't it cooler to think of a super power as an uncommon attribute that both common-folk and super heroes both demonstrate? That way, we can have moments when we are teetering on the edge of being like a super hero. You know? Those moments where you run into a burning building or a cat from a tree branch or try to scale the side of a building with suction cups wearing your undies on the outside of nothing but spandex. Oh yes. That is all it takes. Just imagine: a man, a building, spandex, and monstrous cajones.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Finals Rundown
So this post may be a lot shorter than I would like, but I haven't had time to write it yet and the finals get under way tonight so I've got to get it down before then.
I have heard so many commentators give the series to the Lakers without much hesitation, but I think there is a need to pause before making a choice. I am not saying I disagree with their pick, but I think people have become disillusioned by the Celtics performance in the playoffs and forget the success they have had all year. 66 wins is no joke. They are a phenomenal defensive team. They are not merely good or great, but they are very special when it comes down to what they can do defensively. And if the past 17 years have shown us anything, it is that defensive teams fare very well in the whole winning championships thing. The Celtics' defensive numbers match up much more favorably with those of the champions since 1991 than do the Lakers. And when I say much, I mean much. I think people become enamored with great offenses and expect them to accomplish more than they are capable of (i.e Phoenix Suns). Having said that, I think the Lakers have shown they can play defense when necessary too, although they proved it against a sporadic offense at best in San Antonio.
One other quick point. The collapse of Ray Allen in the playoffs has been incredible. He is the wildcard for them. PP and KG are both consistent in their around 20 ppg. They may abberate from that occasionally, but not by much either way. If Allen can play well in this series the Celtics will not seem to struggle offensively nearly as much as they have so far in the playoffs. His collapse really is the reason the Atlanta and Cleveland series both went 7 games. Not surprisingly, the series he had 2 good games was the 6 game Detroit series; a much tougher team that either Atlanta or Cleveland. He makes a huge difference in their offensive productivity. His outside shooting opens up the mid-range game for PP, the driving lanes for Rondo, and the box for KG. Without it, teams can sag on defense and it makes them much more stagnant offensively. If he shoots well, the Celts are very tough to beat.
The advantage I keep hearing for the Lakers is Kobe. Everyone keeps saying that he is the determining factor. He is what tips the scales in the Lakers favor. I remember watching MJ in his prime. Kobe is not MJ, but he is as close as we have had since then. He is the only player since MJ retired (from the Bulls the 2nd time) that has shown periods that he can completely dictate the outcome of a game. That was very apparent in the San Antonio series, especially in games 1 and 5. San Antonio is a great defensive team, so that may be a decent barometer of how he can play against Boston, but whether he will or not is another question. With all of the defensive and Ray Allen talk, I think that is the biggest factor in this series. Will Kobe absolutely take over like he did against San Antonio, or won't he?
I think he will. Lakers in 6.
I have heard so many commentators give the series to the Lakers without much hesitation, but I think there is a need to pause before making a choice. I am not saying I disagree with their pick, but I think people have become disillusioned by the Celtics performance in the playoffs and forget the success they have had all year. 66 wins is no joke. They are a phenomenal defensive team. They are not merely good or great, but they are very special when it comes down to what they can do defensively. And if the past 17 years have shown us anything, it is that defensive teams fare very well in the whole winning championships thing. The Celtics' defensive numbers match up much more favorably with those of the champions since 1991 than do the Lakers. And when I say much, I mean much. I think people become enamored with great offenses and expect them to accomplish more than they are capable of (i.e Phoenix Suns). Having said that, I think the Lakers have shown they can play defense when necessary too, although they proved it against a sporadic offense at best in San Antonio.
One other quick point. The collapse of Ray Allen in the playoffs has been incredible. He is the wildcard for them. PP and KG are both consistent in their around 20 ppg. They may abberate from that occasionally, but not by much either way. If Allen can play well in this series the Celtics will not seem to struggle offensively nearly as much as they have so far in the playoffs. His collapse really is the reason the Atlanta and Cleveland series both went 7 games. Not surprisingly, the series he had 2 good games was the 6 game Detroit series; a much tougher team that either Atlanta or Cleveland. He makes a huge difference in their offensive productivity. His outside shooting opens up the mid-range game for PP, the driving lanes for Rondo, and the box for KG. Without it, teams can sag on defense and it makes them much more stagnant offensively. If he shoots well, the Celts are very tough to beat.
The advantage I keep hearing for the Lakers is Kobe. Everyone keeps saying that he is the determining factor. He is what tips the scales in the Lakers favor. I remember watching MJ in his prime. Kobe is not MJ, but he is as close as we have had since then. He is the only player since MJ retired (from the Bulls the 2nd time) that has shown periods that he can completely dictate the outcome of a game. That was very apparent in the San Antonio series, especially in games 1 and 5. San Antonio is a great defensive team, so that may be a decent barometer of how he can play against Boston, but whether he will or not is another question. With all of the defensive and Ray Allen talk, I think that is the biggest factor in this series. Will Kobe absolutely take over like he did against San Antonio, or won't he?
I think he will. Lakers in 6.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)