nfreeman

If you like Wes Anderson, I recommend "Royal Tenenbaums." I was one of the Mad-Max-was-just-OK group (there were only a few of us, IIRC). My top 4 action movies of all time: 1. The Terminator (the first one) 2. Speed 3. Broken Arrow 4. Total Recall (the one with Arnold) Of course, YMMV.

FWIW, Ken Campbell of The Hockey News was on Hockey Hotline (no longer with Kevin Sylvester) today and reported that GMTM tried to trade for Stamkos last summer. He also said that it's pretty certain that Stamkos is leaving TB, and that he didn't think Stamkos would go to Toronto. Campbell said the most likely destination is Detroit. If true (and I think Campbell is OK, but just OK), I think that means it's pretty likely that GMTM takes a respectable swing at Stammer this summer in free agency. Boom!

WC -- How long is the internship for? And is it full-time? If it's full-time and for an appreciable period of time (6 months or more) I would recommend taking the internship unless you have a better offer elsewhere. The internship is a great opportunity to get in front of the people you want to work for and show them that you can be an asset to the company if and when they're ready to hire an entry-level person for a regular position.

MODO -- very glad you're here, and very sorry about your team. These things tend to go in cycles, though -- they'll be back.

We've all got our issues. For example, I am no longer capable of walking anywhere alone for more than 2 minutes unless I am listening to a podcast.

Speaking of the Surface: I just pulled the trigger on a Surface Pro 3. I should be receiving it tomorrow. I'm pretty psyched -- a friend of mine has one and loves it. My primary needs are (i) having a tablet to use around the house for email, internet, netflix, etc. and (ii) having the tablet "flex" into a laptop when I travel and want to work while traveling (which is pretty frequently during the summer). I wanted a Windows product because my work system is 100% windows-based, and my understanding is that the Surface will integrate very well with my work system. I sprung for the i7 CPU, which comes with 8 GB of RAM, so I'm cautiously optimistic that I'll get 3-5 years out of it before it ages out. I saved a good bit of cash by getting it on ebay, which carries its own special set of risks. I've had good luck buying tablets and laptops on ebay previously, so I'm not that concerned, but of course anything can happen. I'll report back once I've gotten it set up.

Definitely. Borderline nutcase. And I think you're right that the audience is meant to like Jimmy more than Chuck. I just take issue with the "Jimmy's good/Chuck is bad" theme that has sprung up around here. I agree that Chuck doesn't think Jimmy should be practicing law, but not that he's taken steps designed to retard his progress. Although keeping Jimmy out of HHM undoubtedly had the effect of retarding his progress, that, IMHO, was not Chuck's purpose in doing so -- his purpose was to protect HHM. What other affirmative steps has Chuck taken to retard Jimmy's progress? Let's just say what happens in the NF casino...

Chuck may have acted in a two-faced manner with Jimmy, but that isn't "sabotaging" Jimmy's legal career. Jimmy was at all times free to build a legal career -- just not at Chuck's firm. (OTOH, Jimmy forging documents to harm Chuck's client and cause Chuck to lose the client absolutely was "sabotage.") Jimmy's working hard to get his law degree and Kim's exile have nothing to do with any alleged sabotage -- not sure how those are relevant. Is Chuck a tight-ass? Should he treat Jimmy with more kindness and familial affection? Absolutely. But protecting HHR from his destructive little brother, isn't the same as "sabotaging" Jimmy -- even if the effects of protecting HHR were detrimental to Jimmy. We all know guys like Jimmy -- i.e. guys who are loyal and whose hearts are usually in the right place, but who continually screw things up for themselves AND for the people around them. They are the guys who crack wise to the cop who's pulled over the car with everyone out for a night on the town, resulting in everyone getting arrested, or the guys who shoplift, also resulting in everyone getting arrested, or the guys who start a fight at a party held by a rival school, resulting in beatdowns/arrests, etc. They're fun, and they'll get out of bed in the middle of a snowy night to pick you up if your car breaks down -- but they'll also keep taking risks with your assets, and you'll end up worse off, and they never learn.

How, exactly, did Chuck try to sabotage Jimmy's legal career? By not wanting Jimmy to practice law at HHM? Am I forgetting something? As for being willing to send Jimmy to jail, we don't know that he would've taken it that far, although it's certainly possible.

Yes -- she knew (or, more accurately, she believed) he did it. That is what I meant about her being compromised. OTOH, it's a serious accusation -- presumably a felony -- and as a lawyer she knows that Jimmy can't, and shouldn't, be convicted without evidence. Once again Jimmy has put her in a bad position. If she resigns from the Mesa Verde representation and Chuck pursues legal action against Jimmy, she looks guilty by association. If she doesn't resign, she's swallowed a big unethical poop sandwich.

Yes indeedly -- for both Jimmy and Mike (with the good Samaritan getting killed after the truck hijacking). This was maybe the central theme of BB. What conniving and manipulation? I'm with Robvy on this. Chuck hasn't screwed Jimmy. Chuck built up a great firm and knows that Jimmy is a corner-cutting agent of destruction, so he didn't want Jimmy in a position where he could harm the firm (which, let's remember, employs a lot of people other than Chuck). Chuck was willing to pay Jimmy a referral fee for bringing the nursing home case to HHM, but he didn't want Jimmy working for HHM as a lawyer. That's not screwing Jimmy -- it's just Chuck protecting HHM from Jimmy. For example, Chuck guessed, correctly, that Jimmy was probably breaking the client solicitation rules in signing up the individual nursing home clients, and he didn't want HHM to be associated with that kind of rule-breaking. More broadly, Chuck also didn't think that Jimmy was suited for practicing law. In retrospect it's hard to argue with that assessment. As for the scene with Chuck's wife/girlfriend -- yes, Chuck clearly resents Jimmy's easy charm. But that doesn't mean that Chuck trying to protect his firm from Jimmy is tantamount to Chuck screwing Jimmy. Regarding Kim, I agree that she's somewhat compromised albeit still walking a fine line. I think if Chuck had any solid evidence of Jimmy's forgery, Kim would've capitulated.

That GD meddling earth rapist buffoon.

I think it was Mike Harrington last year. Has anyone ever seen PAFan in the same room as Mike Harrington?

TB -- I do not think Hillary would be getting the level of superdelegates she is getting if she were losing. I also think it's fair to say that she'll probably win the nomination, and when she does that it will be the correct democratic result. (I also think neither Sanders nor his supporters have any idea how the world works, but that's another conversation.) However, I think the fact that she is getting *this* many superdelegates, and that they are all that is standing between her and a brokered convention at the same time she under an intense FBI investigation and possibly an indictment, smells unavoidably like the Clintons. Dissatisfaction and suspicion are inevitable.

Panarin could be a Zetterberg/Datsyuk level find for Chicago.

That sounds awfully confident in light of how ineffective he was for pretty much the entire season. Still, I appreciate the team support.

I agree that the superdelegate mass defection is not going to happen. However, the fact that the superdelegates are needed to close it out for her makes the griping about party elders determining the outcome understandable IMHO. EDIT: the fact that superdelegates are needed to close it out for her, AND that a highly disproportionate share of the superdelegates are supporting her, makes it understandable IMHO.

But isn't it true that if all of Clinton's superdelegates switched to Bernie, Bernie would have more delegates?

I just think 2 Canadian sports radio yobs speculating about PK being traded is not credible. More directly: there is NFW the Habs are trading PK. But if they were, and if the Sabres ended up with #3 overall, I would trade that pick for PK in a heartbeat, and there aren't many assets that the Sabres have that I would refuse to include as sweeteners.

The 2nd trade is pretty interesting, but the first is at least as...optimistic as my proposal for Lindholm was.

No question that injury risk is a real concern. I'd like to see another season of him starting to evaluate whether he's a guy who can't stay healthy. But I saw him throw quite a few great passes last year, and when he scrambled, I saw things I haven't seen from anyone since pre-incarceration Michael Vick. I'm not throwing that away in favor of another rookie or journeyman until there's another season of data to evaluate.

Great stuff, WC. These GDTs are another reason the future looks bright. And 19-13-7 in their last 39 games means that if they win out, they will finish the 2nd half of the season above DeLuca .500. Yes please.

I like TT and think he has a ton of potential.

I found out earlier this week that a good friend from high school, with whom I'd lost touch many years ago, died suddenly of a heart attack last week. Taken at age 48, leaving his wife and 3 kids. I haven't seen or spoken with him in 20+ years, but I still feel a sense of loss.

Burning a year of his ELC seems highly ill-considered.