The snowplow driver calling himself Dogg has been ticking off a lot of people.
Mark Hussey, who plows the streets of Lowell, Mass., for a private contractor, made a video of himself as he buried cars in the white stuff and blocked driveways by pushing back the snow shoveled off of them. The worst part: He's loving every minute of it.
The video, which he posted on YouTube, has caught the attention of the winter-weary Web?and confirmed some people?s fears that snowplow drivers make their lives more difficult on purpose, leaving the roads clear, but everyone else pretty much stuck.
Hussey filmed himself through the windshield of his snowplow after a Feb. 10 storm dropped two feet of snow on the area. The local Fox 25 News station interviewed the 47-year-old, whose video showed the joy he took in doing his job just a little too aggressively.
"Oh, I'm sorry, was your car down there?" Dogg is heard at one point as he buries one sedan in snow. "You want to find your car? You come see me, I'll let you know where your car is."
Needless to say, residents are not amused. Al Bedard, who was digging out in Dogg's wake, told the Fox station, "It's very aggravating. You want to throw a shovel at him. It's very aggravating,"
Dogg claims he?s just doing his job, which is to widen the streets. And there's no doubt he enjoys it.
He says on his video, ?If you?re plowing, I know you?re not having as much fun as I am.?
A fossilized fungus gnat from Driftwood Canyon, Canada. The fly is only a few millimeters long.
By Stephanie Pappas LiveScience
Fifty million years ago, cool temperatures predominated in western Canada. But new research finds that species in the region were once as diverse as in a modern tropical rain forest.
The reason, according to the new study, is that the temperate regions of the globe once lacked seasons, just as the tropics do today. The findings suggest that although the incredible wealth of life in the modern tropics seems like an outlier now, it is actually the rest of the world that's gone wonky.
"We're living in a time of truncated global biodiversity," study researcher S. Bruce Archibald, a paleontologist at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia told LiveScience.
Seasons and diversity The study looked at a type of diversity dubbed "beta diversity." This is the difference in species from place to place. Consider a patch of African savanna where zebras, lions and wildebeests live. Now compare that with an area of tropical rain forest that's home to howler monkeys, centipedes and poison dart frogs.
In this simplified example, each area is home to only three species, so they are equal in what is called "alpha diversity," or species richness in a certain spot. But the beta diversity between this hypothetical savanna and the rain forest is high ? not a single species overlaps. [Image Gallery: Borneo's Quirky Species]
The tropics are known for high alpha diversity, with many species sharing space. But mountainous tropical regions also have very high beta diversity. Two neighboring valleys, separated by only a mile and a mountain ridge, might look like entirely different ecosystems. In temperate zones, mountainous regions tend to have much less beta diversity.
In the 1960s, an ecologist named Daniel Janzen of the University of Pennsylvania came up with a theory to explain why the mountainous tropics were so high in beta diversity. The key was seasonality. In the tropics, temperatures hold fairly steady year-round. A beetle that lives in Valley A may try to climb the slope out of its habitat, but it will soon hit high mountain passes with temperatures its body can't handle and die before reaching Valley B. Thus, ecosystems are effectively walled off from one another. (Isolation is a strong driver of evolution. Similar geographical and ecological barriers could have caused dinosaur diversity to explode about 75 million years ago.)
In temperate zones, seasons cause temperatures to vary at different elevations considerably. A beetle trying to reach the next valley over in the Rockies will likely be able to find some time of year when the mountain passes aren't too cold or too hot to make the journey.
Ancient diversity These days, temperate climes and seasons tend to go hand-in-hand. But that wasn't always the case. During the Eocene period about 50 million years ago, Earth's climate was warmer on average, but also less seasonal. Tropics-style year-round stability stretched all the way to the Arctic.
In what is now British Columbia, high elevations meant temperatures were cool, not far off from Vancouver's average annual temperatures today. But those cool temperatures held steady throughout the year. This climate history gave Archibald and his colleagues a chance to test Janzen's theory outside the tropics.
The idea, Archibald said, is that modern-day diversity patterns could be an unusual blip in Earth's history.
"Maybe the question isn't why there are a whole lot of species in the tropics," Archibald said. "Maybe the question is, 'Why are there so few outside of it?'"
Fortunately, British Columbia in the Eocene was dotted with mud-bottomed lakes, which happen to preserve insect fossils in amazing detail. The researchers sampled multiple sites in the region and analyzed more than 700 insect fossils, determining their species. [Image Gallery: Intricate Fossil Insects]
The result was an ancient insect "who's who," revealing what creepy-crawlies lived where, and how much diversity varied from spot to spot ? which turned out to be a lot.
"The overwhelming result was that these communities differed tremendously from site to site," Archibald said.
That confirms Janzen's hypothesis that it's a lack of seasonality, not latitude or some other factor, that drives beta diversity, he said. What's more, it's more evidence that global biodiversity has dropped since the Eocene, with increased seasonality as the likely culprit.
The research is basic and focused on reconstructing the past. But the findings have implications for the future, Archibald said.
"We're obviously entering a time now when patterns of climate are changing and they're changing right around us. We see those effects every day, so it's very important for us to understand how differing climates affect natural communities and species diversity," Archibald said. "We need to have a better grip on that relationship going forward."
Follow Stephanie Pappas on Twitter @sipappas?or LiveScience @livescience. We're also on Facebook?andGoogle+.
Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
At the request of the participants ? Canada, Japan, and the European Union ? the Appellate Body Division in these appellate proceedings has decided to open the oral hearing to public observation by WTO?Members and the general public via simultaneous closed-circuit television broadcast to a separate viewing room. The oral hearing will take place on Thursday, 14 March and Friday, 15?March 2013.
In the light of limited seating capacity, the places reserved for the public will be allocated on a first come, first served basis upon receipt of the completed registration form. Completed forms should be sent by e?mail only to the following address: ABRegistration@wto.org. Applications will be accepted until 5?p.m., Geneva time, Tuesday, 5 March 2013. Those to whom seats have been allocated will be advised by e-mail by Friday, 7 March 2013, at which time further information regarding the hearing will be provided. Those attending will need to present valid identification (official photo ID) to access the viewing room. Please note that no audio/video recording will be permitted. Portable phones and other such devices must be switched off throughout the hearing. Security checks may delay access to the viewing room.
The WTO cannot offer any support, including financial, for accommodation, flight arrangements and visas.
ONLY THOSE WITH RESERVED SEATS WILL BE ADMITTED.
>?Registration form
RSS news feeds
>?Problems viewing this page?
Please contact webmaster@wto.org giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.
If you missed Part 1 of the Simmons-Lowe Trade Deadline E-mail Exchange Fiesta (we're still working on the title), CLICK HERE. For Part 2, we picked things up in real time with time stamps and everything.
Simmons (2:07 p.m. EST): Hey Zach ? less than an hour before the deadline and our three biggest Thursday trades have been headlined by Dexter Pittman, Jordan Crawford and Bassy Telfair. Right now, I'm refreshing Twitter every 20 seconds while trying to decipher from Sekou Smith's NBA TV interview with Josh Smith whether Josh wants to get traded or not. (My final verdict: Sort of.) Oh, and I'm trying to figure out how Boston landed Crawford for Leandro Barbosa when Barbosa's left knee currently doesn't have an attached ACL. I feel like my eyeballs are going to come flying out of my head. Too much going on, only nothing's going on. Is this why people start taking Adderall?
Lowe (2:13 p.m.): Well, Atlanta and Milwaukee might take us to the deadline on Smith, and we'll probably get at least a couple of little deals that trickle in before the deadline ? right? The Pittman and Telfair deals are essentially irrelevant ? insurance policies for teams that don't really need them. The Heat cut some money from their tax bill, and the Grizz ? out a first-rounder to Cleveland, and another to Minnesota ? get a second-round pick for their troubles. I'm sure the Grizz had higher hopes for their trade exceptions, especially the $7 million-plus one they got via the Rudy Gay deal, but here we are.
Simmons (2:15 p.m.): Can't say I love what Memphis did (assuming they're done). They spent a future first-rounder to give away two decent bench guys (Ellington and Speights, both of whom play for Cleveland) to save money, then they traded Rudy Gay to save money ? um ? why did they have to make BOTH trades? Confusing. (Note: I also would have kept Jose Calderon over dealing for Prince's contract; I just think he's a better player and would have made them more interesting. They could have always found a stopgap swingman closer to the deadline. That's what Prince is at this point ? at least the Prince I've been watching these last two to three years. Maybe it's just my TV.) But wait ? you don't think Bassy Telfair is a good backup?
Lowe (2:20 p.m.):Before getting to Bassy, you're right that the scrutiny of the Rudy Gay deal should start with the pick Memphis gave the Cavaliers, and not really the Rudy trade itself. But I've covered that at length here, and the finances aren't so simple.
Back to Bassy: I don't really get the rush to give up anything of value, even just a second-rounder and player you'll never use (Hamed Haddadi), for a third point guard. John Lucas III is a shoot-first, shoot-second, shoot-third backup point guard, which can drive coaches crazy ? especially a staff that wanted Jose Calderon over the more aggressive Kyle Lowry. But third point guards are like bullpen catchers: Why give up anything to get one, since you're screwed either way if your team reaches a point at which it actually has to use that player?
Simmons (2:22 p.m.): I'm biased toward Bassy; I may have seen the three best games he's played over the past two years in person (all against the Clippers). He loves going against Chris Paul. Plays him as well as anyone. I wish I could delete the part of my brain that knows things like this.
Lowe (2:23 p.m.): What do you make of the Jordan Crawford deal? Will KG murder him this week or next week? Do you care at all?
Simmons (2:25 p.m.): I didn't mind it ? they gave up someone who currently can't walk for him. My rule with these things is that, if the contracts are equal, you always want the guy who can walk over the guy who can't walk. Crawford belongs in that Nick Young/John Lucas/Nate Robinson group of Irrationally Irrational Confidence Guys, which is a level below the true Irrational Confidence Guys (Jamal Crawford, J.R. Smith, etc.). When he's hot, you ride him. When he's not, you sit him. Of course, Doc couldn't stand coaching Robinson. So this will be interesting. I've always had a soft spot for Crawford dating back to his Xavier days ? there's always room in a 10-man rotation for someone who can catch fire NBA Jam?style, and he's one of the ultimate "no-no-no-YES!" shooters. Did you like the deal for Boston?
Lowe (2:29 p.m.): Funny you mention Young ? one league exec made this exact comparison to me just a couple of hours ago. Young was a crucial player in one pivotal playoff game last season ? Game 1 in Memphis, the Clippers' massive comeback ? and Crawford, for all his warts, may do something similar for Boston this season. His shot selection is egregious, he'll struggle to guard wing players, and the Wizards' offense has basically died when he's played the point this season. Point guard in Boston is a shared duty now, so hopefully the Celtics will never lean too heavily on Crawford in this way.
Simmons (2:33 p.m.): According to ESPN.com's Jeremy Lundblad, Jordan Crawford is one of seven players averaging an 18-5-4 per 36 minutes, joining LeBron, Kobe, Wade, Harden, Westbrook, and Manu. You know what's the most amazing thing about that stat? Jordan Crawford is averaging five assists per 36 minutes????? I don't think I've ever seen him pass. By the way, David Aldridge's ability to do a live studio show while tweeting and gathering info at the exact same time is amazing. I'm so impressed.
Lowe (2:36 p.m.): In Crawford's defense ?
1. He played limited minutes with John Wall and Nene, meaning Crawford has gotten little opportunity this season to play alongside Washington's best offensive players ? a trend that makes his on-court/off-court splits look terrible. But they are terrible, and they were last year, too.
2. He's nearly a league-average 3-point shooter this season, a big step up, and he can create a 40 percent shot off the bounce against anyone. That's valuable when the shot clock is running down. He really only takes 40 percent shots, but that's a different story. Boston could use his creativity and long-range shooting, but they have a ton of weird combo-style guards now in Crawford, Jason Terry, Avery Bradley, and Courtney Lee. At least one should be elsewhere by next year's tipoff.
3. He did make a real effort to pass more this season when the Wiz used him as a de facto point guard, but those lineups failed so miserably they almost broke the NBA.com stats database. He's putting up a career-high assist rate, as you mention. He might win a playoff game ? or, more accurately, a playoff quarter ? but he's not a player I'd really want on my team for the long haul. Washington just gave him away for nothing after benching him almost upon Wall's return, which feels a bit spiteful on the Wizards' part. Very little harm, very little foul for Boston. But don't expect much.
Simmons (2:40 p.m.): Good work, Zach. Between you and Jeremy Lundblad, I've totally talked myself into this trade and now believe it's the steal of the century. I won't even dwell on the part that Washington was soooooo desperate to get rid of him, they traded him for an expiring contract who cannot walk and won't be able to run at full speed until after his contract ends. Bring on the Crawford era! Meanwhile, we're suddenly 20 minutes away from the deadline! Where are the moves? What is happening to Josh Smith???
Lowe (2:42 p.m.): It looks like Milwaukee or nowhere. I have to admit, Milwaukee's emergence here caught me off guard.
Simmons (2:44 p.m.): And you've always been overprotective of Milwaukee because of your unabashed love for LARRY SANDERS! Serious question ? if SANDERS! got engaged to Swin Cash and they didn't invite you to the wedding, would you try to crash it anyway and risk a trespassing fine and possible jail time?
Lowe (2:45 p.m.): That would be difficult for me. I think Swin already has a restraining order after All-Star weekend.
Simmons (2:46 p.m.): If Milwaukee can land Josh Smith without giving up Jennings or SANDERS!, that would be pretty intriguing. I might not be the biggest Josh Smith fan on the planet (he's one of those guys who scares you when he's on the other team but scares you even more when he's on your own team), but I'm still one of the few who agrees with Smith that he's a max player. I had him as a second-team All-NBA forward last year. He stumbled a little this season, mainly because they didn't take care of him and he's a mild headache (and you have to take care of mild headaches before they become pounding migraines). But if you're looking at this from his point of view, the following guys are "max" players right now (or damned close): Deron Williams, Rudy Gay, Pau Gasol, Eric Gordon, Roy Hibbert, Joe Johnson, Amar'e Stoudemire, David Lee, Paul Pierce, Andrew Bynum, Carlos Boozer, Andre Iguodala.
Look at that list again. He's not a max player? JaVale McGee got $11 million a year to be someone's backup center last summer. Gerald Wallace gets $10 million a year to imitate Marvin Williams in Brooklyn. (Not a compliment.) Josh Smith can't get $16-$18 million a year? I mean ? I wouldn't pay him max money, but somebody will. That's a fact. Nobody should make fun of Josh Smith for thinking he's a max player ? in a goofy, twisted way, he TOTALLY is. Just about every good-to-great NBA starter is overpaid by 25 to 30 percent except for LeBron, who's underpaid by 400 percent.
Lowe (2:50 p.m.): Somebody is going to pay Smith the max, or very close to it, but you have to remember not all "maxes" are created equal. Harden's "max" starts about $4 million per year below Smith's potential max, though Harden's would go up if he wins the MVP this year. That obviously won't happen, but it would be hilarious, since it would trigger a cap rule upping Harden's value significantly.
Simmons (2:52 p.m.): He needs to play 20 more straight games like the one he played last night against Oklahoma City and the MVP is within reach. Just 20 straight 46-point games in which he misses six shots per game total and makes every big play down the stretch, that's all.
Lowe (2:54 p.m.): I'm a Smith optimist, though I recognize his flaws ? very bad shot selection at times, lazy boxing out, moodiness, etc. He's not an "A" player, but he might be a "B-plus" player in nearly every phase of the game ? passing, defense, rebounding, scoring from the block, etc. ? and that's rare. He's only 27. If you're never going to get a star free agent to sign outright ? and the Bucks aren't ? this is the kind of gamble you have to make sometimes. The Raptors just made the same gamble with Rudy Gay, and Smith is a better player than Gay.
Simmons (2:56 p.m.): I wholeheartedly agree. And also, Smith was excellent last season. Gay hasn't been excellent for a couple of seasons, and maybe ever. Coincidentally, both of them have been first-teamers on the Tantalizing Potential All-Stars since, like, 2007.
Lowe (2:57 p.m.): Two Josh quibbles, though ?
1. I'm surprised the Bucks were so interested in this move with both SANDERS! and Ersan Ilyasova onboard. I heard from multiple people they sniffed around a Thad Young/Monta Ellis swap, but might have gotten cold feet ? presumably because of positional overcrowding issues.
2. I'm worried Smith will age poorly. He's a "do your work late" kind of player on defense, and especially on the glass. By that I mean: His fundamentals are sometimes poor, in terms of sliding or boxing out, because he thinks he can use his speed/leaping at the end of a play to make up for any lost ground. That ability vanishes as a player ages. But he's actually a very smart player, and he might learn to adjust.
In any case, Atlanta has about three minutes to make up its mind between the Bucks, Nets, and whoever else is out there. Also: Eric Maynor just got dealt to Portland, apparently. Woohoo!!!
Simmons (3 p.m.): Things are heating up! We're on a run of third-string point guards getting dealt ? look out, Willie Green, you might be next. Uh-oh, I just checked my Twitter feed and about 20 NBA guys reported at the same time that (a) the Bucks were out of the Josh Smith Sweepstakes, and (b) J.J. Redick was probably headed to Milwaukee. But for what??? My best guess ? Monta Ellis and a conditional pick to Orlando, Redick and Josh McRoberts's Expiring Contract to Milwaukee. I'm just worried that two white guys might not go over well in Milwaukee.
In other news ? THE DEADLINE HAS PASSED. We made it.
Lowe (3:07 p.m.): It's over. Whew. Sifting through all these last-minute deals ? Anthony Morrow to Dallas, Eric Maynor to Portland, where he'll actually be a major upgrade to the league's worst bench ? the headliner of the day is J.J. Redick to Milwaukee in what appears to be an eight-player, three-team deal, with the Bobcats also involved.
Simmons (3:09 p.m.): In other words, we won't be bouncing our grandkids on our laps someday and telling them about Trade Deadline 2013. I'm glad Presti finally dealt Maynor ? that means our long national nightmare of Presti trying to pull a Jedi Mind Trick on the media and pretend Maynor was good at basketball and had genuine trade value is finally over. That totally would have worked if writers and other GMs didn't have League Pass and NBA Broadband.
Lowe (3:13 p.m.): I liked the Thunder snagging Ronnie Brewer from the Knicks for a second-round pick. I'm not sure what happened to Brewer in New York. He started off defending well in killer small lineups, getting baskets on cuts, and even making corner 3s. The 3s weren't going to last, and he did suffer a couple of bumps and bruises, but he could still do that other stuff for a team that could use some healthy, stout wing guys. The Knicks are now counting very heavily on Iman Shumpert and a slumping Jason Kidd ? on both ends ? and need all the wing depth they can get to play heavy minutes with Melo at power forward. So that bears watching.
Simmons (3:16 p.m.): Jason Kidd isn't slumping ? he's old. He's like four years younger than me, and I have to rub elk semen on my knees just to play pickup hoops once a week. Remind me to buy deer antler spray; I keep forgetting. Anyway, keep going.
Lowe (3:17 p.m.): The Thunder have never really had a full-time backup small forward for Kevin Durant. Thabo Sefolosha has basically assumed that role in the playoffs, and he wasn't big enough to guard LeBron James in the Finals. DeAndre Liggins and Perry Jones aren't going to be ready in June. Brewer may not impact the Thunder at all, but he's worth a shot as a backup defense-first wing and potential extra ingredient in small lineups with Durant at power forward.
Simmons (3:19 p.m.): And the Zombies certainly could have used Brewer last night against Harden. Hey, it's just dawning on me that the Celtics kept Rondo/Garnett/Pierce together at least through next June. What a strange run it's been ? for three of the last four Februarys, we were thinking to ourselves, They're gonna blow it up, they're gonna blow it up, and it never happened. But during the fourth February, we weren't thinking anything because they had the best record, and THAT was the month they blew it up (Perkins for Green).
Anyway, I'm OK with standing pat this month. Garnett didn't want a trade. That Clippers deal (KG for Bledsoe and Jordan) was sitting there; he didn't want it. (Deny it all you want, Clippers. Your general manager Chris Paul wanted to make that deal.) But Garnett wants to retire as a Celtic. My question is ? when? This summer? Next summer? Or is the plan, "As soon as we're positive that Rondo is healthy, we're dealing him for whatever we can get?"
You never want to be in NBA No-Man's-Land, and right now, the Celtics are in NBA No-Man's-Land. That's why I would have considered a Rondo/Bass for Smith/Pachulia/no. 1 pick deal, as mentioned in this SportsCenter clip ?
? when I successfully (and improbably) used ESPN's touchscreen Trade Machine. Could the Celtics have made the Eastern Finals with Smith? Would it have been worth dealing Rondo? Can they do better with a Rondo trade next summer? Should they deal him at all? Can you write about the Celtics without including eight question marks per paragraph?
Lowe (3:24 p.m.): Something is going to change in Boston soon. The Celtics as of now wouldn't have significant cap flexibility until the summer of 2015, though they could get there a year earlier if KG retires before his deal expires. Rondo only has two more years on his (probably below-market) contract, and he'll miss a chunk of one of them. Smith was an enticing target in theory, and he's close with Rondo, but even an injured Rondo was clearly way above the market price for Smith on an expiring deal. The front office has tried to move on, and they'll keep trying. You can bet they're watching the rest of this season for what it might tell them about Rondo's value; his free agency isn't all that far off, and he may demand something like a max deal.
Simmons (3:27 p.m.): Let's talk about the trades that did happen. What did you think of the Redick deal? I liked it for Milwaukee obviously. But I like all deals for Team X when Team X gets J.J. Redick. I'm a Redickite. Redickphile? Redickan?
Lowe (3:28 p.m.): Milwaukee paid a price for what might end up being a short-term rental, though one that will help them clinch a playoff berth they are 100 percent committed to cinching. They gave up Doron Lamb and Tobias Harris, along with Beno Udrih's expiring deal. Harris's departure is a particularly sad marker. The Bucks need a two-way wing player going forward, and there was great optimism around the league ? both within the Bucks and elsewhere ? that Harris, a bruiser with limited range and unproven defensive ability, might be that player. Guess not ? or at least not in Milwaukee. Lamb is interesting, but he's shooting 35 percent in limited minutes. The Bucks get back Ish Smith, a deep reserve, and Gustavo Ayon, whom the Magic and Hornets both liked before dealing him. Ayon is a useful player who may struggle to get minutes in Milwaukee's crowded frontcourt. He's a smart passer and cutter on offense, and he's a decent defender.
Simmons (3:32 p.m.): Translation: This Redick trade was for NBA nerds only, a.k.a. the people who watch four games at once on a Monday night and know who any of these guys are. And for the record, I am a HUGE Gustavo Ayon fan. I may or may not have been involved in an "I think Orlando has been misusing Gustavo Ayon" conversation within the last few weeks. So I don't love this trade for Orlando because I like the two guys they gave up. Redick is a proven playoff guy. And a good teammate. The Bucks are better, I think.
Lowe (3:36 p.m.): Redick is obviously the highlight of the deal. He's a very, very good player, and Orlando is now officially in full Tank Mode. He'll have to play some small forward, but anytime he takes from Ellis is a plus for Milwaukee. Milwaukee's offense features a lot of fast-paced cutting for pick-and-rolls around the elbows, and Redick has been thriving in that kind of action for years in Orlando.
And he can shoot. Milwaukee needs that, badly. The Bucks are shooting 34.8 percent from deep, 21st in the league, and Ellis is shooting 22.8 percent on a totally irresponsible 3.5 attempts per game. That is borderline sabotage. Here is the total list of players in league history to attempt more than three 3-pointers per game in a season while hitting fewer than 25 percent of them.
Simmons (3:39 p.m.): There's a good chance that he decided to spend the season trolling the advanced-metrics community with his shot selection. Don't rule this out. Maybe he's trying to drive Kirk Goldsberry to hardcore drug use.
Lowe (3:40 p.m.): It may be that Ellis, as good as he can look on majestic highlight layups, is just a poisonous player. He does some things well ? driving, slashing, and finding teammates for productive looks at the rim. But he does more Bad Monta things ? taking long jumpers, basically ? than Good Monta things on offense, and on defense, there is only Bad Monta. He gambles for steals, stands upright so that even "blah" opponents can blow by him off the dribble, he's undersized, and he's an inattentive help defender.
Basically: I'm beginning to believe a team would be better off just not playing Monta, unless he's going to shoot 50-plus percent, which last happened in 2007-08. Shifting some of his minutes to Redick will help by itself, and Jim Boylan should be able to fit Redick in the small forward rotation, alongside Luc Richard Mbah a Moute (all defense, no spacing) and Mike Dunleavy Jr. (all spacing/passing, no defense).
Simmons (3:44 p.m.): I'm suddenly terrified of Bad Monta sharing Boston's backcourt next season with Basic Cable Rondo. You're looking at Monta's career the wrong way, though ? the way I see it, we're just inching closer and closer to Monta reaching his ultimate destiny as an Irrational Confidence Bench Scorer on a contender, like a cross between Vernon Maxwell Circa 1994, Jason Terry Circa 2011 and even Eddie House Circa 2008. Maybe that's what he was always meant to be.
Lowe: (3:46 p.m.): Last point on the Redick deal: It's basically a wash financially for the Bucks in terms of cap room this summer, and it gives them the option of just letting Ellis go ? assuming he opts out ? and re-signing Redick to replace him. But Redick wants to win. Is this the right place for him to do that?
Simmons (3:47 p.m.): If "win" means "winning slightly more games than you're losing," then yes, it's the right place for him to do that. If you're talking about winning multiple playoff series, then no. I'd say that he's more focused on the second point. I was hoping he'd land in Indiana; he could have made a nice splash for the Pacers (they needed another shooter, as you know). If the Bucks land the no. 7 seed, could they bother Indiana or New York in the first round with Jennings, Redick, Ilyasova, SANDERS! and Mbah a Moute or Dunleavy at crunch time? I mean ? maybe? But I think that's where it ends.
Lowe (3:50 p.m.): As for Orlando: It seems they couldn't get a first-round pick, so this return is fine. That's the story of the trade deadline: Only one first-round pick changed hands after January 1 ? the pick Memphis sent to Cleveland in their pre-Rudy trade. About four or five future first-rounders changed hands on average in the last few trade deadlines.
Simmons (3:52 p.m.): So either the new tax rules (and the shrinking cap) changed the trade landscape going forward, or it's a massive aberration that means nothing. Hmmmmmm. Last Bucks thought: Why not deal Monta Ellis as the second part of that Redick move?
Lowe (3:53 p.m.): Perhaps they couldn't find a taker for Monta, though it's unclear if he was in the offer to Atlanta for Smith (apparently not). The Bucks have the talent to bother anyone, but they're still a step below the East's second-tier teams. "Why didn't Indiana trade a late first-round pick for Redick?" will be a popular question in the wake of this deadline. Ditto for "Where the heck was Utah?" Teams were very cautious with first-rounders, even late ones that typically produce very little. This is a question for tomorrow, though. But a bunch of teams choose "do nothing" over all other options, and that includes the Hawks with Smith. They had offers on the table and chose none of them.
Simmons (3:56 p.m.): For the record, I fully support the Hawks keeping Smith over dealing him for 40 cents on the dollar. Nobody made them a decent offer. Sorry, I'm not dealing someone who was the fourth-best forward in the NBA last season for a crappy Nets first-rounder, MarShon "I'm 24 + Can't Even Play On My Current Team" Brooks and the right to pay Kris Humphries $12 million next season; I'm not dealing him for Brandon Bass, Fab Melo and Jared Sullinger; and I'm not doing it for Jared Dudley and Michael Beasley's Semi-Albatross Contract.
Also, they're 29-23 and have no chance of dropping into the lottery because the East has been so dreadful. Why not keep Smith, then hope you go on a spring run and he plays up his value for sign-and-trade purposes this summer? Don't you owe it to your fans to (a) make an attempt at a playoff run or (b) give them the Illusion of Hope that he might stay and play with Dwight (or get sign and traded)?
Don't ever forget about the Illusion of Hope, Zach Lowe. You're always better off misleading your fans for as long as possible over just doing something dumb immediately. Why not prolong the agony?
Lowe (4:02 p.m.): They could also use Smith as a lure to chase Dwight Howard in the offseason, assuming the Lakers haven't yet erected a statue of Howard outside Staples Center. (Side note: Atlanta would have to free up some cap room to offer Howard his true max, which starts at about $20 million in Year 1, since both Smith and Jeff Teague will carry pricey cap holds.) They may also just view losing Smith for nothing, and remaining lean, as a viable alternative. Taking that course with Joe Johnson might have ultimately been healthier for the franchise.
I've heard from two sources in the know that the Nets final offer was: Brooks, Humphries, an unprotected first-round pick and the rights to Bojan Bogdanovic, though Brooklyn officials would not confirm. That's not a terrible offer, and it comes with little locked-in long-term cost. But Atlanta is fully within its rights to hold its nose and say "no." The Nets will continue the Humphries drama over the summer, and potentially into next season; flipping an expensive contract for another expensive contract is really the only means they have of improving the roster, beyond nailing a late first-round draft pick.
Simmons (4:08 p.m.): That's a horrible offer. Even Geoff Petrie turns down that offer. (Thinking.) You're right, he probably grabs it. Hold on, I asked Rembert Browne (die-hard Atlanta fan, die-hard Beyonc? fan, die-hard Joe Johnson hater) for his take on the Hawks keeping Josh ? partly because he's our Grantland buddy, and partly because he might be the only living Atlanta Hawks fan. The Hawks' fan base is the United States in I, Robot and he's Will Smith. Anyway, here's what Rem e-mailed back.
Rembert (4:09 p.m.): The Hawks did the right thing for the 2012-13 Atlanta Hawks. Who knows if that's a great thing for the future, but I happen to believe they still have a lot to prove, this season, as a team that dealt a premier talent just a year ago. All season, they've seemed to pride themselves as a superstar-less team that works hard enough and believes in one another enough to find ways to win. While I've loved that approach to the game (the exact opposite of the Lakers' "too many cooks in the kitchen" debacle), you can't just deal the one thing on this slightly scrubby team that, at times, shows glimmers of superstardom. (I love you, Al, but no.)
Not this season, at least.
I LOVE YOU, JOSH, EVEN IF YOUR THREES ARE LIKE BLINDFOLDED DRONE STRIKES.
Simmons (4:10 p.m.): So there you go. Somebody should make a coffee table book of e-mails/tweets that Hawks fans share with each other after an atrocious Josh Smith 3. I would totally buy that. Hey, Zach, let's quickly hit the teams that disappointed us because they didn't do anything. I have five.
Let's start with Utah. You mentioned them already, but I'm now operating under the premise that Kevin O'Connor was kidnapped and replaced by one of Sam Presti's spies. First of all, the Kevin O'Connor I knew never would have given up Devin Harris's expiring deal last summer for two years of Marvin Williams, a.k.a. The Worst Starting Small Forward Alive. And second, they have $26 million in expirings with Jefferson, Millsap and Raja Bell, as well as a logjam at forward ? I mean ? what's the long-term plan here? Re-sign everyone? Start over with the young dudes? I'm just confused.
Lowe (4:15 p.m.): Stay tuned. They have a ton of flexibility over the summer. The "doing nothing" course will anger fans who dreamed of Eric Bledsoe, but it's unclear if Bledsoe was ever really available to them, and they can always sign-and-trade Paul Millsap this summer. Keeping Al Jefferson over Millsap would be a shaky decision, but let's give them some time. Maybe they couldn't find an offer that brought in long-term money attached to a player they actually wanted to pay.
Simmons (4:18 p.m.): My second team ? Phoenix. We covered this in Part 1, but their trade-deadline strategy was to grab a bullhorn and scream, "TWINS! NOW WE HAVE TWINS!!!!!!!"
Batting third for me ? Toronto. They dragged Andrea Bargnani through the mud for four weeks ? then they kept him? Huh?
Lowe (4:21 p.m.): They'll continue to look at Bargnani deals later, and see if he can do anything for them in the meantime. He has been really bad, even by his standards, in the last week or so. Again: Teams were very stingy with first-round picks. Had Toronto been able to snag one without taking on a poison deal that runs longer than Bargnani's, I bet they'd have moved.
Simmons (4:25 p.m.): My fourth team ? the Lakers. If you're keeping Howard and D'Antoni, you can't NOT deal Gasol. Inane. Nonsensical. I don't get it.
And last but not least ? Chicago. They punted on competing for a title this season ? la Cuban punting on last season. They have some trade assets, too. What if Rose is operating at 100 percent capacity in four or five weeks? Couldn't they have at least made a run at Redick with Rip Hamilton and that Charlotte pick? Could they have given Miami a real run with Redick and a healthy Rose? I say yes. That makes me wonder if they're sitting out Rose until next season.
Lowe (4:30 p.m.): On the Lakers and Bulls, that struck me as semi-wishful thinking. Gasol might miss most of the regular season, he's still a good player, and he's an expiring next season. Deng is emblematic of Chicago's identity, and though he's the most movable (from the perspectives of both the Bulls and the other 29 teams) of Chicago's big-money players, I'm not really sure how movable he is right now. He's got a big-money contract that would make teams pause, and the Bulls view him as a core piece of a title contender next season. Also: The Bulls didn't dump Rip Hamilton! They are actually set to pay the luxury tax for the first time in franchise history!
Simmons (4:40 p.m.): As we were swapping this last batch of e-mails, Derrick Rose's brother came out and ripped the Bulls for not improving before the deadline, then made it clear that Derrick shouldn't have rushed back if the Bulls weren't committed to contending this season anyway. Now, the history of Loose Cannon Siblings coming out in defense of their famous athlete brothers is basically a disaster, and he DEFINITELY shouldn't have said anything ? there's just no upside. But I agree with Derrick Rose's Loose Cannon Bro in this respect: Why should Rose rush back if the Bulls aren't in any rush to contend for the title? They have legitimate trade assets like the rights to Charlotte's future no. 1 pick, Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, and even Luol Deng (whom Butler made semi-expendable recently). They could have moved on Redick pretty easily, or maybe even Pau Gasol (using Deng as the bait). They didn't do anything, which reinforces the fact that ?
A. They were never serious about winning the title this season, which is why they built the team they did.
B. Everything that happened (a.k.a. the winning) was an unexpected surprise.
C. They didn't let their success steer them from building a long-term contender around Rose and allowing him enough time to get healthy, even if it meant punting on the title this season.
I agree with the strategy. I think. Just know that, if Rose comes back in April and he's flying around by May, and they're trading body blows with Miami in the Eastern Finals, they're going to wish they had J.J. Redick on their team. (And he's going to wish he was a Bull.) Alas.
A man uses the Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer after an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
A man uses the Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer after an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
The Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer is shown at an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
Sundar Pichai, Google's senior vice president of Chrome and apps, discusses the Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer at an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
Sundar Pichai, Google's senior vice president of Chrome and apps, discusses the Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer at an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
Sundar Pichai, Google's senior vice president of Chrome and apps, discusses the Google Chromebook Pixel laptop computer at an announcement in San Francisco, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013. Google is adding a new touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) ? Google is adding a new and more expensive touch to its line of Chrome laptops in an attempt to outshine personal computers running on software made by rivals Microsoft and Apple.
The Chromebook Pixel unveiled Thursday includes a nearly 13-inch display screen that responds to the touch or swipe of a finger. That duplicates a key feature in Microsoft Corp.'s Windows 8, a dramatic makeover of the world's leading operating system for PCs.
The Pixel's high-resolution screen displays 239 pixels per inch, slightly more than Apple Inc.'s MacBooks with high-resolution Retina displays. A MacBook Pro with a screen that measures 13.1 inches diagonally can handle 227 pixels per inch, while the 15.4-inch model is at 220 pixels per inch.
"This is the future: high-resolution screens and touch," said Sundar Pichai, a senior vice president who oversees Google's Chrome Web browser and operating system.
Google Inc. designed and built the Pixel for "power users" ? a fastidious and generally more affluent segment of the PC market willing to pay more for machines equipped with compelling features and components not found in cheaper laptops.
The strategy is a departure for Google, which had positioned Chromebooks based on its Chrome operating system as affordable options for homes and offices looking for a quick and easy way to connect to the Web. Google has been partnering with PC makers to make Chromebooks over the past two years. Among them: Acer Inc. makes a bare-bones Chromebook for just $199, while Samsung Electronics Co. sells one for $249.
The Pixel, which Google is building without a partner, will cost $1,299 for a Wi-Fi only model with 32 gigabytes of flash storage. A 64-gigabyte machine that can connect on both Wi-Fi and a 4G LTE cellular network will cost $1,499. That's the same price as the cheapest MacBook Pro with a comparable screen, though the Apple laptop comes with 128 gigabytes of storage.
Apple does have a cheaper, lighter laptop, the MacBook Air. A 13-inch model with 128 gigabytes of storage starts at $1,199. It weighs less than 3 pounds and doesn't have a high-resolution screen. The Pixel has the high-resolution screen and weighs 3.35 pounds. The 13-inch high-resolution MacBook Pro weighs 3.57 pounds.
Google believes Pixel is a better value than the Air, given its higher-resolution screen with touch controls. Google is also throwing in 1 terabytes of free online storage in its data centers for three years ? a benefit that Pichai estimated would cost $500 to $600.
The Pixel "will stand up very, very well to the MacBook Air," Pichai said. "The goal here is to push the boundaries to deliver the best laptop at the best possible price."
Though its popular iPad has a touch screen, Apple has shunned touch-screen laptops. Apple figures that because people use laptops with the screen in front of them, rather than in their hands or laps, it's not a pleasant experience to constantly have to reach out to touch the screen.
Microsoft, on the other hand, considers touch screens to be central to all computing environments. Windows 8 was designed to make desktop and laptop computers work more like tablet computers. Computers with touch-screen monitors can respond to touch along with old-style mouse and keyboard commands.
Google's online Play store will begin selling the Pixel in the U.S. and U.K Thursday, with BestBuy.com expected to take orders on Friday. A hands-on experience with the Pixels also will be available beginning Friday in 10 of Best Buy's retail stores in California, Minnesota, Washington state, Virginia and New York.
Pichai declined to say how many of the lower-priced Chromebooks have been sold, but said the models have ranked as the most popular laptop sold by Amazon.com Inc. for the past four months.
The free online storage is being included with the Pixel to overcome the laptop's lack of a hard drive. Like other Chromebooks, the Pixel functions like a terminal dependent on an Internet connection to get to information and applications stored in large data centers run by Google or other technology providers.
Spurred by the growing popularity of smartphones and tablet computers, Google is betting more people will prefer having data, photos and video stored in remote data centers instead of individual hard drives so the content can be accessed from any Internet-connected device.
Google's expansion into the high-end of the laptop market immerses the Internet search and advertising company more deeply into the business designing and making gadgets.
The company is already a major player in the mobile device market through its Android software. To help promote Android, Google also has designed a line of smartphones and tablets under the Nexus brand. The company also owns smartphone maker Motorola Mobility, which it bought for $12.4 billion last year.
Google's deepening involvement in hardware has ignited speculation that the company might eventually open its own chain of stores to sell its products, just as Apple and Microsoft already do. Pichai didn't address that in a response to a question on that topic at Thursday's event.
Apple and Microsoft already have been hurt by the increased competition from Google. Most smartphones and tablets running on Google's free Android software cost less than Apple's iPhone and iPad, helping to siphon sales away from those devices. Sales of PCs running on Windows also have been sagging during the past year, partly because consumers are relying more on Android devices.
Google says it expects to make a small profit on each Pixel sold, but the company figures to make more money from the online traffic delivered from the machines. Like other Chromebooks, the Pixel is set up to automatically use all of Google's services, including its search engine, Gmail and YouTube video site.
JOLIET, Ill. (AP) ? Drew Peterson ? the swaggering former suburban Chicago police officer who gained notoriety after his much-younger fourth wife vanished in 2007 ? was sentenced to 38 years in prison on Thursday for murdering his third wife.
Illinois does not have the death penalty, and the 59-year-old Peterson had faced a maximum 60-year prison term. The judge gave him four years' credit for time he has served since his arrest.
Jurors convicted Peterson in September in Kathleen Savio's 2004 death. Neighbors found the 40-year-old's body in a dry bathtub at home with a gash on her head ? her hair soaked in blood.
Peterson is also a suspect in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson ? who was 23-years-old when she vanished ? but he hasn't been charged in her case. It was her disappearance that led authorities to take another look at Savio's death and eventually reclassify it from an accident to a homicide.
Fascination nationwide with Peterson arose from speculation he sought to use his law enforcement expertise to get away with murder.
Peterson shocked the courtroom during his sentencing hearing by shouting, "I did not kill Kathleen!" as he made a statement to the court.
Someone in the court audience responded by shouting back, "Yes, you did," and the person was then removed from the room.
Earlier Thursday, Judge Edward Burmila denied a defense request to grant Peterson a retrial. Peterson's current attorneys contended his former lead attorney, Joel Brodsky, botched the initial trial.
Brodsky stepped down from the defense team in November, as his quarrel with Peterson's current lawyers worsened.
Steve Greenberg was on the trial team and still represents Peterson. Greenberg says Brodsky forced Peterson to take part in a damaging pretrial media blitz and that it was Brodsky's decision to call a witness whose testimony ended up backfiring on the defense.
Brodsky has called allegations from his former colleagues "a bald-faced lie" and insisted the entire legal team agreed on trial strategy.
A turning point at the trial came when the defense called a divorce attorney who said he spoke to Stacy Peterson before she vanished. Rather than blunting her credibility, the witness stressed to jurors that Stacy Peterson seemed to truly believe her husband killed Savio.
Before his 2009 arrest, the glib, cocky Drew Peterson seemed to taunt authorities, suggesting a "Win a Date With Drew Contest" and then, after his arrest, "Win a Conjugal Visit With Drew Contest." More recently, his story inspired a TV movie starring Rob Lowe.
The case began with a gruesome discovery. A neighbor came across Savio's body March 1, 2004. She was face down in her dry bathtub, her thick, black hair soaked in blood and a 2-inch gash was on the back of her head.
The death of the aspiring nurse was initially deemed an accident. After Stacy Peterson vanished in 2007, Savio's body was exhumed and re-examined.
Drew Peterson had divorced Savio a year before her death. His motive for killing her, prosecutors said, was fear that a pending settlement would wipe him out financially.
Peterson's personality loomed large over his 2012 trial, illustrated by crowds of bystanders gathered outside the courthouse in a circuslike atmosphere after his conviction last year, cheering as prosecutors walked by and shouting, "Loser. Loser. Loser," at defense attorneys.
The verdict was a vindication for Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow and his team, who gambled by putting on a case they conceded was filled with holes.
Prosecutors suspect Peterson killed his sandy-haired fourth wife because she could finger him for Savio's death, but her body has never been found and no charges have ever been filed. Jurors weren't supposed to link her disappearance to Savio's death, and prosecutors were prohibited from mentioning the subject.
Peterson has maintained his fourth wife ran off with another man and is still alive.
Prosecutors faced enormous hurdles as they tried Peterson for Savio's death.
They had no physical evidence tying him to her death and no witnesses placing him at the scene. They were forced to rely on typically barred hearsay ? statements Savio made to others before she died and that Stacy Peterson made before she vanished. Illinois passed a hearsay law in 2008 tailored to Peterson's case, dubbed "Drew's Law," which assisted in making some the evidence admissible at Peterson's trial.
The hearsay ? any information reported by a witness not based on the witness' direct knowledge ? included a friend testifying that Savio told her Peterson once put a knife to her throat and warned her, "I could kill you and make it look like an accident."
Peterson's attorneys have said they might appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on grounds the hearsay law is unconstitutional.
RSS news feeds
