Walton's Wisdom

Blazer Analysis

2009-08-02T10:02:00.000-07:00

This has been a tumultuous offseason for the Portland Trailblazers. Whether you're pumped or baffled about the moves and the direction of the franchise, you have to agree to that much.

Living in Portland, my 45 min morning commute is comprised of 35 min of Blazer analysis on the radio. After digesting the reaction of callers and radio hosts, there are a few points I'd like to touch on as we head into next season.

1. Jerryd Bayless - Which Side are You On?

It's amazing how much can change in a year.

Just twelve months ago, Bayless was heralded as (an integral piece of) the future for the Blazers. Today, the overwhelming majority seems to have given up on him, calling for his head and hoping a trade ensues. While I'm somewhere in the middle with regards to Bayless as a player, I am beyond annoyed by the overnight shift from a fanbase of Bayless believers to a fanbase of Bayless haters.

What caused this shift? A few summer league games. Summer league? Yep. This is the same summer league that Oden averaged 42 fouls/game in last year. What was fans' response to Oden's lack of discipline last summer? That he's still young and has plenty of time to learn. So why hasn't the same patience been offered to Bayless? You got me. More on Oden later in this post.

On Bayless, most fans are just now coming to the realization that he isn't a point guard. This is the primary reason for the abandonment of the fan base in recent months.

I knew Bayless wasn't a point guard from day one, but who really cares? The same point guard experiment failed on Monta Ellis in G.S. and Ben Gordon in Chicago. Both of those guys have managed to make a good living in this league, despite their lack of height and lack of a distributor's mentality.

So he can't pass. Big deal! As soon as Blazers' brass stops pushing him as a point guard and gets creative with lineups, he'll be just fine. The fact remains, Bayless is a FREAK athlete... you don't believe me, just youtube his high school and college highlights. He gets to the rim at ease and finishes. He can pressure point guards better than anyone else on the roster save Andre Miller. Let's stop focusing on what he isn't and focus on what he is.

Failed Transactions

Much has been made of Portland's failure to land Turkoglu and Millsap. What do I think? I think the Blazers are better off. While I love both of those players, they would have put a tremendous burden on Portland's future cap space.

Will Turkoglu really be worth $10mil+ in 5 years, when he's in his late-thirties? I doubt it. Plus, he excels with the ball in his hands as a point-forward of sorts. B Roy is still the pick-and-roller late in games, and I can't say with certainty that Turkoglu would have been as effective playing off the ball.

Millsap would have brought some toughness, but at the expense of $10mil per? Remember, he would have been coming off the bench. It's hard to justify paying that kind of money for 25-30 min per game.

In short, the death of those proposed deals could be a positive in the long run.

On Oden: Sam Bowie or Dwight Howard?

Let me start by saying that Greg Oden will be a much better player than Sam Bowie ever was. However, there are certain things about the former #1 that I am a bit worried about.

Did anyone else find it concerning that Greg opted against training with the team in favor of academic pursuits in Columbus? For a guy who underwhelmed in year one, I would think he'd dedicate every minute of his summer attention to getting better. Not saying he hasn't been working hard, but to even divert some of his attention to the books seems foolish to me at this point. If anything, it just strengthens the argument that Oden just isn't THAT passionate about basketball... at least not compared to the all-time greats people have been likening him to. That worries me.

As I mentioned earlier, the unwavering support for the big fella has been astounding. It's like people forget that free passes aren't given to #1 picks. People so desperately want to see him succeed that they are blinded by all of his shortcomings. This wasn't intended to be Oden bashing hour, but from what I've seen he 1) has no offensive awareness WHATSOEVER, 2) is extremely undisciplined on defense, 3) shows little aggressiveness or passion for the game, and 4) is injury-prone. Yet, somehow, people up here still think he was a better pick than Kevin Durant. Unbelievable.

The Blazers did the right thing by hiring Brian Grant to be Oden's personal trainer this summer. He should do wonders for the big man.... Grant was always a tireless worker and brought toughness to the court. If he can help Oden in these facets of the game, he should be a big-time contributor this year.

Despite all my criticism, I'm not gonna give up on the big guy yet. He is still VERY young and has years to come into his own. He's got the God-given tangibles that can't be taught, now it's just a matter of him taking it upon himself to improve every year. I hope this happens.

This Season and Looking Forward

The Blazers should be a contender this year, even more so than they were last year. I'm expecting a win total in the 55-60 range, which would be good for 3rd or 4th in the West. They aren't quite a championship-caliber team at this point (especially with the offseason improvements by the Spurs & Lakers), but they should make it past the first round. If they can lock down Roy & Aldridge to long-term deals, and Oden makes Pryzbilla expendible, this team could be downright scary in a couple years. There is not a team in the league that is more loaded with young talent. Should be fun to watch!

Trades Out-Hype the Draft

2009-06-25T22:56:00.000-07:00

It is fitting that the draft commonly thought of as the weakest in years was outdone by trades.

When Orlando and Cleveland met in the Eastern Conference Finals, Orlando walked away with the last laugh. On draft night, Orlando laughed last again by countering Cleveland's Shaq acquisition with their Vince Carter pickup. Coincidence? I think not.

Clearly, O'Neal and Carter are both on their way down the peak of their respective careers. In fact, this night's draftees were still in grade school when Carter and O'Neal came into the league.

These moves were made out of desparation. Cleveland knows that now may be the only time to convince Lebron to stay. Orlando could taste supremacy this season, only to watch it slip away in the final round.

So what do these trades mean for these teams? Do these elderly statesmen have enough in their tanks to make a difference? Do they even fit with their new teams' rosters? Let's take a closer look.

Shaq to Cleveland:

On paper, Cleveland didn't risk much in this transaction. Shaq's gargantuan contract expires next year, and the departed (Ben Wallace & Sasha Pavlovic) will hardly be missed. In reality, Cleveland risked everything. Lebron may pack his bags if the Diesel isn't the right piece and Cleveland can't win a title next season.

Shaq's presence will be felt one way or another. That's what immovable objects do. Whether this presence will be positive or negative is the real question.

Best case scenario, the double-teams commanded by Shaq will give Lebron more room to operate and free up Cleveland's array of one-dimensional shooters. His body will wear down Cleveland's newest nemesis (Orlando) and neutralize Dwight Howard. Cleveland's undoing in the ECF was largely due to the inability of the Wallace/Illgauskas combo to slow down Dwight Howard. Finally, Mo Williams won't have to be the #2 option, a role he wasn't ready to play against Orlando.

Worst case scenario, Shaq's immobility will be a problem in defending pick-and-rolls. His loitering in the offensive lane will clog things up for Lebron, who's jumpshot isn't good enough to remain on the perimeter. His ego will be damaging when Lebron steals all of his publicity.

I'm guessing the Cavs' regular season record will be impacted negatively by this transaction. It will take the team weeks, if not months, to become accustomed to having Shaq on the court. Defensive rotations will change, offensive spacing will change, and Lebron's development as the team's leader will by stymied.

However, Cavs didn't make this trade to win the regular season. They made this trade to win the postseason. Acquiring the Diesel was monumental for Cleveland's chances to outlast Boston and Orlando in the 2010 playoffs. As those playoffs will probably make or break the franchise's future with Lebron, this was a great move.

Carter to Orlando:

Bringing in Carter shows Orlando's commitment to the here and now, sacrificing the future promise of Courtney Lee to get a few twilight years from Carter.

First question I have is: who's going to take the last shot on this roster? Lewis and Turkoglu showed icy veins time and again this postseason. Carter has provided late-game heroics throughout his career. I suppose this dilemma is a good problem to have. The only thing I know for sure is that Dwight Howard won't be taking the last shot.

Best case scenario, Carter will flourish in the pinstripes. His three-point proficiency and ability to finish in the open court will mesh perfectly with Orlando's open style of play. If teams struggled matching up with Turkoglu and Lewis in '09, adding Carter to the mix could make the matchups nightmarish in '10. Now all five Magic starters are all-star caliber players.

Worst case scenario, Carter is lost in this offense. He isn't accustomed to sitting in the corner awaiting a kickout, which is what Magic players not named Dwight Howard do best. He doesn't handle the ball enough to play his game, and his ho-hum attitude takes the fire out of Magic bellies.

I think the Carter pickup will solidify Orlando's domination of Lebron's Cavaliers. Lebron couldn't cover Hedo and Rashard simultaneously this season, and nobody else on that roster could cover either of them. With Carter and Turkoglu interchangeable as ballhandling wings, Orlando will pick-and-roll Shaq to death. With a healthy Garnett, however, I still don't see Orlando beating Boston in a seven-game set. Carter will help the Magic if they make it back to the finals, but getting there will be a tall task.

Picking Apart the Top Picks

2009-06-23T23:13:00.000-07:00

Admittedly, it's all speculation at this point. . . but this year's draft class seems pretty weak.

Browsing the sports cyber-world, I came across NBA.com's consensus mock draft, and was shocked by how many players with glaring weaknesses were projected as lottery picks. In fact, every player not named Blake Griffin (and potentially James Harden) seems destined to underwhelm at the pro level, in my estimation.

Normally, I focus my pre-draft analysis on team needs and overlooked "sleepers." This year, I'm going to be as pessimistic as possible. For each consensus lottery pick, I will present my arguments for why he shouldn't be drafted so high. I've excluded #1 (Blake Griffin) because I don't see any glaring flaws in his game.

2) Hasheem Thabeet: Where do I start? I contemplated writing this entire piece on Thabeet's shortcomings. He's a flimsy, one-dimensional shot-blocker with no resemblance of an offensive game. He got manhandled in college by DeJuan Blair, who is 9 inches shorter than him. He ain't gonna sell any tickets. But he's tall... and he has upside. Yeah, we've heard that before. Think Mutombo at best and Sam Bowie at worst.

Thabeet Rocking the Pink Throw Sweater in Defensive Stopper Fashion

3) Ricky Rubio: The Pistol Pete comparisons are tiresome. If the videos I've seen aren't lying, the Pistol could shoot. Ricky can't. In fact, he shot below 40% from the field last season in EuroLeague. And for all of the press on his remarkable ball-handling, Rubio turned it over 3 times a game in only 23 minutes per. That projects to around 5 turnovers playing starter minutes. But he's excited to play in the NBA. As long as he's not in Memphis. Or OKC. Or Sacramento. Or Minneapolis. Good luck with that.

4) James Harden: Harden's college stats point to a well-rounded game. I saw him play a lot, and he was clearly the best player on the court. When he was engaged. If Harden is going to be a bona fide shooting guard in the NBA, he's gotta be more aggressive. 13 shot attempts per game (like he had at ASU) isn't gonna cut it. I also think he's a little slow for a 6'4 guard.

5) Tyreke Evans: Apparently GM's searching for their franchise point guard aren't putting much merit in Evans' college stats. 3.9 assists, 3.6 turnovers, 27% on threes, 71% on free throws. Shaq can get away with those kind of stats. Point guards can't.

6) Jordan Hill: Meat and potatoes guy. Every team needs a power forward who can rebound and hit the mid-range jumper. There are a lot of guys in the NBA who can do that. That's why you pick one up through free agency -- not with the 6th overall pick.

7) Stephen Curry: Curry should be a 2-guard, but isn't really big enough to play the position full-time. He has the stroke to fill that Vinnie Johnson/Ben Gordon microwave role, but this is the lottery we're talking about here. You don't use a top-7 pick on a role player.

8) Jonny Flynn: I'm having DaJuan Wagner flashbacks...

9) Demar DeRozan: For all the "De"'s in his name, this dude doesn't play much "de"-fense. That's problematic for swingmen trying to cover Lebron, Kobe, and the rest of the multi-talented offensive juggernauts at that position. Oh, did I mention he shot 17% from three? And that's from the college three-point line.

10) Jrue Holiday: He can do a lot of things. He's just not great at any of them. 8.5 ppg & 3.7 ppg as a frosh at UCLA. Impressive.

11) Brandon Jennings: When drafting a point guard, leadership should be as important a factor as scoring, ballhandling, or passing. Jennings didn't get the memo. When Jennings couldn't skip college for the NBA, he thought he was too big for the NCAA, making headlines with an international rotation. Then he made those laughable pre-draft comments. He's sure got a lot of confidence for a guy who put up 6 ppg and 2 apg while in Rome. Rubio's international stats don't look too bad after all.

12) Gerald Henderson: The last 5 guards drafted out of Duke? J.J. Redick, Daniel Ewing, Chris Duhon, Trajan Langdon. That worked out well.

13) Earl Clark: Last year, he put up 14 points on 12 shot attempts per game. Not terribly efficient for a 6'9 guy. To be honest, I haven't seen him play much. I did a little research, and it came as no surprise that "shot selection" was listed as one of his weaknesses. Another listed weakness was "focus." That would worry me.

14) DeJuan Blair: It's no wonder Blair can't block shots. He's just a hair over 6'5" without shoes on. Only one post player has ever excelled in the NBA at that height: Charles Barkley. Will Blair be the next Barkley? I say no.

Memorable Draft-Day Moves: LA Lakers

2009-06-19T15:39:00.000-07:00

Now that the season is over, draft talk is in full swing.

While this year's class bores me overall (although I contemplated a piece on Ricky Efron-Rubio), years past have provided all kinds of intriguing moments. Franchises have been built by ingenius picks and destroyed by negligent picks.

Over the years, the Lakers have been a model of consistent success. So what moves have they made to build greatness and which ones were temporary missteps? In honor of their '09 championship, let's take a look back at the most monumental decisions made by Laker brass on draft day.

5. 1977 NBA Draft -- Kenny Carr (6th overall pick)

In a baffling decision, L.A. selected Kenny Carr with the 6th overall pick of the 1977 NBA Draft. In doing so, L.A. passed on future all-stars Bernard King (7th), Jack Sikma (8th), Rickey Green (16th), and Eddie Johnson (49th). So how did the Forward from NC State fare in Purple & Gold? Carr put up 6.2 and 7.4 ppg, respectively, in his first two seasons in the league before the Lakers gave up on their investment 5 games into his third season. Carr would later travel around the league for another 8 seasons as a journeyman, with mildly effective stops in Cleveland, Detroit, and Portland. To the Lakers' credit, they did steal Norm Nixon with the 22nd pick in the same draft year.

4. 1962 NBA Draft -- Leroy Ellis (6th overall pick)

Even great franchises make bad calls sometimes. The Lakers selected this "promising" young big man with the 6th overall choice, bypassing John Havlicek (who was picked next at #7). Ellis was decent in his four seasons with the Lakers, but capped out at 12 ppg in his last season in L.A. However, it wasn't so much what Ellis didn't do, but more what Havlicek did do that came back to haunt the Lakers. Havlicek was a thorn in L.A.'s side for the next decade-plus, one of the key reasons L.A. kept finishing a close second to Boston in the NBA playoffs.

3. 1996 NBA Draft -- Kobe Bryant (13th pick via Charlotte)

Jerry West took a chance in trading long-time crowd favorite Vlade Divac for the unproven, college bypassing Bryant. I don't even think the Logo knew how fortuitous this decision would become. We know the history: Bryant went on to team up with Shaq for 3 titles, and won a 4th without the Big Fella this season. Equally impressive is the fact that in a league marked by player movement and free agency, Bryant has remained in Laker gold for his whole career. Wise decision, Mr. West.

2. 1975 NBA Draft -- David Meyers (2nd overall pick)

After appearing on the cover of Sports Illustrated in college, Meyers was picked 2nd overall in the 1975 draft, only behind future Hall-of-Famer David Thompson. Meyers went on to play only four seasons in the L, putting up modest averages of 11.2 points and 6.3 boards per outing. Dumbest pick in NBA history, right? Not so fast. After being drafted by the Lakers, he was packaged with three other half-wits and shipped to Milwaukee for Lew Alcindor. We all know what happened next...

Lone remaining jpg. of David Meyers on Google Search

1. 1979 NBA Draft -- Earvin 'Magic' Johnson (1st overall pick)
The Lakers struck gold in landing the first pick in the 1979 draft and made the no-brainer choice to select Magic. The four picks that followed L.A.'s selection? David Greenwood, Bill Cartwright, Greg Kelser, and Sidney Moncrief. I'd say the Lakers made the right decision here. Magic went on to team with Kareem and James in bringing home 5 NBA championships and a plethora of close second's. He was the catalyst of the "Showtime" era and solidified the franchise as the second-best in all of pro basketball.

Final Words:
I flirted with the idea of including the Jerry West and Elgin Baylor selections on this list, but kept them off in the end. Going through the team's draft history, it is easy to see why the Lakers have remained good (or great) for most of their history. Unlike many franchises (ahem, Sam Bowie), they made the right decisions in the offseason.

Live Game 4 Blog

2009-06-11T17:24:00.000-07:00

Keep in mind, this is coming from a Laker fan. Thus, the below observations are completely biased.

1st Quarter:
- Kobe line-drives an 18-footer. 78 seconds in, we get our first teeth-clenching moment.
- Gotta give it to Courtney Lee, he's got an awful lot of confidence for a rookie who blew a game-winning layup and missed two wide open threes to start the game.
- Bynum picks up the obligatory 2nd foul with 8:42 left in the first. True to form, his foul was wasted, not hard enough to prevent a three-point play, not soft enough to avoid the whistle.
- Kobe forces another shot early in the shot clock. Will he ever take the ball to the basket again?
- Skippy throws in his second prayer of the game. He's a different player at home.
- Kobe FINALLY decides to take the ball to the basket and gets a three-point play. The NBA: where amazing happens.
- This is the "hardest" Jeff Van Gundy has seen Howard play for a six minute stretch... in this series... in the games in Orlando... while the Magic have had the lead... and Courtney Lee has two fouls. Riveting stuff.
- Was it irresponsible for ESPN to have the coach's brother commentate these games?
- Speaking of the Van Gundy's, the interview of Papa VG was priceless in game three.
- I love it when Turk complains that he got fouled. It's kind of like watching Bobby Brown protest against domestic abuse. If Bobby Brown had been born with fetal alcohol syndrome.
- Tony Battie sighting.
- Orlando fans boo when Kobe rips through, raises up, and draws the foul. Have they ever watched Turkoglu play?
- DJ Mbenga sighting. Drumroll please... Josh Powell sighting.
End of 1st: Magic 24, Lakers 20

2nd Quarter:
- Luke Walton starts things off with a feathery jumper. He has played terrific basketball all playoffs long.
- Proof positive that Breen is an idiot. "J.J. Redick has become a facilitator this year under Stan Van Gundy." I checked the stats: Redick averaged an eye-popping 1.1 apg this season.
- Turk is making himself some money this series. He's playing all-star ball.
- Magic by 10. Maybe their game three shooting (and the Lakers' defense) wasn't a fluke after all.
- In case you were wondering, Marcin Gortat cannot guard Pau Gasol.
- Bynum makes his first legitimate post move in 96 hours. In other news, Americans elect their first black president. Wait...
- Dwight Howard grabs his 47th rebound of the half.
- With no other low post options, L.A. subs-in trainer Gary Vitti. Maybe he will box out Howard.
- Mark Jackson criticizes SVG for not subbing Turkoglu on the last offensive possession. Shockingly, JVG quickly changes the topic of conversation.
Halftime: Magic 49, Lakers 37

3rd Quarter:
- Since when did Brian Scott become the spokesperson for the Lakers?
- Bryant pulls up and hits a three on the slow break. Camera pans the Magic bench as Pietrus drops his warmups.
- Ariza hits his third straight shot, and it's a five-point game. And the Magic just lost 10% of its playoff fan base.
- In breaking news, Kobe likes Hedo as a player.
- Question for SVJ: when a player is one-dimensional and that dimension is failing, why would you keep him in the game? Sub-out Redick.
- The refs confer with Fisher, who calls it Laker ball.
- Maybe Howard shouldn't have sprinted every possession in the first half... he looks winded.
- Orlando looks lost without Turkoglu on the floor.
- In the most amusing play I've seen in recent memory, J.J. Redick tries a Hedo/Kobe pump, lean, & chuck and actually expects a foul to be called.
- I stand corrected. Kobe trying to man up on Howard is the most amusing segment I've seen in recent memory.
End of 3rd: Lakers 67, Magic 63.

4th Quarter:
- SVG tries to weather the storm by starting the fourth with Tony Battie in the lineup. Nice.
- Why doesn't Shannon Brown play in this series? He would give Skippy fits.
- Wow. Pietrus blows the 1-on-0 break. That's a game-losing play right there.
- Did Jameer Nelson gain weight and shrink during his layoff? He looks like Muggsy Bogues tonight.
- After Pietrus hits a three, Kobe hits an impossible three, check that, two, in Pietrus' face. Coincidence? I think not.
- Even JVG is annoyed by the "hand down, man down" phrase at this point...
- Whenever Dwight Howard makes a free throw, I feel like a flock of seagulls has just crapped on my head.
- Pietrus is one of those Stephen Jackson/Travis Outlaw players, the player who has no concept of good basketball play vs. bad basketball play. These types of players tend to play well at the end of games because they have no filter and aren't bothered by the moment (because they don't understand what "the moment" is). 76-75 Magic.
- The lost 10% of June Magic fans are back again.
- David Stern walks over to the Laker's bench and takes back the embroidered "best closer" chair when Kobe misses a wide open three.
- Mark Jackson offers his apologies to SVG for questioning his playing "Muggsy" Nelson in the fourth quarter. JVG bites his tongue.
- Does that "best closer" chair belong to Trevor Ariza?
- Stern calmly walks the chair over to the Magic bench and slides it under Turkoglu as he sits down. Magic by 5 at the timeout.
- Kobe takes a horrendous three as the rest of the team watches. This is getting old.
- Howard misses first of two. This one could make it a two possession game. Shot's up... and out. The Lakers have life.
- Fisher hits the second-biggest shot of his career, and JVG's partiality comes out as he chastises Jameer Nelson for leaving him open.
- 4.6 left, tie game. SVG is contemplating subbing-in Courtney Lee.
- Pietrus misses the buzzer-beater. So much for my above theory.
End of 4th: Lakers 87, Magic 87.

Overtime:
- Lewis starts things off with a "magical" three. Okay, I apologize to anyone who just read that.
- Kobe with two straight. Stern sneaks back to the Magic bench to reclaim the "best closer" chair.
- Pietrus blatantly whacks Bryant on the wrist. No call.
- Howard hits 1-of-2 to make it a tie game with 1:30 left. The Magic team doctor resuscitates SVG.
- Gasol swears in espanol as Nelson hooks his arm on the rebound attempt.
- Fisher hits the third-biggest shot of his career, and Breen finally gets a chance to talk again. Lakers by 3.
- After a Bryant elbow, Nelson's teeth would be intact if he ever kept his mouthguard in his mouth.
- France and Spain square off. Advantage: Spain.
- Game, set, match. Series over, folks.
Final: Lakers 99, Magic 91.

The 5 Most Polarizing Athletes of this Era

2009-06-10T20:29:00.000-07:00

Polarize (v) - "To cause to concentrate about two conflicting or contrasting positions."

In my previous post about Kobe Bryant, I called him the most polarizing figure in sports. With some inspiration from Knee Jerk, I put a little more thought into this claim, identifying the professional athletes who have elicited the most bipartisan reactions from fans in recent years. I started by brainstorming the historical players who met this criteria, but quickly learned that that was far too difficult an exercise. There is no way I could create a responsible list of the all-time most polarizing/controversial players when I either: a) wasn't alive or b) wasn't coherent enough to really get a feel for the reactions they brought forth in fans and the media. Consequently, I've narrowed this list to the 5 most polarizing athletes of the past twenty years.

Honorable Mention: Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling, Ron Artest, Dennis Rodman, Allen Iverson, Charles Barkley (retired), Randy Moss, Chad Johnson, The Manning Brothers, Pete Rose (retired), Mike Tyson, Jose Canseco (retired).

5. Shaquille O'Neal
The Diesel didn't make this list because he is the center of controversy (like Roger Clemens or Ron Artest). He made this list because ever since he has entered the league there have been two camps: one camp calls O'Neal the best center and most dominating force of his generation (or even all-time), the other says he was simply bigger than anyone else and did not dedicate himself to the game (pointing to his free throw percentage and lack of conditioning). Perhaps the biggest factor in including O'Neal on this list is his media-fueled feud with Kobe Bryant. Since Kobe is the most polarizing athlete in the game, anything Kobe creates a rift amongst fans. Stemming from the Kobe-Shaq feud, Kobe's supporters generally dislike (or even hate) O'Neal and Kobe's naysayers generally praise O'Neal and his accomplishments.

4. Terrell Owens
T.O. stirs up self-inflicted controversy every year. From calling out every quarterback he has ever played with, to crying after a playoff loss, to overdosing on pills, to contract disputes, to self-proclaimed greatness, to crunches in his driveway on ESPN, to trend-setting touchdown celebrations, he is constantly the center of attention. The only reason T.O. isn't higher on this list is that there is a sizeable disparity between the amount of fans who love him and the amount of fans who hate him. Every sports fan with a pulse in San Francisco, Dallas, or Philadelphia dislikes him. Older generation fans generally dislike him, and younger generation fans are split. At one time or another, most fans have at least admired his on-field accomplishments or physical attributes, even if they later made the switch and became T.O.-haters.

3. Alex Rodriguez
Any time a player is dubbed the next big thing, there is bound to be a mixed reaction. That's exactly what happened when Rodriguez came into the league as a protypical young talent. Any time a player gets those types of accolades and clearly believes them to be 100% true, the eaction is even stronger amongst fans. When that player suits up for the most polarizing team in professional sports, these reactions are only further magnified. Rodriguez's record-breaking contract, postseason struggles, MVP trophies, relations with Madonna, and steroid admissions have all elicited mixed reactions and been the focal point of the media. Just like the team he plays for, you must love him or hate him -- there is no middle ground.

2. Barry Bonds

Barry has never been a media darling, even while compiling some of the most prolific stats in his sport's history. There isn't much debate as to whether Bonds is a "likeable" public figure -- he is standoffish, arrogant, and unapproachable by fans. The debate, and the cause of the mixed reactions to Barry, are his statistics. The general assumption is that Barry took steroids for at least a portion of his career. In the process, he broke baseball's most hallowed record and took it from a former player who was endeared by the fans and was still around to witness the feat. Many fans have embraced Barry despite the controversy and have recognized him as a top-5 player of all-time, many others have chastised him and called his statistical contributions fraudulent. In a way, Barry personifies the greater steroid issue that has plagued baseball over the past decade. The rampant use of steroids has created a divide between baseball fans of old and new, where records and history play a bigger role than any other sport. For these reasons, Barry Bonds is the second-most polarizing figure in sports.

1. Kobe Bryant
Kobe wins the top spot on the list by a wide margin, in my opinion. Shaq receives more love than hate, and the other three athletes on the list receive more hate than love. What makes Kobe the most polarizing figure, in the true sense of the word, is that he receives equal parts love and equal parts disdain. For every attribute praised by a Kobe-lover, there is a rebuttal for a Kobe-hater. For every accomplishment, a caveat. Kobe ran Shaq out of L.A. /Shaq couldn't handle sharing the spotlight. Kobe is a "ballhog" / Kobe is the best scorer in the game. Kobe can't win without Shaq / Kobe hasn't had the supporting cast to win without Shaq. The list goes on... and on... and on. The love/hate divide began when Kobe came into the league and grew when he was compared to the most sacred name in hoop history: Michael Jordan. Like A-Rod, Kobe plays for the most polarizing team in his sport, which only intensifies opinions about him. No matter how you slice it, Kobe is the most loved, and hated, player in the NBA. Winning both of these imaginary awards simultaneously makes Kobe Bryant the most polarizing athlete of this era.

In Winning, the Magic Proved They Have No Chance

2009-06-10T08:43:00.000-07:00

The Magic played nearly flawless basketball, shooting an astounding 63% from the floor. Five Magic players scored at least 18 points, and Rafer Alston looked like he was a legitimate player (for once). Pietrus went French M.J. on a few shots, and most of the bounces went the way of the home team. A normally cash money Kobe missed five of his ten free throw attempts, and the Lakers had multiple late-game brain freezes. Despite all of these positive factors, the Magic only led by two points with 0.2 seconds left in the game.

After game two, I thought the remainder of the series was a formality. Despite the ultimate outcome of game three, this feeling only got stronger. The Lakers played pretty well, but the Magic played out of their minds. I'd venture to guess Orlando won't have another record-breaking game of 63% rain. I'd also bet Bryant doesn't miss 5 of 10 free throws again in this series. Every key player on Orlando's roster played well, and nobody on Los Angeles' roster exceeded expectations (save Jordan Farmar). Simply put, Orlando hit their historical peak and Los Angeles was at best slightly above their average.

To me, this game provided the most concrete evidence that the Lakers are a better team than the Magic. Orlando played the best they could possibly play, on their home court, against an average Laker performance. Yet they still barely won. This game provided the most concrete evidence that the Magic may hang around for a bit, but they aren't going to win the series. If anything, I expect a split in the 4/5 set and a trip back to L.A. with the Lakers up three-two. If so, the Magic would need ninety-six minutes of game three basketball to win the series. Not happening.

Kobe Bryant and His Coat of Many Colors

2009-06-08T18:39:00.000-07:00

As Kobe hones in on title #4, his supporters are applying the tanning oil in preparation of basking in his glory. It has been seven long years since title #3, and the non-stop chatter about his failure to win a championship without big brother can finally come to an end. To rest can go the argument that his supposed me-first attitude would preclude his teams from winning the ultimate prize. To them (or us, depending on how you see it), Kobe's greatness will finally be undeniable even to the harshest of critics.

Kobe's naysayers, meanwhile, are plotting their angle of attack, brainstorming the ways to undermine his accomplishments and deny his greatness. In actuality, denying his greatness has never been an approach of the naysayers. The chosen approach has generally been to attack Kobe by claiming others are, or were, greater. Even as an outspoken pro-Kobeist, I have never been bothered by this form of "criticism." To me, attacking a player because he falls just short of the greatest ever (M.J.) or the to-be greatest ever (Lebron) isn't criticism at all. It is actually cleverly-disguised praise. To even include Kobe in that conversation with the Jordans, the Magics, the Lebrons, is to concede that he is one of the greatest players to ever play this game.

To reuse the most overused descriptor of Kobe's blossoming legacy, Kobe is downright polarizing. The most polarizing player in all of professional sports, in fact. Ever. In my tenure as a fan, which has included tedious study of the game's forefathers, I have never witnessed or heard of a player who elicited such extreme reactions from fans, who commanded such love & respect while also giving rise to such ill will and hate. He is the individualized New York Yankees.

Since the day Jerry West took that prophetic leap of faith in bringing the young Kobe Bryant to L.A., I have watched closely. As I have studied Kobe Bryant the man, Kobe Bryant the player, Kobe Bryant the public figure, I have witnessed the most primitive yet remarkable transformations. His career thus far can be broken down into four chapters, each of which I feel compelled to expand upon below.

Growing Pains (1996-1999)

When Kobe entered the league as a confused, young kid with a crater-sized chip on his shoulder, I found him to be immature (even for his age). He was at one moment an innocent prototype and the next a conceded egoist. Young Kobe fumbled over words in interviews but had the confidence to seize the moment before his game was polished enough to do so. The commingling of his confidence and his insecurity was perhaps summarized best by his three airball performance in the waning moments against Utah in the 1997 playoffs. A bench player at the time, Kobe stepped into these shots like he was a go-to-guy and singlehandedly wrecked the Lakers' season.

In the early years, Kobe's childlike charm was often overshadowed by an unwarranted arrogance. This was the formula for his polarizing effect on fans. This set the stage for the two camps we are familiar with today: the Kobe-lovers and the Kobe-haters. What made him endearing to many made him despicable to many more. The lovers voted him in as an all-star starter when he was the sixth man for his own team. The haters provided boos and mockery at each opposing arena he set foot in. Nearly thirteen years later, most people haven't wavered from their initial loyalties to these camps.

As Bryant's game developed in seasons two and three, we were exposed to the monster that lived within him. His unquenchable thirst for perfection and unhealthy need for acceptance isolated him from teammates and fan base. Kobe was not misunderstood by the fans so much as he was misunderstood by himself. He tried so desperately to win the favor and respect of the basketball world that he failed to understand what it would take to be embraced. The failure to make ends with humanity meet did not come without effort. Kobe was beyond impressionable, to the point that he released a rap song when he heard he had no street cred, praised M.J. when he heard he was a two-three imposter, and fed Shaq when he heard he was a ballhog. Sometimes too much is not enough -- Kobe dug his own public relations grave through these futile attempts.

Blemished Supremacy (1999-2003)

By the time the 1999-2000 season rolled around, Kobe had exhausted all efforts to be the NBA's poster boy. Kobe turned his cheek to the criticism, embarking on a journey to prove all naysayers wrong. In the process, he had built a mini-dynasty on the cape of a in-his-prime Shaquille O'Neal.

Bryant must have thought that winning would bridge the gap between unimpressed fan and devoid Kobe. Kobe the competitor was birthed out of his undisguised worship of Michael Jordan (trust me, Kobe's mannerisms and career track offer undeniable proof that his steps were paved by the observance of His Airness), and he saw the fan-filled fruit that was cultivated by Jordan's championships. I can't say I blame him.

Three championships later, Kobe's public persona had only experienced subtle changes. The three-peat stimulated talk of basketball immortality, but his character flaws and the looming shadow of Shaq dwarfed the level of respect that he should have received. Winning soon became habit more than fulfilling, and a rift between the two stars left most on the lovable giant's side. This was the beginning of the end for the Shaq-Kobe duo and the Lakers' spot at the top of the hill.

Failure (2003-2007)

After the threepeat, winning was not enough for Kobe. He had to be revered as the best player in the league, but first he had to be revered as the best player on his team. For the first time since pre-2000 Kobe, we saw his stubborn side again. Consequently, Kobe's Lakers were upended in the NBA Finals by a far less talented Detroit squad. Team's triumph over individual led many to believe that Kobe was a cancerous presence for the purple & gold. Upon Shaq's departure and subsequent success in Miami, these beliefs were strengthened and perpetuated by the media. By this time, he held the undisputed title of best two guard in basketball, but was excommunicated after legal troubles and a lack of winning without the Diesel.

Despite all of his individual accomplishments, Kobe was also without the ultimate individual accolade: an MVP trophy. It is hard to say whether he was more bothered by the losing or by watching Steve Nash hoist back-to-back MVP trophies. His "look-at-me-now" performances over this period suggest the latter was equally important as the former. Kobe put up an astounding 35.4 ppg in the 2005-06 season despite his team's meager 8th place finish. Along the way, he scored over 60 points twice, including the absurd 81-point outing. Inexplicably, Bryant decided to refuse shots in game seven against Phoenix in the same season, proving a point at the expense of his team.

During this middling period between championships, Bryant took on a me-against-the-world attitude. It was a strange phenomenon where Kobe was so much better than anyone else that he actually controlled his own statistical output. He was anything but reactive to the defense, opting instead to oscillate between deadeye scorer and facilitator. This was done partially as an experiment, to determine the best formula for winning while playing on team with many imperfections. But more than anything else, it was done to prove that he was just that good. Rather than channeling his superiority in a fashion that would better the play of his team, Kobe channeled his superiority to engage in Kobe vs. Media, Kobe vs. Fan, Kobe vs. Lakers, and Kobe vs. Kobe battles. In the process, Kobe blasted his teammates when they failed and was jealous when they succeeded.

By the summer of 2007, Kobe appeared half-ready to give up. He had failed to win a championship without Shaq, had failed to win an MVP by his own devices, and had failed to win the affection of the basketball world by being jagged. His trade demands and public criticism of Andrew Bynum were an ugly display of his selfishness and frustration, and I thought he was destined for a general admission ticket to the hall of fame when he could have sat courtside.

Redemption (2008-Present)

After the near-implosion of the Lakers in the summer of 2007, Jerry Buss delivered in a big way by stealing Pau Gasol. By doing so, Buss showed Kobe that he was still more concerned with building a present-day winner than developing young talent for the future. This transaction in and of itself breathed new life into Kobe, and for the first time since Shaq's departure he was confident in the team's direction.

With this new confidence, Kobe matured overnight as a player. Until then, all of Kobe's efforts to put the team ahead of himself were visibly fabricated, unauthentic. In early 2008, Kobe passed because teammates were open and shot because he was open. His predetermined game approaches were no longer, and this translated to more wins than losses. Adding a player of Gasol's caliber surely didn't hurt the Lakers' on-court performance, but Kobe's transformation was the most important factor in the equation.

Although his statistics in 2007-08 were similar to the numbers he posted in the previous two seasons (maybe even worse), Kobe's transformation into an authentic leader did not go unnoticed. Kobe received his first NBA MVP award at the conclusion of the regular season, and was showered with praise until the Lakers' six-game failure to the Celtics in the NBA Finals. Even in ultimate defeat, the majority of the external blame was placed on the Lakers' lack of toughness inside rather than Kobe's inability to win the big one.

While Kobe's athleticism has slightly deteriorated over the past several months and Lebron has been ushered in as the newly crowned king of the league, we have witnessed the most effective basketball of Kobe's career during this year's playoffs. He has taken over in stretches and looked mortal in others, but for the first time in his career he appears to be playing reactive basketball without reacting to his critics' faulty logic. His focus has been nothing short of mesmerizing, and his movements calculated but improvizational.

In 2009, it has all clicked for the Mamba -- just in time to put a cap on his legacy with his fourth championship as a player and his first as a true leader. When he hoists that trophy as an NBA champion later this week, his lovers will still love and his haters will still hate. That's just the way it's always going to be. I just wish that in love or in hate, we would look at him for what he's become and not what he hasn't.

The Magic Threw Away Game Two... and the Series.

2009-06-07T22:59:00.000-07:00

Sorry, Cinderella... the shoe doesn't fit this time.

Just got done with the most anticlimactic 3 hours of back-and-forth basketball I've ever been exposed to. I'm a Laker fan, the Lakers won an overtime game, and there were something like 21 lead changes in the fourth quarter & overtime combined. That's the type of stuff instant classics are made of, right? Not so much. Despite all of the makings of a thriller, I walked away from the television feeling empty.

Maybe it was the style of the game, with both teams struggling to reach 90 without the overtime period. Maybe it was the continuation of strange officiating that detracted from the drama within the matchup (the phantom foul calls in Kobe's favor in the fourth quarter, the failure to call goaltending when Howard reached through the rim to block Gasol's layup, Turkoglu initiating contact every time he touched the ball and rarely getting called for a foul, etc.). I can't put my finger on exactly why I wasn't nervous during the game or elated after the game, but all of the feelings that I had during the Rockets-Lakers & Nuggets-Lakers series' were no-shows. I don't think there was one moment during the game that I felt nervous or sat on the edge of my seat, which is really odd considering all that transpired.

With that off my plate, I'd like to bid farewell to Orlando's 2009 title hopes. The Lakers are bound to have at least one of their dominating performances (where they are focused & unbeatable) sprinkled amongst the three-game set in Orlando, and there is virtually no way the Magic will win two straight in L.A. if it comes to that. Under no circumstances do I see Orlando winning four of five, with two of those games in Staples. Not with their lack of consistent point guard play, not with their failure to effectively utilize Dwight Howard, not with Tony Battie and J.J. Redick playing key minutes, not with their severe handicap in the coaching matchup, and certainly not with Kobe Bryant on the other team.

Before signing out, a few observations I took away from game two:

Orlando's players do not respect Stan Van Gundy or what he has to say to them. As if Shaq's vocal criticism in '06 wasn't enough, this probably should have been obvious to me after a normally reserved Dwight Howard disrespected him in front of the national media during these playoffs. But until tonight, I thought the criticism directed toward SVG was somewhat unwarranted, as he has a pretty good track record in terms of wins & losses. Tonight, I saw ESPN's cameras pan in on multiple huddles where players were taking part in side conversations or appeared to be completely tuning out what he had to say. This was also evident during his halftime speech ("mic'd up" by ESPN), where not a single player was making eye contact with the coach and as a whole looked indifferent.

Kobe is much more difficult to analyze now than he was even a few rounds ago. At one moment he appears to be on a violent mission, shooting death stares at his teammates and hitting impossible shots in cold blood. The next minute he is jovial, sharing laughs with said teammates and perfectly content in the decoy role. It used to be that Kobe would enter a game with a predetermined approach. He would carry out this approach to a flaw, either by forcing up shots in his "scoring Kobe" mode or passing up wide open looks in his "passing Kobe" mode. Now, his approach is changing from quarter-to-quarter or even possession-to-possession. I still haven't fully embraced the notion that his behavior on the offensive end is entirely reactive (as opposed to predetermined), but he has recently made a point to tell us that he is "taking what the defense gives him" in every interview. Really? Not only do I see nobody in pinstripes (individually, or collectively) who is capable of dictating his approach to the game through their defense, but I also think Kobe is entirely too analytical and stubborn to be patient in his strategic decisions. I still think that on certain possessions he decides that he is going to shoot regardless of the defensive front, or that he is going to get others involved regardless of whether or not he has an open look. I will probably write another post addressing these opinions separately in the near future.

Hedo Turkoglu is more physical than his reputation. I never noticed, but Turkoglu initiates contact almost every time he touches the ball and is very crafty in getting defenders in the air. He was called for a push-off on one critical possession late in the game, but overall his initiation of contact paid dividends via free-throws. As much as the Lakers claim to be a tough team, I still see them struggle when the game becomes more physical. Physicality was the only reason an injury-plagued Houston team made round two a series, and Denver pushed the Lakers around in the paint all series long in the WCF.

Until next time...

How the Magic can Win this Series

2009-06-05T18:11:00.000-07:00

SVG's Game One Surprise: Tony Battie?

Game One Reaction

After last night's bludgeoning, few have given the Magic a chance to win this series. Sure, the commentators have gone out of their way to remind us that this is just "one game," and that more often than not a beatdown does not carry over to the next game. To me, this is a clever way of promoting the series and keeping viewers interested. After all, disinterested fans lead to poor ratings and the commentators are employed by the networks who care about that sort of thing.

That said, this series is far from over. I know the Magic were outshot, outdefended, and just plain outclassed in game one. We all witnessed just how good a focused Laker team really is, and the Magic's weaknesses were certainly exposed (namely the lack of a second post player and too much reliance on outside shooting). Clearly, if the Lakers continue to play this way the series could be over in four games. But as we have seen in these playoffs, the Lakers don't play this way every game. It seems every game, our impression of the Lakers flipflops between heartless and determined. Phil Jackson's Jekyll & Hyde analogy wasn't too far off.

Unfortunately for the Magic, both versions of the Lakers are better than most teams in the NBA. Even on down nights, they have the talent and experience to keep things close. The Magic must play near-perfect basketball to beat this juggernaut, and even then I'm not sure it can be done in a seven-game series. Nevertheless, I've put together a gameplan for Orlando to shock the world and win this series:

1. Feed the Beast, Even When in Foul Trouble
The Magic must feed the ball to Howard early and often. Regardless of the foul situation, they must be persistent on this front. Nobody on the Lakers has the strength to guard him down low, despite the common belief that Howard has no post moves. Bynum is the Lakers' bulkiest threat, and Howard has eaten him alive when given the opportunity.

I know it's tempting for Stan Van Gundy to monitor his star's fouls. Much has been made of Howard's foul troubles in these playoffs and the detrimental effect it has on the team. I know he picked up a few offensive fouls in game one and feeding him the ball increases the likelihood of said foul trouble. I know the Lakers are sagging and positioning help defenders to take charges when Howard makes his predictable spin move.

I understand how these factors would play into SVG's strategy, but I still don't agree with his cautious approach. I think he needs to throw all these fears out the window and take his chances. The Magic aren't going to win this series playing scared. They aren't going to win this series holding back Howard, as he is the only significant positional advantage that the Magic have in this series. To win, the Magic must force-feed their star until he fouls out. At worst, this would occur in 25 minutes of court time. This would eventually force double-teams from the Lakers and would open up the three-point line for Orlando's shooters, who didn't have good looks at the basket in game one. It would also force the Lakers into foul trouble of their own.

2. Mix Things Up
When Bynum picks up his inevitable second foul midway through the first quarter, put Gortat in the game alongside Howard. Slide Lewis to the three and Turkoglu to the two. Odom would then be forced to cover Gortat and Gasol may pick up some cheap fouls trying to contain Howard. Lewis would have easier looks against shorter defenders (without Odom guarding him), and Kobe would have to exert more of an effort on defense against Turkoglu than he does against Courtney Lee.

In game one, it was as if the Magic were playing reactive basketball instead of forcing the Lakers' hand. They were reluctant to play Gortat and Howard at the same time for any significant stretches of the game, and their best attempt to match the Lakers' size was by inserting seldom-used Tony Battie into the game in the second quarter. Battie looked lost; it was as if he 1) hadn't picked up a basketball in 8 months, 2) forgot that he can't shoot midrange jumpers and/or 3) knew he wouldn't play again and wanted to get up as many shots as possible in the meantime.

3) Revise the Jameer Nelson Experiment
Nelson looked great for the first three minutes in the second quarter, before his I.R. legs showed themselves. I'm not really sure what SVG was trying to do by playing Jameer the entire second quarter, even as the Lakers mounted a run. He must have not noticed that his team actually led after the first quarter with Alston at the point.

I'm not necessarily opposed to tinkering with lineups (even in the finals), but I think SVG should change his approach with Nelson. I don't agree with Mark Jackson's assessment that the Magic should either play him starter minutes or bench him. I think Nelson brings some different elements to their offense that can still be valuable in shorter stints. He should play the true backup role (15-18 minutes) rather than instituting a platoon system at the point. The Magic made it this far with Alston at the reins, and Skip is the type of player who needs to get quantity minutes to find a rhythm. By playing each of these guys equal minutes, they both become less effective.

4) Increase Pietrus' Minutes
Mikael Pietrus shot horribly in game one and did little to slow Kobe Bryant. However, my observation was that the other Magic defenders did a worse job on Kobe and Pietrus was one of the few Magic players who didn't look scared by the Staples lights. Pietrus showed us in the Cleveland series that he is capable of hitting big shots and his early-game misses against L.A. in game one didn't cause him to shy away from open looks later in the game. I've gotta believe that his shots will start to fall soon enough, and this could provide the scoring spark the Magic desperately need.

5) Play the Zone
The Magic should insert a pseudo two-three zone or box-and-one defense for part of game two. While the Lakers have a few players with decent range, I'd rather take my chances on Luke Walton's or Trevor Ariza's three-point shooting than on Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom in the post. Much has been made of the Lakers' 55-41 advantage on the glass in game one, but that was mostly due to Orlando's poor shooting (30%!) leading to defensive rebounds for L.A. The real problem was L.A.'s 56 points in the paint. The Magic don't have the quickness on the perimeter or the size down low (outside of foul-prone Howard) to keep the Lakers away from the rim, so a straight man-to-man defense is not going to work. If Orlando's players can find bodies when shots go up, the zone could be very effective in frustrating L.A. If nothing else it would give the Lakers a different look, one that they probably haven't prepared for.

Game One is Here!

2009-06-04T17:13:00.000-07:00

Game one has finally arrived, and I couldn't be more excited. Even though the Magic wrapped up their series with the Cavs just 5 short days ago, it feels like it's been months since the last NBA telecast. So long, in fact, that I felt compelled to pick up the pencils and create some artwork of the Finals' two best players (see above).

For game one, I'll keep the predictions short and sweet. The first half will be a "feeling out" period for both of the teams, and Finals jitters will show through uncharacteristic turnovers and overall sloppy play. By the second half, the teams will have locked in and good basketball will be played. I'm predicting unexpected contributions from Sasha Vujacic (9 points, all from the three-point line) and Courtney Lee (15 points). I'm predicting a down game from Rashard Lewis, who will finish with 12 points and shoot below 40%. The Staples Center crowd will prove to be too much for Orlando in a seesaw battle. Lakers by 8.

Rashard Lewis and the Importance of #2

2009-06-03T14:11:00.000-07:00

Continuing in my quest to chronicle role players, I turn to the opposition. Sure, it's hard to argue that a player with two all-star berths and multiple 20 ppg seasons is a "role player," but Rashard Lewis is still a player that is often overlooked. This is partially due to the fact he has never played in a large market, but is also due to his demeanor and style of play. I don't think Lewis is either over- or underrated, but I do think that he has been under-analyzed. Thus, the need for a player profile.

Rashard Lewis has been overlooked since he was a teenager. When he bypassed college for the pros in 1998, he was an intriguing prospect to the point that he was asked to sit in the Green Room on draft night. However, Lewis was the last man standing in the Green Room, a la Brady Quinn. When the dust settled, Seattle stole him with the 32nd pick. As a point of reference, 1998 was the year Michael Olowokandi was picked #1 and Raef LaFrenz was picked #3.

Lewis was probably overlooked because GM's hadn't fully embraced the new regime at the time of his arrival. They hadn't foreseen the impending transforming of the game where all 5 players must be able to score in a variety of ways. They hadn't foreseen the value that could be derived from a 4-man who could stretch the defense or the forthcoming defensive rule changes that would allow teams to hide weak individual defenders behind zone defenses. Outside of Bird, tall shooters hadn't made their mark on the game and GM's still believed that there were five distinct positions with five distinct skillset requirements. (NOTE: This thinking was evidenced further by the Olowokandi pick at #1 and Tractor-Traylor at #6). As such, Lewis was too slight to bang down low as a 4, and lacked the ballhandling & lateral quickness to play on the wing. He was a 'tweener, a distinction that only had negative connotations at the time.

Another factor in Lewis' descent on the draft board was that the 1998 draft class included Antawn Jamison (#4), Nowitzki (#9), and Al Harrington (#25). Even Raef LaFrenz (#3) and Michael Doleac (#12) were more highly-coveted than Lewis at the time. Lewis was considered a second-tier version of these players, and aside from Garnett executives were still skeptical about a player's ability to transition to the NBA without intercollegiate experience.

As time passed, the NBA's transformation became more apparent. Nowitzki transcended the game as the first 7-footer who could play effectively from the 3-point line in, but other aforementioned members of the '98 draft class (Jamison & Lewis) were part of the transformation, as well. In fact, today's team builds are due in large part to the contributions of the draft class of '98. Orlando's current composition of 4 shooters and a big man would have been considered foolish just 10 short years ago. Today, range from the four-spot is considered a necessity.

As stated earlier, Lewis has always done most of his damage behind-the-scenes. He shared the spotlight with Ray Allen in Seattle, and shares it with Dwight Howard in Orlando. Lewis is a rarity in that he shows glimpses of being a franchise-type player (see big shots against Cleveland in the Conference Finals) and there are also times when he's seemingly invisible on the court. It's as if he's comfortable with the spotlight, but equally content playing second- or third-fiddle. Call it Lamar Odom Syndrome.

Until this season, Lewis had never been considered a "winner" in quantitative terms. He had played many seasons of losing basketball, and his greatest accomplishment from a win/loss standpoint had been a trip to the second round with Seattle. When he signed that ridiculous contract with Orlando in '07, skeptics were quick to point out his track record of losing and his incapability to play the star role. Why pay a guy star dollars if he couldn't play the part of a star?

Well, like everything else, opinions change. We are now embracing the idea that Rashard Lewis was never put in a position to win. Maybe he is capable of being a star, but flourishes as a secondary option. Maybe Lewis never desired to hold the key to a basketball city's championship aspirations. Maybe, just maybe, Lewis lacks the intangibles or the "win at all costs" mentality required of a winning star. If put in the #1 role, maybe Lewis' teams would have been destined for mediocrity. As crazy as it sounds, maybe Lewis yearned for the #2 role where he could continue in his predestined trade without the level of praise and criticism that attaches itself to a bona fide #1.

Game-Winner vs. Cleveland. He's even got #2 Emotion.

This isn't the first time a phenom has saved his best for when he became second best. It is becoming more and more evident that championship teams need players with star pedigrees to fill secondary roles. Pippen was the enabler for the Bulls' championships (disgruntled or not) and Parker/Ginobili were a huge part of the Spurs' championship parades as well. The Cavs couldn't do it in '07 with one star, and neither could the Sixers in '01. On the flip side, only the Pistons of '04 have done it without at least one brand name.

But while it seems rather simple -- teams are at an advantage having multiple threats on the court -- it is not always as easily done as it is said. The deepest pockets in the league have tried and failed to build team environments where multiple big names (and games) can coexist. It may work for one season, but it is often difficult to sustain this type of environment successfully. The ego-to-skill ratio must be less than 1-to-1. For as the tides become rocky and adversity strikes, most players of this caliber have a difficult time accepting the criticism without deflecting blame. We saw the failed experiment of four #1's in L.A. in '04. To be accurate, we saw the failed experiment of two #1's in L.A. in '04. If Kobe or Shaq would have been willing to concede a few shots, or interviews, or prideful moments, we would have seen five or six straight titles instead of three.

For it to work, one of the stars must be humble enough to accept the #2 role. He must be capable of delivering in #1 fashion, but content receiving #2 attention. The Celtics found the right personalities to pull it off last year. The Magic and Lakers have found the right personalities to pull it off this year. For all of his god-given ability, it is rare to hear Pau Gasol gripe about touches (although, ironically enough he did have these qualms against the Nuggets), and it is even more rare to hear those types of complaints out of Rashard Lewis.

Some may call it timidness, others unselfishness. I prefer self-awareness. Rashard Lewis' self-awareness has propelled the Magic to their first finals berth since the mid-nineties. He's willingly accepted a back seat in Dwight Howard's car. He's willingly accepted an unrecognized voice and an uncelebrated celebrity. He knows that Dwight Howard is the star and the face of this franchise, and that doesn't seem to bother him one bit. If it did, his face would have been photoshopped into one of TNT's "Gone Fishing" mosaics after the first round.

If the last twenty years has taught NBA GM's anything, it should be this: when shopping for sidekicks, start with guys who don't need a lot of coddling. Make pushes for Pau Gasol, Rashard Lewis, David West; steer clear of Shawn Marion, Amare Stoudemire, Allen Iverson. Follow this rule, and championships may be attainable.

Player Profile: Derek Fisher

2009-06-02T23:03:00.000-07:00

Derek Fisher doesn't get much publicity. He's rarely asked to take the podium for postgame interviews, hasn't had his name etched into the Hollywood walk of fame, and his house hasn't been featured on "Cribs." On the national scene, Fisher is just "that" guy, capable of keeping a job but incapable of selling jerseys. Even amongst the NBA's most diehard of fans, I'd be willing to bet most couldn't name Fisher's alma mater. Fisher probably runs errands at local strip malls without getting much attention.

D-Fish's lack of notoriety is quite remarkable, all things considered. After all, he is the starting point guard for the team favored to win the NBA Championship. He has won three titles. His miraculous shot against San Antonio in '04 did salvage L.A.'s chances at a four-peat. He has earned the trust and confidence of the most skeptical and condescending superstar in pro sports (Kobe). Phil Jackson did draw up the last shot of Game 2 against the Nuggets for him (not Kobe). He has made the most of his abilities. He does leave it on the court every night. He did skip a critical playoff game to tend to his ailing daughter. He does play the game the right way. But to most of us, none of that matters.

Overshadowed in the city of angels by the brighter stars of Kobe, Pau, Lamar, Phil, Jerry, and Jack, Fisher just goes about his business. He comes in early and stays late. He studies film to the point that mental lapses are a rarity. He prefers the standard chest back rather than going behind the back. And for these throwback tendencies, Derek Fisher might be the least sexy player in the entire NBA (and the least sexy to write a blog about, for that matter). And to most of us, that does matter.

My guess is that Derek Fisher could care less about what matters to us, though. His approach has always been substance over form. In a league of Hummers, Benzes, and Beamers, Derek Fisher is a Ford Taurus. Low maintenance, limited features, consistent performance. Consistency equates to boredom in the eyes of most NBA beholders. Derek Fisher's game is not aesthetically-pleasing and his stats are not spectacular. We know Fisher is good for 12 points, 5 assists, and a clutch jumper. We seldom like what we know.

I find this to be an unfortunate reminder of what the NBA has become for us fans. Overachievers aren't exalted like they once were. We favor the high risk, high reward guys over the guys who seemingly do more with less. NBA GM's see it the same way. Why else would Tyrus Thomas be chosen ahead of Brandon Roy in the draft? As fans or as executives, we're willing to take the risk that an inconsistent or underdeveloped player will be a bust if there is a glimmer of hope he could become a superstar. We don't pack the house for Fisher's 12 and 5, we pack the house for Greg Oden's 20 and 10, or Greg Oden's 4 and 2. We pack the house for Ron Artest's ejection and we pack the house for Chris Anderson's arm flaps and we'll pack the house for Ricky Rubio's seven turnovers.

These days, Derek Fisher is playing blue-collar ball in a sport that is no longer blue-collar. He is relying on wits and experience to hedge against his painfully obvious physical decline. But while he has failed to successfully chase the younger point guards in these playoffs, he has remained a professional. Despite his decay, he hasn't gone Scottie Pippen on us by turning into a crotchety old man, unwilling to let go. And for these reasons, we choose to neither praise him nor ridicule him. To slander the 2009 Derek Fisher would be nearly as sacrilegious for a basketball fan as it would be to love his game.

When the Staples lights come on Thursday night, we will tune in to the broadcast and tune out Fisher's game. We will watch intently for Dwight Howard's foul count, Rashard Lewis' success rate from the three-point line, Stan Van Gundy's animated facial expressions, Kobe's preference between assassin or facilitator, Lamar Odom's level of effort, and the Lakers' persistence (or lack thereof) in getting the ball to Gasol in the post. Knowingly or not, we have already come to the conclusion that Derek Fisher will be neither great nor horrible. He is the epitome of afterthought, and as a Laker fan, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with it because I know that when those lights come on, Derek Fisher will be ready to play -- whether we're paying attention or not.

2009 NBA Finals Preview

2009-06-01T09:34:00.000-07:00

I am about to step into the realm of NBA blogger redundancy. Over the next few days, every armchair expert in the blogosphere will be detailing his/her failproof assessment of how the Finals will be won and lost. Nevertheless, I'll add to the e-pile of meaningless analyses by giving my own two cents. Here goes, position by position (Note: with the way the NBA is played today in terms of zone defenses & double-teams, position-by-position analysis is kind of silly but it still provides the best basis for player comparisons)...

Point Guard: Rafer Alston/Anthony Johnson vs. Derek Fisher/Shannon Brown/Jordan Farmar

Neither group is among the NBA elite, which begs the question: does a team really need an upper-echelon point guard to win a championship? I did some research, and the answer is often times "no." In fact, the league's three best true point guards haven't won a title yet (CP3, Nash, & Deron Williams). What a championship team does need is a serviceable point guard who knows his role and doesn't make dumb mistakes (see all Bulls point guards of the 90's and Laker point guards earlier this decade).

The Lakers and Magic both have role players for point guards, but Alston is the only one in this group who has proven that he can score 20+ any given game in these playoffs. The Lakers' most visible weakness during these playoffs has been their defense at the point of attack and have been burned perpetually by quick (or savvy in the case of Billups) point guards. Sure, Derek Fisher has the experience and will knock down a couple of momentum-changing shots and should have an easier time chasing around Rafer Alston (or, rather, monitoring him on the three point line) than he did Williams, Brooks, or Billups. However, the Magic have a decisive advantage at the point guard spot in my opinion.

Advantage: Magic by a decent margin.

Shooting Guard: Courtney Lee/Mikael Pietrus vs. Kobe Bryant/Sasha Vujacic

Lee has to be the best player in the NBA with a girl's first name. I love the way he plays and has been the x-factor in a few games during these playoffs. Pietrus did a terrific job of holding Lebron James to 38.5 ppg in the Eastern Conference Finals (sorry, I had to throw that in after the TNT crew consistently pointed out how tough he was making things on King James). In all seriousness, both of these players bring athleticism, three-point shooting, and defensive toughness to the Magic's backcourt. They are perfect role players for a championship-caliber team.

I'll limit the superlatives in describing Bryant and take a plain vanilla, fact-based approach. Kobe is the best shooting guard in the world. He has already played in four NBA Finals and won three championships. He is the most competitive man playing this sport, and the most feared late-game shooter on the planet. Vujacic and his other backups are terrible, but that doesn't matter since Kobe will be playing 40+ minutes per game this series.

Somewhere, Dahntay Jones is smiling

Advantage: Lakers in a landslide.

Small Forward: Hedo Turkoglu/Mikael Pietrus vs. Trevor Ariza/Luke Walton/Lamar Odom
Turkoglu has been nails in the fourth quarter during the regular season and in the playoffs. In late-game situations, he seems to always come up with a big bucket or assist. In fact, he averaged more assists/game than Alston against Cleveland in the playoffs as a whole. Turkoglu created mismatches against Cleveland when Lebron wasn't guarding him, using his rare combination of size (6'10), outside shooting (1.5 threes/game), and vision (6.7 apg) to score or set up teammates. Pietrus was mentioned earlier in the shooting guard analysis, but with the Magic's lack of depth (8-man rotation), he gets many minutes at the three. He's Orlando's best spark off the bench and a versatile defender. I'm expecting big minutes out of him to match up with Kobe or Ariza.

Trevor Ariza has been a media darling this postseason. Adding a three-point shot to his already-imposing defensive presence and athleticism, he has been the perfect complement to Bryant (namely because Kobe doesn't have to expend as much energy on the defensive end as in years past). Odom is one of the biggest enigmas in the league, no-showing one night and looking like the most talented player on the court the next. His back problems have been well-chronicled, but a little cortizone should do the trick this series. After all, it is the NBA Finals. A lot will be discovered about Odom's heart and competitiveness in this series, and I see him doing a better job on Turkoglu/Lewis than Cleveland did. Luke Walton will get limited (but valuable) minutes in this series with his headiness coming at a premium in crucial junctures of the games.

Advantage: Toss-up. I like L.A.'s depth, but Turkoglu has been the most consistent player in this group.

The Pride of Turkey

Power Forward: Rashard Lewis vs. Pau Gasol

There is nothing "power"-ful about Rashard Lewis, but he could create some problems in this series. He has been lights-out in the clutch, upstaging Lebron with his late-game heroics in game 1 and game 4. The Lakers will be forced out of their traditional gameplan that includes heavy minutes with Bynum and Gasol on the court at the same time. Neither of these Laker bigs can stay with Lewis on the perimeter, and I'm guessing Jackson will have to adjust his strategy after Lewis drains a few uncontested threes. This should be the most intriguing chess match of the series, as Lewis also won't be able to match up with Gasol or Bynum down low.

Gasol is the league's most skilled 7-footer outside of Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitzki. He is adept around the basket with either hand, can put the ball on the floor, shoots the 15-footer efficiently, and is an excellent passer. For what he lacks in brawn, he makes up for in skill and finesse. If the Magic put Dwight Howard on him, Howard is sure to get in early foul trouble. If the Magic put Lewis on him, Gasol will score at ease in the post. If Gortat guards him, all of the above apply. The Lakers would be foolish if they avoid Gasol in the post like they did for much of the Denver series as the Magic clearly have nobody (outside of Howard, who the Magic will be protecting from foul trouble) that can even pretend to guard him. This is probably the biggest matchup nightmare for either team in the series.

Advantage: Lakers.

Center: Dwight Howard/Marcin Gortat vs. Andrew Bynum/DJ Mbenga/Josh Powell

Howard is an absolute beast. He drove, elbowed, and dunked his way to forty points in the series-clinching victory agains the Cavs. Illgauskas looked like Robert Swift trying to guard him. I listed three Laker centers, including two who rarely see the court, because Bynum will be in foul trouble early in the first quarter of every game. Phil will be forced to dig deep into his bench and play hack-a-Dwight during parts of this series. While the Lakers may be the best-equipped team (aside from Boston) to guard Howard, there is no stopping him. In fact, there probably isn't even slowing him down. The only hope the Lakers have here is that Van Gundy and his band of perimeter shooters will forget about their stud in the middle. That, or he'll be watching the game from the bench with foul trouble.

Andrew Bynum hasn't looked very good this postseason, on or off the court. He has showed little desire to block out or play sound defense, opting instead to wait in the paint for rebounds and chase blocked shots. He will look terrible in this series. If Bynum continues to watch rebounds instead of blocking out (which I think he will), Howard will eat him for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. If the Nuggets could dominate the offensive glass against L.A., what will Howard do? Scary thought for Laker fans. The Lakers can take some comfort in knowing that their bench is loaded with big bodies to foul Dwight. A foul-fest is exactly what I foresee in this series, and the Lakers should hope that it results in early foul trouble for Howard.

Advantage: Magic by a mile.

Keys to Winning -- Orlando:

The Magic's keys to winning are quite simple & obvious. For Orlando to win, it must keep Dwight Howard out of foul trouble. That means keeping him on Bynum and in position to challenge shots without fouling. The Magic's weakside help defenders (other than Howard) must do a better job than they did against Cleveland, because L.A. has more than one player that must be defended.

The Magic also have to knock down the three-point shot with regularity. They have lived & died by the three all season, and this series will be no different. If Orlando can hit three-point shots with consistency, the Lakers will be forced to play honest defense and leave Howard in one-on-one situations in the post. Nobody on the Lakers (or in the league for that matter) is strong enough to keep Howard out of the paint by himself. Howard needs to have a few 20-20 games for the Magic to win this series.

Keys to Winning -- Los Angeles:

The Lakers' keys to winning are also quite simple, and they revolve around Dwight Howard. L.A. must get Howard into early foul trouble. If they can do this, the Magic will become one-dimensional with the three-point shot as their only source of scoring. The Lakers have the quickness & depth to play the Magic on the three-point line if they aren't forced to double-team Howard.

The Lakers also must be disciplined on the defensive glass. Denver's offensive rebounding is what made the Western Conference Finals a series. Possession after possession, the Lakers' bigs turned their heads and watched the ball coming off the rim instead of blocking out. This same mistake cannot be made against Orlando, as Howard feasts on putback opportunities. If the Lakers are smart, they will put two guys on Howard's body on every shot attempt.

Lastly, the Lakers have to keep the tempo up. The Magic only play 8 guys, while the Lakers prefer a 10- or 11-man rotation. L.A. must push the ball at every opportunity and get easy fast break buckets. They should trap and apply full-court pressure for the entire game, as Alston is sometimes turnover-prone and Anthony Johnson doesn't have his wheels anymore. Six guys will be playing 30+ minutes for the Magic, and 7-8 (Johnson and Gortat) will be used sparingly. A fast-paced game will tire out the Magic and play into the Lakers' favor.

Additional Thoughts/Analysis:

This should be a very interesting series. One of these teams is going to have to change their strategy, as the Magic like to put Dwight down low and play four-wide and the Lakers prefer power-ball with two seven-footers on the court. If the Magic can make their threes, the Lakers will have to respond by subbing on of the seven-footers. If the Magic miss their threes, the Magic will have to insert size into their lineup, an area that is a glaring weakness outside of Howard.

Cleveland lost to Orlando because nobody outside of James (who was asked to do everything on both ends of the floor) could cover Turkoglu or Lewis. While Howard's box scores stood out, those two guys were the difference-makers in the series. L.A. is much better equipped to match up with Turkoglu & Lewis. Between Kobe, Ariza, Odom, and to a certain extent Walton & Vujacic, the Lakers have the range and athleticism to give Lewis & Turkoglu fits.

On the other side of the ball, the Magic have a trio of defenders that will be charged with covering Kobe. Pietrus, Lee, and Turkoglu all offer distinct defensive skillsets to slow Bryant down. Lee has more quickness than anyone who guarded Bryant against Denver. Pietrus is your classic athletic defender a la Trevor Ariza. Turkoglu is too slow to keep in front of Bryant, but can use his body and length to alter some shots. At the end of the day, Kobe will be Kobe and probably average close to thirty in the series. If he chooses to absorb double teams and be a passer as he did in games five & six versus Denver, the Lakers will benefit greatly. If he chooses to be the hero and forces difficult shots, it could be a long series for L.A.

Overall Prediction:

The Lakers have too much depth and versatility for the Magic to make this a seven-game series. I foresee Orlando winning two games: one by virtue of a dominant performance by Howard and one by virtue of a barrage of three-point shots by the Magic's perimeter players. As discussed above, the Lakers have a wide range of weapons that can be deployed and have peaked at the right time during these playoffs. Although L.A. has shown a tendency to become complacent, I think they'll come out with a fire as they try to avenge their 2008 Finals defeat. If by some miracle this series does go seven games, I like the Lakers' chances in Staples Center and with all their big-game experience. Lakers in six.

No Conspiracy Here!

2009-05-29T20:54:00.000-07:00

The age-old story of playoff fandom revolves around bellyaching about the officials. The NBA, more than any other professional sport, has been littered with "conspiracy theories," theories propagated by the fans of losing teams from smaller markets. These theories have been fueled by the reigning supremacy of large-market franchises from Chicago, Boston, and Los Angeles. To small-market fans, how else would large-market teams from a salary cap sport sustain success while small-market teams have remained on the greatness-doormat roller coaster? The theories were further validated by the Donaghy scandal and the microscope placed on officials in recent years.

As a Laker fan, maybe I'm naive or biased. After all, the Lakers seem to be the center of most of these theories. In fact, I don't recall a big Lakers win that wasn't tainted by cries of conspiracy or biased officiating in the fan universe. Nevertheless, I'm downright annoyed by NBA fans and their conspiracy theories.

Without a doubt, NBA execs would love to see a Lebron-Kobe Finals matchup. Ratings would soar, and revenues would follow suit. Pitting the two best (and most marketable) players in a head-to-head matchup on the biggest stage would be fail-proof from a business standpoint. Everyone from Shanghai to Chattanooga would be tuning in to that matchup, and the NBA undoubtedly understands this. However, has anyone considered the possibility that the teams with the two best players in the universe have the best chance of winning?

If the outcomes of NBA games were truly influenced by Monty McCutcheon, Joey Crawford, and Dick Bavetta (as instructed by David Stern), the NBA would be more concerned with extending series. I'd think the best way to maximize revenue (and overall viewership) would be to add games. The NBA figured this out a long time ago when the season was extended to 82 games. So why, from this perspective, would the NBA and its officials allow the Cavaliers to breeze through first- and second-round sweeps? Why would the refs allow Kobe & Company to deliver a knock-out punch in Denver (even after all of George Karl's whining) and thereby eliminate a game seven in L.A.? Either the NBA is run by idiotic businessmen, or there is no conspiracy theory this season. I choose to believe the latter.

The Lakers came out and dominated Game Six. Needless to say, Officials are virtually incapable of directing a 27-point blowout, but let me list some of the facts. The Lakers shot 57% from the floor, 56% from three, and 100% from the line in game six. The Nuggets? 44%, 42%, and 80%, respectively. Absent shrinkening the circumference of the Nuggets' rims, the referees couldn't be blamed for these discrepancies. Maybe they affected the game through their whistles? I think not. Free throw attempts: Nuggets - 25, Lakers - 24.

Nugget fans, coaches, and players were enraged by the "horrendous" officiating in game five. Watching the game (even as a Laker fan), I thought these claims were unfounded and borderline paranoid. Just to do my due dilligence, I checked the box score on this one as well. The Lakers shot 49% in that game compared to the Nuggets' 39%. At a critical juncture in the second half, the Nuggets missed something like 16 of 17 shots. Again, the officials probably weren't to blame for that collapse. The Lakers shot 35 free throws to the Nuggets' 30. Not a huge discrepancy. Despite these tangible facts, the fans were still in an uproar and conspiracy theories were flowing.

Maybe kissing up to the refs would've been a better approach

If the Cavs make the NBA Finals, it won't be because the NBA "played God." It will be because the Magic (and every other team in the NBA for that matter) cannot defend Lebron James with any success. It will be because the Cavs put together an improbable comeback and put behind them three heartbreaking losses that could've gone either way. It will be because we have all witnessed the (soon-to-be) best player of this generation single-handedly leading an undermanned group of role players to an NBA Finals. It will not be because the NBA has subscribed to the doctrine of predestination and monkeyed with the outcome of games in order to boost ratings.

So let's all sit back and enjoy the greatness of Kobe & Lebron. Let's all enjoy the greatness of the 2009 NBA playoffs and the historically unparalleled skill level of today's players. Let's take the outcome of games at face value. After all, in the vast majority of cases, the best team wins.

Player Profile: J.R. Smith

2009-05-14T10:21:00.000-07:00

Over the past few months, I've been especially intrigued by the skillsets and personalities of complementary players on playoff teams. More so than the stars, I've spent some time analyzing the games and court behavior of players like J.R. Smith, Luis Scola, Derek Fisher, and Courtney Lee. This inspired me to log my thoughts and observations, and in the coming days I will be profiling individual players that caught my eye. My first profile will focus on J.R. Smith.

J.R. Smith is often thought of as a one-dimensional player. For the casual fan, J.R. comes off the bench and provides instant offense for the second unit a la Dennis Johnson. This impression is not without reason: in the playoffs (entering game 5 against the Mavs), J.R. was #14 among all players in field goal attempts per 48 minutes. He is higher on that list than Yao, Paul Pierce, Chauncey Billups, and Dwight Howard, to name a few. The "microwave" reputation was not earned exclusively from his 20 three-point attempts against Sacramento this year or his volume shooting in the 2009 playoffs. The reputation was accumulated over the past three seasons, and its connotation is partly positive and partly negative.

Prior to the trade for Billups, I had developed an opinion of Smith. In short, I thought that he was selfish & lazy, that his god-given talents were minimalized by his unwillingness to play defense or take responsibility for his performance on the court. Magnified during their early playoff exits, he appeared to have bought into Iverson's pouty brand of basketball and anti-professionalism. Energy was spent on the offensive end and in skirmishes, rarely spent on other facets of the game. Passing was an afterthought, and head-hanging was a trademark when he was excluded from the offense or pulled from the game. His defensive philosophy had playground-style undertones, focused on reaching-in rather than keeping his body between the basket and the man. Excitement rarely ensued as a result of team success unless his scoring average had been padded in the process. Understandably, George Karl's doghouse was a vantage point J.R. was accustomed to heading into the summer of '08.

Pre-Billups J.R.

Then it clicked. On a timeline similar to Denver's transformation as a team, J.R. transformed his approach to the game (at least from my perspective). The transformation of J.R. Smith was subtle in its parts and profound in its entirety. Much of this transformation can be attributed to the influence of a true leader in Chauncey Billups, but it can also be attributed to the apparent maturation of J.R. Smith as a man.

5 games into the 2008-09 season, the Nuggets decided that they were going to play defense. This decision coincided with the arrival of Billups and the departure of Iverson. About 20 games later, J.R. Smith decided that he would embrace his role on the team. He also realized that if he played defense and passed to open teammates, his minutes would increase. The Denver Nuggets realized that as J.R.'s minutes increased, the team improved.

Don't get me wrong, J.R. Smith's role with the Denver Nuggets has not changed dramatically. He still comes off the bench, drops his warmups, and shoots a three in one motion. When he gets his swagger going (which doesn't take much), he'll fire from anywhere. Anywhere. While the ancillary aspects of his game have improved, they are still that: ancillary. Smith is a shoot-first, shoot-second type of guy. But to call Smith a one-dimensional player is to discount his development, to discount his skillset.

Over the past year, Smith turned into a good teammate. Watch a Nuggs game, and he's the first one to meet Chauncey or Carmelo for a chest bump at a timeout. This is coming from the J.R. who pouted his way to the bench last year. Smith displayed flashes of point guard and stretches of lockdown defender. By "flashes of point guard," I mean to say he's got silky handles in the open floor or the congested paint and is a pretty crafty passer. By "lockdown defender," I'm referring to his defensive assignments shifting from the Wally Sczerbiaks to the Dwyane Wades (when Dahntay Jones isn't in the game). J.R.'s athleticism is off the charts. What I like most, though, is that he plays like he's on fire even when his shot's off; make or miss, the defense has to account for that. His game is John Starks circa '93, but his skillset is Ray Allen circa '99.

All statistical measures aside, J.R. Smith's style of play is aesthetically pleasing. Not so much for the casual fan -- more so for the NBA junkie. This is probably his greatest contribution to the game at this stage of his career. The casual fan sees another athletic specimen, the dime-a-dozen shooting guard. The NBA junkie appreciates the details. The fluidity with which he catches & releases, the purity with which his shot breaches nylon, the skip in his step after consecutive baskets, the playground scowl that's been refined and institutionalized. Basketball is a team sport, but the individualism is what makes this game so beautiful.

These next few years is where J.R. will cement himself as a premier sixth man or blossom into a bona fide star. He's got all the tools -- the athleticism, vision, stroke, and brashness -- to be elite. However, only the most special of players, those possessing the skills, work ethic, and borderline obsessiveness, harness their abilities to enter the upper echelon of the league. Time will tell if the maturation process will continue, if his psyche will allow him reach his full potential as a basketball player. I'll be watching.

Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs! Playoffs?

2009-05-11T23:17:00.000-07:00

This year's NBA playoffs have taught us a number of things:

1) This is NOT your father's NBA.

In fact, this ain't even your sister's WNBA.

It's a shame these refs weren't around for the early stages of Enron, because their whistle-blowing would have saved public investors millions. A tongue flap gets a T, a hip check gets a flagrant-1, and an "Artest" on the back of a jersey gets a flagrant-2. The extraneous whistles and penalties have been so rampant this postseason that even Rajon Rondo has been painted as a thug.

I have yet to watch a game without at least one technical foul and one flagrant foul. In fact, most games have had ejections and been surrounded by league investigations. In years past, playoff refereeing has been heavily scrutinized; but mainly by losing fans who are attempting to blame their teams' shortcomings on inconsistent whistles or home cooking. This type of bellyaching has taken a backseat in 2009 as inconsistency has not been the problem. 2009 playoff referees have been consistently temperamental and borderline paranoid. It's as if the hangover from "the brawl" in the Palace has hit stage 4. "Playoff fouls" are a distant memory, and uncontested layups are the new black. Kevin McHale just rolled over in his lottery grave.

2) Rajon Rondo is good.

Just 11 months ago, the Celtics were said to have won an NBA Championship in spite of Rondo. Fisher was a roaming double-team while Rondo was left free to operate. While he made the Lakers pay on occasion, Rajon mostly looked like a deer in the headlights, like a teenage boy afraid to swoop for the goodnight kiss with Dad in the window.

Now we've got this terror, this unbridled mess of chaos and beauty. His foot quickness is in an elite class with the Parkers & Harris', and his hand quickness is rivaled only by CP3. Only Ason Kidd is a better rebounder from the point guard spot. His athleticism is criminally underrated (see this), and he has to be the lankiest 6-footer to ever suit up in Celtics green. His decision-making is remarkable considering the speed with which he plays the game; his assist-to-turnover ratio is a filthy 4:1 in the playoffs.

To truly understand his coming-of-age, one need only look at his playoff averages thus far: 18 ppg, 10.5 apg, 9.5 rpg, and 2.5 spg. On a team with three future hall-of-famers (albeit only 2 are playing), Rondo has been the most valuable player. He has been the glue holding together this fragile team that is clawing and scratching to stay alive. Not bad for a 23-year-old.

3) Ron Artest is even crazier than we had imagined.

Any man willing to throw punches at tipsy fans (in the stands, nonetheless) probably has a chemical imbalance. Ron once flirted with premature retirement to pursue a rap career. He has faced charges of domestic abuse and his jekyll & hyde personality creates priceless soundbites with every interview. Before the 2009 playoffs, however, we haven't gotten this level of coverage, this level of observation.

Artest started off this playoffs manning budding star Brandon Roy and called him "the best player I've played against"... outside of some guy named "Mike" from Queensbridge that went to jail at the age of 15, naturally. When asked by Craig Sager, Artest didn't back down from his asessment when asked if Roy was better than Lebron or Kobe (and you wonder why Kobe has taken this series' battle so seriously?). Artest capped the interview by calling Charles Barkley "a bit overrated."

In the second round, Artest got thrown out of consecutive games (although the second toss-out was a complete joke). His interview after game two was another seesaw battle between sanity and insanity. Ron nonchalantly made the transition from his team's clean play to the kid who was stabbed to death by a leg of the scorers table. Just when you thought things couldn't get any more random...

In my opinion, Ron's lunacy is what makes him so lovable. With the micro-policing of playoff referees, he adds spice and keeps fans on the edge of their seats. I used to think he was a hard-nosed player with bull-like strength (years with the Bulls). Then I thought he was merely a harmless self-promoter who idolized Dennis Rodman (note his promotional shoe campaign in the '04 All-Star Game). Finally, I thought he was in the midst of an identity crisis (failed pursuit of a rap career). Now, I think he's a combination of all of the above. Above all, he's entertaining and gives his team a better chance to win.

4) The NBA, where repetitive ad campaigns happen.

I've always thought of the NBA as the most innovative & progressive league in professional sports. From international expansion, to the NBA Cares campaign, to the "Green" campaign, the NBA has been a step ahead of its counterparts with regards to pop culture and globalization. While that opinion hasn't changed, I've been turned off by the "Where Amazing Happens" campaign. Last year it was new and interesting; this year, it's exhaustive and annoying.

My wife makes nightly alternative plans to avoid sitting through NBA playoff games with me. She has been quite successful in her elusiveness, but failed to plan appropriately the other night. In the waning moments of Game 3 between the Mavs & Nuggets, I caught her humming along to the piano bit in a "Where Amazing Happens" commercial. If the NBA is trying to create brand recognition, I suppose it's working. "The NBA: Where Dried Up Advertising Budgets Happens." How amazing is a slow motion layup by Jason Kidd?

2009 Free Agents

2009-05-11T16:29:00.000-07:00

With the much-anticipated summer of 2010 still more than a year away, I did a little research on who would be available this summer. Below are my picks for the top five UNRESTRICTED free agents (in no particular order):

- BEN GORDON:

The positives - We all know what B.G. can do: score. And he does it well. Unlike many big-time scorers, however, Gordon seems to save it for when it matters most. Ever since he came into the league, he has been amongst the leaders in fourth quarter scoring, and he didn't disappoint in this year's playoffs. B.G. dropped 40-plus in a back-and-forth game two against the Celtics. His fourth quarter heroics were dwarfed by Ray Allen's game-winning three, but they weren't overlooked by people like myself. Dude's a gamer.

The negatives - We have also come to know B.G.'s shortcomings. At 6'3", you'd like him to be more of a distributor (3.0 APG for his career). Although he's stout for his height, he isn't exactly a lockdown defender and can be taken advantage of in the post by bigger guards. In reality, outside of scoring, Gordon doesn't do much to fill up a box score.

The good fits - Utah, Phoenix, Chicago, any bad team where he can shoot 20+ times per game.

I think Gordon's game is better suited for the open court style of play that the West offers. Utah is going to lose a lot of scoring if Boozer packs his bags, and Gordon's defensive shortcomings could be masked by the physicality of Deron Williams. In Phoenix, B.G. could continue in his shoot-first ways with Nash dishing the rock, and Gentry's commitment to NO defense would be ideal for this volume shooter. Chicago grew up in the playoffs (despite the narrow loss), but they need to continue to surround the unselfish Derrick Rose with shooters. With Hinrich's departure probable, keeping Gordon could be a priority for Management. I don't think I need to explain why B.G. would flourish for a subpar team.

Has B.G. had enough in Chi-Town?

- ANDRE MILLER
The positives - Miller brings all the intangibles you want out of your point guard: leadership, poise, unselfishness. He's pretty physical for his size and a good passer. He's an accurate foul shooter in late-game situations and has been durable throughout his career. He's always amongst the league leaders in steals and rebounds well for a point guard (4.5 RPG in 08-09).

The negatives - Miller turned 33 this spring. He probably doesn't make much sense for a rebuilding team, as his window of peak play is behind him. He also has a hard time keeping up with younger, quicker point guards (e.g. Rondo, Paul, Parker, Harris). For a point guard, he is a dreadful three point shooter (28% in 08-09). As such, any team looking to pick him up needs to be equipped with shooters to surround him with.

The good fits - Portland, LA Lakers.
Miller would complement Portland's young guns perfectly and would provide veteran experience that the team is currently lacking. With Rudy Fernandez and the impending return of Martell Webster, the Blazers have the shooters in place that Miller needs. Miller could create more off the dribble than D-Fish, which would take some pressure off Kobe. I don't think the Lakers would be concerned with Miller's age, as they have the pieces in place to compete for NBA Championships NOW.

- CARLOS BOOZER (Player Option, but does anyone doubt he will take it?)
The positives - Boozer is a tireless offensive rebounder and a proven scorer. He has a good work ethic and is a pretty heady player (courtesy of Coach K). Boozer's ability to hit the 18-footer with regularity causes matchup nightmares, and his quickness enables him to defend the pick-and-roll.

The negatives - C.B. has a tough time guarding taller players and doesn't block many shots for a power forward. He has been somewhat injury-prone in his short career. Clearly, the Jazz see him as expendible as they have all but turned over the keys to Paul Millsap.

The good fits - New Jersey, Atlanta.
New Jersey has its center of the future in Brook Lopez (sigh), but they lack consistent play from the power forward position. If Carter is shipped, Boozer and Harris would be a good scoring tandem. In Atlanta, Boozer would enable Josh Smith to play more minutes at his natural position (small forward), Horford could slide to Center, and Zaza Pachulia could slide down the bench. Although Horford is a decent scorer, it is not his natural strength. Boozer would take some pressure off Joe Johnson and Horford could focus on being a beast at the defensive end and on the boards.

RASHEED WALLACE
The positives - Sheed can stretch the defense with his three-point shooting. He's also a very underrated defender and a decent rebounder. When he is focused, there is only one player in the league who can stop him from scoring from the mid-post (Garnett). Plus, he will put fans in the seats with his childish antics.

The negatives - Often times, I wonder if Sheed even cares. He is one of the most gifted players in the league, but seems content to stand on the three-point line most of the time. His antics, while they draw headlines (good or bad), can be a huge distraction. Even though he has great touch from the floor, his free throw shooting has been suspect at times.

The good fits - San Antonio, Dallas, Golden State.
San Antonio's window is closing quickly, but Sheed would fit in nicely with what they try to do at the defensive end. His ability to stretch the defense would give Duncan more room to operate in the post. Dallas is one- or two- pieces away from being great, and Sheed could be just the lift they need. Just make sure he isn't rooming with Josh Howard on road trips. Don Nelson has shown the ability to harness the energy of hot-headed players (see Stephen Jackson). In Golden State, Sheed could play the uptempo style and fire 5-7 threes per game without getting benched.

-LAMAR ODOM
The positives - Odom possesses the rare combination of size, athleticism, and court vision that GM's drool over. He probably has the best handles of any 6'10 player in the league, and is one of the better rebounders in the game. Odom can create matchup nightmares when he is playing at the three spot, towering over his defenders. L.O. has a great touch around the basket.

The negatives - At times, Odom disappears on the court. The rap sheet says that he takes plays off, which I can't necessarily argue with. Odom is a mediocre (at best) outside shooter, and his free throw shooting is especially a problem late in games. When playing the three spot, he can create congestion on the court as he is best suited around the paint. His point guard mentality can lead to careless turnovers at times.

The good fits - Cleveland, Houston.
L.O. would flourish playing alongside King James. He is a significant upgrade from Varejao/B. Wallace at the offensive end, and would add the athleticism that the Cavs need (outside of James, of course). Odom does well in situations where he plays the second- (or third) fiddle on offense. Houston is another team that needs to get more athletic. They already have guards who can knock down the three and power forwards who can step out and hit jumpers. If Artest leaves this summer, Houston will need a versatile player like Odom at both ends of the floor.

Didn't make my list: Mike Bibby (yawn), Ason Kidd (too old), Allen Iverson (cancerous), Antonio McDyess (too old), Ron Artest (too crazy), Shawn Marion (I think he'll stay in TOR), Al Harrington (unimpressed), Jermaine O'Neal (too injury-prone)

Manny struck out, who's next?

2009-05-11T09:34:00.000-07:00

The last twelve months have been a circus. Hence, my contributions to the blogosphere have been, shall we say, lacking. So to my four regular readers, I apologize. Now that I've gotten that off my plate, let's get back to talking sports.

Manny, Manny, Manny... why hast thou disappointed me? I thought that if there was one natural, one "clean," player in the game, it would be Senor Ramirez. Maybe I had my blue-tinted sunglasses (er, blinders) on. Maybe I just truly believed he didn't give a you-know-what. Whatever the case, the news of his foul play came as a bit of a shock at my house.

MLB's axe has come down hard on some of the big boys now. The once-towering redwoods that were the legacies of Manny, A-Rod, Bonds, McGwire, and Clemens (to name a few) have been compromised. Bud Selig & Co. came a swingin' and chopped them down to pitiful stumps. Okay, okay... enough with the Paul Bunyan-type metaphors. You get my point.

Now that the list of marque names on baseball's (and the hall of fame's) black list is growing, one has to wonder who will be next. For the most part, the sacred Mitchell documents have been kept under wraps. The remaining names on "the list" are still a secret, which comes as no surprise to me. Releasing those names would be bad for business. Imagine the repercussions if one of Selig's golden boys (e.g. Jeter, Pujols, Rivera) became a known con. MLB's already non-existent marketing would be toast. MLB's already tarnished reputation would take another hit.

Quite frankly, I don't care who's on the list. Baseball purists may argue that full disclosure is the only way for baseball to overcome these issues. There may be some truth to that, but I'm still not convinced that it would solve the problems. To me, the damage has already been done. Anyone with half a brain knows that everyone, or close to everyone, was using some type of performance-enhancing substance during the "Steroid Era." With that in mind, what good would come from letting the proverbial cat out of the bag at this point? What good would come from knowing that the top 10 home run hitters in 2002 were all juiced?

If anyone would benefit from this type of disclosure, it would be Bonds, McGwire, Manny, and the rest of the bunch. The more names that get dropped, the better for their legacies and chances at getting into the Hall of Fame. The HOF committee can blackball a handful of known offenders, but would it really turn away an entire era of players? Highly doubtful.

Any thoughts? What's baseball's next play?

Double Standard, No?

2008-09-03T17:38:00.000-07:00

Well, here we go again. Another NFL offseason has passed, and we have witnessed 7 more months with player arrests, shootings, and the now-standard prima donna behavior. We've had greed-motivated holdouts, domestic disputes, drug abuse, and Vegas fun gone awry. No, this offseason hasn't been much different than any other offseason in recent memory, and that's what makes it even more disturbing. Even worse is that the league still doesn't have much of a PR problem by most accounts.

Is it just me, or is there a serious double-standard in the way the public perceives the NFL versus the public perception of other professional sports? Maybe I'm imagining things, but I still feel as if the NBA is the league with the most perceived problems -- despite the undeniable fact that NFL players are making the most headlines for the wrong reasons. The NBA has been widely acclaimed the "thug" league ever since the brawl at the Palace, despite Stern's tireless efforts to clean out the cobwebs. Meanwhile, NFL players are filling court rooms and prison cells year-in and year-out and we barely bat an eye. In 2006 alone, at least 35 NFL players were arrested on various charges.

Shawn Merriman gets busted for roids, and we have already forgiven and forgotten. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are accused of taking roids (and rightfully so), and their careers will forever be tainted in the public eye. Ron Artest has been arrested, what, once? That's four times less than Chris Henry or Adam "Don't Call me PacMan" Jones, yet he is portrayed as just as big of a villain in most sports circles. NFL guys like Jones and Henry are getting second, third, fourth, even fifth chances to "change," and (many of us) are okay with it. Don't get me wrong -- it's us fans (myself included) who are waiting with open arms when these prodigal children come home. We're the ones who excuse the behavior and fill the stands chanting their names their first game back from suspension.

So why do we examine this league and its players under a different light than other sports? Is it because football is a violent sport, and we assume violence off the field is an inevitable by-product of productivity on it? Is it because we truly love the game of football more than any other sport and we're willing to turn a blind eye on its imperfections? Maybe it's a combination of both.

I know that I, for one, will be watching Week 1 intently and won't be dwelling on any of the questionable behavior we've become so accustomed to. I'll probably forget about PacMan's five arrests if he takes a punt to the house. Does this mean I don't care? Should I care?

College Football is Upon Us! Time for Homerism

2008-08-28T16:30:00.001-07:00

Ahh, just minutes from kickoff of the 2008 College Football season. I can't remember a year I was more excited to watch me some pigskin. Of course, it probably has a lot to do with the fact my Oregon State Beavers are kicking off the national schedule with a trip to Palo Alto. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit nervous for the game, but I'm still optimistic they can pull one out on the road (despite the injuries). I'm getting goosebumps just thinking about it.

I try to remain pretty objective in my posts, but my true colors can't help but bleed through when I'm talking about NCAA FB. I'm anxiously awaiting my first chance to watch Jacquizz Rogers carry the ball. If you haven't had a chance to check this guy out.... here's a video you may want to lay your eyes upon. Can you see why I'm pumped? 50 touchdowns as a junior, and 37 as a senior... in Texas nonetheless. This kid is going to be electrifying. If the Beavs even get serviceable help from the QB spot, the combination of Rogers, his older brother James, and a rejuvenated Sammie Stroughter will be too much for defenses to contain in the open field.

If you didn't click on those video links (especially the Jacquizz and Sammie vids), you are missing out.

USA vs. Spain - Live Game Blog

2008-08-23T23:28:00.000-07:00

1st Quarter

Did Pau just flop on a jump ball?
Spain strikes early and looks determined to make it a closer game than the previous matchup.
Hmm, I'm shocked JC Navarro didn't last in the L. Most NBA teams love undersized shooting guard who can't play D. Just ask Chicago.
Navarro for three? Nope.
Who knew? Zack Efron plays point guard for Spain?
Efron just made Kidd look foolish. How slow is Jason Kidd?
Spain 21, USA 17. Coach K doesn't look happy.
Gasol just got hit for the first time, and missed a layup. Maybe the U.S. should be a little more physical with him?
This game is being played at Spain's pace. I don't like it.
The U.S. makes a mini-run and takes the lead. You know the U.S. is focused when they start hitting free throws.
Wade is EVERYWHERE. I haven't seen him play with this sort of tenacity since '06. Maybe I'll be a believer before this one's over.
Spain is face-guarding Wade on the three point line. Did they not get the memo about his outside shooting?
Most overused image of the Summer games: camera pans Lebron and Kobe chumming it up on the bench.
Marc Gasol is a stud. Part of me thinks he could have helped the Lakers more than Pau in the long run.
Tayshaun Prince sighting.
Where is Rudy Fernandez?
Did Wade just make a three?

End of 1st Quarter: USA 38, Spain 31

2nd Quarter

2nd quarter begins, and we get a chance to see Rudy.
Kobe enters game, and abruptly drains a three.
Dwight Howard flagrantly fouls Pau Gasol. Gasol misses BOTH free throws. Coincidence? I think not.
Spain is getting a little testy -- they believe they can win this game.
Fernandez for three.... splash.
Efron beats Kidd to the basket again. Coach K?
Kidd gets subbed by Paul. Finally.
Wow, Paul delivers a perfect alley-oop from past halfcourt.
JC Navarro hits an impossible one-handed floater. Those are the types of plays that have "upset" written all over them.
Collins' sidekick just called the official a "Sting lookalike". I'm buying.
Lebron did his best Walter Payton impression on the fast break and gets an and one opportunity.
America is up 10, and the depth is taking its toll on the Spaniards. This could get ugly fast.
Fernandez is a good passer... I had no idea.
When Lebron and Wade start hitting threes, there is no way to stop this team.
Fernandez for three... splash.
Boozer still hasn't gotten in. Even Coach K knows how far he's fallen in the past 6 months.
Fernandez step back for three... splash.
Apparently the refs don't call moving screens, because Spain moves on every screen.
Reyes looks pretty good -- why didn't he make it in the L?
David Stern sighting. He must have been at the track & field events the past 4 days, because that tan is looking immaculate.

Halftime: U.S.A 69, Spain 61

Third Quarter

The wife just called it a night, but I'm gonna stay up for this one.
Spain comes out and hits a jumper to make it a 6-point game. The senior citizen quota minutes have already been met - K needs to sub Kidd.
The famous pump-pump-pump-lunge into defender move fails Lebron. Maybe these international refs get it.
Dwight Howard sighting. There is no reason Howard shouldn't get a double-double every game in this tourney.
Kobe gets what appears to be a three-point play, only to be called for traveling. No way that gets called in the NBA.
Pau makes an Olajuwon-esque jump hook. Time for the obligatory "Maul-a-Pau."
Replay just showed Howard cheap-shotting Pau in the face after he hit the jump hook. Maybe Dwight is a smarter player than I give him credit for.
Navarro with impossible one-handed floater #2.
Howard dunks Gasol and the ball in one motion.
Navarro hits impossible one-handed floater #3. Seriously?
David Beckham sighting. Bet the wife wishes she stayed up now.
With the U.S. up four, Kidd gets yanked in favor of CP3. Let's monitor the over/under with Kidd out of the game.
Kobe forces a three. Will the selfish tendencies resurface?
Kobe comes back with a tremendous assist -- so much for that theory.
Lebron Earl Campbell's his way to another and-one. Nevermind, I forgot he can't hit free throws.
Spain goes to the zone. I don't like America's current lineup against the zone.
Michael Redd sighting? Nope.
Wade is playing out of his skull.
I'm retracting my opinion that Paul is a top-3 player in the NBA. He's looking pretty pedestrian tonight.
Deron Williams with a gorgeous step back. I LOVE him in this tournament.
Navarro with impossible one-handed floater #4? Nope.

End of the 3rd Quarter: U.S.A 91, Spain 82.

4th Quarter

Deron Williams misses a sure layup. Put Kidd back in... kidding.
Fernandez to Gasol for the alley-oop. 5 point game.
Fernandez for three? Splash. This guy is going to be good in the L.
Coach K signals for a timeout.
The human momentum killer (Kobe) hits a desperation runner. I love it.
After a Fernandez miss, Williams hits a huge three to put the U.S. up by 7 again.
Howard dunks Gasol and the ball in one motion. Nine point game.
Fernandez for three? Nope. Fernandez for three? Yep. Is anyone guarding him?
Kobe with the retaliatory dagger three. Nine point game again.
Fernandez with the and-one throwdown. What can't this kid do on the offensive end?
Kobe circa 2005 fires a deep three early in the shot clock and comes up empty.
Dwight Howard goes to the line up by eight. I just put my hard hat on.
1/2... I'll take it.
The U.S. can't keep the Gasol brothers off the offensive glass.
Pau stands in the lane for 5 seconds, Marc pushes an American to the floor, and Pau hits a jumper. Spain's within 5.
In the biggest play of the game, Kobe hits a three AND gets fouled. On the same play, Fernandez fouls out.
Who should NBC zoom in on after the biggest play of the game? David Beckham, of course.
Navarro with impossible one-handed floater #4. Maybe he's doing this on purpose.
Some guy named Jimenez hits a three to put Spain within 4.
Wade hits a three to put it back to 7.
After a Spain timeout, Kobe is jawing at JC Navarro. That's almost embarrassing.
Bryant with yet another game-saving shot. Is there any debate about the iciest veins in the world?
Zack Efron picks up a personal foul and a technical foul. Disney execs cringe after exhausting their PR budget last month on Miley Cyrus' provocative photos.
Kobe hits both free throws. Game over.
In one of the most awkward moments in sports history, Kobe pours a water bottle over Coach K's head and slaps him on the butt.

Game Final: U.S.A 118, Spain 107.

Bela Karolyi = Legend

2008-08-20T19:46:00.000-07:00

I've gotta admit, my interest in the Beijing games had been dwindling ever since Phelps won #8. Outside of a few track & field events and the first half of the basketball games, I had little motivation to tune in to NBC. That all changed last night when I watched a gymnastics event. No, I'm not referring to the comedic irony of an event called "women's" gymnastics being dominated by pre-teen girls. I'm referring to the passionate broadcasting of the "Romanian Rocket", Bela Karolyi. If you don't know who I'm talking about, here's a little photo montage for your viewing pleasure (excuse the lame spin-off of Nike's early-90's ad campaign):

Bela Knows Bravado

Bela Knows Body Building

Bela Knows Bringing 'Em Up Right

Bela Knows Basement Slumber Parties

Bela Knows Beating the Odds

Bela Knows Being the Predator, not the Prey

Bela Knows Building Camaraderie

Bela Knows Body

For anyone who hasn't had the pleasure of listening to fire he brings to each Olympic broadcast, do yourself a favor and go to youtube. You won't regret it.

What does Brandon Roy's Injury Mean?

2008-08-15T15:57:00.000-07:00

Deja Vu? A key cog to the Blazers' resurgence requiring microfracture surgery on his knee. In both cases (Oden & Roy), team doctors found what was an otherwise unknown problem during a "routine checkup." Is this a coincidence, or are the Blazers working out a little too hard in the offseason and not giving their bodies enough rest after the wear-and-tear of the regular season?

One thing is for certain: Brandon Roy can now be officially given the "injury-prone" label. Just two seasons into his thus far illustrious career, he has been an ongoing health problem. I don't even bother picking him up in my fantasy league because I know there is a good chance I'll be sitting on him for 20+ games/year. Even Baron Davis gave me 82 games last season...

Many fans in the Portland area were depressed to hear the news. They immediately envisioned another lottery year, and are fearing "rebuilding" mode will be in effect for yet another season. I don't think we should jump to that conclusion just yet. The silver lining on this unfortunate event is that Bayless and Fernandez will be forced into more significant roles from the get-go. I think both of these guys are going to be electric: now there is no excuse for sitting them on the pine to start the season.

I may be optimistic, but I don't think this injury is going to hurt the Blazers too much in the long run. After all, Roy will be back long before the stretch run and this roster is loaded with young talent at the guard spots. Blazer Nation, help me weigh in on this set of circumstances...

Unconventional = Sexy

2008-08-14T23:14:00.000-07:00

NBA fans love to make comparisons between players present and players past. (Fill in the blank) is the next Michael, the next Magic, the next Wilt. Dwight Howard is the next Shaq and Kevin Love is the next Kevin McHale. Do you remember when Adam Morrison was the next Larry Bird? Rather than give a player a chance to define his own style, we tell him who he should play like and criticize him when he falls short (just ask Harold "Baby Jordan" Miner).

I'm not quite sure how this occurs. Do these players choose their own destinies at a young age by idolizing their predecessors? Or is it us who force the players' destinies by looking at their height, shooting touch, demeanor, or skin color and telling them who they should emulate? Maybe it's a combination of both of these factors; in most cases, at least one of these factors appears to be at play. Whatever the case, the vast majority of stars are delegated a counterpart from a past era. The comparisons begin when the player successfully reproduces sporatic glimpses, or full-length motion pictures, of memorable greatness.

As soon as we link a young player's game to a legend of past, the marginalization begins. It's not: "Wow, this is the first player who is even a close comparison to Michael Jordan." It's more like: "He's good, but he ain't Jordan." Shawn Livingston never stood a chance of living up to the "next Magic" label, even if he hadn't gotten injured. J.J. Reddick couldn't even survive Steve Kerr comparisons. We draw these parallels, parallels that are so constrictive in nature. Rather than imagining what a player could be, we limit his potential to the reality that we know, the reality that played in a past era.

Herein lies the problem with our natural tendency of comparing current players to former players. We certainly won't concede - even in our inner thoughts - that this young gun could eventually be better than the O.G. we are comparing him to. If we did, we'd be minimizing the history of our beloved sport. Consequently, we are giving the player a ceiling. We may admit that he's great, but no matter what he does, he will be the lesser version of a legend prior. Sports fans don't like ceilings, and a comparison is effectively a ceiling.

Every so often, a player comes along who defies common logic and gives us a brand of basketball that is remarkably unique. Our comparison attempts are thwarted when we can't put a finger on who this new player reminds us of. When this occurs, our excitement exceeds that which surrounds the arrival of "the next Jordan" or "the next Malone/Barkley/Dantley." Why is this? It's quite simple, actually. We think we know what the comparables can bring, because we've seen their forefathers play. As our excitement for this outlier, this uncomparable, never-before-seen phenomenon grows, we dream about what his originality will mean to the team or to the league.

There are a few modern players that come to mind when I speak of the outliers, and our responses to their arrivals have been predictably irrational:

Josh Smith: Before Smith, we had never seen a versatile wing player capable of leading the NBA in blocked shots. This singular factor undoubtedly points to his athleticism, but we assign it so much more. Many people call Smith the "future" of the wing positions, despite his current status as the second-best player on a sub-.500 team. Rarely do scouts, GM's, or fans point to his attitude as a cause for concern. I find that particularly interesting given his on-going feud with his head coach, questioning of team management, and place amongst the league leaders in technical fouls. Rarely do they speak of his apparent apathy for long stretches of games, his streaky (at best) jump shot, or his careless turnovers. But boy, can this guy block shots. But his prowess in that one statistical category makes him far more intriguing than, say, Rudy Gay.

Dirk Nowitzki: While I won't disagree about his status amongst the game's elite, I think we may have the wrong idea about his value to the Mavericks. Especially early in his career, we had never seen a 7-footer who could stroke from 30 feet. For this, we tabbed him the forefather of a movement that would forever change the NBA. We saw (and see) so much more upside to a frail, 7-footer who can stroke it than a sturdy 6'9er who can bang with the big boys. Why is that? It's quite simple: we had never seen the size/touch combo possessed by Nowitzki but we had seen a plethora of average-sized bangers. For this reason, we ignore the fragility that cost him his matchup with David West, despite the fact West would never be mentioned in the same breath as Dirk. We rarely Dirk's futility as an individual defender or his inability to get offensive position below the high post. We even make excuses for his failure to knock out an 8th seeded team of midgets in the '07 Playoffs. As fans, all of these shortcomings are overlooked the moment he lofts a feathery three-ball.

Yao Ming: Yao's sheer mass, combined with his ascent from a non-Basketball country, made believers of us all. He would redefine dominance, we said, and lead the Rockets to multiple titles as soon as the Shaq regime came to a close. We scoffed at the notion that Yao would be a perpetual injury risk. We still rarely mention Yao's lack of mobility that has been Houston's achilles heel in the playoffs. Even a 20-game win streak without Yao hasn't convinced us that he is a defensive liability.

Let's be clear: I'm including myself in this group of fans who loves to see the new & shiny traits of an unconventional player on display. A sweeping cartoonish move by Ginobili is far prettier than a Hardaway-esque crossover by Deron Williams, and the Warriors are much more endearing than the Spurs. I really didn't intend for this post to become a Smith or Nowitzki or Yao bashing session. In fact, I love watching all of those guys play. I'm merely making an observation about our love for players who don't conform to the classical interpretations of how to play their positions. In drafting this post, I became aware of one thing: unconventional is sexy.

Ole! Ole! Ole!

2008-08-11T20:16:00.000-07:00

In case you haven't seen it already, the above photo was taken of the Spanish Olympic Basketball Team as part of an advertising campaign that ran in the Spanish newspapers. This photo is grainy, but what we have here is the Spanish team making a slant-eyed gesture as they stand over a chinese dragon symbol. This was clearly in good fun, and clearly, the Spaniards are as diplomatic as Don Imus when it comes to race relations...

Was this the best Spain's marketing department could come up with, or do we have a bigger issue here? According to this article, this wasn't the first incident of kind. In recent years, Spanish sports and cultural/racial insensitivity have been synonymous with each other. In a time when the global media machine is working harder than ever, you'd think the Spaniards would strive to appear tolerant at least.

I realize players frequently say things that are misinterpreted. This advertisement, however, was a calculated statement. It wasn't the product of an untimely interview quote by a sore loser. It wasn't a statement by one "bad apple" from an otherwise tolerant group of athletes. It was a thought-out, organized, advertising campaign that was participated in by an entire basketball team.

Maybe this type of advertising isn't viewed as offensive in Spain. Maybe (though I highly doubt it) it isn't even viewed as offensive in China. Regardless of whether some cultures shrug this off as a lame attempt at humor, others (America included) are going to be appalled when they see this ad. The Spaniards have to understand they are speaking to a bigger audience than their home fans. What makes it even more disgusting is the fact that seven of the participating players either wore an NBA jersey last season or will wear one this season. You'd think they'd know better.

Profit-Sharing in the NBA?

2008-08-10T10:14:00.000-07:00

In making my daily visit to FreeDarko, I came across this tasteful morsel (FreeDarko Post). The post in reference was aimed at analyzing Lebron's interest in playing overseas and the potential impact it could have on the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). It got me contemplating the NBA and its current compensation structure and how this structure could be revamped in the near future.

The fact NBA stars Lebron, Kobe, & DWade have shown interest (regardless of their sincerity) in playing overseas has to have NBA heads talking. In an era where "Show me the Money" is a prevaling theme and stars (e.g. Lebron) are as much aspiring businessmen as they are aspiring NBA legends, this talk should come as no surprise. Sure, the Olympics are here, making the obligatory "I'd play overseas" statement en vogue. I get that. But these stars aren't idiots, or they're at least getting advice from people who aren't idiots. There is a load of untapped money & fame overseas, and basketball is quickly gaining popularity in these markets.

The Motivations of Superstars have Changed over the Years

If Josh Childress can become "the highest-paid player in Euroleague history," making ~$7M/year, what kind of money would be thrown at Lebron or Kobe? Lebron half-jokingly threw out an asking price of $50M/yr, but is that number really as ridiculous as it sounds? I'm not so sure. I am sure that there are international teams that would be willing to outbid NBA franchises, with salary cap limitations in place and all. Who's to say Lebron the businessman wouldn't take an offer of, say, $40M plus some sort of ownership stakes to play in China? If not James, how about a Lamar Odom-type player? A player like Odom could never be the face of the NBA but he could be the face of Croatian basketball or its equivalent. If a Croatian team threw $15M, profit-sharing, and endless endorsement possibilities at Odom, would he take it? I don't know if Odom would, but I'm fairly certain some players would.

Is this where international basketball is headed? In recent years, the migration of international stars to the NBA has been the trend. As interest grows overseas, who's to say the trend won't be NBA stars migrating to international leagues? While the NBA still has the premier competition, competition is no longer the primary movitator for all professional athletes. I could particularly see veterans who had reached the pinnacle of NBA fame & fortune making the move overseas. It would only take the movement of a few players (e.g. Lebron and/or Kobe) for an exodus of sorts to gain momentum.

The Chinese Love Them Some Kobe

So, assuming more players follow Childress' lead and move overseas, how would the NBA respond? If it were only a few players and none were All-Star caliber talents, Stern probably wouldn't bat an eyelash. If it were a handful of players and one or more of those players were cogs in the NBA's marketing machine, Stern would be sweating bullets. As soon as Greece, Italy, China, and Germany start flashing the dough, Stern and his cronies will have to take a hard look at the NBA's current compensation structure. This will be an absolute must-do if the NBA wants to continue to monopolize the world's best basketball talent.

In observing the Stern regime, I'm fairly certain he won't stand pat if basketball's balance of power begins to shift away from the U.S. Stern, in spite of all of his annoying tendencies, is an innovator of sorts. To date, he has embraced the globalization movement wholeheartedly -- and while you could argue that MLB had an influx of foreign players long before the NBA did, basketball is now leaps and bounds ahead of its American sports counterparts in terms of international appeal growth rate. It should be noted, however, that this was a calculated embrace. The progressive approach Stern has taken with regards to globalization has been aimed at growing the NBA's appeal (and revenue) overseas. I don't think he will be so eager to embrace the globalization of basketball if international leagues begin reaping the benefits at the expense of his NBA.

Without totally destroying the salary cap system in place, profit-sharing could be a solution. Lebron and others have already shown interest in participating in team ownership, so why not?While in the past I had been an advocate of the CBA, I'm beginning to think it may be too restrictive. The argument that players are overpaid can certainly be made, but foreign leagues (without salary caps or profit-sharing restrictions) will be able to overpay them even more. Furthermore, NBA franchises generate enormous amounts of revenue from ticket & merchandise sales. While marketing has improved and team management & coaches should be compensated for assembling & developing talented, cohesive, winning rosters it's hard to argue that the players are not primarily responsible for these revenues. Take the Cavs as an example: aside from winning the lottery and making the biggest no-brainer #1 selection ever, they have done virtually nothing to improve the franchise. In fact, they have probably been one of the worst-run franchises in the NBA in the past few years. Lebron has quite literally carried that franchise on his back. Players like Lebron transcend the game and sell merchandise, tickets, and the game's overall popularity on their own.

In any other type of American business, the compensation for Lebron-types would be more closely related to the overall success of the businesses they were employed by. They would get commissions, bonuses, and/or huge allotments of stock options. All of these forms of compensation reward the employee (or player) when their contributions positively impact the business's bottom line. Rather than adding variable (and minimal) compensation to be paid if the team makes the playoffs or wins the championship, couldn't some fraction of player compensation be tied to ticket sales, jersey sales, and overall profitability? Maybe not for all players, but at least for the players with the "franchise" label?

I realize this could get tricky really fast. Employing a profit-sharing system in the NBA would inevitably expose the league to the problems experienced by the MLB. Boston, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago would have bigger bargaining chips for the superstars due to the relative profit potential advantages in those markets. Small-market teams like the Trailblazers wouldn't be able to rely upon good management alone to build competitive rosters. The NBA has kept its structure intact to avoid these types of disparities. To be quite honest (even as a Laker fan), I'm not sure I'd be happy if profit-sharing brought these inequities with it.

So what, if anything, should be done if NBA players start bailing to play overseas? Would the assurance of the best players remaining in the league outweigh the consequences of profit-sharing? I'm torn. If this posting hasn't thoroughly confused you, I'd love to hear your thoughts...

The Los Angeles Heat

2008-08-08T10:53:00.000-07:00

It's official, the Los Angeles Clippers are heads and shoulders above every other NBA team this offseason in terms of activity. Last night, I read a headline that Jason Williams (aka White Chocolate) will be joining fellow former Miami guard Ricky Davis with the Clips.
What do these moves mean for the Clippers? Quite a bit, in my opinion.

Williams, much maligned for his flashiness, has actually developed into a pretty reliable NBA guard. Despite this supposedly flashiness, White Chocolate has presumably matured over the years. In 28mpg last season, he only averaged 1.36 turnovers -- far below his career average of 2.27 in 31mpg. Choco will be a great backup to Baron Davis, and suddenly the Clippers went from having Dan Dickau & Brevin Knight to having Davis and Williams. HUGE upgrades.

Ricky D is a high risk, high reward type of player. Nobody has ever questioned his talent, but many have questioned his work ethic. Have you forgotten Ricky's infamous attempt at a triple double by purposely missing a shot on the other team's basket so he could grab his tenth rebound? Yikes. On the other hand, this is Baron Davis' team now. He did a marvelous job of helping to keep Stephen Jackson's head on straight in GS, so why can't he do the same for Davis? Jackson is a bigger hothead, in my opinion, and Ricky's game is actually pretty similar to Stephen's. In fact, I'd argue that Stephen Jackson is almost a poor man's version of Ricky Davis. I'm betting on good chemistry between the Davis' this season in LA.

The Clips have set themselves up with a pretty solid roster. It is lined with veterans (Davis, Williams, Camby, Kaman, other Davis), but also has a few young prospects that are very talented (Thornton, Gordon). In my experience, this type of mix has "playoff berth" written all over it. I'm predicting it now: Clippers get the 7th playoff seed in a loaded west.

The Artest Factor

2008-08-07T16:49:00.000-07:00

I'm calling the Ron Artest trade the most intriguing move of the offseason. It will be very interesting to see how it turns out. It all depends on whether we see Good Ron or Bad Ron...

What to expect if Good Ron shows up

By "Good Ron", I am referring to the player who came to Sacramento midway through the 2005-06 season. The Ron who told Rick Adelman (coincidence?) that he would lead the Kings to the playoffs despite their longshot hopes at the time -- and delivered. The Ron who is just plain nasty and scares opposing offenses with his maniacal defense and physicality. The Ron who is comfortable playing in the shadows of superstars.

This is a side of Artest that we haven't seen much of, but he has been trying to make believers out of all of us ever since he was dealt. I was pleasantly surprised by his reaction to Yao Ming's public statements of concern regarding his character and the Detroit brawl. He's been referring to himself as a "Yao Ming Soldier" in interviews, and went out of his way to sort things out with the Chinese giant the day after Yao's remarks went public. He even hinted at the possibility of traveling to Beijing to support Yao in the Olympics this summer.

If Good Ron emerges and remains focused throughout the season the Rockets could be scary. In my book, they'd have a chance to dethrone the other Texas teams and compete for home court advantage in the West. At worst, he would help end McGrady's oh-for in playoff series. At best, he could help T-Mac shed his reputation as a perennial choker.

Even if Yao went down via another injury, the Rockets would be a tough out in the playoffs due to their defense alone. Put Ron with all-defensive player Shane Battier and a 67-year-old Mutombo, and there would be no easy baskets. In the Finals, we saw just how much of an impact stingy defense can have.

What to Expect if Bad Ron Shows Up

By "Bad Ron", I am referring to the bipolar sideshow that has earmarked the majority of Artest's career. The Ron who flirted with retirement to pursue a hip-hop career. The Ron who leaped into the stands and duked it out with Piston fans. The Ron who has a tendency to be at the center of domestic disputes.

Ron has always said that he is "misunderstood." No argument here. The majority of basketball fans are at least somewhat sane -- of course we don't understand the psychological or behavioral oddities of a lunatic. I know for certain Yao Ming doesn't understand him.

This oft-seen side of Artest has me worried. How can I expect him to mesh with the Gentle Giant and the emotional, softspoken McGrady? I won't be surprised if this whole thing backfires in an ugly way. If Bad Ron shows up, at best they are a fringe playoff team in the West with some serious issues heading into the playoffs. At worst, Ron goes Ricky Davis and poisons any chemistry this team has built. Meaning: no playoffs & no players that want to stay around to witness the carnage.

My Prediction

I've always believed that winning is the best medicine for any individual player's problems. For this reason, I think Good Ron is going to show up. As a Laker fan, I advocated an Odom for Artest deal. The Rockets have a championship-caliber roster, and Artest knows it. Despite his numerous character flaws, he is a fierce competitor who relishes the opportunity to win. The Kings sucked, and Artest knew that, too. Despite his god-given ability, he is an immature man who relishes the opportunity to make headlines (a la Dennis Rodman).

I see Ron's situation in Houston similar to Dennis' situation in Chicago. They are (and were) at the peak of their pre-madonna status, but nobody ever questions (or questioned) the toughness they brought to the table. For the first time since playing under Chuck Daly, Rodman respected his coach. Artest has played for Adelman before, and has nothing but good things to say about him.

In closing, I think the Ron Artest deal is going to work out for the Rockets. Of course, all bets are off if they start off slowly. If so, we are in for a circus, and the West is still safe for the other contenders' taking.

The Never Ending Stories

2008-08-06T22:40:00.000-07:00

In light of the Brett Favre soap opera, I thought it would be appropriate to reflect upon the 5 most overplayed, over-covered, overkilled stories that have hit sports media in the past year. Here goes...

5. Celtics vs. Lakers "Rivalry"
Did anyone else get tired of the media likening the 2008 Finals to the 80's matchups between Bird & Magic? I'll give it to ABC: the intro they played before each game was almost goosebump worthy. Aside from that, the NBA's marketing attempts were rather exhaustive.

Sorry folks, those weren't your Dad's (or Grand-dad's) Lakers or Celtics. As much as the NBA wanted its disgruntled fan base to get nostalgic, the reality is that most of these guys (aside from Kobe & Ray Allen) had no bad blood going into the series. They had barely spent any time playing with their teammates, let alone playing against their newly-constructed opponent. It had been over 20 years since the franchises had met in the Finals. I don't blame the NBA, but the whole rivalry campaign was overdone and discounted the days when the players had to wear headgear to walk away from the series in one piece.

4. Failures of the BCS System
Everyone knows (myself included) that the BCS System is flawed. Most fans want nothing more than a playoff system, but the reality is that the NCAA isn't willing to give up the dollars associated with the Bowl system in place. It's a fun topic to debate, but we might as well get used to things as they are. They won't be changing for awhile.

This year, there was a new "snub" every week it seemed. With all of the upsets, there was a different team sitting at number 3 on a near-weekly basis. #3's fans always have reasons they should be ahead of #2. #4 has reasons it should be ahead of #3. Everyone in the top 100 has reasons they should be ahead of Notre Dame. As long as the National Championship matchup is decided by popular vote, there will be gripes. It's not that I disagree with these gripes, I just get sick of listening to them on every sports show for a 3 month period.

3. Spygate
I, for one, was happy when Spygate hit the national scene. I had always harbored thoughts that Bill Bellichick was evil, this just proved it. I always believed the Pats' victory of the Rams was tainted, this just added credibility to my paranoia. It was fun watching Bellichick struggle for words and look like an idiot on national television. I have no problem admitting it.

Then the Patriots kept winning. And they kept winning by ridiculous margins. Before long, they were making the rest of the league look like a joke. It became evident by about Week 6 that the Patriots were just that much better than everyone else, whether they knew the other team's signals or not.

Nevertheless, ESPN had a weekly Spygate story and former assistant water boys were making vague, unsubstantiated claims about all of the Patriots' supposed cheating. Goodell destructed the tape evidence, and all the Patriot-haters were calling it a big conspiracy. They even went so far as to compare the Patriots' franchise to the mob, insisting that they must have bribed these "witnesses" to keep their mouths shut. There's nothing I hate worse than sports conspiracy theories, especially when they dominate my sports radio on the way to work every morning.

2. Roger Clemens' Steroid Use
Is he lying? He must be lying. But he sounds so sincere. That's how delusional sociopaths sound when they lie. Let's take this to federal court... forget all the violent criminals who are awaiting trial, we need all of America's brightest court minds on THIS case. America will not be a safe place until we know whether or not Roger Clemens lied about taking steroids. Oh, dear lord, his wife took them before her SI Swimsuit Issue shoot! Roger had to know. Roger slept with a teen country singer in 1987? This type of evidence clearly links him to steroid use!

Is the NBA regular season really that boring? Did we really need to waste four good months of sports coverage on this story? Did anyone really doubt Roger Clemens was using steroids? Did anyone really care? Boy, I sure didn't. This was without a doubt one of the most over-covered stories in the history of sports. Most baseball fans put a mental asterisk next to any record that was broken in the past ten years LONG ago, so why did I have to pain my ears with coverage on Clemens' drawn-out trial? It really goes to show how happy fans get when stars are humbled and humanized.

1. The Brett Favre Saga
Was there really any doubt about this pick? What Brett eats for lunch has the potential to be the headlining story on Sportscenter these days. Since the story is still currently in progress, I'll avoid adding to the over-coverage by leaving it at that.

Should the Sixers Re-Sign Iggy?

2008-08-06T00:05:00.000-07:00

Rumor has it Andre Iguodala is asking for a 6-year, $75M deal. Is this too much? No way, says I. He's still young and has a great all-around game: 20pts, 5reb, 5ast, 2stl. If the Sixers don't agree to this offer, or something similar, another team will snatch him up.

Anyone who thinks this is too much money needs to examine recent history on free agent contracts. $12.5M per is his market value.

Naysayers may argue that he's not good enough to build your team around. I say he is, especially since the Sixers also have Elton Brand. Brand's signing will free Iguodala up even more going forward -- no longer does he need to be the primary, err, only scoring option. Now he can let the game come to him and put his all-around ability on display.

If the Sixers lock Iggy down, they will be good. Very good in the East. They now have a starting lineup of Miller & Iguodala in the backcourt, with a young and blossoming Thaddeus Young at SF, Brand at PF, and Dalembert at C. Only the Celtics and Pistons (and possibly the Magic) have better starting 5's in the East. The fact that they can bring microwaves Lou Williams and Willie Green, and hard-fouling rebound machine Reggie Evans off the bench could push them over the top in the JV conference. The fact they are much younger than the Celtics and Pistons makes their long-term prospects even juicier.

Philly, if you're listening: bone up and pay the man, you won't regret it.

Over-Coaching is Dead

2008-08-04T18:50:00.000-07:00

I came across some interesting commentary by Jason Whitlock regarding Lute Olson and the whole Brandon Jennings situation (thanks BMac):

"Strictly from a basketball standpoint, a year in Europe will do Jennings good. No one who knows anything about basketball believes Lute Olson would teach Jennings a thing about the fundamentals of the game. I'm not taking a cheap shot at Lute to defend Jennings' decision. It's a well-known fact within basketball circles that Lute Olson is famous for rolling the ball on the court, kicking back, and enjoying the work of his recruiters. Lute Olson is not Bobby Knight."

I know Whitlock is a writer who thrives on getting people riled up ("any publicity is good publicity"), but he's a little off-point on this one.

First and foremost, it's a little odd to say that playing under the tutelage of Lute Olson wouldn't help a point guard's game. Say what you will about Lute, but his development of guards is almost unparalleled (see Bibby, Stoudamire, Arenas, Jefferson, Iguodala, Terry, etc.) -- if you measure "development" by NBA success. I sure do. Brandon Jennings (along with virtually every other blue-chip prospect) clearly hopes to excel in the NBA, so how can Whitlock say that playing for Lute would be bad for his "development?" Further, as much as frosh-to-NBA guards struggle to adjust, most international guards seem to struggle even more with the transition to the NBA (aside from Parker & Ginobili). So tell me again, why is Brandon Jennings better off playing in a second-tier international league than he would be playing at Arizona?

Whitlock's criticism of Lute's relatively hands-off approach to coaching is unfounded, as well. As I stated earlier, it is every college player's dream to excel in the NBA. Lute's players, more than almost any other coaches' players, excel in the NBA. So he's "not Bobby Knight." How many players has Bob Knight coached in the last decade that have turned out to be even mediocre pros? That's what I thought.

So he "enjoys the work of his recruiters." Clearly, the aforementioned U of A stars were all extremely talented coming into college. However, there have been countless top preps who have amounted to nothing in the NBA. Lute must be doing something to "develop" these kids. Furthermore, why do you think these McDonald's All-Americans choose to play for Lute in the first place? Because he lets them play and doesn't try to play puppeteer like Whitlock's beloved Mr. Knight.

All of this discussion brings me to my main point: over-coaching is dead. Just take a look at the coaches who are turning out the most successful pros -- besides Lute, Roy Williams, Billy Donovan, Rick Pitino, John Calipari, and the late Skip Prosser (to name a few). All of these guys employ wide-open, relatively hands-off systems. Go back a few years and you could say the same thing about Dean Smith (relative to the other coaches of his era). It's no coincidence that their players shine at the next level -- NBA teams play the same type of wide-open game. Even Phil Jackson, considered to be one of the more hands-on coaches in the league, often goes long stretches without calling timeouts just to let his players "play through it." It's also no coincidence that players of structure-crazy coaches like Knight & Ben Howland often turn out to be average pros (at best).

Let me take this argument one step further -- my above theory specifically applies to perimeter players. I still believe that big men in structured systems may have a better chance of succeeding in the NBA. This probably has a lot to do with the more structured environment that they play in (relative to guards) in the NBA. It also may have to do with the fact big men are far more likely than guards to have underdeveloped fundamentals heading into college. In other words, they are more likely to benefit from what I would call "over-coaching."

Take Duke for example, with Coach K. Duke gets some of the top prep guards AND big men every year. Coach K has an extremely structured system in place. In recent years, the best pros to come out of Duke have been Elton Brand & Carlos Boozer (both big men), while their highly-touted guards (Langdon, Jason Williams, Redick, etc.) haven't done much of anything in the NBA. On the other hand, Lute's "hands-off" system has produced great NBA perimeter players, while his big men (see Loren Woods, Channing Frye) generally don't live up to their hype in the NBA.

These conclusions make me even more convinced Kevin Love will flourish after playing in a structured system (while Arron Afflalo & Jordan Farmar will be mediocre at best). It also convinces me Derrick Rose will eventually be a star (and Joey Dorsey will be a nobody) after playing in a "hands-off" system. The only thing that scares me about this rationale is that I am practically conceding the Lopez Twins might be decent pros -- Stanford has a structured system in place...

Monta Ellis gets $67M

2008-07-24T22:48:00.000-07:00

Is this a good move? I'm torn. It's not that I don't believe he's worth those kinds of dollars, it's just that I'm doubting the Warriors will utilize him properly.

I'm a huge Ellis fan, but I think the Warriors are making a mistake if they plan on building around him as a POINT GUARD. I'm hoping the W's are planning on developing newly-acquired Marcus Williams as their point man, because Ellis is not and will never be a lead guard in this league.

Ellis is a shoot-first, pass-second kind of player. I don't think he's selfish by any means -- he is merely best suited as a scorer. Playing alongside B-Diddy the last few seasons took the burden off him from a ballhandling and distributing perspective. He could finish on the fast break and slash from the wings. With Davis gone, he's probably going to spend the bulk of his minutes at the 1. Nellie is going to start him with Jackson & Maggette, and neither of those two are capable of playing the point guard.

Watch the turnovers pile up in this whirling dirvish offense next season...

If the NBA Started Fresh...

2008-07-10T21:30:00.000-07:00

I got to thinking what it might look like if the NBA cleared all its rosters and had a 12-round draft to re-form the teams. I'm not going to make a 12-round mock draft -- despite what you may think, I really don't have that much time on my hands. I'll start by making my picks for spots #1 through 15 and will follow up with 16-30 in the coming days. My criteria for the top players on this list are as follows: 1) age (I want a player who isn't going to fade away in less than 5 years), 2) skill set (I want players who are versatile and can play multiple positions), 3) leadership (I want someone I can build my team around), 4) love for the game (without passion for the game, how can I expect him to improve?), and 5) marketability (the NBA is still a business, and some players are better at putting fans in the stands than others). Obviously, this list is up for criticism as it is a daunting task and I will inevitably make some questionable picks.

1. Lebron James
There isn't a young player in the game with a higher ceiling. He put up 30, 7, & 7 as a 23-year old kid last season. He can play multiple positions, and makes his teammates better. Plus, the NBA is determined to make him their poster boy for the next ten-plus seasons, so the marketing possibilities would be endless.

2. Chris Paul
Already the best point guard in the game, and still only 23 years old. Had averages of 24, 11, & 5 in his first playoffs and almost singlehandedly knocked out the defending champs.

3. Dwight Howard
Only 22 years old, and already the best true center in the game. An absolute beast who still has time to correct his obvious flaws (FT shooting, Turnovers). I gave him the nod over Kobe because he will be around much longer.

4. Kobe Bryant
The best player in the game and the most-feared player in the clutch. He's still only 29, so I'm giving him 6-7 quality years left. Like him or not, we all know he has the drive that will keep him at the top of his game for that long.

5. Deron Williams
Probably my first pick with any legitimate "shock" value. Say what you want, but he's already (at 24) the leader of a very good Utah team. Plays like a guy who's been in the league ten years. Unlike players who rely upon athleticism & quickness (although he has both), his style of play is one that will remain effective even as his legs start to wear down. Besides, he's a point guard -- and most NBA GM's are sold on point guard as the position to build your team around.

6. Amare Stoudemire
Although he's not great on the defensive end, he is a workhorse on offense. He's only 26, and has shown a great work ethic in coming back from that season-ending knee injury a few years ago. Virtually unguardable from the mid-post and will get your team plenty of easy baskets.

7. Kevin Durant
I said it a year ago, and I still believe it -- Durant should have been the first pick in last year's draft. I'm not overly concerned with his low shooting percentage as a rookie (that will improve as he learns NBA game) or his skin-and-bones frame (he only missed a few games in an 82 game season). He's already a prolific scorer, has a 7' wingspan, and made a few game-winners as a rook. He also seems to have a deep passion for the game, which makes me believe he will improve tremendously over the next few years. Oh yeah, he's 19!

8. Brandon Roy
Great all-around player going into his third year in the league. Has shown leadership at a young age and the ability to play multiple positions. Also possesses the "it" factor that results in icy cool play down the stretch of games.

9. Derrick Rose
My top 10 may be a little point guard-heavy, but as I said earlier -- that's what GM's crave. Rose went #1 this year, so who's to say he wouldn't be a top-10 pick under this draft's format? Given his age, ceiling, and unselfishness, I probably have him a little too low on this board.

10. Dwyane Wade
Despite his recent string of injuries, some GM would nab him this high. It was only two years ago that he led the Heat to the NBA Title (yes, it was Wade... not Shaq). He's still only 26 and can play the 1 or the 2. He's got a motor that won't quit and a knack for hitting the big shot.

11. Carmelo Anthony
He may be a crybaby, but there's no mistaking his love for the game. He'll continue to work at it and has the ability to drop 50 any given night. There are only a few scorers in the league more gifted than Melo, and he is improving in his rebounding, defense, and passing. If Wade goes #10, Melo goes #11.

12. Greg Oden
Oden went #1 last year, and even after the injury he would still go this high. Many heads in the league still believe he will be battling Dwight Howard for distinction of best big in the game within a few years. While I'm not going to go that far, he's a huge, athletic body -- the type of physical specimen that only comes around once every five years or so.

13. Chris Bosh
While I'm not Bosh's #1 fan, I can see why scouts would drool over this guy. He's a pretty cerebral, almost a throwback type of player who can step out and hit the 18-footer at 6'10". I take him ahead of Nowitzki and Duncan here because he's only 24 and those guys are in their thirties.

14. Josh Smith
Smith greatly improved his stock after a stellar playoff series against the NBA Champion Celtics. He makes easy plays look spectacular and spectacular plays look easy. Players who can play multiple positions flourish in today's wide open style of play, and there are few more capable of doing so than Josh Smith.

15. Al Jefferson
Yes, I took him ahead of KG. The only reason I did this is because KG is 32 and Big Al is 23. Is he in KG's league right now? Not even close. However, I'm betting my future on a player who will be around 12-15 years instead of a player who will be around 3-5 more years.

16-30: Coming in a few days

Baron Davis just took it in the...

2008-07-09T13:36:00.000-07:00

After Davis opted out and signed with the Clippers, ESPN reported Brand had been asking Clippers management to pursue Davis leading up to the signing. A few days later, Brand opted out and appears to have signed with the 76ers.

I guess we'll never know how much communication occurred between Brand & Davis, but comments by Baron led me to believe that they had been talking extensively and that he expected Brand to stay in LA. That also leads me to believe one of they main reasons BD signed with LA is because he liked the prospect of playing alongside Brand (who can blame him?). Guess who was most bummed out by the news of Brand going to Philly? Mr. Davis himself, of course. If the rumors about Brand beckoning Davis to come to LA are true, it was a pretty sketchy maneuver on EB's part.

Of course, I try to be a realist. Elton Brand has always said he was better suited for the Eastern Conference's style of play (although I disagree -- but that argument's for another day). I'm not certain, but I'm guessing he has family on the East Coast given he grew up in New York. He's entering the home stretch of his career, and family/lifestyle tends to become a bigger factor for players at that stage of their careers. It's also not like Brand moved to a miserable team that was merely willing to pay him -- he went to a team with a solid, young nucleus that plays in a Conference that's easier to manuever in. I get it -- the NBA is a business and Elton Brand probably did what was best for Elton Brand.

Nonetheless, I'd feel a bit shafted if I were Baron Davis. Overnight, he went from moving to a potential contender (at least for the second round of the playoffs) to a team in the same position as the one he left behind. If the aforementioned rumored coaxing by Brand is in fact true, it would be like salt on the wounds. I suppose he'll be happy living in his hometown and being closer to the entertainment scene that he has grown to love. From a basketball standpoint, however, he's gotta be frustrated.

Will the Clippers continue in their quest for improvement by seeking the services of another solid free agent? As the pickings become "slimmer", it's hard to see them luring anyone in until the summer of 2009.

At the Hip: Behind the Glory of the Lopez Twins -- Week 1

2008-07-02T22:39:00.000-07:00

There has been many a joke floating around the blogosphere regarding the potential of a Robin & Brook Lopez reality tv show. Joke no more, the voices have been heard. Oxygen Network recently announced it will be airing "At the Hip: Behind the Glory of the Lopez Twins" in one of its fall season slots, immediately preceding the second season of "Tori and Dean." Taping began during pre-draft workouts when Brook & Robin were living together in their parents' basement.

We got a glimpse of what the season will entail as Oxygen allowed us to sneak preview the pilot (week 1) episode. Here are the highlights:

The first five minutes portray the "real people" qualities that the twins possess. Robin & Brook are locked in a heated boxing match on their Nintendo WII, when Robin lands a combo that sends Brook's fighter to the mat. Brook throws his controller at Robin and accuses him of standing too close to the TV to gain an unfair advantage. Robin quickly diffuses the situation by reminding his brother that "bro, we're supposed to be BFF's." A bro-hug ensues, and Brook apologizes by telling him that he hopes they get drafted by the same team.

After a commercial break, the twins are filmed hiding in the bushes of their parents' side lawn. They are throwing water balloons at cars that drive past on the street and covering their mouths so their laughter cannot be heard. One driver screeches his car to a halt and catches the boys. Mrs. Lopez makes them take a 10 minute timeout and they reluctantly promise to clean the neighbor's car after lunch.

The twins make the most of their timeout by debating the best movie of all-time. Brook says "Cool Runnings" is his number one because he likes the "Jamaican dude's accent" and (he thinks) it was based on a true story, making it even better. Robin vehemently disagrees and says that "The Bride of Chucky" is by far the best movie of all-time. When Brook scoffs at his choice, Robin counters by saying: "you don't like BoC because you had to sleep with Mom & Dad for a week after we watched it." Brook fights back by saying "you're just jealous because I was born first." Robin yells at Brook, calling him a "prick" and Mrs. Lopez makes them spend the last 5 minutes of timeout in separate rooms.

After another commercial break, Mrs. Lopez calls the boys downstairs for Peanut Butter & Banana sandwiches, their favorite lunch. Brook asks his mom if he can have a pack of guzzlers with lunch, but Mrs. Lopez reminds him they had Frosted Flakes for breakfast -- they can only have one "sweet" per day because they are training for the NBA.

The phone rings, and Kevin McHale wants to talk to Brook. He tells him that the Timberwolves are very interested in him and want him to come work out. Brook asks if they have x-boxes in the locker room, and lights up when McHale says they do. "I bet I can beat Al Jefferson at Tony Hawk 3," boasts Brook. McHale is impressed with his confidence and schedules a workout for the following week.

The episode ends after Mrs. Lopez approaches the boys with the box of SI Swimsuit Editions that she found stashed under their bunk bed. Neither twin will fess up, and Mrs. Lopez won't believe them when they try to convince her the magazines belong to their older brother, Alex. The credits roll, and Coldplay (Robin's favorite band) plays in the background.

As expected, episode 1 didn't disappoint. Like any great reality TV show, Oxygen gives us conflict, resolution, more conflict, and a cliffhanger. It's a shame that they make the viewing public wait a whole week to see what happens next...

10 Reasons to Wear Your Letterman Jacket After High School

2008-07-02T11:01:00.001-07:00

10. Free entrance to the homecoming football game

9. You can cut in line at any fast food restaurant without opposition

8. Adds credibility to any "when I was in high school" story

7. Guaranteed top-3 pick in any pickup game chosen by captains

6. It will have only cost you $5 per year if you wear it for forty years

5. The rising cost of movie tickets won't impact you -- you'll still qualify for the student rate

4. Your parents may forget that you should have moved out by now

3. Everyday photo ops will turn out as classy as your senior pictures

2. You'll never have to bring a printed resume to job interviews -- it's already on your back

1. Hitting on high school chicks won't look as creepy to unknowing bystanders

10 Reasons to Hate the San Antonio Spurs

2008-07-02T00:01:00.000-07:00

10. Manu Ginobili's flopping

9. Fabricio Oberto's flopping

8. Robert Horry's flagrant fouls

7. Tim Duncan's wide-eyed, elbows cocked, basketball clenched whining after every call/no-call involving him in the post

6. The ten minutes devoted to praising how fundamentally sound Tim Duncan is in every Spurs vs. anyone broadcast

5. The five minutes devoted to reminding us how "underrated" and "overlooked" the Spurs' dynasty has been in every Spurs vs. anyone broadcast

4. Tim Duncan's oversized shirts in post-game press conferences

3. The always stretched-out neck of Tony Parker's jersey

2. Bruce Bowen

1. The Riverwalk being San Antonio's #1 tourist attraction

Honorable Mention: Jacque Vaughn's jump shot, the ugliest uniforms in pro sports, the Spurs fan who calls in to national radio shows, Tony Parker trying to rap

B-Dizzle to LA???!?

2008-07-01T23:33:00.000-07:00

Not gonna lie, I'm a huge Baron Davis fan. He's definitely one of my 5 favorite players in the league right now. I've got mixed emotions about his pending departure from the Bay.

On one hand, I'm pretty sad to see him go. He personified that fun-n-gun style. He made basketball interesting in a great basketball city that had been dormant for about 10 years. To be quite honest, I don't know how Golden State is going to recover. Monta Ellis can't play the 1 full-time. Stephen Jackson might spontaneously combust on the court without Davis' (the only Warrior Jackson respected) calming presence telling him to chill out. Golden State just went from a team that could compete on any given night to a team that will be lucky to win 30 games.

On the other hand, I'm pumped to see what the new-look Clippers will be able to accomplish. If they re-sign Brand (which they probably will), we could see a starting lineup of Davis, Eric Gordon, Al Thornton, Brand, and Chris Kaman. That lineup could be pretty scary. It could be the right balance of veteran leadership and youth. If Dunleavy lets them loose, they could put up some big numbers next year.

Could we see an LA-LA playoff matchup next season?

Draft Grades -- Eastern Conference

2008-06-29T23:31:00.000-07:00

Here are my unqualified draft grades for all the Eastern Conference teams...

Chicago: B-
Whenever you pick at #1, you inevitably end up picking who everyone else tells you to pick. It's just too big of a risk as a GM to take a shot in the dark with so many chips on the table. That said, Rose was clearly the best prospect in this draft. Hinrich was miserable last season and isn't strong enough to fit into the Bulls' "hard hat" system. Rose is strong, quick, and gets it. Their second-round pick of Sonny Weems is a bit curious... aren't they already LOADED at guard? He may not even make their active roster. I thought they should have used the pick to get a raw big man (anyone would be an upgrade to Aaron Gray as a backup) or better yet -- use it on a foreign player who could stay overseas and develop for a few years.

Miami: C
Beasley was clearly the second-best player in the draft -- so you can't really fault them for this pick. However, I think it could be problematic to have a self-proclaimed socialite living under the bright lights of Miami. They then proceeded to take another undersized power forward in the second round (Darnell Jackson), which makes less sense given the fact they already have Udonis Haslem. I can't believe they didn't use either pick to get a point guard or a center.

New York: B-
I like the Gallinari pick, as I think he will end up having a good NBA career. The Knicks have needs at virtually every position, but I would have preferred seeing them draft a point guard to ensure Marbury's tenure would be coming to a close.

Milwaukee: D
I had mixed feelings about the Jefferson trade. Yi showed some flashes in his first season in the U.S., and they used a high lottery pick on him just a year ago. Seems a little premature to be dumping him, regardless of the fact Jefferson has proven to be a 20ppg scorer in the league. If they are so high on Jefferson, why did they use both of their picks on small forwards?? I'm baffled.

Charlotte: C-
I'm starting to look like a pessimist here, but I don't get this pick, either. I'm not sold on Felton being unable to succeed as a starting NBA point guard. If they plan on sliding him to the 2, they would have the shortest backcourt in the league with Felton (6'1?) and Augustin (5'10). Curious. As much as I dislike Brook Lopez, he would have been a much more logical choice here. Okafor could have slid to the 4 and their starting lineup would have been decent by next season. I've lost all hope in Michael Jordan as a front office decision-maker.

New Jersey: A
I spoke above about how I disliked the Jefferson-Yi trade for Milwaukee. Not surprisingly, I liked the trade for NJ. It was evident that Carter and/or Jefferson would be dealt soon, and they got a promising young player in return. I think the New York area will be a much better spot for Yi from a marketing standpoint, as well. There is no question they can capitalize on that gigantic Chinese population given there are only 2 relevant Chinese players in the league. As for the draft, New Jersey got a good deal in Lopez at #10, and scored one of the most underrated prospects in the draft late in the first round (Anderson). I LOVED the CDR pick at #40. He is going to be a legitimate scorer in the NBA, and Carter is probably on his way out the door.

Indiana: C-
What is Larry Bird thinking? He has two positions filled by promising players (2 & 3) in Granger & Dunleavy. Apparently he isn't aware of this, as he traded his lottery pick for Rush, who will play 2/3 in the NBA. They will undoubtedly be loaded at the wings, but after trading O'Neal they are left with a front court of Troy Murphy & Jeff Foster. Sorry, but I don't see that being the recipe for anything better than a first round playoff exit.

Philadelphia: B+
Speights was a great pick. He is a tremendously gifted athletically and will fit in perfectly with the Sixers' raw, young, roster that loves to run the floor.

Toronto: C+
While I think Hibbert was undervalued in this draft, I don't see him fitting into their style of play. It is no secret that Colangelo likes to put together teams that run, run, run. Hibbert doesn't have the foot speed to play in that kind of system. I think he would have been a better fit for a grind it out type of team (say, Miami or San Antonio).

Washington: B
JaVale McGee was a solid pick at #18. He could have easily been a late lottery selection, so I'm happy if I'm Washington. I like his length and athleticism in the Wizards' system -- he just needs to put on a few pounds. It will only be a couple years before he is supplanting Haywood in the starting lineup.

Cleveland: C+
J.J. Hickson was a decent pickup at #19. I wish they would have dealt this pick for a decent veteran high-post scorer, but Hickson is already a better scoring option than Ben Wallace. He's got potential, time will tell if he will turn into a viable option in the NBA.

Orlando: B
Outside of the 4-spot, Orlando needed most help at the wings (as a third wing option after Lewis & Turkoglu). I think Courtney Lee has the potential to fill that void. Given Turkoglu's emergence last season, the Magic have the ability to ease Lee into the rotation. I like this pick.

Detroit: C+
With Sheed on the last legs of his career, Detroit clearly needs to find a big man. While I like Deron Washington's athleticism, they already have an athletic energy guy in Maxiell. I'm not one to question Dumars after proving to be a savvy decision-maker (see Rodney Stuckey last draft), so I won't be too critical of their 08 draft management, but I would have used my pick(s) differently. I probably would have used #29 on the potential upside of DeAndre Jordan (and not dealt him to Seattle as they did with their #29 pick, D.J. White).

Boston: B+
I liked the Giddens pick at #30 and liked the trade for Bill Walker even better. Even though they are stacked at the 2 & 3 with Pierce & Allen, Boston is aging quickly and will benefit greatly from these two young, athletic wings.

Atlanta: B
Atlanta didn't do anything on draft night, and it was the right move. The last thing they need is to get younger.

Draft Grades - Western Conference

2008-06-27T19:47:00.000-07:00

Here's my take on how all the teams in the West fared on Thursday:

Minnesota: A-
McHale made no bones about his "love" for Love. There was some talk that he might take him with #3, but for the first time in his tenure as GM, McHale outsmarted someone. He managed to get Love and a perenially underrated Mike Miller. In the process, he also dumped an unhappy Marco Jaric. I think Miller will provide the perfect veteran leadership and an all-around game that any team would love to have. Love will spread the defense and give Jefferson room to operate under the basket. Picking Nikola Pekovic was smart, as well. Many scouts think he is a top-15 talent, and he probably dropped to the second round simply because he won't be coming to the U.S. for a few years. With a roster that is already loaded with young talent, it may be best in the long run that they don't have another young player on the roster next season, anyways.

Seattle: C-
I liked Bayless at #4 and thought he would have been a better fit in Seattle than Westbrook. Bayless is a much more proficient scorer and would have taken more pressure off Durant on the offensive end. Their other 5 picks were okay at best. I really expected more out of Seattle with all of the picks they had on their hands.

Memphis: B-
I thought they should have held onto Love. Instead, they dumped their second-best player (Miller) and added a fourth point guard and a shooting guard. Now Memphis could potentially be stacked at the guard spots in a few years (Conley, Mayo, Gay), but have virtually nothing underneath. I do think Mayo is going to be special, but I really thought Memphis would have targeted a big man to keep. Apparently they are happy with keeping Darko & Kwame in their rotation (if not starting). The best they can hope for in a few years with this roster is the modern day version of the 2004 New Jersey Nets (Carter, Kidd, Jefferson). Silver lining: they got Darrell Arthur, who could have easily been a lottery pick.

LA Clippers: B+
Gordon was a good pickup, although I think Bayless would have been a better pick for LA at this slot. He can play both guards, and with Maggette probably leaving, they will need help at both guard positions (they don't have a decent healthy point guard, either). Gordon won't be playing any point, but I do think he will help them tremendously in the scoring department. What bumped up their grade in my opinion was the steal of DeAndre Jordan in the second round. I still can't believe he fell so far, and with Brand and Kaman holding the fort down low, the Clippers have the ability to be patient in Jordan's development. Solid day overall.

Sacramento: D
Wow, Jason Thompson at #12? I don't think anyone saw that one coming. They do need help at the 4, but this was a major stretch in my opinion. I would have easily selected Arthur if they were looking for a 4. Patrick Ewing, Jr. probably will never amount to anything in the NBA, so the Kings best hope is that someone will fall in love with his name and make a foolish trade for him. The one silver lining for me was the pick of Singletary -- I like his game and the Kings needed help at that position. Problem is, he will probably never be a quality starter in the NBA.

Portland: A
I probably shouldn't be shocked that Pritchard stole a high-quality talent like Bayless, but I am. In the process, Portland also dumped one of its mediocre point guards in Jack and got a tough young player in Diogu. In my eyes, they got the 4th best player in the draft with the 13th pick. Oh yeah, PG is the position they needed the most help. Even better. About the only flaw I saw in the Blazers' decision-making was trading away Arthur, but the local paper up here had Pritchard singing the praises of Batum -- and I agree that he could become a solid NBA player. A point that has been somewhat overlooked is the 3 future second-round picks Portland traded for. These could be valuable assets to use as part of future multi-player deals. Best draft-day management of any team.

Golden State: D
I feel like I'm experiencing deja vu. Didn't the Warriors use lottery picks on speculative big men in each of the past 2 drafts? Now they draft Randolph, who in my opinion was the most overrated player in the entire draft. Why make that pick when they already have Biedrins and a young Brandan Wright down low? It baffles me and lets me know that Don Nelson has nothing to do with the decision-making on draft day. I would have thought they would have targeted a guard given Baron Davis' & Stephen Jackson's probable departures in the near future? So what did they do in the second round? Pick another power forward. I'm stunned.

Phoenix: C-
Brook Lopez doesn't even have the semblance of an offensive game, and he is a painful show to watch on the court. Obviously, Kerr is overcompensating for the Suns' lack of defense by trying to get a defense-only player here. I could be wrong, but it doesn't make much sense to me to shift the entire personality of a franchise that has been consistently winning 50+ games a season.

Utah: B
Kuofos was a great pick at #23. He gives them size & outside shooting ability from the Center position. He'll be able to spell an often out-of-shape Mehmet Okur in a few years. I don't know much about Tomic, but at #44 this was a very low-risk pick. Apparently the Jazz thought about taking him at #23, so the fact they were able to nab him this late was a well-calculated risk.

Houston: C
They should have kept Batum with this pick. They could have also nabbed DeAndre Jordan, who would have had time to grow playing behind Yao. Leunen was a decent pick at #54, but in my eyes is a Steve Novak clone -- whom Houston already has.

San Antonio: B
The video I saw of George Hill made him out to be a pretty solid, yet undersized combo guard. Watching the draft, they mentioned he had a 6'7 wingspan which could turn him into a good defender. I think he'll be a solid upgrade to Vaughn as Parker's backup by year 2. I really liked the pick of James Gist at #57. He was a productive player in one of CBB's best conferences (ACC) and is an athletic specimen. On an aging Spurs roster, he could be a valuable energy guy off the bench.

New Orleans: B
No players to show for this draft, which is fine given they have a young & talented roster with no gaping holes that need to be filled immediately.

Dallas: C
Dallas does need help at the guard positions, but I don't think Shon Foster is the answer. Since they didn't have a first-round pick, there wasn't much hope that a solid guard would still be available at #51, but I like Joe Crawford better.

LA Lakers: B
Joe Crawford was a pretty good pickup at #58, given the slim pickings at that stage of the draft. The Lakers could use him in a few years with Fisher near retirement and Kobe needing a sub (every once in a great while). Crawford is a hard-nosed player. As this was their only pick in the draft, that's all I've got.

Denver: C
They didn't have any picks and made no moves in this year's draft. While they are great on paper, the culture of that franchise is miserable. It could still happen, but I'd trade away one of their pre-madonna stars before the season starts to shake things up a bit. Time will tell.

Coming Soon: Draft grades for all Eastern Conference teams

Just for Fun

2008-06-25T21:47:00.000-07:00

I took an art class as a college elective and decided I would draw a bunch of nba players for my final project. I forgot how much I liked doing it until last night when out of boredom I decided to pick up the pencil. As a tribute to my hometown Blazers, this is what I came up with:

I'm certainly no pro and I won't be quitting my day job any time soon, but it's fun nonetheless. Rather than loading this website with more images than it can handle, I started another blog with some of my older drawings (from that art project). If you wanna check it out, here's the link: playersinpencil.blogspot.com

Why not send the NBA's best team to the Olympics?

2008-06-24T18:47:00.000-07:00

Quite frankly, I'm concerned for this summer's Team U.S.A. Based upon Colangelo & Co's selections, it is quite obvious that they completely abandoned building the best "chemistry" team and instead offered invitations to the best available players, regardless of position. This is going to put our country's team into a precarious position in the International competition. We have learned three things from our recent international basketball failures: 1) to win the international game, you need shooters, 2) to win the international game, you need need to have players who can defend multiple positions (pick & roll defense) and 3) the foreign teams have better chemistry and continuity. I just don't see the 2008 U.S. roster meeting these needs.

I read a good post (http://highfivehoopschool.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-team-usa.html) that got me thinking. Most people who are skeptical about this summer's roster have ideas about how to construct the ideal roster for international competition. Most of these skeptics have ideas about which individual players would be the perfect "pieces" for our roster. "You need a shooter, a rangy defender, a strong rebounder, a power forward who can stretch the defense", etc. More often than not, these pieces are from multiple teams. I'd like to put a new spin on a possible solution to the U.S.'s shortcomings in international basketball: put the best NBA team in the Olympics.

I'll start my argument by saying that I realize there are a few obvious problems with my proposal. The first problem is that it would be very difficult to choose the "best" team to represent our country in the games. The second problem is that most NBA rosters are loaded with international talent that couldn't compete for the U.S. Lastly, this solution could create substantial discontent amongst NBA fans who would be unwilling to support a team they were used to rooting against (e.g. Kings fans would have a hard time supporting the Lakers). For sake of argument, however, let's pretend these issues didn't exist. Just bear with me as I make my case.

As I stated in the first paragraph, foreign rosters seem to have much better chemistry and continuity than the U.S. team does. What better way to ensure chemistry/continuity than to field a team that plays together all year long? The current roster has a plethora of "star" players who are not used to sharing the spotlight. NBA teams have all year, if not several years, to learn & understand their players' roles. The successful ones have very clearly defined roles, and execute these roles beautifully. Even if the perfect balance of players was put together (from multiple teams), these players would only have a few months (or less) to get accustomed to playing with each other. This isn't enough time to build great chemistry and for players to fully understand their places on the court.

While the international playing field is leveling out, it is still extremely obvious that the best overall talent exists in the U.S. How else do you explain the fact that far more than 50% of the players in the best league in the world (NBA) are American-born? I don't doubt other countries are catching up -- and fast -- but it will take years for another country to pass the U.S. in overall basketball talent. Basketball is still a relatively young sport in most foreign societies. I have to believe that the best teams in the best league could also be the best teams in an international competition.

Rather than labor to find the perfect mix, why not send a pre-assembled, battle-tested, proven NBA squad to the Olympics? Two teams come to mind: the Pistons and the Celtics. These teams have succeeded in the NBA & have predominantly American-born rosters. They have the "shooters," the "rebounders," the "versatile defenders" and the "hustle guys" that the U.S. has lacked in recent international competitions. They know how to play together & they know how to win.

I know many people believe that my proposal would negate our talent advantage. I disagree. I've gotta believe even role players for the Celtics or Pistons would be stars overseas. Isn't Carlos Arroyo (an NBA bench warmer) always considered one of the more valuable players in international competitions? Need I say more?

Do I believe this will ever be employed by the U.S.? No way. It would be far too difficult to pick which team would represent the league without awarding the pass on an objective basis, say, to the most recent NBA Champion. The problem with that system would be when a team like the Spurs wins and half of its players cannot compete for the U.S. This year (and 2004, coincidently), I believe my system would have worked beautifully. I truly believe the U.S. Celtics would win gold this year and the 2004 U.S. Pistons would have won Gold, as well. Our current squad, however, may have its hands full in Beijing...

Thoughts???

Derrick Rose is a Freak

2008-06-21T14:41:00.000-07:00

Even though I listed Rose as my #1 in my mock draft post, I never realized how athletic he was... this video is pretty ridiculous:

KG's Ring = Validation?

2008-06-19T23:06:00.000-07:00

I lost track of how many commentators, bloggers, & sportswriters have heralded KG's ring as the final & irrefutable truth that Kevin Garnett is one of the all-time greats. I'm confused by such logic for a number of reasons.

First and foremost, Kevin Garnett did not need to win a ring to be considered one of the all-time greats. His career stats speak for themselves: 20.4 pts, 11.2 rebs, 4.4 asts, 1.4 stls, & 1.6 blks. For his CAREER. His circumstances also speak for themselves: the best teammates he ever had (until this season) were an aging Sprewell & an aging Cassell. Often times, circumstances far outweigh individual talent. To win a championship, you must be in the right place at the right time. This year, Garnett finally was surrounded by other superstars and a ring was the payoff.

Since KG finally got a ring, does it mean this was the best seasons he has ever played? No way. Sure, he "changed Boston's culture." Blah, blah, blah. No, he came into a situation where he had two other great players and competitors in Ray Allen and Paul Pierce to play alongside him. I do not mean to undermine KG's leadership, but let's make no mistake about it -- this was a team effort. In fact, KG had a VERY mediocre Finals series (except for Game 6). He went into Game 6 with a 16 ppg average on 40% shooting (as a post player!). Both of these numbers are well below his career & career playoff averages. He was probably the main reason they lost Game 5, missing 3 of 4 FT's down the stretch & a couple of uncontested layups. In a bit of irony, one of KG's worst series turned out to be the series he turned his "loser" label into "winner."

I am sick of the number of championship rings being viewed as the #1 indicator of individual greatness. There are certainly some players who rise above the competition in the Finals, but it's usually their circumstances (i.e. the talent they are surrounded by) that got them into the Finals in the first place. Paul Pierce, for example, has been the same clutch player his whole career. He just hadn't been on a good enough team to make the finals until this year. Low and behold, he dominated the Finals and the world is finally recognizing his greatness. If Ainge hadn't swapped for Garnett & Allen last offseason, the greater basketball world would think of Pierce as just another good player who played on poor teams.

It's laughable that players of the caliber of Charles Barkley and Karl Malone will never be viewed as "clutch" and might even be considered "losers." Or look at football with Barry Sanders, or baseball with Ty Cobb. It isn't that these players weren't clutch or "winners," they just happened to play their best ball when there were dynasties dominating their respective leagues (Bulls for Malone; Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, Bulls for Barkley; Cowboys, Niners, Packers for Sanders; Yankees for Cobb).

To me, it's even more laughable that someone like Bill Russell is "unquestionably" the best Center of all-time in some peoples' minds. "You can't question his greatness -- look at all those rings!" Guess what, folks: there were between EIGHT and 14 teams in the entire league when he won all of those championships. Today, there are 30 teams, the overall skill level is much better, and it is an international competition with a much larger competition pool. I don't question that Russell was the best (or one of the best) of his time, but he also played on a team that was much better than the rest of a small league in a not-quite-popular sport at the time.

In closing, I'm very happy for Kevin Garnett. He should have been considered one of the all-time greats whether or not he won a championship, though. It's a shame that it took one for people to finally put him in that category.

Game 1

2008-06-05T22:43:00.000-07:00

As I suspected, Kobe let his "feud" with Ray Allen get the best of him in Game One. He turned the first quarter into a grudge match and strayed from what had brought the Lakers success all playoffs. I can't recall a game those two have squared off in where Kobe hasn't lost focus of the team concept for stretches of the game. I also thought Odom had several mental lapses during the game. We've seen this multiple times during the playoffs, where he appears to lose his focus/concentration which ultimately leads to stupid fouls and 7-8 minute stretches where you forget he's on the floor. While his stat sheet may not have been that bad, he made several key mistakes that swung momentum.

Boston didn't play their best game, either. They were fortunate enough to hit some timely baskets and get some fortuitous rolls (see Paul Pierce's banked three to make a four-point play). Mainly, they just appeared to have more energy and were getting on the floor for loose balls. Boston wanted it more, and it paid off in the end.

This being said, I'm sticking with the Lakers to pull off a Game 2 upset on the road. Odom hasn't had back-to-back mediocre games in awhile, so I see him coming back focused. Kobe's shot selection should improve after watching game tape and doing whatever Voodoo exercises Phil has him doing these days. Call me a homer if you want, but I've got LA in game two -- feel free to make me eat my crow if I'm wrong.

One final thought: How bad could Pierce's knee actually be if he was playing full-speed, high-intensity basketball just minutes after "injuring" it? If I didn't know any better, I would have thought he was breathing his last breathes while lying on the floor moaning for 2-plus minutes. Part of me thinks it was a big scheme (that paid off) to re-energize the crowd upon his heroic return. Either that, or they just gave him some ridiculously potent meds.

This could be a Finals for the ages!

My 2008 NBA Mock Draft Lottery

2008-06-04T20:49:00.001-07:00

Here is my mock lottery for the 2008 NBA Draft. You will quickly find out that after picks 1 & 2 I am not creating a board where the "best" available player, regardless of position, is picked. My mock draft focuses on the most glaring weaknesses/needs of the teams that have the picks and does not take into consideration all of the draft-day trades that will inevitably take place. Enjoy.

1. Chicago Bulls - Derrick Rose (Memphis, PG): I know a lot of people think they can't afford to pass up Beasley here, but I disagree. Beasley is going to be a 3/4 combo player in the NBA, and that's the exact position played by Tyrus Thomas (whom the Bulls are still high on - remember he was a top-4 pick?). They also have Nocioni who plays the same 3/4 combo position. Further, Rose is going to be the next great PG in the league. With rumors already circulating that Hinrich is now on the trading block, Rose would be a perfect pick. I say they try to get a late-first round pick in exchange for Hinrich and use it on a big man or trade him for an already-proven big man, because they would be loaded on the perimeter with Deng (3), Gordon (2), and Rose (1).

2. Miami Heat - Michael Beasley (Kansas St, PF): This is a no-brainer. The Bulls' pick will dictate what Miami does, but there are only two options here and one will have already been taken.

3. Minnesota Timberwolves - OJ Mayo (USC, SG): This pick makes the most sense as the next-best available player is Bayless, who plays the same type of game as Foye. This will also give them a good reason to dump McCants, and we all know that needs to be done sooner rather than later.

4. Seattle Supersonics - Jerryd Bayless (Arizona, PG): I think he would be a perfect fit and it wouldn't be long before he took some scoring pressure off Durant. I also think he could come in right away and play some minutes at the two, which would enable Durant to slide to the three (his most natural position).

5. Memphis Grizzlies - DeAndre Jordan (Texas A&M, C): He's as big as Brooke Lopez, and much more athletic. Mainly, I couldn't stand the mental image of a Darko/Lopez front line. Yuck.

6. New York Knicks - Brooke Lopez (Stanford, C): I was torn on this slot because I think Westbrook would fit perfectly with D'Antoni's style. However, he would be a major upgrade from Eddy Curry in terms of mobility. I'm sure they'd rather have Jordan with this pick, but he's already been taken in my mock draft.

7. Los Angeles Clippers - D.J. Augustin (Texas, PG): I know, I know, #7 is a stretch for Augustin. However, the one position the Clippers desperately need help at is PG. I'm sorry, but when Dan Dickau is getting the majority of PG minutes, you've got problems. I think the Clippers are aware of this, as evidenced by their late-season signing of Smush "brain-dead" Parker. Augustin is the closest thing to a pure PG (even though he's score-first) that's left in terms of lottery-worthy players since I don't think Westbrook will ever be able to carry that mantle (see Monta Ellis).

8. Milwaukee Bucks - Danilo Gallinari (Italy, SF): I have gone seven picks without a foreign player, and we all know there is no way we will ever see another NBA Draft without a foreign player going in the top 10 picks. The foreign factor always adds a bit of uncertainty, which really turns on GM's. That said, I saw some video of this guy, and he appears to have a solid all-around game and good size for a SF (6'9"). Plus, after re-signing Mo Williams last offseason and getting Yi in the draft, SF is the position where the Bucks need the most help.

9. Charlotte Bobcats - Kevin Love (UCLA, PF): I'm sure I'll get plenty of flack for this pick, but I can't help but think Love would thrive for a Larry Brown-coached team. Think of their future starting five: Felton, Richardson, Wallace, Love, and Okafor. With Brown on the bench, they would be a playoff-ready team in the East within two years at most.

10. New Jersey Nets - Eric Gordon (Indiana, SG): This pick would make sense to me as I foresee Jefferson or Carter being traded in the near future. They would have a talented, young backcourt with Devin Harris and Eric Gordon, along with some young bangers down low (Boone, Williams).

11. Indiana Pacers - Russell Westbrook (UCLA, PG/SG): If he falls this far, he would be a major steal at #11. Westbrook is a great on-ball defender & super athletic. I think he would complement Granger & Dunleavy nicely in that fast-paced offense, and we all know about the inury/behavioral problems of Tinsley. Although not a pure point guard, their offensive style does not demand as much in terms of ballhandling out of the lead guard position.

12. Sacramento Kings - Darrell Arthur (Kansas, PF): Kind of a boring pick, but it would make sense given their needs. They just drafted Hawes to be the long-term solution at Center, and the emergence of Beno Udrih created some stability at the PG spot.

13. Portland Trailblazers - Joe Alexander (West Virginia, SF): I would love it if this pick actually happened. The dude is straight athletic, and athleticism is something that is lacking on the Blazers' roster. Selfishly, I'd also be relieved of watching Outlaw log so many minutes and make so many "what was he thinking?" plays (I live in Portland).

14. Golden State Warriors - Ryan Anderson (Cal, SF): This pick would also raise some eyebrows, but if the Warriors can extend the contract of Biedrins, he (along with Brandan Wright) would ensure a talented, young, frontcourt. Their backcourt is already loaded, so a swingman is probably their biggest need at this point. I like Anderson because he has a good three-point shot (which is necessary on any Don Nelson team) and would provide size & depth to a lineup that normally played undersized and had a short rotation.

Seeing Double

2008-06-03T19:59:00.000-07:00

Without further ado, here are my top five player/celebrity look-alike tandems:

5. Fabricio Oberto & Kurt Cobain: Nirvana loyalists, no need to fear. Oberto has been practicing his vocals and the band plans on reuniting in the near future with Fabricio on the mic. Should be a seamless transition. In fact, Flea (Chili Peppers) was sitting courtside at this one and told me Oberto was actually singing the lyrics to "Come as You Are" when this photo was shot.

4. Donyell Marshall & Ludacris: Just take a minute to look at these photos. The resemblance is uncanny.

3. Kyle Korver & Ashton Kutcher: With Korver's move to Utah, there's a good chance he will eventually have been with as many women as Ashton has - but Korver's women will be all at the same time. Even Ashton can't top that.

2. Manu Ginobili & Borat: Which picture is more disturbing? Rumor has it Manu actually auditioned for Borat's role in "Borat comes to America." He didn't make the cut because his legs weren't hairy enough. With a little rogain, he could be ready in time for the biographical movie commemorating Borat's life that is scheduled to hit theaters in 2011.

1. Sam Cassell & ET: If the Celtics win the NBA Championship, Doc Rivers promised Sam that he would ride his bike into the galaxy with Cassell in basket to give him a proper retirement send-off.

What's in a Name?

2008-06-03T13:40:00.000-07:00

Most star athletes have unforgettable nicknames, whether earned through their play (e.g. "The Big Hurt") or through self-promotion (e.g. "Ocho Cinco"). However, there are far too many athletes who's play has been deserving but are only known by their first (or last) names. Slam magazine has a feature each month, identifying such athletes and hosting a contest to come up with creative monikers for the identified un-nicknamed players. Here are a few I came up with for players without nicknames or whose nicknames don't do them justice:

"The Stork" -- Marshall Faulk
Sort of fitting that Marshall Faulk has had one of the highest-"scoring" careers of any athlete -- both on and off the field. Marshall once held the single-season touchdown record, but also managed to produce (at least) 6 children by 3 different women. Since these children came as a surprise and were delivered without a real father, I think "The Stork" is a fitting nickname.
Close second: "The Fertilizer"

"Little David" -- Barry Sanders
After searching the net, apparently Barry Sanders did have a nickname: "B." Neither do I recall this nickname, nor do I think it does justice to the greatest running back in NFL history. "Little David" (his middle name) suits him better -- making Goliath-sized defenders look stupid game-in and game-out.
Close second: "TNT"

"The Pill" -- Rafael Palmeiro
This nickname would have a double meaning -- referring to his days as a spokesperson for Viagra and for whatever else he put into his aging body in the late-nineties.
Close second: "Fingers" (just watch video of his court appearance)

"Stillframe" Steve -- Steve Nash
I was trying to mimic the "Pistol" Pete thing... I think Nash is similarily crafty with the ball, and it seems like he sees the court in slow-motion (or in stillframes) at times. Okay, kinda lame, but I think it's a travesty that the two-time MVP doesn't have a catchy nickname.
Close second: "The Puppeteer"

"Million Dollar Baby" -- Stephen Jackson
This is probably my favorite nickname that is not already owned by a professional athlete (that I know of). I most certainly would have given this title to Sheed, Iverson, Duncan, Kobe, or Rip if they didn't already have nicknames of their own...
Close second: "Three-to-Five Upstate"

Some other star athletes that need nicknames in the worst way: Derek Jeter, Tom Brady, LaDanian Tomlinson (since he stole the original LT's nickname)

Beijing Olympics Boycott Threats

2008-06-02T20:57:00.000-07:00

Virtually every nation in the free world is up in arms about the 2008 Summer Olympics. From celebrities to key political figures, we are hearing cries to boycott the Olympics. These cries, broadcast through the world's loudest human boom boxes, aren't just mindless background noise (as they normally are) -- they are valid complaints and echo the sentiments of millions of others who don't carry big sticks.

The "threats" to boycott have undoubtedly sent chills down China's spine, considering China has shown a willingness to do just about anything to portray itself as a model country for the Summer Games (at least aesthetically). Rumor has it that China is even trying to develop a means of clearing its notoriously hazy skies so that CBS, BBC, and the other networks will capture a beautiful & scenic urban landscape this summer. Despite these efforts, however, China has made no moves to clean up its act. Despite all of the negative press from a globalized media, despite the outcries from its own citizens, and despite all of the hollow promises that were made when it sold itself to the Games Committee, China has stubbornly held its ground through its disregard for human rights.

This is not about cultural relativity (i.e. what's right for us is not necessarily what's right for them, and we don't have the right to tell them what we feel is right or wrong in the first place). It is just plain wrong -- how can it even be argued? I read a press release today that announced Chinese officials had stripped two Chinese defense lawyers of their licenses to practice law because they took on cases to defend human rights. I've also read stories about foreign press being warned that it will be monitored in all of its conversations while covering the Summer Games -- whether these conversations take place in public or in the "comfort" of their own hotel rooms.

If you are from a developed nation, just try to imagine these scenarios unfolding in your hometown.... that's what I thought. It's unthinkable. For all the moaning we do about the civil unjustices in our backyards, peeking over the fence should show us that we have it pretty good. So good, in fact, that it is not a matter of us having an agenda here, it is a matter of us having a social responsibility.

So here comes the real question: will any of our countries or athletes, either collectively or individually, actually boycott the 2008 Summer Games? Individual athletes may take a real stand against these unjustices, but I highly doubt any countries will boycott the Games entirely. There is just too much money, too much fame at stake. Sure, we'll shout at the Chinese Government and metaphorically slap their wrists. But chances are that our athletes be suited up in our national colors right next to all the other countries' performers come August.

What kind of message is this going to send? Will it say that we care about the issues, but not at the expense of our gold medals? I sure hope not.

What's worse -- Donaghy or Steroids?

2008-05-27T21:51:00.000-07:00

Okay, okay... I'm back at it again... (echo?)

The Topic

I was listening to Sportsradio the other day, I believe it was the Dan Patrick show. Normally, I don't like that show too much but an interesting topic came up for debate: what was worse, Tim Donaghy's gambling or Steroids? To me, this question was two-fold: (1)which was worse for it's respective game's image, and (2) which was worse from a moral standpoint (i.e. who's a worse person for his deeds, Tim Donaghy or Roger Clemens)? I will address each element of the question separately.

The Image Debate

Basketball's image took a major image hit when news of Tim Donaghy's fixing of games was announced. To make matters worse, Donaghy has hinted on multiple occasions that he was not the only referee who was involved in the fixing of games. Stern quivered from his tanning bed when it became clear that a fraternity of cheaters may exist within his game's officiating ranks. Joe from Sacramento probably wonders whether the hated Lakers had any help when they beat his Kings in 7 games in 2002. Ken from Dallas wants to know if Dwyane Wade really earned all those free throws in the 2006 NBA Finals. These questions are probably warranted, and provide some credence to those NBA fans that perenially cry about the unbalanced officiating when their teams lose. Overall, however, I don't think fans have totally lost their trust in the relevance of NBA officiating. I have not heard about any decline in the league's fan base. This, of course, could change dramatically if more names come out with Donaghy's dirty laundry or the outcomes of key playoff games come into question. That remains to be seen.

As for baseball, the game's image has slowly gone down the tube ever since Canseco's book hit newstands. Baseball, more than any other game, is about tradition. It's not so much that fans hate the players for their disregard for the games rules (or the law), rather that they hate the players for disrespecting the game's heritage & traditions that come along with it. Basketball records are generally viewed with the mindset of: "records are established to be broken." Baseball records, on the other hand, are generally viewed as sacred. When players are nearing a milestone (with the exception of Cal Ripken, Jr.), there is an equal body of fans who are rooting against the player who is about to break the record. For whatever reason, baseball records are viewed as untouchable, and for commemoration on grainy black-and-white film, not in high-definition. Furthermore, steroids/performance enhancing drugs became a widespread epidemic in baseball, whereas we are only aware of one "bad apple" who fixed basketball games. Any extraordinary season between 1990 and 2007, whether spoken out loud or not, comes with an asterisk in the minds of baseball fans. For these reasons, I think baseball's image has been hurt far worse than basketball's.

The Moral Debate

There is no question that both of these series of actions were wrong -- that cannot be debated. They represented cheating in the purest sense of the word.

In baseball, some of the game's most prominent spokespeople were caught dead in their tracks after blatantly lying to cover up previous lies that covered up more previous lies. Roger Clemens & Rafael Palmeiro, to name a few, looked foolish on national TV and in front of a judge and jury. Not only did they commit perjury, but they also defrauded fans, coaches, and fellow players by using illegal substances to gain competitive advantages. What kind of example does that set for young baseball fans that have these players posters hanging from their bedroom walls? Despite Charles Barkley's famous "I'm not a role model" quote, Charles, Roger, and Rafael are all role models. It's selfish, childish, & cowardly for these players to shy away from that responsibility. It's a shame that these players were given everything the material world has to offer -- yet fail to recognize or honor that responsibility. It comes with the territory -- and it's exactly the reason these players pursued major league careers in the first place. They watched their role models (former athletes) and followed in their footsteps. Earth to Charles, but every job comes with some degree of responsibility that we don't necessarily ask for. Deal with it, I think you've got a pretty sweet gig. By cheating, acting illegally, and lying, steroid-using players set a horrendous example for young fans -- and that is inexcusable.

As for Donaghy, most of the above baseball discussion is true -- but to a lesser degree in my opinion. I'm pretty sure there aren't any young children with Tim Donaghy posters in their bedrooms, unless he is standing behind Kobe with whistle in mouth. So in this regard, his actions didn't have the same universal impact. However, what he did had an additional impact of its own that cannot be easily measured. That impact, stemming from his immoral acts, was financial. We have all heard about the handful of bookies that profited handsomely from the games he swayed. In all reality, however, their financial gains mostly repaid debts already owed to them by Donaghy. What we haven't heard about is all the people who were clueless about his scandalous work when they bet on the games in question. The reason we haven't heard about these people is because a definitive listing of tainted games has not been released to the public. When and if this happens, my money says those betters who lost on the over/under are going to be in the national spotlight. There will probably be some nasty lawsuits flying around if this ever happens. I'm not an expert on the sports betting world, but I do know that thousands of people rely upon sports betting as their primary source of income -- right or wrong. As such, Donaghy's "playing God" may have put some individuals in some serious financial trouble (not unlike the trouble he was in himself). Although nobody knows how much was really lost at this stage, I think it's safe to say this is a real issue.

Due to the financial implications and possible hardship that he caused to countless individual betters, I believe Donaghy's actions were worse from a moral standpoint. To solidify this position, I'll also point out that many players used performance enhancing drugs when they were still in a sort of "gray" territory -- Team Management & the league seemed to be turning their backs on the prevalance of usage. Fixing games, by all accounts, was and is wrong.

Where Should they Go from Here?

One caller to the Dan Patrick Show made an excellent point regarding the Donaghy issue: the NBA reviews game tape and essentially grades referees on their performance each game. These ratings should be made public, just like a box score is available to critique the players' performance. This would help to do away with some of the bellyaching that takes place regarding officiating by the fans of losing teams. It would help to do away with the notion that the NBA is willing to do anything in (or out of) its power to ensure a Lakers-Celtics final. It would provide the type of transparency that is desperately needed in the aftermath of the Donaghy scandal.

Baseball is screwed. The best way to mitigate any future damage would be to stop the blame game. If players want to go public about their own steroid usage, so be it. But continuing to investigate even after the Mitchell Report can only bring the sport more harm. Instead, they should focus on ramping up the random drug testing program and set the proper tone at the top.

Random NBA Thoughts

2008-05-07T23:32:00.000-07:00

For lack of a more creative idea, I will call these my "random" thoughts -- and that's exactly what they are. Bear in mind I'm writing this May 7th, the same night the Lakers went up 2-0 on the Jazz and the Magic pulled within 2-1 of the Pistons.

- Jerry Sloan sure swears a lot for coaching a team who's fan base is 90% Mormon. Either TNT only zooms in on him when he's pissed, or he throws in an F Bomb every (F-ing) sentence...

- How did Carlos Boozer get so bad, so fast?

- I've repeatedly called Billups overrated. I'm eating crow after watching the Billups-less Pistons self-destruct against the Magic tonight...

- Has Hubie Brown ever completed a sentence without using the word "percentage"?

- Does anyone actually watch the Bill Engvall show?

- Nothing irritates me more than the stretched-out neck of Tony Parker's jersey. To me it reads: "I've never quite rid myself of my need for a pacifier," more than: "Eva insists I wear this jersey to bed while we're on the road."

- I went through 4 oxy pads during the last Spurs game when Popovich was getting extra face time.

- Somebody needs to tell KB24 & CP3 the MVP race is over, because they seem to be doing their own rendition of "anything you can do, I can do better..." in every game. Just wait until they are playing head-to-head in the conference finals.

- I wish Okur would just stay on his offensive three-point line because I HATE watching him (attempt to) play defense.

- Surely, Reggie Miller will conquer puberty one of these broadcasts, right? I guess my voice would be higher if I was sitting next to Marv Albert, too.

- I wonder if anyone on the Jazz thinks it's funny T-Mac was once considered in the same class as Kobe...

I've never committed a foul!

2008-04-29T16:16:00.000-07:00

There are some players in the NBA who act downright shocked every time the whistle blows and their number is signaled to the scorer's table. It wouldn't matter if they unleashed a roundhouse kick to their opponent's torso -- it would still be reason enough to cry to the officials. There are other players who feel like they are fouled on every play, especially if they miss the shot. Watching the NBA Playoffs this year has increased my annoyance with the NBA's crybabies, and inspired me to take my buddy's suggestion (the only guy who actually reads this blog) and make a list of the NBA's five biggest whiners.

5. Kobe Bryant
If you've read my other blogs, you'd know Kobe is my favorite player to watch in the NBA. I truly believe he is the best player in the world, but he still makes my list.

Kobe can walk all over most of the refs in this league, and he knows it. If he goes into the paint, one of two things will occur: 1) Kobe will get a foul called on his defender or 2) Kobe will remind the ref that he should have gotten the call.

"You can't do this to me -- I'm the best, the best!"

Granted, when you are that good, your defender often gets out of position and is forced to commit a foul. Nevertheless, he thinks he is always fouled. And when it comes to his own defense, Kobe believes it to be flawless. How many times per game do we see Kobe's sarcastic smile/laugh after his number is called for a foul? All you have to do to track this stat is to look at how many fouls he picks up during the game.

If you don't think Kobe is much of a whiner, all you have to know is this: Kobe led the NBA in technical fouls. As I mentioned earlier, he can walk all over most refs... which makes this statistic even more telling.

4. Tim Duncan
Despite Duncan's reputation as a choir boy, he whines with the best of 'em. You can probably picture the typically-stoic Duncan's reaction after a foul is called (or isn't called). The arms out, the shoulders shrugged, and the already-wide eyes even wider. He then picks up the ball defiantly, slaps it with his right hand, and angrily bounces it back to the referee.

A bigger picture would show the ball in his right hand, ready for triple-threat position

I would love to watch a game where Duncan is mic'd. I can't even imagine what he is actually saying to dispute these calls (or no-calls). I'm pretty sure the language wouldn't be as strong as Rasheed's -- there would undoubtedly be a lot of "shuck's" substituted for sh**'s. Regardless of his "clean" whining, it is whining all the same.

It's somewhat amusing watching the way Timmy's whining has almost disappeared against the Suns. Does he realize he doesn't have a gripe because the refs are doing everything they can to give San Antonio the series? Or does he realize he would be whining about Shaq and knows Shaq could crush him with one blow?

3. Rip Hamilton
Memo to Rip Hamilton: just because you are 6'7", 145 lbs, it doesn't mean you are incapable of fouling the opponent.

"I'm too skinny to commit a foul!"

I blame this attitude 100% on their trade for Sheed...

2. Rasheed Wallace
This choice probably needs less justification than his buddy Rip (above). Living in Portland, I became accustomed to Sheed's "poopy diaper" face following every whistle. It got so old, fans overcame their natural biases and did everything short of whining themselves when Sheed wasn't called for a foul.

The "Poopy Diaper" Face

The main difference between Sheed and the other whiners is that it has never mattered if Sheed was involved in the play or not. In fact, he doesn't even have to be in the game. He would probably make the same gestures if he were in the locker room watching it on a monitor.

As noted earlier, his poor attitude seems to make a horrible impact on his teammates. Before long, they all become whiners, too. Not to Sheed's level, of course. He acts like a spoiled 16-year-old girl when her daddy won't shell out the big bucks to buy her a BMW for her birthday.

He broke the NBA record for most technicals in a single season, only to re-break his own record the following season. He whined about "having" to play in the All-Star Game. Seriously, who does that? Only Sheed...

1. Allen Iverson
I never quite noticed the extent of Iverson's whining until these playoffs. While he whines when he is called for a foul, he does his real damage when he's on the offensive end. Quite literally, AI complains after every one of his shot attempts. I think he should be thrown out of every game in the first quarter. In game four, I saw at least three replays where AI made a shot, was not touched, and still managed to shoot a furious look at Dick Bavetta.

His face may soon be frozen in this expression

Sure, the guy is courageous with his drives to the basket, but more often than not he is the one who is creating the contact. Just because he is so tiny, he is the one who takes the brunt of these collisions. Shooting fouls are created by contact initiated by the defensive player or by a defender who's feet aren't set when the contact occurs. They are not created by a player flying into the lane with reckless abandon and falling hard to the floor.

What irks me even more than AI's constant lobbying for "And 1's" is his overall attitude towards authority. Isn't he supposed to be a full-grown man? He logs more minutes than any player in the NBA, yet still throws temper tantrums every time he is taken out of the game. He publicly criticized George Karl for not putting him back in the game when the Nugs were down by 23 with 7 minutes left against the Lakers. He is constantly involved in self-promotion with regards to his playing through injuries (as if we don't hear about it enough from the announcers). He demands trades and doesn't practice hard ("practice, we're talking about practice!"). As far as I'm concerned, the guy is poisonous to his team and the locker room.

It is frequently mentioned that AI is "the best player pound-for-pound in NBA history." Maybe so. I'd argue that he's "the biggest whiner pound-for-pound in NBA history."

Enver Nuggets -- a Statistical Nightmare

2008-04-23T22:28:00.000-07:00

After watching the Lakers-Nuggets game tonight, I decided the Nuggets must have the worst chemistry of any team in the NBA. How else do you explain all of these statistical studs' failure to coexist on a single basketball court?

They have two of the top four scorers in the league. They have the league's top shot blocker (and 2nd best rebounder). They have a solid bench (namely Smith & Kleiza). They even have arguably one of the better coaches in the game (look at Karl's resume). Yet, they barely squeezed into the playoffs and will probably get swept in the first round.

Obviously, their number one problem is there just aren't enough shots to go around. Carmelo & AI are undoubtedly two of the best scorers in the game. In fact, there are only a few players in the league I would rather have taking the final shot with the game in the balance. As we've seen, having two scorers of this caliber can be both a blessing and a curse. Who takes the big shot? In games I've watched, AI has taken the majority of these shots (seniority, I guess). However, there have been a number of occassions where the play seems to be designed for nobody in particular -- whichever big gun has the ball in his hands as time expires takes the shot. What a nightmare.

Is A.I. #1, #1a, or #2?

As for the defense, or lack thereof... "But Marcus Camby won defensive player of the year last year!" "AI has been amongst the league leaders in steals for, forever!" "How can two of the league's best defenders be part of the league's worst defense?" Wow, what a misconception. Sure, these two put up gaudy defensive stats (in the form of blocks, steals, and rebounds), but that doesn't mean they play great -- or even good -- individual defense. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Camby gave up 36 points to Gasol in Game One. Camby is a terrifically gifted shot blocker, but it certainly helps that he gets countless opportunities against 6-foot-nothing guards that have been blowing past the Nuggets' hapless perimeter defenders with ease.

To keep things short and sweet, here's my conclusion: the Enver (thanks Charles) Nuggets are a fantasy owner's dream and a reality owners' nightmare.

My favorite all-time basketball kicks

2008-04-18T21:23:00.000-07:00

I'm fairly categorized as a basketball shoe fanatic. I became infatuated with basketball shoes in elementary school and the love hasn't since died. This love led me to wait in line for the re-issuance of the Jordan IV's and to stockpile weekly allowances to purchase shoes outside of my parents' budget. This love now leads me to devote half of my closet space to shoes I haven't worn in over three years.

Making a list of the "best" basketball shoes of all-time is nearly impossible. If I had unlimited free time and a non-existent social life I could probably draft a top-100 list. However, for sake of time & energy I have narrowed the list to my top five.

5. Air Penny II
This pick is probably pretty controversial. Given Penny's titanic fall-off, I'm not sure anything associated with him deserves a top-5 ranking. To be honest, I probably put them on the list out of fear that this would turn into "the top five pairs of Jordans of all-time" more than anything else. Nevertheless, I think these shoes were sick. When they were released, shoe fanatics like myself were exposed to new levels of consumerism. We began to re-think what we would pay for the best new shoe -- in this case ~$140/pair!

4. Nike Air Force I
I realize that the version in the picture is not the "true" Air Force I, it is the variation created by Nike for Sheed to wear in the 2007 All Star Game. When I was looking for a picture of Air Force I's, this came up and I couldn't pass it up. Sheed has been the twentieth century in-game model of the Air Force I, and the pictured version was only worn by him for one game. That being said, the Air Force I has probably had more influence on Nike's basketball shoe evolution than any shoe outside of the Jordan Series. Air Force I's came back with a bang a few years ago, and any time a shoe can have that kind of impact 20 years after its release, it deserves a spot amongst the basketball shoe immortals.

3. Air Max Force I (Barkley I's)
Interestingly enough, this shoe wasn't even first made famous by Barkley. It was actually brought to the forefront of the basketball apparel world by the University of Michigan's "Fab Five" in 1993. The starting five sported these beauties when they were the most en vogue team since the showtime Lakers. The design was simple but had enough detail to catch the eye. The shoe's design pretty much personified Charles Barkley's game, and that was probably the determining factor in making this list -- my number one qualification is that the shoe must fit the player. This shoe certainly did.

2. Air Jordan XI
I could have easily put Jordan III, Jordan V, Jordan XIII, or Jordan VI in this spot. This shoe narrowly edged out those other versions because it was just a tad bit flashier -- and who was flashier than Michael Jordan? I copped a pair of the black & red version of the XI's, and they certainly didn't disappoint. They fit like a glove, and they're one of those pairs of shoes that when you wear them for the first time you feel like you're quicker and can jump higher. I know they didn't actually expand my physical capacities, but it sure felt like it... most basketball players (who are also shoe fanatics) can associate with this feeling.

1. Air Jordan IV
Maybe I'm partial -- I've owned this shoe twice -- but it wasn't even much of a competition for the top spot on this list. These shoes are everything. They came out before styles got too chaotic, but after Nike had perfected the air pocket and had improved the durability of its products. Oh yeah, they were also worn by the greatest player of all time, just as he was beginning to earn that reputation. Enough said.

Honorable Mention: Air Jordan V, Air Jordan III, Air Jordan VI, Air Jordan XIII, Air Huarache 2K4, Air Zoom Lebron II, Nike Air Up (original Pippens), Air Flight 89, Nike Air Zoom Flight 5 (original Kidd's).

Yes, only Nikes made my list (including honorable mention). I don't think this needs to be justified.

Worst Sports Predictions of All-Time

2008-04-10T12:48:00.001-07:00

Seems like we hear it every year, especially around playoff time: "I guarantee we will win this game" or something to that effect. Give an outspoken player a microphone, and let the camera roll. Once relegated to boxers, the art of the prediction has spread to virtually all of America's professional sports.

Normally, coaches cringe at these public displays of arrogance. They seldom do enough to motivate the team of the player making the unabashed prediction. More often than
not, these predictions actually have a bigger impact on the opposing team. Let's face it: the predictions are generally made by the overwhelming underdogs, as the favorites don't have as much to prove. A ballsy prediction by the underdog often lights the fire of the more talented, favored team, giving them extra motivation to run up the score and rub it in the predictor's face. Consequently, we have witnessed several meltdowns of historic proportions after these predictions have been made in recent years.

In the age of the prediction, I had many to choose from in drafting this post. While I normally stick to basketball, I threw in a few football predictions that went sour - they were just too good (or bad) to not mention.

Without further ado, my five favorite predictions-gone-wrong (in ascending order):

5. Anthony Smith's predicted upset of the Patriots

After the Steelers opened the 2008 playoffs with a win, their high-energy safety made a prediction to do what no other team had done: beat the 2007-08 New England Patriots. By high-energy safety, you must be thinking, "Polamalu, right?" Wrong. Anthony Smith. "Who?" My thoughts, exactly.

Smith's comments puzzled virtually every member of the national media. Had he studied any film heading into the game? Did he fail to notice the 6'4 gazelle or the 5'10 spark plug being hit in stride by the best quarterback in the NFL? Even so, he must have caught at least one Sports Center segment that tabbed this offense as the best ever.

If he underestimated the Patriots' machine, he was quickly enlightened. Then he was abused. Then he was stolen of his manhood. Bellichick, Brady, & Co picked on Smith early and often. He got caught in open space and didn't stand a chance. Brady even looked his way when other receivers were wide open. In the end, Smith got scored on twice and looked foolish doing it.

"Anthony, where are you? Ahh, there you are..."

When the dust settled, Smith's Steelers were pummeled 31-14 and he was forced into the fetal position by a Quarterback. After the game, Darth Vader himself (Bellichick) had the following analysis for Smith: "We've played against a lot better safeties than him, I'll tell you. The safety play at that position was pretty inviting." I'll say so. Smith's post-game comment? "We will see them again. Well, it's gonna have to wait until next year at the earliest. Next time, Smith would be wise to just shut up.

4. Gilbert Arenas' prediction to score 50 points against Nate McMillan's Trailblazers

After being cut by Team USA in the summer of 2006, Arenas had undisguised beef with Nate McMillan (an assistant coach on Team USA). From Arenas' blog came the following prediction: "The most important game is on Feb. 11 (2007). Well, it's not the most important but that's the game I'm going to say is my next 50-pointer."

The 50-point prediction came on the heels of multiple (successful) predictions: the 54 pts he dropped on Phoenix and the game-winner against Utah. This prediction didn't go so well. After much was made of his prediction, Arenas dropped 9 pts on a disgraceful 3-for-15 (0-3 on threes) shooting in 33 minutes. Oh yeah, the Wiz also lost by 21 points to the lowly Blazers and Arenas contributed 5 turnovers to boot.

Yes, Gilbert... it was THAT bad.

3. Jerramy Stevens' "sad day" prediction for Jerome Bettis & the Steelers

In the days leading into the 2006 Super Bowl, much was made of Jerome Bettis' return to his hometown of Detroit to play in his first Big Game. Knowing Bettis & his Steelers were the sentimental favorites, little-known Seahawks Tight End Jerramy Stevens made the following comment (publicly): "It's a heartwarming story and all that, but it will be a sad day when he leaves without the trophy."

This statement made headlines leading into America's biggest sporting event, and it woke up Steelers linebacker Joey Porter. Porter responded by saying: "When a guy says something who lines up in front of me every play, I have to like that. He has to see me. There's no way he can hide from me. We have to meet - over and over and over. . . I'll remind him every time I put him on his back." Yikes -- just what Stevens wanted to hear. A 255 pound linebacker with a propensity for violence is relishing the opportunity to put him on "his back."

Did Stevens feel Porter coming on this drop?

And Porter did just that, laying out Stevens on multiple plays. When Porter didn't get him, Stevens heard footsteps and dropped key passes. These dropped balls (most notably the pictured ball in the red zone) may have cost the Seahawks the game. Interestingly, we haven't heard much from Stevens since...

2. Joey Dorsey's "I am Goliath" prediction against Ohio State's Oden

Before Ohio State & Memphis matched up in the '07 NCAA Tournament, Memphis Center Joey Dorsey called out college basketball's golden boy (err, Man), Greg Oden. He called Oden a "little man" (really?), and said he (Dorsey) was Goliath and Oden was David. He also went on to say Oden was "way overrated" and that he would hold the Ohio State "little man" to 9 points and 5 rebounds. Dorsey also said that he would put up 15 points and 20 rebounds against Oden. Calipari must have been ecstatic about these idiotic predictions.

The biggest "little man" in the world

You know the story - "David" beat, no, massacred, "Goliath" just like in Biblical times. Dorsey's line for the game (a 92-76 loss) was 0 pts, 3 reb, and 4 fouls in 19 minutes. Oden? 17 pts & 9 rebounds on 7-8 shooting.

The future still looks bright for Dorsey, though. I'm sure he will replicate the draft position of Oden in this summer's draft (#1 overall). Right...

1. Matt Hasselbeck's coin-flip guarantee

First, my apologies to Seahawks fans for giving you two spots in the top 5. Living in the Northwest, your team has just blessed me with too much good material. This one takes the cake.

In the 2004 NFL playoffs, Seattle and Green Bay were gridlocked in a tie at the end of regulation. The two teams sent their captains to midfield, where a coin toss took place. Seattle won the toss, and that's where all the fun began. Matt Hasselbeck grabbed the mic and estatically proclaimed: "We want the ball, and we're gonna score!"

Watching the game live, I could almost feel the grumble from Holmgren's beer belly. At that point, Hasselbeck hadn't proved anything in the league. He was a poor-man's Favre, high-risk/high-reward type of player with no postseason experience. This was a setup for disaster.

I'll give Hasselbeck a little credit - it was pretty ballsy. In reality, the first part of his prediction came true: the Seahawks did get the ball. The second part? Not so much. Not only did the Seahawks fail to score, but Hasselbeck (Mr. Prediction himself) was picked off by Al Harris. Harris returned the interception for a score on the same play, leaving a dejected Hasselbeck and his bold pronouncement in his wake. Classic.

Uh, Matt, they scored...

I know I have missed some worthy predictions, so make mention of these omissions...

The Miami Meat

2008-03-30T19:45:00.000-07:00

I was scanning the daily NBA box scores when one game jumped out at me: Boston 88, Miami 62. 62? 62! To be honest, I didn't even blink about this "game" resulting in a blowout win for the C's.... but 62 points for Miami? From now on, I'm calling the 2007-08 Miami squad the "Miami Meat." It would be a perfect way of commemorating the countless slaughterings that have taken place in recent months.

I don't remember the last time I saw this type of ineptitude displayed on a basketball court, and in the NBA nonetheless. Upon further review, I noted the Meat didn't manage 20 points in any quarter of Sunday's game. I don't care how good the Celtics' defense is -- and it is very good -- 62 points is just plain inexcusable. Two years ago, Kobe scored that much (or more) on two different occasions! MJ dropped 63 on the Bird-led Celtics in a playoff game in the Garden.

Did Pat Riley waive the white flag on the season? Okay, so that was a rhetorical question... of course he did. I dare you to name 4 current players on the Meat's active roster. Tick... tock... tick... tock... okay, I'm guessing you couldn't do it. Outside of Ricky Davis, there really isn't a single recognizable name logging minutes for the Meat these days. The second-highest profile player donning the red & black on Sunday was Mark Blount. Rounding out the starting lineup was Chris Quinn, Kasib Powell, & Earl Barron. The reserves? Even worse: Joel Anthony, Stephane Lasme, Blake Ahearn, & Alexander Johnson. Who are these guys? I'd be willing to bet the casual NBA fan would recognize more names on most D-League rosters right now.

Dead Meat

Look down the Meat's bench these days, and you might think you are staring at a night club entrance line. The problem with that analogy is that there is undoubtedly more game being laid down in Miami night clubs than there is on the basketball court this year. Stern must be beaming at the sight of his dress code in full force: Wade, Williams, Haslem, Marion, Dorell Wright, Daquan Cook, all decked out in three piece suits. Riley's proverbial white flag was raised when Wade was given a shower pass for the remainder of the season, and apparently the rest of the team is getting the same treatment.

Riley is playing for lottery balls at this point, and doing a horrible job of disguising his motives. For a coach of Riley's stature, there is no such thing as a "moral victory." He's going through the motions, drawing up x's & o's during timeouts, but it's not hard to see what he's doing. He's putting together lineups that he knows cannot succeed. After each loss, he knows his Meat are one step closer to securing the best probability of landing the top pick in June. Meanwhile, the Sonics, Grizzlies, and T-Wolves (equally disgraceful) are putting out their best 5 every night, for better or for worse.

He is just salivating at the possibility of nabbing Michael Beasley, and justifiably so. It's not that I'm particularly disgusted with Riley's ever-growing infatuation with Beasley, it's just the way he's going about it that disturbs me. These guys (his players) are making some serious money sitting on the bench and getting soft tissue massages after the games. If I were a season ticket holder, I'd be furious. I'd be demanding a refund for all that coin I shelled out to watch this joke of a season unravel. If I'm an Eastern Conference contender, I'm even more furious. What happens if a team gets into the playoffs because they beat Miami's C squad in the 82nd game?

Riley is compromising the integrity of the game with his scheming and careless disregard for competitiveness. His future as a coach is not in jeopardy, so he is doing everything short of throwing games to improve his 2008 roster. Carlesimo, Iavaroni, and Wittman don't have that luxury. For the sake of justice, I hope the 2008 lottery defies probability and the Meat don't get a top-5 pick...

The Five Most Overrated Players in the NBA

2008-03-19T23:06:00.000-07:00

All it takes is one good playoff series, a single spectacular game, even one buzzer-beater for a player to boost his status among the NBA's elite. Before long, he is being praised with the game's all-time greats and all but guaranteeing his spot in Springfield. A reputation can sometimes be a tough thing to gain, but is usually an even tougher thing to lose. Reputations, right or wrong, lead to the notion that a player is either underrated or overrated.

Both sides of the coin are often debated, but I find it more interesting to talk about why a player is overrated than why he is underrated. Without further ado, here is my list of the five most overrated players in the NBA:

5. Dwyane Wade, Heat: Some may scoff at this ranking, pointing to the NBA Championship he won after being in the league just three seasons. I've even heard such absurd comments as "Wade won a title before Lebron, so he is a better player in my book." My response: has Lebron ever played with Shaq, or any player for that matter, that was a viable scoring option? No. The Cavs have never had a better second option than a slow, soft, and certainly goofy Zydrunas Illgauskas.

One of the most frequent sights in pro sports these days

I'll admit, I was on the Wade bandwagon -- until this year. I realize Wade was struggling with injuries, but have you watched any Heat games this year? Silly me -- they are on TNT every week, so how could you not have watched them play? Without Wade, they are pitiful. With Wade, they weren't much better. When Wade hung up the sneakers for the season, the Heat had an NBA-worst 11-54 record highlighted by a stint where they went 1-26. Can you honestly imagine KG, Lebron, Kobe, or Duncan - even paired with eleven of the league's worst players - starting a season 11-54? I sure can't. In fact, I think Wade is surrounded by just as much talent as Lebron and the Cavs are 4th in the East. So why does Wade get mentioned in the same breath as the superstars I mentioned above? I rest my case.

4. Robert Horry, Spurs: I know he doesn't get a whole lot of mention during the regular season, but when the playoffs come around he is getting more publicity than the Beckhams. I swear Marv Albert is going to spontaneously combust every time he utters the phrase "Aw-ry, for three!"

I realize big names are born in the playoffs, and Horry has hit numerous game winners, but let's examine his career stats: 7.0 pts & 4.8 rebs. "Yeah, but he saves his game for the playoffs when it counts..." Horry's career playoff averages? 8.4 pts & 5.8 rebs. He shoots 42% in the regular season and 43% in the playoffs.

Those shots in the final minute have been clutch, no doubt, but what about the other 47 minutes in the game? Is he more valuable than the guys who put up 20+ during the game purely because he has a propensity for hitting the "big one" at the end? Apparently so, because I've heard more than one broadcaster plead Horry's case for the Hall of Fame. If that prophecy ever came true, he would have beat out hundreds, if not thousands, of current and former players who have contributed more to their team's success over the course of an entire 48-minute game.

3. Yao Ming, Rockets: I really hesitated on this one, because I think Yao has all the tools to be one of the most dominant forces this league has ever seen. He is 7'6", yet shoots free throws better than most guards (85%+). It's not that I think Yao has underachieved per say, I just think he has been the victim of unparalleled hype. The first player to come to the NBA from the World's most populous region, this hype was probably inevitable.

That said, he is grossly overrated. I measure a player's worth by the overall impact he has on his team's winning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't the Rockets played their best ball while Yao has been out of the lineup? I'm not saying he makes the team worse, I'm merely pointing out his team has continued to improve despite his absense. I hate to bring up King James again, but every time he is out of the lineup, the Cavs play miserably. Same goes for the Suns when Nash is out, and the Spurs when Duncan isn't playing. At this point, Yao is an offensive force who is incredibly injury-prone, a defensive liability, and picks up stupid fouls. Sure, he is capable of putting up 30 & 15 any given night, but does he really make the Rockets much better as a team? If this past month has shown us anything, it's that the Rockets can be an elite team -- with or without Yao.

Part of my claim that Yao is overrated stems from my beef with McGrady-haters. T-Mac has taken most of the heat for the Rockets' underachievement in the postseason, while Yao has escaped criticism for the most part. If you watched the Rockets-Jazz series last year (like I did), you saw McGrady at his best, putting up 25 pts, 7 asts, & 6 rebs per game in the series. By no means did his play lead to the Rockets' demise. The Rockets lost that series because Yao couldn't contain a smaller, quicker Carlos Boozer, giving up 35 pts and 14 rebounds to the Jazz big man in the decisive game 7 (Boozer scored 41 in game 2 of that series, as well).

2. Shawn Marion, Heat: This selection probably has a few of you scratching your heads, and I think I know why. This may be counterintuitive, but Marion is a rare player that has been called underrated so much over his career that he has actually become overrated.

Marion's pouting in Phoenix these past few years has been well-documented, as he has called himself undervalued (despite being paid $16.4M per year) and asked to have more plays called his way. Either D'Antoni totally missed the ball, or Marion just isn't the type of player you can run an offense through. I tend to believe D'Antoni in this case, as he is an offensive mastermind.

Marion will fill up the stat sheet, but he cannot create his own shot. He may be the best "garbage" player in the league, but his team will only be successful if he is surrounded by capable offensive threats and he doesn't have to be a primary option. Case in point: the Heat got no better after acquiring the Matrix and I'll bet his efficiency dips with Wade out. For this reason, I don't think he's deserving of that gaudy contract. If a player's contract is reflective of his perceived worth, I think he is one of the most overvalued players in the league.

Shane has everyone fooled...

1. Shane Battier, Rockets: I know a lot of you Dukies are going to be butt-hurt over this selection. Coach K's golden boy could never do wrong if you're a true fan of the white and blue. His heroics guided Duke to a National Title and his intellect warranted Billy Packer's bona fide man-crush during March Madness.

I know, I know, Shane is "Mr. Efficient." He's as consistent as winter rain in the Northwest. If by consistent you mean consistently mediocre, I agree. Despite playing nearly 37 mpg, he has only managed to average 9 pts and 5 rb per contest this season. For a player who's consistency and fundamentals are constantly praised, I was surpised to find he was shooting a miserable 43% from the field and a below-average 72% from the charity stripe.

It's not that Shane is a bad NBA player, it's just that he is very average. For whatever reason, though, USA Basketball (mainly Coach K) felt inclined to include him on the National Team. I know that the staff is looking for the best "team," not necessarily the best "players." Using that criteria, what makes Battier a better fit than Ime Udoka or Luke Walton? Because he is Shane Battier, "Mr. Efficient," "Mr. Intangibles," or whatever other adorable nickname he earned in college.

In my opinion, Shane Battier has been a bigger beneficiary of his past reputation than any other player in the league. The fact that he was asked to represent our country as one of our best fifteen players is reason enough to call him the most overrated player in the game.

Disagree with any of these opinions? If so, leave some feedback... maybe even your own list of the league's most overrated players.

Sonics' moving East makes perfect sense

2008-03-15T19:09:00.000-07:00

Sonics' ownership finally reached a preliminary agreement to lease an arena in Oklahoma City. I guess the writing was on the wall. The franchise has been going downhill - fast - ever since the Glove left town. There was that feel-good year when Shard and RayRay won a playoff series a few seasons back, but the storybook closed as soon as McMillan took his underrated schemes 200 miles south on I-5.

When Clay Bennett took ownership of the club, he said all the right things to keep hometown fans on his side. He even went so far as to unveil an arena proposal that would have kept the team in Seattle. But did anyone really believe him? Bennett is an Oklahoma City native, and he came over just after the Hornets moved back to New Orleans. Seattle was on the verge of relocation when he arrived -- so why would he choose the Sonics as a purchase target if he didn't want to take them to OKC?

Now Bennett has exactly what he wanted all along -- a crop of young talent, a ton of cap room on the horizon, and a city's, his city's, full support as there are no other professional sports teams in town. Mr. Bennett had no problem selling the farm on the franchise and looking to the future, leaving a helpless city and its basketball fans in his wake. What does he care? It was all part of his master plan. I gotta say, the whole thing smells funny. I am a Northwest native, and the Sonics' departure leaves a basketball-shaped hole in the third largest market on the Left Coast.

I'm sorry, but the "Oklahoma City Supersonics" just doesn't have a great ring to it, either. The Space Needle can no longer be affixed to the Sonic emblem, so what will be its replacement? I searched the internet for "Oklahoma City tourist attractions," and this came up #3: http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide-2738793-omniplex_oklahoma_city-i;_ylt=AsDc6Xogtvf55wcLf301ghCpFmoL. Wow, #3 in the whole city? #1, you ask? A memorial to the 168 people who died in that tragic bombing in 1995. I don't want to sound cynical and I would certainly never make light of such a horrific event, but I just don't see it meeting standard protocal for NBA logos. Moreover, the Oklahoma City metropolitan area population is ~1.2M, compared to Seattle's metropolitan population of ~3.2M. I know Seattle fans have been fickle at times, but its looking more like a sentimental move than a wise business decision on the part of our boy Clay.

Alright, alright, I'll stop my griping. In fact, I'll buy this move on one condition -- the Sonics are moved to the Eastern Conference. I realize that absent a move to New England, Stern wouldn't spend his precious time re-shuffling the makeup of the conferences -- especially when he could be spending that time face down at a beach in Cancun (have you seen that glorious tan?). Just hear me out, though, as I think my proposal makes logical sense.

Seattle/Oklahoma City, Minnesota, and Memphis should play in the East with the rest of the NBA's JV squads. This would improve greatly improve these franchises' chances to be competitive. It would also spare us West Coast fans the frequent matchups with these miserable opponents. To further brighten the line between the two conferences, Boston, Detroit, and Cleveland should play in the West. After all, these are the only three teams that could compete this year in a crowded Western Conference.

Please, spare me your Orlando Magic sentiments. The Magic, an astounding 31-11 in the East, are a pedestrian 14-13 against Western Conference opponents. They will finish 3rd in the East but it would be an uphill battle for them to make the playoffs in the West. To put things into perspective, Phoenix is #5 in the West and has a 22-4 record against the East this year. As far as overall records go, Portland is #10 in the West but would be #5 in the East.

The stats don't lie: the East is absolute garbage this season. Since a two-tiered system will never be employed, at least spare the West's worst from further embarrassment and give them a fighting chance in the East. Give the East powers some real competition night-in and night-out by moving them to the West. The two conferences could have their own playoff systems, and the winner in the East could score a best-of-seven series against the champions of the D-League.

I'll keep dreaming...

I hate "homer" announcers

2008-03-11T23:47:00.000-07:00

Is there anything as painful as listening to a home crew of announcers who don't even attempt to hide their bias during the broadcast? Or even worse, they are so delusional about their hometown heroes that they think they are giving an unbiased account while level-headed fans cringe at their every word.

Living in Portland, I have been exposed to quite possibly the worst announcer on the face of the planet in Mike Rice. He is without a doubt the worst announcer in the NBA. For awhile, his analogies were so off point they were borderline amusing. I didn't mind listening to Blazer telecasts because they provided such comic relief. This season, I have literally gotten to the point that I watch all broadcasts on mute to spare myself of the man's idiotic commentary.

Rice lives off of player comparisons, namely comparing role players to former and current superstars. Here are a few that quickly come to mind:

Sergio Rodriguez as the next Steve Nash: this is a favorite point of Rice's that has been iterated during garbage time of multiple games. Undoubtedly, Rodriguez is a wonderful passer. Unfortunately, this is where the comparison stops. For those who haven't seen Rodriguez play, he invariably creates sheer chaos (for his own team) every time he steps on the floor. Picture Steve Nash, minus the court vision, minus the leadership, minus two inches and 15 lbs, minus any semblance of an outside shot, minus the clutch factor, and of course, minus the acne scars.

Greg Oden as the next Tim Duncan: This is probably the comparison that puzzles me more than any of the others. Aside from being 7 feet tall and #1 picks, these players are nothing alike. Let's start with their personalities -- Oden: Mr. Personality, goofy, and outgoing; Duncan: Mr. Monotone, soft-spoken and private. Now let's look at their games -- Oden: more power, less finesse, untamed brawn on the court; Duncan: less power, more finesse, sweetest 15-foot bank shot in the game. Oden will make a living cleaning the glass and playing with his back to the basket on offense. Duncan makes a living facing up his defender and is always a triple threat on offense. I'm sorry, but I just can't picture Oden opting for a baby-hook or face-up jumper over a drop step and throw down.

Brandon Roy as the third best player in the NBA: I didn't actually hear these words come out of Rice's mouth, but the comment was relayed to me by a friend I consider trustworthy. When I heard this one, I about gagged. Believe me, I'm as big of a Roy fan as the next Portlander. I thought his All-Star selection may have cut out a few more deserving players (ahem, Baron Davis), but by no means did I think it was absurd. Roy would be a top-5 guard in the East this season, but not in the loaded West. Take it a step, no, a leap, further and say third best in NBA? Not funny. Rice must be referring to Kobe and Lebron as #'s 1 and 2, with Roy biting at their heels. Is he implying Roy is better than Nash, Garnett, Duncan, Iverson, Wade (when healthy), Paul, and Stoudemire? Need I say more?

Travis Outlaw, Martell Webster, and various other Blazers as Jerry West: Listen to Blazer games, and you really get a feel for how much the league has expanded since the 60's. You get the feeling Rice played half of his NBA games against the Lakers based on how much he drops West's name during broadcasts. Jerry West's silhouette is still the NBA logo. I feel like I need to remind Rice of this fact every time he nonchalantly says a mediocre player "looks like Jerry West" if he scores on consecutive trips down the court. I'm sure "the Logo" would be apalled if he knew that his legacy was being abused to this degree. The seemingly weekly Jerry West comparisons were the straw that broke the camel's back for me and caused me to watch the remainder of the season on mute.

As a fan of Sports in general, all I'm asking is that hometown announcers are reasonable during their broadcasts. I understand their target audience is predominantly hometown fans, but some of these guys just get out of hand. Am I alone in this opinion?

For comic relief, listen to the Bucks announcers debate whether Mo Williams shaves his shoulders while live in the booth:

Kevin Love as an NBA prospect

2008-03-10T21:13:00.000-07:00

If the NBA draft were held tomorrow, Kevin Love would probably be picked somewhere between 15th and 20th. He might even slip further in favor of more athletic, higher "upside" players (see DeVon Hardin of Cal). Teams like Atlanta, New York, & New Jersey just couldn't pass up the chance at "once-in-a-lifetime" talents like Hasheem Thabeet, Darrell Arthur, or Anthony Randolph. Even Jay Bilas (Love's biggest fan) would praise these perenially poor evaluators of talent for their ingenious selections.

The Spurs would steal him with a pick in the mid-twenties, and draft analysts would call it a perfect fit for the predictable, efficient, if not boring Champs. After all, those are the adjectives best fit for describing Love's game, no? Love's game is "pedestrian," "heady." He's "overrated," "physically limited." He plays "slow" and "below the rim."

What's so wrong with predictable and efficient? Why are we so enamored with the unknown? Year after year, teams drool over athletic specimens like Hakim Warrick, Tyrus Thomas, and Stromile Swift. It turns into a vicious cycle for the league's bottom-feeders: trade a proven veteran to land a "specimen," spend 2-3 years trying to break these players of their bad habits, and then ship them off for less than they paid in the first place. All they have to show for it is a depleted fan base and poor team chemistry.

Kevin Love will be the next... Bill Laimbeer? Brad Miller? These seem to be the most common comparisons. Of course they are -- he's a big man who can throw the bounce pass and hit the nineteen-footer. More than anything else, he's white. We are in love with comparing white guys to white guys. If Love could jump into a time machine, he would fit in perfectly with the Celtics teams of the early 80's. He'd look great in knee socks and short shorts, coming off the bench to replace McHale as the team's designated human elbow.

To me, the Laimbeer/Miller comparisons are laughable. He has the passing ability and shooting touch of those guys, but also crashes the boards with the reckless abandon. He has excellent footwork in the low post, and his ability to create inside looks or draw fouls against taller defenders shows the maturity of his game. In short, his brand of basketball is much more diverse than Miller's or Laimbeer's.

I foresee an NBA career that includes 4-5 all star appearances and numerous deep playoff runs. Those accomplishments would be pretty impressive for a late first-round pick.

Follow this link to read a hilarious & well-written blog about Love and his well-documented outlet passes: http://stopvitale.collegehoopsnet.com/2008/02/kevin-love-and-his-magical-cancer.html

Why are there so many Kobe haters?

2008-03-09T20:16:00.000-07:00

I went to college for four years in L.A., and two of those years followed the Kobe-Shaq divorce. If you recall, that monumental melee made more headlines than Nick & Jessica's breakup (if you can believe that). Outside of L.A., the coverage was excessive. Prime example: there is an actual topic on Wikpedia.com titled "Shaq-Kobe Feud" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaq-Kobe_feud). Living in L.A., the coverage was way beyond over-the-top.

As big as Kobe Bryant had become, Shaq was the NBA's unofficial spokesman of sorts. He embraced this role wholeheartedly, and numerous up-and-coming stars went to Shaq for advice. His endearing personality had won over millions of fans and made him the media's sweetheart. Meanwhile, Kobe remained in the shadows as much as possible given his blossoming stardom. Kobe was and is much more of a private figure, not unlike MJ.

Before long, whispers of "Kobe's selfish" turned into newspaper headlines. It made a lot of sense: Kobe played the shooting guard position, fired up close to 30 shots per game, and had that swagger only before seen by MJ. What was often forgotten during all the drama was that it was Shaq who asked for a trade when Phil's contract was not renewed. Kobe met with the Clippers, but he re-signed with the Lakers before the feud was resolved. The fact of the matter remains: these were two young stars, playing different positions on the same court. They were both arguably the best in the league at their respective positions, and there weren't enough shots to go around. It had all the makings of an envy-fueled feud from the get-go.

I'll be the first to admit Kobe has alienated himself from many fans and parts of the media through his numerous public criticisms of teammates and management. At times, his public statements have been downright immature. However, he was not the only one to blame for the nasty breakup. I don't think it's coincidence that Shaq also feuded with another young star guard when he was in Orlando. Granted, Penny disappeared from the spotlight faster than Shawn Kemp at a child support hearing, but the parallel can still be made. Shaq has never been able to share the spotlight, and probably would have had beef with Dwyane Wade if they didn't play together during the twilight years of Shaq's career.

I still believe Kobe has been the target of unwarranted criticism throughout his career. He is greeted by more "boos" in opposing arenas than anyone else in the league. Why is this? What inspires fans to boo Kobe in, say, Atlanta? He's never faced them in the playoffs, has never shunned the franchise during trade talks, or made negative comments about the city -- all typical reasons for the "boo birds" to come out. It's not even an arguable point -- Kobe is clearly the most hated player in the NBA.

Here's my take on why so many fans hate Kobe Bryant: he reminds people too much of Michael Jordan. The jump shot, the acrobatic dunks, the size (both 6'6"), the knack for making impossible shots in the clutch, and even the way he speaks in interviews. Phil Jackson coached both of these players, and he has said that Kobe is even more competitive than Jordan (if that's possible) and that both players were always the first and last at the gym. Kobe's game and personality are eerily reminiscent of Jordan, and no Jordan fan wants to accept it.

Let's be honest, Jordan did all of this first. Every other superstar has made his own niche, been the first to play the way he plays. Shaq-Wilt and Lebron-Elgin are the only other comparisons that even come close, but those duos played eras apart, so most fans (myself included) weren't really around to recognize the similarities. Jordan was making a comeback with the Wizards when Kobe hit center stage, so it was nearly impossible to avoid the comparison.

In the mid-nineties, Jordan was almost universally recognized as the greatest player ever. He won six championships, all those scoring titles, and revolutionized the game while doing it. He was the first athlete to take endorsements to another level (see Wheaties, Hanes, Gatorade, and his own personal branch of Nike). Ask anyone between the ages of 20 and 40 who their favorite all-time player is, and there is a 50/50 chance they will say His Airness.

Watch Kobe talk, run, jump, shoot, and dunk, and you get the feeling he modeled his entire game after Jordan. It's actually incredibly annoying. Why couldn't he just do his own thing, take all of that God-given ability and channel it into something we have never seen on the basketball court? The answer: if he had, he wouldn't be so successful. Most shooting guards in the league grew up with coaches teaching them to shoot "like Mike," to play defense "like Mike," to chew gum "like Mike." The only difference is that Kobe was the only one who could actually pull it off. I don't blame him one bit -- if you are going to model your game after another player (everyone does), why not model it after the best who ever played?

Recently, I've been starting to see fans' opinions change. A few nights ago, playing AT hated rival Sacramento, chants of "MVP! MVP!" echoed from the rafters as Kobe stepped up to the foul line. Even last year, this would have been unthinkable. As time passes, people are growing to love him. While he is still the most hated player, he is also the most loved player in the league today. Now that he has a formidable supporting cast, his star is shining brighter than ever. Generation Y is replacing "MJ" with "Kobe" as its favorite all-time player, much to the dismay of the Baby Boomers and Generation X.

So how will Kobe be remembered in 20 years, long retired, two or three rings richer (three would be most fitting)? I think there's a very good chance he is mentioned in the same breath as Russell, Bird, Magic, and Jordan. Am I way off-base? What are your thoughts?

Some great Kobe links to read up on:

Remembering the 81-point night -- http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-060123

Why Kobe is the best (and worst) ever -- http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/59791/why_kobe_bryant_is_the_best_and_worst.html

"Kobe Bryant blog day" -- http://hardwoodparoxysm.blogspot.com/2008/02/special-announcement-march-11th-kobe.html

Rewind: why Kobe was more wrong than Shaq -- http://archive.salon.com/news/sports/col//barra/2001/01/31/lakers/?sid=1009362

Brett Favre is just like you and me

2008-03-08T10:03:00.000-08:00

I'm beginning to recover from the catastrophic news that broke early this week. The initial shock has passed, and I'm coming to grips with the retirement of my best friend I've never met.

After announcing his retirement via voice mail on Chris Mortensen's cell phone (who does that?), a media frenzy ensued. Talk radio, news stations, websites, and blogs have spent the last four days examining the man and his contributions to the game of football and the world of sports. This retirement has dominated sports media in a way we have never seen, to the point I was borderline relieved when I clicked on ESPN.com this morning to find Marion Jones' jail arrival as the top story. Sheesh.

This said, all of the publicity is probably warranted. Brett Favre is an icon, and played America's favorite position in America's favorite sport (apologies to NASCAR and MLB). He has captured the hearts of more American sports fans than probably anyone else in his generation, Michael Jordan included. It's a shame that it took his retirement to make me realize all of this.

His stats speak for themselves: 253 consecutive starts, 442 career touchdown passes, and 61,655 career passing yards are all records that will not be touched anytime soon. These achievements are not what sets him apart from the other quarterbacks of his generation, however.

So what does set Favre apart from Montana, Marino, Brady, Young, and Elway (to name a few)? I've read countless articles and listened to hours of analysis, but I think one statement from Wright Thompson's article sums it up best: "If Tom Brady is what America is, then Favre is what America was and, sometimes, I think we wish we could have that America back" (great article BTW, read the full version at http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3276537).

Favre is a man's man, and that appeals to the common fan. We don't see him dating supermodels or walking the red carpet at Hollywood events. He is a spokesperson for Wrangler jeans, the same company that sells its products at Wal-Mart. He probably wears the jeans from those commercials and a Carhart jacket on his days off. Brett would probably choose to eat at the local Home Town Buffet over Geisha House.

These are the types of things that set Brett Favre apart from the other quarterbacks of his era.
We didn't ostracize him when he admitted to his addiction to pain medication or his alcoholism. These confessions only made him more lovable. Everyone has their own struggles, so his vulnerability bridged the gap between the pedestal athletes are placed upon and our own lives. Brett Favre has the flaws of your older brother or firstborn son -- the flaws you will vehemently defend if someone wants to be critical.

Where does he rank amongst the all-time greats? I don't know. Some will argue that a quarterback's greatness can be measured by the number of Super Bowl rings he has won. If so, Brady and Montana, among others, can be called better quarterbacks than Favre. Does this mean Trent Dilfer had a better career than Dan Marino? I think not. Great players elevate the play of their teammates and come up big in the clutch. Icons change the landscape of the sport by growing its fan base.

Favre grew the fan base of the NFL by appealing to the coal miner and the housewife. This cannot be said for any other quarterback in recent memory. And that is exactly why he will be so missed.

See Favre's "goodbye" press conference at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kACbVGsWN74.

Intro

2008-03-08T00:11:00.000-08:00

I was watching Rome is Burning the other day and two thoughts crossed my mind: 1) for being such a great radio personality, Jim Rome sucks at TV, and 2) Jim Rome probably has one of the best jobs in the world.

Honestly, the dude makes cash money interviewing athletes and opining on the current happenings of the sports world. Aside from actually being one of the athletes he is interviewing, I can't think of a better occupation. Do the talking heads of sports seriously get paid to debate who would win between the '85 Bears and '07 Patriots? Or whether the Celtics would have won all those titles if they had had Chamberlain instead of Russell?

There is no definitive answer to these questions, but I love to argue about them all the same. For whatever reason, I'm passionate about this stuff. I don't have a degree in media relations or broadcasting and I'll never be a retired professional athlete or a gorgeous, articulate sideline reporter. I'm just your average Joe who played sports in high school and now works for "the man." For these reasons, my opinions will forever remain in sports bars, on message boards, and the occassional dial-in to the local ESPN affiliate radio station.

That's why I'm adding a blog to the mix. I'm not sure if anyone will read it, and it feels a bit awkward typing into the cyber abyss as if I'm having a conversation with a human being. I don't even know what this is going to look like, so any feedback would be greatly appreciated. For now, I'll post a few topics each week that can be commented upon, and see where it goes.

Enjoy...