Jump to content

Dbeasy

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    11507
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dbeasy

  1. So starting a year and a half ago, I made a commitment to get my golf game back to better than it was in the 2000-2010 years. I was an 8 HC with below average distance and consistency. Today I'm an 18. Ouch. My plan has three main goals in support of my single HC objective: a) fix my major swing flaw, b) improve my distance signficantly, and c) fix putting/chipping which has always been weak. My plan to do that is to a) play and practice more often, b) get better and more golf instruction, c) get better clubs. So far, I've made progress on all areas, but am not quite there: a) Swing flaw - I'd take deep divots and hit fat on occassion. I've made pretty good progress on this and now have a solid inside out swing with a draw and a better divot. However I have to solve a draw that keeps turning into a hook. I achieved this through primarily practice and trying things. For the draw/hook, I'm now working with an in-person instructor and online videos. I think I'm close. b) Distance - Watching videos and practicing. I've gained iron distance but have screwed up my woods. In the process of fixing that via videos and in-person instruction. I still have a long way to go. I'm still a short hitter, probably partially because of my age. c) Clubs - I've hit many types of clubs and am not quite sure which direction to head. I have a fairly slow swing speed still, but I like the feel of thinner faced irons. I'm leaning towards Player Distance irons. Under consideration are Ping i530, Titleist T150 or T200, Taylor Made P790, Mizuno JPS925 Hot Metal Pro, Callaway Apex Ai200, Mizuno MP-245, Srixon Zi4/5, or Callaway Elite. Does anyone have any opinions on these or other irons for someone in my situation? I've hit all of these and they all are good and better than my old Callaway X-18s. I'm also trying to figure out shaft. I'm old (60) but have always resisted graphite shafts for irons. Finally, I used to hit 2 irons until they became impossible to find, and I'm unhappy to find that 3 irons are no longer available. I have no idea what to replace a 3i with.
  2. that's what I'm using. It's great.
  3. I didn't watch the video but this sounds ridiculous. The Mavs could have easily shipped Luka to Miami directly, unless there is some sort of salary cap strange issue.
  4. Adelsons are purposely tanking the Mavs because the Texas legislature rejected their gambling casino bid. They will screw up the franchise so badly that the nba will approve a move to Vegas, or the Texas legislature in 2027 will finally approve their casino. Giving Luka to the Lakers helps nba numbers so they will let it all happen. The really shocking statement in there is that the Adelsons have stated they could care less about basketball. They did this to get a casino in Texas. Ugh. If you want to take this further, ask why Cuban would sell to them and why the NBA would allow themselves to get strong-armed like this? Just my speculation, but anyone who has significant gambling assets must have ties to organized crime, which can make things very uncomfortable for anyone who stands in their way. Why those tactics didn’t bring the Texas legislature under control isn’t clear.
  5. Don’t know if someone is creating a 2025 thread. Besides the indoor simulator, I’m now going down the rabbit hole of internet video golf instruction. Been at it for two weeks and it’s potentially a game changer. At the very least, i understand the golf swing 50x better than before. I’ve been playing for 50 years but never really sat down and understood the true mechanics of what causes a golf ball to do certain things. I finally do now. I’m kicking myself for not taking the time to figure this out 49 years ago.
  6. Cross posting here because it fills in some details the board hasn’t fully addressed. This totally makes sense now, especially “why Lakers?” It’s a bribe for the nba to step aside https://x.com/loewylawfirm/status/1886211634097746331?s=46&t=1xhM83oX4_0pVKdmxhpexA
  7. As Troy Aikman mentioned last week, having a strong running game requires commitment and a certain attitude, including having offensive linemen who have a bit of a nasty streak to them. That advice is pretty consistent with what we’ve seen in the past at Texas and elsewhere. I hope Texas is weighing that heavily for its OL recruiting.
  8. This analysis of the deal is pretty compelling. It is consistent with some of the views here on surly. It answers the one question I couldn’t really figure out. Why give Luka to the Lakers? According to this analysis, it’s so the NBA won’t interfere with the tanking or the move to Vegas. I really think this is what’s really going on. https://x.com/loewylawfirm/status/1886211634097746331?s=46&t=1xhM83oX4_0pVKdmxhpexA
  9. Ok how about this. It’s all an elaborate ruse to fleece AD from the Lakers and Luka signs with Dallas in the offseason.
  10. It’s not the worst trade in NBA history. It’s the worst trade in organized sports history.
  11. I don’t understand your point. Who is Dallas and who are the Lakers here? Because Dallas got NOTHING like what OKC got. And Luka is a bigger star than George. Who cares if the Lakers acquire a guy who underperforms. We are talking about Dallas making a terrible decision, because they could have gotten 3-5x more from some other teams.
  12. Maybe Luka really really liked massage parlors.
  13. SA wouldn’t trade their star but I bet they would have traded multiple first round draft choices.
  14. He will just say Anthony Davis is the only person they wanted, and that’s all they could get for Luka from the Lakers.
  15. When the Mavs hired Nico I thought it was the dumbest decision I’d ever seen, because his background was in a completely different business. He knew nothing about running a basketball franchise. And then when he traded for Kyrie, it reinforced that belief because of the overlap with Luka and his current status in the league. But then that move was great, in retrospect, and everyother move he made was great too, and I assumed he must know a lot more than what his position would imply. This move throws all of it out the window. There has to be more to the story, or he was incredibly lucky with his previous moves that looked bad working out great.
  16. Whether each team is better or not the key issue. The key here is that the Lakers acquired an extremely valuable asset for next to nothing. Dallas could have gotten so much more franchise help than they got. To add to crazy conspiracy theories, it sure shines a light on the Mavericks not getting a TV deal done for coverage outside of Dallas.
  17. Oh my god. I just assumed he did this because kidd was complaining about something.
  18. l’ve always been a spurs fan first and Mavs second except for 2011, but this move makes me feel really sorry for Mavs fans and not excited that it should benefit the spurs slightly by taking one team out of the long term race for the top of the West.
  19. Cuban retaining 28% of the franchise was very likely a requirement by the Adelsons’s, not Cuban’s desire. Most private equity deals require that. First, it ensures the seller remains cooperative and helpful after the deal closes, but more importantly it reduces the amount of money required to fund the deal, raising the return on equity down the line once the entity sells again in the future.
  20. And to everyone who believes this mavericks team will play better than the one with Luka, 90% of nba games are won down the stretch with clutch shots by superstars. And guess what? There are only about 4-5 teams that have that type of superstar who can do it. The Mavs until last night were one. They will never sniff the finals ever again during our lifetime.
  21. Ha. Damn Apple autocorrect.
  22. Ok so I already posted what would have to be true in order for this trade to not be the worst in sports history. Now let’s look at this from a conspiracy theory view. Why did Cuban sell the franchise to such a questionable buyer? One reason. They offered the most money. But did they? Cuban sold 72% for $3.5b. Let’s say it was a 15% premium over other bids, or $500m more than any other bid. That is not chump change to a guy worth probably around $5-6B. But the Adelsons tank the franchise, requiring a major injection of capital at a substantially lower valuation. Cuban can’t put more money in and gets diluted down in ownership even further. The Adelsons essentially “get back” some of the extra premium they paid over other bids. Cuban gets screwed. Meanwhile, the Adelsons who love the Lakers and have a suite, have some sort of nefarious back room deal with the Lakers that may or may not have a Vega mob element, to deliver a title to the Lakers while the Mavs end up as a Vegas franchise. Put on your tin foil hats
  23. I typed out a long write-up about how this was the worst trade in the history of organized sports, but deleted it. I still think it probably will be, and it's obvious. But instead of just piling on with everyone else, I tried to step back and think about this from the Mavs perspective and come up with some sort of rationale that isn't a conspiracy theory revolving around moving the franchise to Vegas. It's the only way to keep my sanity. For this trade to make sense from the Mavs perspective, the following must be true: 1. The Mavs believe Anthony Davis was the only player out there who could get them to the title in the near term, hence why he wasn't shopped to other teams. (maybe?). 2. The Mavs believe with Anthony Davis they will get to the finals this year and can win it. (I'm skeptical). 3. Luka was a problem, not only because of the cost of the extension, but also maybe he was not going to sign, or was difficult to deal with, or some other reason. (maybe?) 4. The team was going to have to be blown up next year because of the cost of Kyrie and Luka contracts. (maybe). 5. The approach of using two superstar point guards was good enough to make the finals but not good enough to win the title (probably true). 6. This is all they could get out of the Lakers (no way; this is bullshit; if pressed the Lakers would have caved for 2-3 #1 picks). If all six of these are not true, this is the worst trade in the history of sports.
  24. I’m sorry were you saying something?
×
×
  • Create New...