The Women In Business Expo 2018 could be deemed a resounding success as it concluded on Sunday evening.The Expo, which was held at the Pegasus Hotel, created a platform for women to showcase their talents, business ideas and ventures. The two-day event was predominantly coordinated by popular fashion designer, Dr Sonia Noel.The annual event concluded with a motivational forum, which saw impactful women from across the globe gathering to share their experiences and positive advice. Titled “Inspire you”, the event aimed at empowering women through the experiences of others who not only shared personal advice, but also guidance on corporate best practices. The speakers included Sherry Ann Dixon, Ayana Mc Calman, Hilda Bourne, Dr Jackie Evans and, of course, Sonia Noel.Among the stellar advice given, there were also calls for men to play a larger role in women’s empowerment, as it was noted that men play a vital role in enabling a woman’s progress.The event was a collaborative effort between the Sonia Noel Foundation for Creative Arts (SNFCA) and the Women’s Association for Sustainable Development. Of the 60-odd businesses on display, many of them showcased locally made, hand-crafted items, which spoke much of the versatility of a woman. This has been the third instalment of the Expo. The Women In Business Expo coincides with the world’s celebration of International Women’s Day, which was held on March 8. The initiative seeks to give women a sense of independence, showcasing the fact that women do not have to depend on a male for financial support.
Colm McFadden in action at O’Donnell Park: Picture by BrianMcDaid/Cristeph GalleryIT may be Division Two football Donegal are playing this year, but it’s very good football – and manager Jim McGuinness is very happy after three wins on the bounce.Taking on Ulster Champions Monaghan, even at home at O’Donnell Park, was never going to be easy.But Donegal coped with everything the Farney men threw at them. And that was very pleasing for McGuinness.“From our own point of view it’s good to get up and running at home,” he said.“We had two good away matches where the performance levels were of similar quality to today. So that’s three good performances back-to-back for us now.“We played nice expansive football at times against Monaghan, with some really good support play. Overall the attitude was excellent and we now have six points on the board.” The Glenties man says expanding his squad and mixing youth with experience is helping the side reap rich rewards.“Every team in the country is on a mission in terms of goals and objectives for the season. We’re no different,” he said.“We’re a team that’s benefiting from having a lot of senior players who are still central to the team. We have them back in the fold and the added advantage of having new guys like Odhran MacNiallais and Darach O’Connor coming in is a boost.“Dermot Molloy’s form has been really good. Patrick (McBrearty) after his injuries is getting 20 minutes in matches and he’s making an impact every day he’s comes on.“Our overall objective is try and get the lads who had the major injuries last year up to the level required by the end of the League, while also giving youth an opportunity to play in the team. “Those two things have been going quite well in the three games and that’s good.”SO FAR, SO GOOD – McGUINNESS HAPPY WITH LEAGUE PROGRESS was last modified: March 2nd, 2014 by John2Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Tags:donegalGAAJim McGuinnessMonaghanNational League
Darwinism is a flexible concept that must embrace a wide variety of observations, from apparently fast-evolving plants (see 10/12/2004 item on maize) to organisms that seem to remain unevolved for eons.2 Darwin himself saw this flexibility as a strength for his unifying concept of common descent; others criticized it as rationalization (i.e., a concept that can explain anything explains nothing). Take the case of so-called “living fossils,” organisms whose modern counterparts are virtually identical to fossils sometimes hundreds of millions of years old. If a land animal could evolve into a whale in 50 million years, for instance, why would a horseshoe crab show no change at all for 10 times as long, 500 million years? (see 06/21/2002 headline). How can the fluidity of constant evolutionary change over time be reconciled with observations that many different kinds of creatures – trees, salamanders, ostracods, reptiles, insects and fish – have apparently not evolved at all? This subject was recently tackled by Lee Hsiang Liow of the Committee on Evolutionary Biology at the University of Chicago. Examining fossil crinoids (branch-like echinoderms that attach to the seafloor, also called sea lilies and feather stars), Liow tested “Simpson’s Rule” of “the survival of the relatively unspecialized,” a rule George Gaylord Simpson proposed in 1944 as an explanation for living fossils and long-lived taxa. Basically, it suggests that specialists evolve, but generalists persist. Liow applied the rule to crinoids and published the results in American Naturalist.1 She studied 1,195 species, representing 752 genera, and concluded that long-lived crinoid genera seem relatively unspecialized, in accordance with Simpson’s Rule, but the reverse is true for higher taxa. The conclusion seems to raise doubts about the utility of Darwinian explanations.Prolonged stasis in a world of change is a puzzling biological phenomenon. Extremely long-lived or geologically long-ranging taxa have been a popular subject of discussion for paleontologists and neontologists alike ever since Darwin ( 1964) coined the term “living fossils.”….Whether it is called bradytely, arrested evolution, morphological stasis, long-lived taxa or something else, or whether “living fossils” are dubbed paradoxical, relictual, primitive or specialized, the phenomenon of stasis has rarely been studied in a quantitative manner. This Liow set out to correct, at least in the case of crinoid evolution. The crinoid class is ideal for study because it span much of the geological column and contains many well-characterized examples, both fossil and living. She compared samples and deduced a morphological average, then tried to determine if longevity was a function of “bizarreness.” Simpson implicitly took a comparative approach when he wrote about the “rule of the survival of the relatively unspecialized” (1944, p. 143). He thought that unspecialized subgroups of a clade seem to persist for longer periods of geologic time but did not explicitly define “specialization.” Here, I quantify specialization by comparing individual morphologies to a group mean; the closer a morphology is to a group mean, the less specialized it is. I ask whether long-lived genera … in any given crinoid order occupy regions of morphospace that are random with respect to the mean morphology of that order. Could survival be correlated with morphological bizarreness or a deviant morphology …? Or would long-lived genera have morphologies close to the mean morphology…?The short answer is: Simpson seems to be right on one level. “I find that the morphologies of long-lived crinoid genera are, in general, closer to mean morphologies than shorter-lived genera in the same order.” But when higher taxonomic categories are examined, the rule fails:Similarly, but from a completely different conceptual perspective, I ask whether long-lived crinoid genera in any given crinoid higher taxon (e.g., suborder, order) occupy regions of morphospace that are random with respect to a basal morphology of that higher taxon. I find that mean morphological distances of long-lived genera from basal morphologies are seldom distinct from those of their shorter-lived relatives.In other words, she found a contradiction in the trend between lower and higher taxonomic groups. Part of the problem is the fuzziness of the evolutionary record:There is no available phylogenetic framework for comparing rates of character transformation in the global pool of fossil crinoids. Likewise, there are no detailed samples of crinoid lineages in a stratigraphic column for investigating character reversals, convergence, or the lack thereof.Nevertheless, she found a way to compare features: “The morphological characters used here are not assumed to be strictly homologous but are assumed to reflect only general fossilizable morphology determined consistently within the crinoid bauplan [body plan].” Also, the fossil history was determined from location in the geological column, both first and last appearance (see 05/21/2004 headline), and when dealing with fossils, the classification into genus and species is not always clear cut. Geological history adds to the confusion:Just as in previous analyses when genera are grouped according to orders, genera in each period are mostly short lived. However, rarefied samples of shorter-lived genera through each period inform us that the long-lived taxa can be more, less, or equally deviant compared with shorter-lived taxa of an equivalent sample size (table C2). Genera that are extremely long lived within each order are also more likely … than other genera in the database to have passed through one or more mass extinctions even though passing through mass extinctions does not necessarily ensure persistence.I.e., the longer you live, the more dangers you have faced, but facing dangers doesn’t make you Supercrinoid. She claims, nevertheless, that “the likelihood of the occurrence of ‘living fossils’ or long-lived taxa increases with time,” a truism given the evolutionary and geological-time assumptions. Liow addresses more factors that confuse the picture and could bias the results, such as taxonomic lumping, limited range of some species, the tendency for long-lived species to swamp short-lived ones, “issues of stratigraphic resolution of age dating,” and disagreement over how to define a “long-lived” taxon. This discussion seems intended to cushion the next paragraph, the conclusions. Before opening the curtain, she cautions, “In summary, longevity is relative and dependent on taxonomic inclusiveness. These important axioms are often neglected in articles that address extreme persistence or morphological conservatism.” Conclusion time. What can be claimed based on this detailed analysis of crinoids?“First, most taxa (genera and families) are short lived and ‘average”…. which implies that experiments in morphology are usually not long lived.” This seems to suggest Mother Nature is a bumbling tinkerer.“Second, long-lived genera within orders are often less morphologically deviant or less specialized than expected when compared with rarefied samples of corresponding shorter-lived genera.” This was apparently a big surprise. “In other words, long-lived genera are not only not unusual, some are unusually average!” (exclamation in the original).“Third, patterns of morphological deviations from basal morphologies versus durations are unclear.” Enough said.Fourth, there appears to be an increase in long-lived groups through time, but this appears to be an artifact of the assumptions of phylogeny and geologic ages.“Fifth, taxonomic ranks and inclusiveness of higher taxa are critical factors when discussing longevity because identities of long-lived taxa may dramatically change according to these factors.” This suggests that previous investigators failed to see the big picture.“Last, identities of long-lived taxa may change with respect to which definitions of longevity are used. This may or may not (as was the case for this article) change conclusions being drawn on long-lived taxa.” This seems to say that conclusions are a function of definitions, not data.She lists a few suggestions that have been offered for why some species persist. Maybe “extinctions are not biologically random,” for instance. Overall, though, she is confident that “Based on the results of the current study, I rule out the idea that long-lived genera are morphologically deviant or unusual when compared within the realm of an order.” This seems to say, “Simpson was wrong” at higher taxonomic levels. What are more instructive in this paper are the zingers in the last paragraph:There are of course many unanswered questions. This study focused on persistence, but there is no available information on actual rate of character evolution. Do long-lived taxa experience rapid rates of character reversals or zig-zag evolution (Henningsmoen 1957), such that apparent persistence is only a sampling artifact, or does persistence necessarily mean slow change or cryptic change (Knowlton 2000)? …. To remain similar enough to an ancestor so a lineage retains a single taxonomic identity requires whole chains of more or less identical events (Gingerich 2001), but what causes these identical developmental events to occur generation after generation? What relative proportions do ecology, biogeography, morphology, and phylogenetic inertia contribute to longevity? Patterns and statistical correlations do not imply causation; tests using techniques from fields ranging from paleontology and phylogenetics to molecular biology and genetics need to be designed to investigate the existence and workings of mechanisms that promote longevity.Go to the top of the paper. Infinite loop.1Lee Hsiang Liow, “A Test of Simpson’s ‘Rule of the Survival of the Relatively Unspecialized’ Using Fossil Crinoids,” The American Naturalist 2004, Vol. 164, pp. 431-443, University of Chicago, 0003-0147/2004/16404-40222.2For examples, see previous headlines about coelacanth fish, pine trees, horseshoe crabs, tuatara reptiles, salamanders, bacteria, protozoa and termites, and butterflies.Every word of this long paper was scrutinized for a hint, somewhere, of an explanation for living fossils. It was like taking a long, hard hike with a confused guide and at the end of the day finding yourself right back where you started, and on top of that, finding out that your destination was much farther off than you first expected. Nothing in this paper was any help to the Darwinites. Simpson’s Rule was tested and found wanting. The number of variables outnumbered the constants, and the validity of any formula was questionable to begin with. There is no reason to suspect that fragile little sea lilies would outlive dinosaurs through mass extinctions, and there was nothing within the known diversity of crinoid classes to predict why some would last long and others would disappear quickly. This is not to pick on Dr. Liow. After all, she meant well and tried to be scientifically rigorous, at least more so than predecessors who relied on comparative rather than quantitative methods. She did her homework and referred to all the prior literature on this subject. And she is, after all, an expert, being on the Committee on Evolutionary Biology at the University of Chicago. But in the end, it didn’t matter; the doubts swamped the claims. Just when we were about to give her credit for finding at least half a trend, she let loose with a barrage of major questions that cast doubt on the validity of any evolutionary explanation for living fossils. Notice also that her subject was not a minor matter. The debate about stasis is a major issue that bears on the very heart of evolutionary theory. If the Darwin Party cannot explain how things change or how things stay the same, then they cannot explain anything. Notice what she admitted in that last paragraph: there is no available information on actual rate of character evolution, she said, and she’s not restricting that statement to crinoids. In lieu of explanations, she tosses out alternative plot lines and made-up concepts, like “zig-zag evolution” and “cryptic change” and other head-scratchers, then unloads a dump truck load of devastating statements that say, in effect, that Darwinists don’t know anything. She just hopes that some day, somebody else will figure it out. From our experience, this paper was not an isolated case. The more in depth evolutionary theorists try to support their hunches with evidence, the more trouble they find. Evolutionary explanations are like hot potatoes. The Darwin Party brags about how many players are in the game and how many potatoes are being tossed around, but there is no potato anyone wants to hold onto and eat. Dr. Liow held it long enough to decide that, “yes, it is hot,” then tossed it to someone else. This game goes on and on in the literature while Eugenie Scott and the other Darwinite salespeople speak of this frenetic activity as if a healthy meal of science is being cooked up. We’re tired of waiting. When do we get served, and how do we know the spuds are even palatable? The ones we have glimpsed so far are pretty gross. No amount of heat will fix a rotten potato.(Visited 21 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Facebook is Becoming Less Personal and More Pro… Guide to Performing Bulk Email Verification The Dos and Don’ts of Brand Awareness Videos A Comprehensive Guide to a Content Audit Tags:#advertising#NYT#social networks#web Related Posts marshall kirkpatrick One of the most obnoxious things about Facebook’s recent changes has been that clicking a Like button around the Web just pushed a dumb, inarticulate grunt out into the newsfeed of your friends. “I Like this thing,” it said, and nothing more. Today that’s changing, with the inclusion of a writable comment space inside the pop-up that appears when visitors Like something out around the Web.Messages sent with personal comments tend to get more click-throughs, the company said today. These messages will now also include a longer description of what’s being liked. This is a great change towards making the point of intersection between Facebook and the larger Web richer, more personal and less condescending.Update:Readers smarter than I point out in comments below that there have been other methods that enabled commenting in a Like button for some time. I stand corrected! I am also glad that it’s now all the easier, including here on ReadWriteWeb.To like in Facebook parlance might be to show support for something, it might represent the intention of subscribing to future updates or it might be an action that a user takes solely to gain access to priviledges exclusive to a page’s Fans, as they used to be called. Allowing users to post additional commentary just makes sense.To like an object is also to give that object’s owner some access to your personal and demographic information on Facebook. Such a complex interaction is inappropriate to make as simple as it has been and adding a place for users to annotate the signals they emit into their social graphs is a logical first step.Remember when George Bush joined Facebook, but in such a way that only people who liked his Fan page could write comments on it? How many of you would have liked to have added a comment to the message that went out to your friends saying you liked George Bush? I know I would have.
LATEST STORIES James scored 16 of his 18 points in the first quarter and the Cavaliers made 11 3-pointers in the first half on the way to a 116-88 rout of the Detroit Pistons on Monday night. Cleveland led 73-46 at halftime thanks to an overwhelming shooting performance, an indication that Detroit’s stay atop the Central Division might not last much longer.The Pistons still lead the Cavs by a game, but Cleveland has won five straight and scored at least 110 points in eight of its last nine.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSWATCH: Drones light up sky in final leg of SEA Games torch runSPORTSSEA Games: Philippines picks up 1st win in men’s water poloSPORTSMalditas save PH from shutout“That was 48 minutes of game planning and execution right from the beginning,” James said. “They’ve been playing extremely good basketball. They were coming off a great win (Sunday) night in Minnesota, so we knew that they were going to come out here and try to give us their best shot, and had to be ready for that.”The Cavaliers led 27-22 when James went to the bench late in the first quarter. By the time he came back in, it was 50-30. Cleveland’s reserves ended up outscoring Detroit’s 26-8 in the first half. QC cops nab robbery gang leader, cohort The Cavs shot 62 percent from the field in the first two quarters and 11 of 17 from 3-point range. They finished the game 16 of 33 from beyond the arc.“I’m not upset at our guys. I didn’t see our guys quitting or anything like that,” Pistons coach Stan Van Gundy said. “We got a little bit shell shocked.”This had the feel of a big game before it started. Although there were still some empty seats at Little Caesars Arena, the Pistons’ new home seemed closer to full than on previous nights, and the attendance was announced as a sellout. The team played well on offense at the start. A 3-pointer by Avery Bradley put Detroit ahead 18-17.James, however, answered with two 3s and a turnaround jumper, and the Pistons weren’t able to keep up with Cleveland’s torrid shooting.“He definitely did set the tone,” Detroit’s Tobias Harris said. “Made some really tough, contested shots — 3s. Got himself going, got his team going, and then they were able to just pretty much fuel off that.”It was 36-23 after the first quarter, and the Cavs broke the game open at the start of the second. Channing Frye made back-to-back 3-pointers to make it 46-28.ADVERTISEMENT Brace for potentially devastating typhoon approaching PH – NDRRMC Typhoon Kammuri accelerates, gains strength en route to PH Cleveland Cavaliers forward LeBron James (23) drives against Detroit Pistons center Andre Drummond (0) during the second half of an NBA basketball game, Monday, Nov. 20, 2017, in Detroit. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)DETROIT — An emphatic win over a first-place opponent had LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers talking confidently again.“We haven’t had a win like that in a very long time,” James said. “That’s what happens when we don’t let up.”ADVERTISEMENT Kammuri turning to super typhoon less likely but possible — Pagasa Harris led Detroit with 11 points. Kevin Love had 19 points and 11 rebounds for Cleveland.ANOTHER BLOWOUTThe previous matchup between these teams wasn’t much different. The Cavs beat Detroit 128-96 on March 14 in Cleveland. That was the largest margin of victory by the Cavs against the Pistons — although Clevelandnearly broke that mark Monday.A BREATHERCleveland led 101-62 after three, and the top players for both teams sat out the final period. James ended up playing only 27:17 after surpassing 40 minutes in three of his previous five games.“I played with Michael Jordan when he was 39; he played 37 minutes a night. Karl Malone was 37 and played 38 minutes a night,” Cavs coach Tyronn Lue said. “Everybody’s built different and if you’re one of the greats sometimes you’ve got to play and sometimes you get rest like tonight.”TIP-INSCavaliers: Cleveland still isn’t close to full strength. The Cavs were without Isaiah Thomas (right hip), Derrick Rose (left ankle sprain), Iman Shumpert (left knee effusion) and Tristan Thompson (left calf strain).Pistons: Jon Leuer (left ankle sprain) did not play. … Detroit’s six-game home winning streak was snapped. This was also the first time all season the Pistons lost the latter half of a back-to-back. They had been 3-0. … Andre Drummond moved into fifth place on the Pistons’ career list with 5,205 rebounds. Larry Foust had 5,200.UP NEXT Trending Articles PLAY LIST 00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles00:50Trending Articles01:37Protesters burn down Iran consulate in Najaf01:47Panelo casts doubts on Robredo’s drug war ‘discoveries’01:29Police teams find crossbows, bows in HK university01:35Panelo suggests discounted SEA Games tickets for students02:49Robredo: True leaders perform well despite having ‘uninspiring’ boss02:42PH underwater hockey team aims to make waves in SEA Games Irving’s 47 lead Celtics past Mavericks to extend streak to 16 straight View comments CPP denies ‘Ka Diego’ arrest caused ‘mass panic’ among S. Tagalog NPA MOST READ Japan ex-PM Nakasone who boosted ties with US dies at 101 Kris Aquino ‘pretty chill about becoming irrelevant’ Cavaliers: Host the Brooklyn Nets on Wednesday night.Pistons: At the Oklahoma City Thunder on Friday night. Read Next Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Stronger peso trims PH debt value to P7.9 trillion
A huge congratulations to all the referees at National Touch League 2019 who received upgrades:LEVEL 6 UPGRADESOpen:Rachel DilgerRichard NorrisRebecca RogersCameron TurnerTess LeahyBree-Ann Lo GrandeCampbell MuirJoe AboudAlex FaulknerLucas PatersonJordan RandleTing FanJosh SchumacherNicole AlexanderSenior:Greg OatenCraig ButlerTony BradleyPeter CooperDanny DongMichael HonerJoseph JeffriesLEVEL 5 UPGRADESOpen Blake CooperTrev SchelbergPaul GeorgeLachlan KennedyMya CookeJosh FishlockAaron FoxoverRiley PrendergastJosh NorthChelsey WilksDarren WhitbourneLachlan BradleySeniorAndrew MahnDavid CooperIvan ColeCharity ElfordGeorge Forster-JonesPeter KhoudairSteve PrattPhil RaingerJason Taylor
Bournemouth winger Brooks could return in November – Giggsby Ansser Sadiq18 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveWales boss Ryan Gigga believes that David Brooks is at least a month away from fitness.The 22-year-old Bournemouth star is suffering from ankle ligament damage.Welsh fans were hoping he could be back sooner, but it appears that Brooks could miss the remainder of his country’s Euro 2020 qualifiers.Giggs told BBC Sport: “Even if he was fit, he has been out a long time.”His return is looking around November.”Now whether that’s back playing or back actually training, I’m not too sure. It’s a bit of a difficult one because he was still in a boot in the last camp.”Even if he was fit he has been out a long time. Even if he’s on the bench or fit for Bournemouth the week before, it will be difficult to pick him because he’s been out for so long.”We will see, you never know, there’s still time yet.” About the authorAnsser SadiqShare the loveHave your say
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Mourinho praises Man Utd PR: Solskjaer has perfect jobby Paul Vegas4 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveJose Mourinho has praised Manchester United for their PR leading into Sunday’s draw with Liverpool.The former United manager believes the club were able to deflect the pressure on boss Ole Gunnar Solskjaer.”Manchester United did a good job in public relations during the week before the match to try to create a positive atmosphere for the game. And I think they did very well. From what I understand the goal is the future,” Mourinho said.”I will try to find a job like what Solskjaer currently has, which at heart is constantly talking about the future and how you are protected in the present. I think it’s a great situation. He has a three-year contract and it’s all about the future and about young players. The results are important but I think it is amazing to have the opportunity to do that in a giant club like Manchester United.”
Hakeem Olajuwon199514.812.910.213.7✔✔ Does it get any better than this? The best player in the world, under pressure that would break lesser men, appears to be using it somehow to make himself even better. LeBron James’s NBA Finals performance so far is the kind of thing we like to dream great athletes can do.Unfortunately, he’s probably going to lose.Monday on FiveThirtyEight, my colleague Neil Paine discussed how both James’s basic and advanced stats point to his being one of the all-time great finals series. On the mothersite, Kevin Pelton argues that James should win the MVP based on WARP (wins above replacement player), and it seems that the idea that James should win the MVP even if the Cavs lose is getting popular.So I’d like to look at James’s production from a slightly different angle. Rather than just look at how James’s production stands on its own right, let’s see how much impact James has had on the series relative to everyone else — combined.Through the first five games, James has gathered an incredible 18 percent of all the points scored, assists dished and rebounds collected by anyone in this series. If that stands, it will be 1.1 percentage points higher than the next highest over the past 46 years (since they started having a finals MVP in 1969). Here are the top 20, plus James: Kobe Bryant200922.214.171.1244.9✔✔ Tim Duncan2003126.96.36.1995.9✔✔ Shaquille O’Neal200117.018.011.616.6✔✔ LeBron James201519.0%13.6%23.0%18.0%–– Shaquille O’Neal200217.914.88.415.8✔✔ PLAYERSEASONPTS.REBS.ASST.ALLWONMVP Tim Duncan199916.617.87.015.8✔✔ Michael Jordan199188.8.131.524.4✔✔ Shaquille O’Neal200018.020.25.416.9✔✔ Michael Jordan199116.28.824.315.6✔✔ Michael Jordan1998184.108.40.2064.1✔✔ The player closest to James who didn’t win the MVP was Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who had a 15.5 percent share in the 1974 finals. Abdul-Jabbar and the Milwaukee Bucks lost the finals that year to the Boston Celtics, and the MVP went to John Havlicek. The only person to win the finals MVP in a losing effort was Jerry West in 1969, and he happens to be right around the fringe where players any more dominant almost always get the MVP trophy.Meanwhile, regular-season MVP Stephen Curry — the most likely candidate to deny James (again) — presently has the second-highest share in the finals with 11.5 percent of all points, rebounds and assists. If it holds, this 6.5 percentage point gap between first and second would be the second-largest ever (since 1969):The only player with a greater than 4 percentage point gap who didn’t win the MVP was James last year, when the winner was Spurs breakout star and current Defensive Player of the Year Kawhi Leonard.In other words, not only has James been the most dominant player in these finals, he has also been one of the most dominant “most dominant” players in finals history.Of course dominating production isn’t necessarily the same as “value,” and I’ve dabbled in esoteric theories of value myself (like, say, how Dennis Rodman might have been more valuable than Michael Jordan).Still, this gap between James and most other finals MVPs — barring any substantial changes — is so wide that unless you rule out the defeated on principle, it will be hard to argue that he doesn’t belong in their company. LeBron James201214.313.021.914.8✔✔ Michael Jordan199718.58.615.115.3✔✔ Kareem Abdul-Jabbar197113.518.66.614.1✔✔ Kobe Bryant201016.110.011.313.8✔✔ Dwyane Wade2006220.127.116.115.3✔✔ Kareem Abdul-Jabbar197417.314.111.315.5 LeBron James201313.013.317.713.7✔✔ Michael Jordan199319.29.812.816.0✔✔ Jerry West196918.104.22.168.5✔ Wilt Chamberlain197010.423.67.413.5
OSU freshman midfielder Sarah Roberts (10) during a game against Minnesota on Sept. 17 at Jesse Owens Memorial Stadium. OSU lost 2-1. Credit: Sam Harris / For The LanternHeavy winds and rain were major factors in Saturday’s match against the nation’s No. 10 team.Penn State got on the board first in the early minutes of the game when sophomore forward Frannie Crouse went one on one with OSU redshirt junior goalkeeper Jillian McVicker, knocking it right past her through the net.Both the Buckeyes and Nittany Lions played an aggressive first half as OSU tried to break through the Nittany Lions’ defensive front but couldn’t get anything going offensively.The Nittany Lions put the next point on the board in the 39th minute as freshman midfielder Marissa Sheva finished inside the left post from 15 yards out.“In the first half, honestly, I couldn’t see,” OSU junior forward Lindsay Agnew said. “The rain was coming in and the wind was blowing hard. It stinks that they got those two goals, because I really feel if we would have held them to one goal then we could have buried them in the second half. Once the conditions changed, they couldn’t get ahold of the ball.”The Nittany Lions’ underclassmen were a threat to the Buckeyes on Saturday, just like they have been all season, as they have accounted for 24 goals on the year, two of which were scored against OSU.The teams went to halftime with Penn State in the lead, 2-0. The Lions also held the 8-2 advantage in shots, including 5-0 on goal.“I told them it was the best position I ever felt being down 2-0,” OSU coach Lori Walker said. “The wind was such a factor trying to get out early on. Having that at our back in the second half, I just said we have to take advantage of it and fight back and just get one at a time. I am pleased that we were able to come back out in the second half and really do that.”McVicker was replaced in the second half by freshman goalkeeper Devon Kerr.“I was confident and ready to play,” Kerr said. “I really wanted to make a change in the game in a positive way to get my team upbeat.”Walker downplayed the change, saying switching goalkeepers is not a big deal. She said a team has to take advantage of the skills each keeper can contribute to the game.“There’s nothing that (McVicker) did wrong in the first half,” Walker said. “It’s just a matter of utilizing players’ skill sets. At this school we change quarterbacks, and we change goalkeepers. It’s just what we do.”Back-and-forth play consumed much of the second half, as it the game remained at 2-0 until the 81st minute when OSU finally broke through the Nittany Lion defense. Freshman defender Kylie Knight found Agnew inside the box, who then knocked it in from eight yards out to cut the Penn State lead to 2-1.Agnew’s goal reignited her team as it tried to equalize.“I think it gave us another little bit of hope,” Agnew said. “But leading up to that goal, we had so much momentum and everyone was working really hard and winning every ball. Kylie played an amazing ball to me over the top and I was just happy to put one away.”Walker said the goal lit a fire under the team, but the clock remained its biggest enemy.“It really excited us, ignited us,” Walker said. “Because when you’re fighting back you just need that one thing to kind of change the momentum. Unfortunately, we just ran out of time.”For the game, the Nittany Lions held a 15-7 advantage in shots, including 9-2 on goal.Saturday’s game was also the return of redshirt junior defender and co-captain, Morgan Wolcott to Jesse Owens Memorial Stadium. Wolcott saw action in last weekend’s game, but it was her first game played back at home.Wolcott had been sidelined due to injury for much of the season.“I thought playing for the first time again, under the lights, in the rain, just got my adrenalin going,” Wolcott said. “Playing with my team and seeing how hard we fought all the way through, a full 90 minutes was unbelievable. I couldn’t be more proud of them.”The Buckeyes now prepare for their final regular season match of the season against the Michigan State Spartans.“Looks like it’s all going to boil down to that one,” Walker said. “It’s a championship game. I love championship games, and I think our players will show up for it. It’s home, it’s senior day, so there’s a lot of great elements to play for.”OSU is slated to kick off against the Spartans at 7:30 p.m. at Jesse Owens Memorial Stadium.