It's that magical time of the week again, when I get to force myself to sit down, make my picks, and see what else comes out in the process. Today, there is the unique situation that is the NBA lockout (A.K.A. the lockout that nobody ever heard of or cared about). It appears that the NBA lockout is coming to an end shortly, and so we're left to determine what that means to us. For the vast majority of sports fans it will mean very little, and that is a huge indicator of how dramatically David Stern misplayed his hand here. The owners well very vocal about their willingness to miss an entire season if need be, yet here they are running back to the table hoping to not miss one regular season game. Why would that be? I would posit that it is because the owners suddenly realized that they were having the proverbial lockout ... about which nobody cared.
To that end, if very few fans were legitimately sad about the lockout, how many could they expect to come back after a year. Hockey has experienced a resurgence recently, years after they canceled their own season via lockout, but Hockey has the same core fans it always had. The NBA has no such luck. Much of their boom in popularity in the 1990s came from general sports fans who were attracted to watching the greatest of all time. The lockout in 1999 gave them a convenient excuse to move on to something else ... baseball, football ... and only recently have some of those fans come back. Now, they see little reason to stick, and with the NFL having resolved their own labor impasse, with baseball rolling along, why would they?
But in the midst of all of this I listened to an interview with Billy Hunter, one in which Hunter misspoke several times, and generally made himself sound like a fool. Still, one concept jumped out at me. Hunter stated rather clearly that the plight of his players was like the plight of "everyman" in that "the MAN" was trying to arbitrarily cut their income. Hunter implied that this wasn't legal, was practically "un-American," and that it shouldn't be allowed to happen.
Now, those of you who know me well know that I try to keep my personal life out of this blog, but in this situation I can't help myself. For anyone working in the social service field right now in the state of Indiana what Hunter has said is downright hysterical. No matter how bad Hunter and his cronies feel David Stern is, I can point my fingers at someone much more Machiavellian in his actions, and much more successful. Ladies and Gentlemen, Director of the Department of Children Services for the State of Indiana: Jim Payne
Now, to understand the man, in a short moment, you just need to understand what he did with his budget this year. Director Payne took the budget that Mitch Daniels gave him, then handed it back and said "give me 30% less." He then proceeded to whip all his regional directors into shape to spend even less than that depreciated budget. Then he took the amount saved, and took THAT out of their budget for next year. He has sent memos out threatening discipline for case workers who place in certain programs. This is all fact.
Now, if Indiana was struggling financially this could be expected. This man, and his Governor, are, after all, hard core fiscal conservatives, the kind who cut indiscriminately in order to get the budget right. But, as Mitch is all too happy to report, our state is currently running a $1.2 billion surplus. Hold on, let's look at that with the zeros: $1,200,000,000. So these cuts are on top of that surplus. And when Director Payne sent out his rates for next year, after all this success and savings, he still cut rates by an average of 35-40% next year. Some agencies took a hit of as high as 50% of their rates; the smallest hits were in the 20-25% range. Of course, they can do this because they are the government, and they make the rules. It is estimated that over 80% of agencies will be unable to survive these cuts, and that will lead to a huge spike in unemployment across the state. Of course they don't care, because this fits Mitch's fairy tail: I came to Indiana, I turned the state into a money maker, I left with a great budget on the books.
So to Billy Hunter, I'd like to say this: go to Hell. You think that the NBA owners are being fascist for asking for 3% more in all basketball related income to go to their end? It still ends up with your union being the highest paid union, per person, in the WORLD. Higher than MLB, NFL, or any other sporting unions. Guess what? If they cut the percentage of income guaranteed to the players by 50% your players would still be millionaires if they were smart. The league minimum wage right now? For a rookie (0 years experience) $473,604. For a year. I'm not going to broadcast my salary over the internet, but let's just say it would take me well over a decade to be able to earn that much money. The more you complain about this, and try to make it seem like you're fighting the good fight for "everyman" the more you seem completely out of touch and make me root for ownership. Even if they are suggesting cuts it's nowhere near the type of draconian cuts that I'm dealing with right now. Get a reality check you jack-ass, and get back to playing basketball for the fifteen fans who still give a damn.
On to the picks:
Last Week Against the Spread: 8-4-1
Last Week Straight Up: 10-3
Season Against the Spread: 52-46-5
Season Straight Up: 71-32
EARLY GAMES
Indianapolis (+9) over Tennessee - Is there anyway this line should actually be this high? Both teams got crushed last week, and while the Colts looked much worse they are also the unquestioned worst team out of these two and were playing the better team. A nine point spread? ESPN's insider has the game at a six point spread, but if I've got to pick on the nine point line I'll take the Colts to cover based on this logic: if Jim Caldwell lays another egg he might be fired before he gets a chance to make it to week nine. I'll take the Titans to win based on this logic: they are the better team, and much like Houston last week, they now face a MUST WIN game if they want to stay alive in the playoff hunt. I just can't see the Colts, who played a number of teams tough, getting killed in this one.
Saints (-14) over St. Louis - If Dallas could cover a large spread against St. Louis, and if New Orleans continues to move along at a good clip like last week, this shouldn't be a problem, even considering the game is on the road.
Giants (-10) over Miami - Miami almost blew the "Suck for Luck" sweepstakes last week; they won't make the same mistake twice. In other news, Tony Sporano's house is reportedly up for sale. I'm a little surprised it wasn't up for sale this past summer when ownership was aggressively courting Jim Harbaugh.
Panthers (-4) over VikQueens - Carolina may, in fact, be this year's good bad team. Good enough to beat the bad teams, bad enough to lose to all the good teams. Time will tell, but if they are this game should be easy.
Ravens (-13) over Arizona - Only because it's Arizona (a bad team) coming east. Otherwise I'd go the other way to punish the Ravens for that no-show against Jacksonville. This line is even higher, but I need Flacco to have a great game this week because Aaron Rodgers is on his bye week ... so Flacco is my starting QB in fantasy land. I think that I should still be able to start Rodgers and get 30 points even on his bye: they guy has been so money he should be able to do that as well, right?
Texans (-10) over Jags - I don't like this line at all; it's like they are just trying to screw with me. On the one hand, you've got Jacksonville just coming off of not just covering the spread against Baltimore, but winning the game. Then you've got Houston, coming off a thrashing of Tennessee, but due for a classic Texans let down game. It seems like the Jags will cover this spread, but I can't take Blaine Gabbert on the road, even if he is getting ten points.
LATE GAMES
Buffalo (-6) over Washington - Rested Bills going against a flailing Redskins team ... I like the Bills. Also, the Bills should be pissed because they are the "home" team playing in Toronto. Win it for the City of Buffalo, eh?
Detroit (-3) over Denver - two straight losses, the gloss is off a little, and the scheduling Gods deliver Tebowmania. I think Detroit will be praising Jesus after this win. I wonder if Tim will be doing the same? Also, if Knowshon Moreno has a breakout game I might hunt him down personally to ask him why he waited until I cut him, after a few years of having him on my team, to decide he cares. I promise if I held on to him in my fantasy league that McGahee never hurts his hand.
New England (-3) over Pittsburgh - very quietly the Steelers are 5-2, after looking left for dead at the start of this year. This game will go a long way towards determining if they are the team I predicted them to be (tough, veteran, able to take advantage of the lockout shortened off season) or the team that Baltimore exposed week one. Sitting here right now I'm going to say New England will win by a TD, but Pittsburgh will come out and will get the 6 wins in the second half they'll need to win the division.
San Francisco (-9) over Cleveland - did anyone else look at the box score from last week's Browns game and ask "really? Nine total points?" I mean, when the Ravens and Steelers play they get more than that. That wasn't good defense. That was just really bad football.
Cincinnati (-1) over Seattle - Please get Tavaris back on the field. Football Jesus (Whitehurst) emphatically answered "YES!" to the question "is it possible that Tavaris Jackson was really the best option for this team at QB?"
SUNDAY NIGHT
Dallas (+4) over Philadelphia - fresh off a bye week, Vick's nightmare continues. I like DeMarco Murray, and if the Cowboys are smart they'll ride him hard to get Romo's confidence back.
San Diego (-4) over Kansas City - The Chiefs got lucky last week by catching a reeling Raiders team. No such luck this week: they get a pissed off Chargers team instead.
