ThinkProgress Logo

Culture

Kobe and Jordan Redux

Bill Simmons:

If he made an unusually splendid play and glanced into the stands for approval, entire sections would swoon. Command of the room. That’s what Jordan had. Kobe doesn’t have it, and he never had it. That will always be the difference between them.

To repeat myself this quest to define the Jordan/Kobe difference in terms of ineffable qualities is silly. Both Jordan and Kobe are shooting guards who won many championships playing for teams coached by Phil Jackson. But Jordan’s brass-tacks basketball performance was much better:

When Kobe Bryant was 21, he put up 22.5 points, 6.3 rebounds, and 4.9 assists per game. Jordan got 6.5 rebounds, offered 5.9 assists, and scored 28.2 points. And not because he was shooting more, because he was shooting better with a TS% of .592 to Kobe’s .546. In Kobe’s most efficient scoring season, he put up a .580—worse than Jordan’s rookie year. Jordan did better than that in six different seasons, and maxed out at .614 in the 1988-89 season. In Kobe’s most prolific scoring season he got 31.1 points, in Jordan’s most prolific season he got 33.4 points per game. Jordan consistently snagged more rebounds and dished out more assists.

Jordan was a better rebounder and better passer, a more efficient scorer who also scored more total points. You don’t need to reach for intangibles to see the difference.

Politics

Cheney endorses effort to repeal DADT: ‘It strikes me that it’s time to reconsider the policy.’

On ABC’s This Week today, former Vice President Cheney threw his support behind President Obama’s efforts to change the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, saying that “things have changed significantly” since the discriminatory policy was first put in place. Cheney said that it’s “time to reconsider the policy”:

KARL: And you think that’s a good thing? I mean, is it time to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military?

CHENEY: Well, I think the society has moved on. I think it’s partly a generational question. I say I’m reluctant to second-guess the military in this regard because they’re the ones who have got to make the judgment about how these policies affect the military capability of our, of our units. And that first requirement that you have to look at all the time is whether they’re still capable of achieving their mission and does the policy change i.e. putting gays in the force, affect their ability to perform their mission. When the chiefs come forward and say we think we can do it, then it strikes me that it’s time to reconsider the policy. And I think Admiral Mullen’s said that.

Watch it:

Cheney’s argument that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen’s statement that repealing the policy is “the right thing to do” because it is an expression from the military leadership that they “can do it” puts him in stark contrast with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). After Mullen announced his personal support for repeal, McCain insisted that the opinion of the top uniformed officer in the military’s doesn’t represent “the views of military leaders.” Additionally, Cheney’s endorsement of the policy change isn’t entirely surprising. After the Bush administration left office, Cheney revealed that he supported same-sex marriage on the state level.

Update

On CNN today, National Security Adviser Jim Jones, a retired Marine general, said that “times have changed” and “young men and women who wish to serve their country should not have to lie in order to do that.”

Yglesias

Vote/Seats Ratio

The UK’s two-and-a-half party system combined with first-past-the-post voting means that the share of the votes parties receive in parliamentary elections can diverge substantially from their share of the seats. Renard Sexton at 538 sums up the recent history of how this works:

uk-crit4

The tendency is for the party that gets the biggest “boost” from the system to also be the party that actually won the most votes, which I suppose mutes legitimacy concerns.

Climate Progress

Launching the Climate Science Project (with your help)

Part 1: Why increasing CO2 is a significant problem

I am launching the Climate Science Project — and I need your help.

At the suggestion of journalists, commenters, and others, I am going to assemble the best explanations of different aspects of climate science and post them.  Or repost them, in this case.  Then I’ll create an overview post for the sidebar that organizes them.

So I’m hoping you’ll help me identify the best articles, blog posts, videos, and the like on all areas of climate science from attribution to water vapor feedback (strangely, there are no “z” words in climate glossaries).  It doesn’t matter if the subject matter overlaps.  People need to hear and see things many times from different perspectives.

For instance, if you want a very good and uber-credible written primer on the science, I would suggest, “Understanding and Responding to Climate Change:  Highlights of National Academies Reports 2008.” If you want to understand why scientists are so certain that CO2 is such a big driver of our climate, you should watch Richard Alley’s lively talk AGU video, explains “The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth’s Climate History.”

UPDATE:  Just to be clear, the explanations I’m looking for are not inherently aimed at one audience.  Obviously, my primary interest is explain things to my readers, but I am also interested in explanations for a more general audience.  Basically, I’m looking for the best stuff.

For “an easy-to-understand explanation for why increasing CO2 is a significant problem,” NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt has an excellent 2007 post, which I re-reprint below:

Read more

Yglesias

The Last Days of the Payphone

Who uses payphones anymore? The New York Times stakes one out to find out and the results make for great weekend feature reading. The phone they picked is across the street from the Criminal Court in Queens so of course that gets you a certain demographic skew.

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up