Playing on Paper

Because I work Sunday mornings, rather than going out in an awful costume last night, I sat on my couch and watched sports.  With the incredible amount of games on last night, this didn't seem all that bad.  I could have probably filled up five television screens and still not caught everything that I wanted to see last night.  As I watched, I had my computer in my lap with my Twitter feed open, which I would nonchalantly check during commercials or when I got bored.  (And I get bored pretty often, so it was updated a lot.)

Then I saw this tweet:

I did a double take.  Then a triple check.  Then I refreshed my page.  Then I googled "james harden trade" and modified the search results for the most recent occurrence.  Then I went back to Twitter.  And checked a few more times and then refreshed my feed a few more times.  After about 30 seconds of checking frantically, I finally believed it.

(This whole checking process was about both my disbelief as well as my gullibility.  Earlier this year, a bunch of people thought it would be cool to make fake accounts of popular sportswriters and I was tricked into retweeting Dwight Howard trade rumors and it made me feel really stupid.  I was determined not to allow this to happen again.)

And even with all of this checking, I still really didn't believe it.  In every single piece I had read regarding Harden and the Thunder, it seemed as though the Thunder would almost certainly go one of two routes in contract negotiations: Extend Harden before the October 31st deadline or deal with it after the season.  Those seemed like the only two logical options.  You would read each author go over the possibility of the Thunder trading Harden before the season, but ultimately rule it out because they didn't think the Thunder would risk this season for a more stable future.  They would ultimately decide that the allure of a championship would be enough for Sam Presti to keep together a team that had came 16 points from sweeping the NBA Finals this past year.

Looking back, that assumption was a mistake.  Presti has always prided himself on making the move that puts his franchise in the best possible position moving forward.  Presti has constantly been obsessed with the longevity of the Thunder.  "Winning a championship" has always been the goal, but never at the expense of the future of the franchise.  "Winning a championship" has always been a vision.  Something to aim for.  Something to move towards.  "Winning a championship" is something that general managers can use to justify decisions that they make that may hurt the franchise for the short-term, but ultimately will make the franchise better.  But in Oklahoma City, "winning a championship" was no longer a far-off vision, it was instead a reality.

Oklahoma City had created a team that could win a championship.  Maybe even multiple championships.  No general manager doublespeak.  No far-off vision.  Winning a championship in Oklahoma City was a reality.

With the trade of James Harden, that reality has once again turned into a vision, maybe not all that far-off, but certainly no longer staring you in the eyes.

-------------------------------------------

In Houston, Daryl Morey created a team based off advanced analytics.  Many people even started calling him "Dork Elvis", in reference to his celebrity status among NBA statheads across the blogosphere.  He was seen as a visionary in the NBA's advanced statistic revolution, but all of his numbers could only give Rockets fans a vision.  A glimmer of hope.  A team that constantly outperformed expectations because of Morey's ability to use numbers to find value in players other teams had discarded, but never a team that could truly copete for a championship.

So, Morey started to stockpile assets.  If a player was talented, Morey wanted him in Houston.  It didn't matter if he played the same position as one of his stars or if they had drafted another player at the same position last season.  All he cared about was having as many young, talented players as possible. 

Then the perfect opportunity presented itself.

The Lakers wanted Chris Paul, but needed to get a third team involved to match up contracts and talent with the Hornets.  Morey stepped in and traded for Pau Gasol.  Then David Stern stepped in.  And the Rockets didn't get Gasol.

Then the perfect opportunity presented itself.

Dwight Howard wanted out of Orlando.  The Rockets had the most talented package to offer.  Morey thought he was going to be able to get Howard, but Howard preferred Brooklyn...or Los Angeles...or he's still not really sure, but definitely not Houston.

So, Morey moved on.  He started using "poison pill" contracts to lure free agents to Houston.  "Poison pill" makes Morey seem quite evil, but essentially Morey just took advantage of a rule that allowed him to offer a considerable amount of money in the final year of a player's contract that other teams would be unable to match because of other cap responsibilities.  His ploy worked. 

This past offseason, Morey was able to lure Omer Asik and Jeremy Lin to Houston.  Morey coveted both of these players because advanced statistics really like both guys.  As detailed by Zach Lowe earlier this week, Asik is one of the best defenders in the league.  This is something that may be difficult to value by simply looking at a box score and seeing Asik average 3 points and 5 rebounds per game.  Time will tell if he can do this as a starter, but Morey believes his numbers will simply extrapolate over more minutes and Asik will become an above-average starting center in the NBA.  The advanced statistics also suggest that Lin will improve.  Lin does a great job getting to the basket and his true shooting percentage would also suggest that he can be a productive NBA point guard for years to come.  (For an even greater (read: nerdier) breakdown, check out this analysis of his advanced statistic report card here.)

Even with these two additions, the Rockets were still not a playoff team and this is something Morey willingly admitted.  He even went as far to say, "We’re probably not going to win the title next year," in a radio interview this summer.  He may not have thought the Rockets would win this year, but he did have a vision for the future.

Then the perfect opportunity presented itself.

-------------------------------------------

James Harden is actually perfect for Daryl Morey.

Morey needed a superstar for his team and Harden is that superstar.  Now some may question whether or not Harden is a superstar.  Harden has only been performing at an all-star level as a sixth man, but no one knows whether or not he can do that as a team's first option...well except for Morey. 

He shoots the ball well from the three point line.  He gets to the free throw line a staggering amount.  He makes a free throw for every two field goal attempts, a rate nearly twice that of Kobe Bryant.  He rarely takes mid range jumpers and attacks the basket with reckless abandon.  His efficiency numbers are incredible.  The time he spends on a court is time well spent.  In short, Harden is the player the advanced analytics community would create if asked to create a player from scratch.

Numbers would suggest that Harden will be more than capable of leading a team, but unfortunately, as the overused cliche goes, the game isn't played on paper, which leaves the Rockets in an unusual position.  I don't think a single team has ever had more question marks going into a season.  Can James Harden be the number one option on a playoff team?  Is Jeremy Lin actually good?  Can Asik double his minutes and still be an effective player?

All of these questions lead to the most important question: Are the Rockets going to be a playoff team or a failed advanced statistics science project?

I might not have the answer to that question right now, but I do know I couldn't be more excited to find out the answer.

-------------------------------------------

It was impossible to read a season preview this season without reading two universal truths: The Heat will represent the Eastern Conference in the NBA Finals and the Thunder and Lakers are the only two teams that could represent the Western Conference.

People could make other picks for shock and awe, but they just weren't realistic.  The Finals were going to feature the Heat and the Lakers or Thunder.  That was it.  And it was going to be an epic NBA Finals.  Either the young guns would get to go at it again or NBA fans would be treated to Kobe vs. Lebron for the first time.  Now the Finals will still be epic, but it doesn't seem like there is much of a chance that the young guns from OKC will be in the showdown.

The Thunder will certainly still be a title contender and be one of the best teams in the league.  Kevin Martin will be able to score off the bench very efficiently just like James Harden, but the Thunder just won't have the same edge.  Harden was the player that gave the Thunder their edge.

Just ask the Mavericks. Maybe they'll remember the 29 points he dropped on them in the closeout game of their first round playoff series last year. They might even remember that 15 of Harden's points came in the fourth quarter.

Or maybe ask the Spurs.  When the Thunder's set broke down late in Game 5, who hit the step-back three to finish the Spurs with 30 seconds left?  Or how about the backbreaking four-point play in that same series?

You could ask Kobe Bryant too.  I'm sure he remembers who wouldn't back down from him and guarded him for a majority of their playoff series last year.  He'll probably remember the guy that was in his face all night.

Though I'm sure some of the things James Harden did for the Thunder last year will be replicated with ease, I just don't think the attitude Harden gave the team can be copied.  Once again, as the overused cliche states, the game isn't played on paper.  Harden's numbers might be replicated, but his attitude can't be.  Without that attitude, the Thunder's chemistry will change completely and thus, the Thunder just won't be the same team.

The Thunder might not be able to win a championship this year, but with the draft picks and talent Sam Presti has acquired, the Thunder will definitely be capable of "winning a championship" in the next five years.

The NBA's U.S. Soccer Team

My brother has been over in Malaysia for the last five months.  This has made communicating with him relatively difficult.  With a 13 hour time difference, there aren't many times during the day that we can actually get a chance to have a conversation.  Instead of talking, our communication has turned into random text messages and emails.  I have woke up to random text messages about an albino Chinese men and Indian men with mullets and mustaches.  I have woke up to emails discussing fantasy football trades and birthday presents, but this Saturday I received his most interesting email yet.

After thinking about which sport has the best athletes, my brother decided to assemble a soccer lineup consisting of American-born NBA players.  He also functioned according to the following assumptions:

• They [American-born NBA players] grew up playing soccer.
• It's similar to Europe in that the best players are all going to be pushed towards striker/offensive midfield early in their career (i.e. obviously someone like Russell Westbrook would be a great defenseman, but he's gonna be a striker because of his overall skill level)
• There seems to be a natural disadvantage in soccer once you hit the height of about 6'6", so you have to be a freak to be considered for the squad if you're over 6'6" (aka Lebron - so the lineup is mostly guards).

He then asked me to forward the email to my soccer-loving friend Troy Luengen.  Each of them wrote out detailed responses that I don't really feel like including, but here are their lineups.

Doug decided on a 4-4-1-1 formation.  His lineup seems relatively well-composed and smart.  I think his biggest mistake comes in the form of Steve Blake at right back.  I know he believed that it was absolutely necessary to have a white guy in the starting lineup and I have to agree with his sentiment.  It's a necessity, but I feel like you can find a better player to fill that role.

Troy decided on a 4-4-3.  His lineup is clearly illegal.  Troy decided to put both Steve Nash (Canada/South Africa) and Jose Calderon (Spain) in the lineup.  I blame these foreign inclusions on Troy's illiteracy, but looking past this clear violation, he put together a pretty good lineup.  Also, reading his breakdown was one of the highlights of my today because it was clear he spent a long time studying NBA stats.  I have to give him credit for completing the exercise even though he knows almost nothing about the NBA.

Finally, here is my lineup:

Goalkeeper: Kevin Love. This fulfills my white guy requirement as well as giving me someone in goal who has incredible instincts and intelligence. No one in the league understands the direction a ball will go in better than K-Love. Also has tremendous hands and as the best outlet passer in the league, he would be unbelievable in distribution. He'd be starting counters right and left.

Defenders: Eric Gordon. He will be in the center of my defense. At 6'3" and 220 lbs, he's a brickhouse that can push strikers off the ball. Little bit of pitbull in him. He's not getting outmuscled in the box. On one side of Gordon, Tony Allen. You guys have already laid out everything you need to know about him. With his strength and quickness, no reason he shouldn't be a top-flight back. On the other side of Gordon, Andre Igoudala. He showed this summer that he's willing to sacrifice for the greater good. He'd be a lockdown defender. And his leaping ability would help him keep teams from cross anything into the box.

Defensive Midfielders: Rajon Rondo. Rondo is the black Michael Bradley. They are both 6'1" and around 180 lbs. Rondo would be about the same player as Bradley. Strong enough to help in defending as a CDM, but would also be the player that starts a majority of the team's forward movement. He has shown in the NBA that he would rather distribute than finish. Not sure there is a better fit for a basketball player in soccer. Deron Williams. Essentially the same argument except he's a little bit thicker than Rondo. Would be able to throw his body around and make some tackles as well as obviously distributing the ball.

Wingers: Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook. This seems like a no brainer as well for me. The NBA's two most dynamic playmakers out on each wing attacking. They both have tremendous pace. They both are elite athletes. They both are very creative with the ball. They just seem like the perfect fit to cross ball after ball into the box for my two strikers.

Central Attacking Midfielder: Chris Paul. The NBA's best point guard will be the focus of my attack. He sees the floor better than anyone so he should see the field better than anyone as well. Also, since he is so unselfish he will be able to feed the ball to my strikers without feeling the need to take any shots.

Strikers: Lebron James. As Troy has already mentioned, he has NO REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE. And as Doug has already mentioned, he's a freak. Fastest kid alive.James Harden. This was my absolute hardest decision for my entire squad. I needed someone that could really score, but also wouldn't have a problem deferring to Lebron when he decided to take over. I thought long and hard about having Kobe in this position, but I worried he may start taking too many shots to keep the attention on him. Harden is perfect because he is a creative finisher, but he also knows when to pick his spots. When he needs to be aggressive, he can do that and when he needs to lay back and let Lebron dominate, he can do that too.

I really wanted to put Kevin Durant and Metta World Peace on the squad, but I just couldn't figure out a way to put either of them on the pitch. MWP is just too big. He wouldn't be quick enough to keep up with world-class soccer players. And KD is just too lanky. I can't think of a soccer player of his size being successful. Just wouldn't work.

This was a lot of fun.  I want to thank my brother for coming up with such a randomly awesome idea.

NBA Free Agency Questions

Since NBA Free Agency began less than a week ago, one of my favorite players joined a team I have historically not liked, a "ball hog" went to Brooklyn, and an old guy moved to a big city.  I decided to ask and answer a few questions about some of these moves.

Did the Lakers really get better by adding Steve Nash?

Yes.  They added a two-time NBA MVP to a team that already made it to the second round of the NBA Playoffs.  Anyone who isn't sure the Lakers got better needs to never have an opinion about anything basketball related ever again.

With Nash on the Lakers, whose team is it?

Every Kobe fan just laughed out loud at this question and stopped reading the post.  They might not read another post I ever write.  "What?  Whose team is it?  Kobe's team!  Kobe should have won the MVP.  He's the best player in the league!  No one is better than Kobe!  LOOK AT THE RINGSSSSSSSSSS!"

Now that we have covered irrational arguments, let's take a look at this Lakers team.  Under Mike Brown, this Lakers team has had NO identity.  Kobe Bryant is allowed to take as many shots as he wants and thinks he needs.  Andrew Bynum is the only post player that gets touches where he can actually be effective and Pau Gasol has been so underutilized that Laker fans forgot that they went to three straight Finals after they added him.  These are problems.  Very large problems.

With the addition of Nash, one would think that these problems would disappear.  When the latest rumors had Nash going to New York, everyone started to question whether or not Nash would be able to thrive playing for a defensive minded coach, Mike Woodson.  These questions were dismissed by many who claimed "Steve Nash is the system."  I think this might be a little simplistic, but overall I would agree with this logic.  In general, the point guard should be the one in charge and needs to dictate a team's style of play, which means this SHOULD be Steve Nash's team.

Unfortunately, this is where we run into problems.  Under Mike Brown, Bryant has been the main facilitator.  He has been allowed to take the shots he has wanted to take when he has wanted to take them.  With Nash on the team, this should no longer be the case.  Bryant should defer to Nash and allow Nash to be the world-class playmaker that he is.  And honestly, I don't think this should be a problem. Bryant might fight it a little bit at first, but after a short time playing Nash, he will see just how easy life can be with an All-NBA point guard...I hope.  In the back of my mind though, I see Bryant being upset about ceding control to another player.  And it's not just any other player.  It's Steve Nash.  A former rival of his.  Someone he may not particularly like.  Like I said, I think Bryant is of a special type of mindset and will be able to easily make the the transition to working off the ball more often, but there is just something I can't shake about him.

The larger problem comes with Bynum and Gasol.  Nash is great in the pick and roll situation and both players should benefit from playing with him, but at the same time it may be difficult for them to figure out who gets to use the pick and roll.  Will Pau be able to be effective in the pick and roll with Andrew on the floor?  Will Pau be able to find the shooting touch and confidence that he had as a Laker in previous seasons?  I tend to believe that they will be able to figure out both of these questions because these four players are among the best in the league at their respective positions, but once again I have lingering doubts in the back of my mind.  I see Andrew Bynum childishly quitting on plays because he isn't getting touches and Pau Gasol hoisting 15 footers he isn't completely confident in, but still I just think there is too much talent on the floor for this not too work.

Does anyone remember Joe Johnson in Phoenix?

The guy that averaged 17.1 PPG, shot 46% from the field, and 47.8% from the three point line?

No.

How about the guy that Bill Simmons described as "a 24-year-old potential All-Star, the perfect swingman for their system, a deadly shooter who could even play backup point guard for them"?

Still not ringing a bell.

How about one of the highest paid players in the league that many people started to refer to Iso-Joe?

Ooohhh.  You said Joe Johnson.  Yeah, I know that guy.  He shoots too much and doesn't seem to try very hard.

This is my biggest problem with the reactions I've heard to the Joe Johnson trade.  Many people have been blinded from seeing Johnson's skill because of the huge contract he signed and the amounts of shots he has taken in Atlanta.  I don't really think you can blame Joe Johnson for either of these things.

Is he overpaid?  Probably.  But what did you want Johnson to do when the Hawks offered him the huge contract?  Was he supposed to give money back?

Does he force up some shots?  Probably.  But what did you want Johnson to do when there were very few viable offensive options in Atlanta?  Was he supposed to encourage Josh Smith to jack up ill-advised threes?

These two things were essentially out of Johnson's control.  Johnson was able to control his immense talent and get himself to into six consecutive All-Star Games.  He's been one of the best players in the Eastern Conference, but extremely forgettable because he was stuck in Atlanta on a team that would always make the playoffs, but would never truly contend.  Johnson was always the team's best player, but I've never thought he was truly comfortable in being the team's best player.  I don't think he ever enjoyed being the guy that had too take every contested jumper late in the shot clock and probably take a few too many shots each night.  This is why I think Johnson will love his move to Brooklyn.

In Brooklyn, Johnson will be able to get more catch and shoot opportunities and more open looks playing with a world-class point guard in Deron Williams.  Besides Chris Paul, you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a better point guard in the league than Williams.  He embodies exactly what you want out of a point guard.  He is a great decision maker who shoots the ball well and is extremely efficient.  Williams' ability as a point guard should help bring the best out of Johnson.  Johnson should hopefully be able to get more open shots and improve his efficiency which will ultimately turn the Nets into a contender in the Eastern Conference.

Is Jason Kidd old?

Yes.  Very old.  So old, in fact, that I think he makes little difference in New York.  I will concede that he will help the Knicks and fits well in New York because he doesn't really need any shots, but overall this doesn't turn the Knicks into a team that compete for an NBA Finals appearance.

The biggest question for the Knicks is whether Jeremy Lin and Carmelo Anthony can coexist.  (I know Lin isn't officially a Knick, but it doesn't seem like they have much of a choice with him.  They need a point guard and will likely resign him.)  This question is especially annoying because we discussed it for about a month last year, but never got an answer because of the injuries to both Anthony and Lin.  For me, I just don't see it working.  Mike Woodson is a great coach defensively, but offensively he just doesn't have a clue.  The Knicks offense slowly regressed into an offense that relied nearly solely on isolation basketball.  That is just not going to work with Lin at point guard.  As much as Lin may help with ticket sales and fan base, he turns the Knicks offense into an absolute mess.

Cole Talks Hockey: State of the NHL

In an attempt to better myself as a sports fan, I am going to attempt to understand the NHL.  To help me do this, I have enlisted the services of my good friend and avid NHL fan Cole Vanden Heuvel.  Today, we start with Cole's State of the NHL piece.  In the coming weeks, I will be emailing Cole questions about the NHL that I, as a novice, have always been curious about.  Enjoy.

As a sidenote, this is all I can think about when I see the word Cole in the title of a post.



Unfortunately, that is not Cole Vanden Heuvel in the video.
--------------------------------------

As you may or may not be aware of, the current CBA in the NHL is set to expire on September 15^th (or the day after my birthday for anyone who cares to send any gifts my direction).  Many of you probably remember the 04-05 season when an entire hockey season was lost.  I wasn’t a fan of the sport at that time so it was nothing more than a footnote on the ESPN scroll that I happily ignored at the time.  However since then I, along with many others, have fallen in love with the game that has embraced a youthful resurgence from players that were barely out of diapers when that season was lost.  This post will hopefully give you an insight into what is currently going on within the NHL and what all these debates over the next few months are actually centered around. 

It’s easy for the average fan to be bitter and blame the players and sport for a lockout, it happened on a smaller scale to the behemoths that are the NFL and NBA this past year.  However where hockey has been lucky is that most of the “faces of the league” weren’t around during that 04-05 disaster.  Alex Ovechkin, Sidney Crosby, and Jonathan Toews are all players that don’t have any blood on their hands and fans are able to get behind.  The league now rests in their, and many other players whom are in the same boat, hands as they have hired Donald Fehr to run the NHLPA.  Fehr’s negotiating tactics are famous because he was the head man leading the MLBPA during their World Series-less season in the mid-90’s, but he is also utilizing a new technique that the talking heads didn’t fully capitalize on during those negotiations in 04.  The NHLPA has announced a 30 member executive committee made up of players with varying experience levels in the league.  On top of that the PA has also offered to pay for the flights and lodgings of any active player interested in going to NY to take part in discussions to both better understand what’s going on and get their opinion out there.

The biggest sticking points in this round of CBA negotiations revolve around the percentage of total revenue that is allocated to player salaries, player involvement in the Olympics, and closing current contract loopholes.  Currently the players get to see 57% of all league revenues by way of salaries.  To any normal person that may seem about right since it’s the players who put butts in the seats and without them it would just be a bunch of suits not generating any revenues.  However when you compare that % to those in the NFL and NBA (both barely about 50%) it results in a quite substantial difference that the owners will be looking to take a chunk out of this go around. 

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman (BOOO!!!) has made it known that he is against the idea of sending NHL players to the Olympics in Russia in 2014.  His thinking is that it does nothing to promote the game and only risks players getting hurt and owners losing out on hundreds if not thousands of dollars.  The 2010 Vancouver Olympics were a great success and did an unbelievable job promoting the sport and increasing viewership and fandom in North America mainly because the marquee games were played during the late afternoon or during primetime.  The 2014 Olympics being played on the opposite side of the planet meaning those same marquee games will take place during the middle of the night or extremely early morning for more North Americans, and when it really boils down that’s the main market that the talking heads care about.  The players love the idea of playing for their country and with their countrymen, but it may be a point they have to give up if they want to keep that large chunk of the “revenue pie”.

The third sticking point of the CBA negotiations revolves around the contract loopholes that are currently being exploited.  If you’re not an avid hockey fan, which I’m working under the assumption encompasses most of the readership here, you may just see the absurd 10-15 year contracts handed out by NHL teams and just scratch your head.  The reason that’s done is because under the current CBA the salary cap is calculated using AVERAGE salary over a player’s contract.  I’m going to launch into an example here, so if you don’t feel like putting up with all the numbers and jargon, please feel free to bypass the next paragraph.

So if you have player X signed for 5 years at $40 million total, he counts for $8 mil against your cap each season.  Whereas you could sign him for 10 years at a total of $50 million and lay out the pay scale such that he makes $8 mil the first 5 years and $2 mil a year for the last 5 years his cap hit falls to $5 mil a year.  This may not seem like a big deal, but imagine if you do this to a player who is 35 and it’s understood he’ll retire at 40.  You’ve saved yourself $3 mil a year in the cap and after he retires you drop off those last 5 years/$10 mil/$5 mil cap hit.  The new CBA will look at likely putting a max amount of years you can offer to a player over a given age in order to remove or at least curtail that sort of loophole in the future.

Of course those aren’t the only 3 issues that the NHL will be discussing, but they are 3 that you will for sure hear mentioned at some point during all the proceedings.  Armed with this info you will be at least somewhat prepared to hold a discussion with another sports fan on these issues, and if not you can show off for all the girls because what chick isn’t interest in a good CBA discussion?

NBA Draft 2012

I have been writing NBA Draft diaries for years.  Typically they were just records of my thoughts and actions as I watched the draft with a group of my friends.  This year, I decided to do things a little bit differently. 

Rather than recording my thoughts and posting them the next day, I decided to cover the draft live and give all of my readers a chance to interact with me as the draft occurs.  I asked my good friend and former radio show co-host Cody Steger to join me.

Just click on the event below and join us for the fun!

Van Gogh Spray Paint

There are just some things in the game of basketball that words cannot do justice. Simply describing some plays is just not enough. As you see it, you know it's special. You can tell the player that executed the play is a keen observer of the game. They've been watching the tendencies of his opponent. He knows the game inside out. And then it happens. That's right. I'm talking about the perfect flop.

Wait...You thought I was going to talk about the perfect pass? Sorry. This is an art form all its own and just as impressive in my opinion.

Let's take a look at some beauties.

Would you look at it?

Would you look at that?

Just look at it?

Right now, I would assume most of you are about ready to skip over the rest of this post. You likely don't want to read an entire post about why grown men falling over is an art form and that's your right. In fact, you're probably not alone because it seems as though the general public is against flopping and I just don't understand it.

The idea of punishing floppers and attempting to outlaw the flop in the NBA started to develop early on this season and I had assumed it would subside, but unfortunately it has not disappeared. In fact, it has strengthened. Now you can't watch a single game without some announcer taking about how acting is not a part of basketball and players should not be rewarded for acting. It's gotten so bad that Jeff Van Gundy can no longer go five minutes without screaming about outlawing the flop. If you go to Youtube right now and type in "jeff van gundy flop", you will find over a page of results!

And why do people want to outlaw it? I'm honestly not sure. The only argument I've heard pertains to the manlihood of each player in the league.

The best way to play basketball is as physical as possible. If you're a post player, it is absolutely necessary to throw elbows and bang around as hard as possible to get position. That's how you play basketball in the NBA. It's a MAN'S GAME.

I'm pretty sure that is how the argument goes. It doesn't make a ton of sense to me, but I guess that's how people see the game. I'm not sure why though because any one who has ever played the game knows that basketball is so much more. Basketball is all about the game inside the game. On offense, if someone takes away Option A, you go to Option B. On defense, after you have taken away Option A on the first possession, you give up Option A to take away Option B. The game is unbelievably intricate and any one who argues that the strongest man should prevail just doesn't grasp the beauty of the game.

The flop is a tool utilized by the smartest players to manipulate the game to their advantage. The flop is not a single play. The flop is a psychological weapon. The flop is not about the play, but rather the plays leading up to and after the flop has occurred. A single flop can affect an entire game.

The greatest flop artists plan out their flops. The entire first quarter will likely consist of overly aggressive physical play. Lots of pushing. Lots of elbows. The pushing will get to such an extreme point that the opponent will be on the verge of throwing a punch. Then it happens.

The flop. A real beauty. Typically within five feet of an official. And completely exaggerated.

This will be infuriating to the opponent. He just spent the last quarter in the most physical battle of his life and now this guy falls over when he gets touched. What will he do the rest of the game? Will he throw some elbows again? Will he fall over?

This kind of psychological battle is something that a majority of people want to remove from the game. Outlawing the flop will remove one of the intricacies that makes the game so special. Instead of painting with a brush, the game would turn into a bunch of artists attempting to replicate a Van Gogh with spray paint.

And now enjoy The Art of Flopping as taught by Professor Vlade Divac.

Why Does Russell Westbrook Shoot So Much?

For most of this postseason, this has been the question when talking about the Oklahoma City Thunder.  Any time the Thunder have lost a game this postseason, this has been the question.  Even in games the Thunder have won, this has been the question asked during post-game press conferences.

This has held true during the NBA Finals.  After each game, countless experts tell us that there is no reason Russell Westbrook should be taking more shots than Kevin Durant.  Kevin Durant should be the one getting the most shots.  And this seems like a logical argument.  Durant is the most potent scorer the NBA has ever seen.  I know that statement probably seems foolish coming from a 21 year old and probably seems to be a bit hyperbolic in nature, but I honestly don't care.  You're looking at a 6'10" wing that shoots it like Reggie Miller and attacks the rim with his incredible length that reminds many of George Gervin.  He's just an absolutely deadly package on the offensive end and has led the league in scoring the last three seasons.  At times, he is absolutely unstoppable.  With all of this being said, Durant shouldn't be the one taking the most shots for the Thunder.

I know this statement seems to defy logic, but let's take a closer look at this argument.

When this idea is brought up to Durant after games, he will say things that either support Westbrook's decision making or suggest that taking a ton of shots just isn't in his personality.  These comments are typically seen by media types to represent Durant being a great leader and teammate rather than his actual preference.  This is where I believe the problem with this theory begins.

Durant has now played in 420 career games.  In those 420 career games, Durant has taken 25 or more shots in only 36 games.  I wasn't a math major at Maryville, but I do know that 36 of 420 games equates to less than 10 percent.  (Much of the same holds up in the playoffs.  Durant has shot 25 or more times in only four of his forty playoff games.)  This would tend to make me believe Durant doesn't necessarily prefer to take a ton of shots.   Some might argue that Durant hasn't had the chance to take a ton of shots because of the people he plays with, but I just don't see this argument holding up.  If Durant wanted to take significantly more shots, he could.  These shots may be of lower quality, but Durant could take more shots if he chose to.

For example, when we take a look at the league's best scorer before Durant we will find a much different story.  The last player to lead the league in scoring three years in a row was none other than Kobe Bryant.  In 1,323 career games, Kobe Bryant has taken 25 or more shots in 356 of the games.  That is over 25% of his games.  I'm not trying to say that this is a good or bad thing.  I'm simply saying that some players prefer to take a lot of shots and some players don't.  As a volume shooter and scorer, Bryant has been the league's best player and one of the ten greatest NBA players of all-time.  So, obviously this approach works out very well for some players.  I just don't see Durant being one of those players.

Another major logical flaw that occurs when discussing Durant getting more shots is the assumption that Durant will continue to shoot at the unbelievably high percentage he has in this postseason.  During this postseason, Durant is shooting 51.4%.  When taking a look at the games in which Durant has taken 25 or more shots in his career, Durant has only shot 51% or more in 11 of those 36 games.  I know obviously this is a small sample size, but, at the same time, the fact that this sample size is so small shows that Durant's preference is not to take a lot of shots and it may be because he simply knows that he isn't all that effective when he does.

On top of all of that, Durant isn't wrong when he says that the Thunder are better when Westbrook takes more shots than him.  This season the Thunder have a 29-8 record when Westbrook has more field goal attempts than Durant.  When Durant has more attempts than Westbrook, the Thunder are 27-14.  Both of those records are good, but clearly the Thunder are a better team when Westbrook takes more shots than Durant.  Will there be games when pundits think that the Thunder would have been better with Durant getting more shots?  Absolutely.  Are the Thunder ultimately more dangerous when Westbrook is taking more shots than Durant?  Yes.

So let's all just lay off Russell Westbrook for a little bit and figure out more ways to pick apart Lebron Jame's game.  Wait, what?

Asking the Tough Questions: The Jeremy Lin Edition

This weekly post will delve into the most important NBA questions I have asked myself in the past week. They may be irrelevant and ridiculous, but hopefully they will be entertaining.  This week I focus on the only NBA story that matters: Jeremy Lin.

Is he for real?

I believe Lin is for real, but I definitely have some doubts.

Thus far Lin has played five very good games against the Nets, Jazz, Wizards, Lakers, and Timberwolves.  That means the point guards he has faced include Deron Williams, Devin Harris, John Wall, Derek Fisher, and Ricky Rubio.  None of these players have ever been confused with the best defensive guards in the league and most of them are considered to be well-below average defenders.  Now taking a look at his upcoming opponents, you'll find the Raptors, Kings, and Hornets, all of which feature more below-average defensive players.  I'm not trying to take anything away from Lin because he's done a great job of exploiting the teams he has played, but there is just no denying that he hasn't played the best competition in the league thus far.

With that being said, I have been very impressed with Lin's play thus far.  He has done a great job in the half-court, which is somewhat surprising because of the offense he is playing.  In Mike D'Antoni's system other point guards have been successful for short periods of time including guys like Chris Duhon and Goran Dragic, but when the success of these other point guards has come in transition.  Both Duhon and Dragic inflated their stats through the fast break and D'Antoni's "Six Seconds or Less Offense".  This has not been the case with Lin.  Lin has done most of his damage in the pick and roll action the Knicks have gotten in the half-court, which is an indication that Lin can do more than just make a variety of simple passes on 3-on-2 fast breaks.

Upon originally watching Lin, I wondered how he would do once teams were able to scout him.  In the NBA, when playing a point guard they've never really seen before most teams will just go over the top of a ball screen and try to pressure the ballhandler.  Lin is very adept at this and I would assume that after seeing him play the last few games, more teams will go under ball screens and force Lin to shoot the ball from the outside much like the Lakers did in the first quarter on Friday night.  I think this is the best way to play Lin.  The Lakers abandoned this strategy after Lin started off the game hot, but in the long run this may be the best defensive strategy considering Lin is shooting around 17% from the three point line in his NBA career.

Another thing you'll notice about Lin is his reliance on his right hand.  He loves going right.  He takes his first dribble on drives almost exclusively with his right hand.  Though he finishes very well with both his right and left hand, he doesn't penetrate very well with his left hand.  The only move he has featured to his left at this point has been a spin move that allows him to immediately switch back to his right hand.  This will be something to watch going forward as well because Lin may actually have strong moves with his left hand, but no NBA team has forced him to show off any of those moves.

Is this just another instance of East Coast bias from ESPN?

Anytime a story based out of New York City or Boston is featured heavily on ESPN people immediately complain about East Coast Bias.  This is a very simple problem to see while living in the Midwest and at times, especially when the Red Sox and Yankees are playing, I've even subscribed to it, but I don't believe East Coast Bias has anything to do with this story.

This story would just simply not mean as much if it wasn't occurring in New York City.  Whether you like it or not, the Knicks are one of the most storied NBA franchises of all-time.  They play in the most important basketball venue in the world, Madison Square Garden, and New York City cares more about basketball than just about any other city on Earth.  No one fantasizes about playing in Bankers Life Fieldhouse or the Bradley Center.  This simply just doesn't matter as much if it isn't in New York.  The Knicks were struggling to figure out how to win basketball games, Mike D'Antoni was getting awfully close to losing his job, and the Knicks playoff chances were looking awfully bleak until Jeremy Lin came around.  He has likely saved D'Antoni's job and quite possibly made the Knicks into a contender in the Eastern Conference.

How did this take so long?

This is the question I really have no answer for.  I understand that Jeremy Lin is not a big name and had never been overly successful in the NBA before he came to New York, but before playing Jeremy Lin the Knicks were getting absolutely nothing out of the point guard position. 

Toney Douglas was the first player to attempt playing point guard for the Knicks.  He failed miserably.  He was not much of a creator and started to shoot a bad percentage from the three point line which is really the only elite skill Douglas had.  Then the Knicks decided to try Mike Bibby's corpse for a game.  Believe it or not, Bibby didn't play well.  The Knicks then turned to Iman Shumpert and Carmelo Anthony.  Neither of them played very well out of position.  After all of these experiments, the Knicks finally turned to Jeremy Lin.

How did it take D'Antoni so long to put Jeremy Lin on the floor?  I know he isn't a big name or anything, but why not at least try it?  There was really nothing to lose.  It's not like the Knicks really had much going for them at the time, so why not try someone that was a little off-the-wall?

Was it necessary for him to sleep on couches for the last month?

This is a hotly contested question in my group of friends.  I contend that it was completely necessary while some of my roommates believe that he could have easily bought himself a place to live.

I believe it was necessary for him to sleep on couches because of his lack of job security.  Though Lin played the entire season with the Warriors last year, he was cut by the Rockets earlier this year and was signed by the Knicks on December 27th.  In my mind, it would have been pretty presumptious of a career backup to buy himself an apartment or loft in one of the most expensive cities on Earth.  He could have been cut by the Knicks very easily in the last few weeks.  Just looking at Marc Stein's Twitter feed (@ESPNSteinLine) from the last few days proves this point.  The Knicks were strongly leaning toward releasing Lin before he broke out against the Nets.  The man that the whole world is seemingly watching now was almost dropped just a week ago!  I also argued that with the ridiculous NBA schedule this season Lin would have had no time to check out any apartments because of an utter lack of free time.  To this point, the Knicks have had 19 days without a game.  Taking a look at the schedule I would assume roughly ten of those days were travel days, which would leave roughly nine days for Lin to look for a place to live.

The argument against led by my roommate and friend Oliver Wiseman goes a little something like this.  Jeremy Lin was an NBA player for an entire season.  In his season with the Golden State Warriors, Lin made $500,000 and signed a three-year contract with Nike.  He believes that with this money he could have easily bought himself an apartment.  As an NBA player, there is no reason for you to live on a couch at any point in your life because you make more money than just about any else on Earth even as a reserve.  Also, he argued that when you make as much money as an NBA player, there is no reason to need to look at the place you are going to live.  You can simply have your agent take care of it and get the job done.

Even with this argument, I believe it would have been fiscally irresponsible for Lin to purchase an apartment in New York, but I'll leave it up for you to decide.

Asking the Tough Questions

This weekly post will delve into the most important NBA questions I have asked myself in the past week. They may be irrelevant and ridiculous, but hopefully they will be entertaining.

Is David Kahn actually a genius?

The Timberwolves have turned into one of the most entertaining teams in the league this season.  They are one of the few teams in the league that you can watch any night and find a team playing great basketball.  All of this is due to the team David Kahn put together.

While in Minnesota, every move made by David Kahn has been scrutinized and for very good reason.  He has made some really, really dumb moves.  Bill Simmons covered earlier this week in his column, but here's a quick recap: Johnny Flynn over Stephen Curry, trading Ty Lawson, drafting Wes Johnson, and overpaying a lot of really bad players including Darko Milicic.  While in Minnesota, he hit one home run and it might be a 600 foot bomb: RUBIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Rubio is breathtaking on the floor.  And excuse me while I hop on the Cliche Train, but he sees the game steps ahead of other players, threads the needle on passes consistently, and is the definition of floor general.  I can't think of a player in the league that wouldn't want to play with him.  He makes the game fun and gets each of his teammates involved which is truly the sign of a great point guard.  Sorry for the gushing.  I probably just sounded like a middle school girl describing the cute boy in class, but I really do love watching Rubio play.  I watched every second of the first five Timberwolves games this season just to watch him play.

Even with the wizardry of Rubio, I still think David Kahn is an awful GM.  He proved this in his most recent move.

Last week, the Timberwolves signed Kevin Love to a 4 year contract with a player option after the third year.  Love wanted to sign a 5 year maximum contract.  Love wanted to become the face of the franchise.  Kahn decided against signing him to the maximum contract.

Let's take a closer look at this.  Minnesota is very cold.  Minnesota is a miniscule market.  Kevin Love actually wanted to sign the maximum contract and Kahn decided not to keep him in Minnesota.  Why would you not want to keep one of the 15 best players in the league on your team for five years?  I have no idea.

The only conceivable reason to do this is to save the designated player contract for Ricky Rubio.  This is a moronic idea.  Obviously, Kahn did a great job drafting and believing in Rubio, but he may not be able to look at the situation unbiasedly.  Rubio was not happy about being drafted by Minnesota.  He attempted to force his way into a larger city before finally relenting and coming to Minnesota.  Does David Kahn really think he can convince Rubio to stay in Minnesota?  If he has struggled this much to get a supporting cast in the three years before Rubio's arrival, what would make him think he could get the job done now?

Does the NBA need to institute the Lew Alcindor rule?

The Lew Alcindor Rule was the rule established by the NCAA that banned dunking from 1967 to 1976. 

Yup.  I just said the NBA should ban dunking.  Why?

In the last week, two of the most amazing dunks I have ever seen have occurred.  Lebron James jumped over another player to grab a one-handed alley oop and Blake Griffin dunked over Kendrick Perkins.  I described it with as little excitement as possible because apparently that's how dunks are treated now.

Michael Wilbon, Jalen Rose, and Magic Johnson all agreed that Lebron's dunk wasn't in his top 800.  They agreed that Lebron had three other dunks in that game that were better.  Look at this dunk.



He jumped completely over another human being to dunk the basketball.  I don't care if that man was John Lucas III and he's not even six feet tall.  Lebron jumped over another player in game action.  That is insane.  How can someone say this isn't in his Top 800 dunks?  Are people just immune to his amazing athletic feats?  Are they just numb to the ridiculous plays Lebron makes?

After watching the Blake Griffin dunk I proceeded to retweet every relevant tweet about it for about 15 minutes and then I saw this tweet from my radio show's co-host Cody Steger: "On the Griffin dunk: it was a solid dunk, but i've seen better..."



What kind of world do we live in where people can't get excited about either of those dunks?  If I would have shown those two plays to Dr. James Naismath, I'm pretty sure his head would have exploded on the spot because he simply would not have been able to comprehend what had just happened in the game he invented.  Or maybe he would have reacted like Father Pat in Semi-Pro.

How good is your "best shooter" when he plays for five seconds the entire game?

While watching the end of the Knicks-Celtics game last night, I couldn't have been more surprised that Steve Novak missed the game winner.  It's crazy that a guy that hasn't played the entire game can't hit a game winner.  I mean there is not a better warmup than sitting on the bench for 47 minutes and 50 seconds.

What are coaches thinking when they do this?  Using the guy as a decoy is one thing, but actually giving him the shot is another.  I'm not sure that Mike D'Antoni know this, but Carmelo Anthony plays for the Knicks and he just happens to be one of the best in the entire league at finishing games.  Just awful.

How will I manage to bring up the Super Bowl in an NBA column?

Whoops.  I don't think I have really in-depth thoughts about the actual game, but I do have some in-depth thoughts regarding the hatred I have for this game.  On one hand, you have the Patriots who I can just not stand.  I respect Brady, but just hate Belichek.  On the other hand, you have Eli Manning who I have very little respect for.  I will be sick to my stomach if somehow after this game, people see Eli as the better Manning.  So, for me, this game is a lose-lose.  I'll take the Patriots for the win though.  New England 27, New York 23.

Asking the Tough Questions

This weekly post will delve into the most important NBA questions I have asked myself in the past week.  They may be irrelevant and ridiculous, but hopefully they will be entertaining.


Has Dan Gilbert sabotaged the best the NBA has to offer from 2010-2015?

I started thinking about this question as I watched the Heat play this past week with Dwyane Wade on the bench with an injury.  As I watched Lebron take over the game night after night I couldn't help but to think of a simpler time when Lebron played for the Cavaliers and had the ball in his hands at all times.  He won MVPs and was one of the most amazing basketball players I had ever seen.  During this time, Lebron was never really given much of a supporting cast though.  Gilbert was never able to find him a legitimate running mate and when it was time for Lebron to become a free agent he fled to go play basketball in Miami with his friends Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh.

While Lebron was playing with terrible teammates in Cleveland, Wade enjoyed his first three seasons in Miami playing with the likes of Caron Butler, Lamar Odom, and an in-shape and determined Shaquille O'Neal.  After winning the NBA Finals in 2006, much like Lebron, Wade suffered through some pretty terrible supporting casts as Shaq's age started to take a toll on his physical condition and the Heat were unable to restock their roster.

And I know this is starting to make it seem like I'm trying to say what Wade and Lebron did was the right thing to do.  It wasn't.  Obviously, you want to see the best players in the world play against each other rather than play with each other, but when you take a look at the teams those two played with from 2007-2010, I'm not really sure you can blame them for wanting to team up and ensure a good supporting cast.

This is where I believe it comes down to Dan Gilbert's decision making.  After being drafted by GM Jim Paxson, Gilbert decided to move in a different direction after Lebron's second season and hired Danny Ferry as the new GM.  To understand the terible decision making made while Lebron was in Cleveland, let's take a look at the major moves made in Cleveland from 2003 to 2010.

July 23, 2004 - Traded Tony Battie, a 2005 2nd round draft pick (Martynas Andriuskevicius) and a 2007 2nd round draft pick (Brad Newley) to the Orlando Magic for Drew Gooden, Steven Hunter and Anderson Varejao.

This was actually a good trade.  Gooden became the Cavaliers' second best player and Varejao is one of the best high-energy, hustle players in the league.  (This trade was made by Jim Paxson.)

August 2, 2005 - Signed Larry Hughes as a free agent.  Signed Donyell Marshall as a free agent.

This is where it starts to get ugly.  Gilbert signed Larry Hughes to a five year, 70 million dollar contract and told anyone who would listen that Hughes would be the running mate James needed.  While in Cleveland, Hughes averaged 14 points per game and didn't really add much to the Cavaliers.  Donyell Marshall sat in the corners and shot three pointers while adding absolutely nothing else to the team.

February 21, 2008 - As part of a 3-team trade, the Cleveland Cavaliers traded Donyell Marshall and Ira Newble to the Seattle SuperSonics; the Cleveland Cavaliers traded Shannon Brown, Drew Gooden, Larry Hughes and Cedric Simmons to the Chicago Bulls; the Chicago Bulls traded Joe Smith, Ben Wallace and a 2009 2nd round draft pick (Danny Green) to the Cleveland Cavaliers; the Chicago Bulls traded Adrian Griffin to the Seattle SuperSonics; and the Seattle SuperSonics traded Wally Szczerbiak and Delonte West to the Cleveland Cavaliers.


Wow.  That's a lot of text.  The Cavaliers gave up Donyell Marshall, Ira Newble, Shannon Brown, Drew Gooden, and Cedric Simmons for Joe Smith, Ben Wallace, Wally Szcerbizak, Delonte West, and a 2009 2nd round pick.

I mean when you can give up on your two biggest free agent signings and your 26 year-old starting power forward as a GM to bring in a 32 year-old power forward, a 34 year-old center coming off two of his worst seasons, a 31 year-old shooting guard in the twilight of his career, and Delonte West, you just have to!  Right? 

Wait a second.  WHAT DID I JUST SAY?!?  That seems completely illogical. 

And I know what you're saying to yourself, "Eric, Why did you analyze that trade in such depth?  Why didn't you just say the Cavaliers traded one pile of feces for a slightly differently looking pile of feces?"  When I hypothetically analyze your response to this piece, it all becomes much clearer to me.  Danny Ferry is an awful GM, but let's continue this fun exercise.  I'm having fun.

August 13, 2008 - As part of a 3-team trade, the Cleveland Cavaliers traded Joe Smith to the Oklahoma City Thunder; the Cleveland Cavaliers traded Damon Jones to the Milwaukee Bucks; the Milwaukee Bucks traded Mo Williams to the Cleveland Cavaliers; the Milwaukee Bucks traded Desmond Mason to the Oklahoma City Thunder; and the Oklahoma City Thunder traded Adrian Griffin and Luke Ridnour to the Milwaukee Bucks.

Now we're talking!  Joe Smith and Damon Jones for a shoot-first point guard in Mo Williams!  I love it!  Just what the Cavaliers needed.  A guy that wants to take a lot of shots and keep the ball out of Lebron James' hands?  Perffffectttt.

June 26, 2009 - Traded Sasha Pavlovic, Ben Wallace, cash and a 2010 2nd round draft pick (Dwayne Collins) to the Phoenix Suns for Shaquille O'Neal.

BLOCKBUSTER!  You were able to trade for an over-the-hill and injury prone Shaquille O'Neal!  I'm sure a slow and old Shaq will be able to keep up with the greatest physical specimen to ever play basketball.  Great trade, Danny Ferry!

February 17, 2010 - As part of a 3-team trade, the Cleveland Cavaliers traded Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Emir Preldzic and a 2010 1st round draft pick (Lazar Hayward) to the Washington Wizards; the Los Angeles Clippers traded Sebastian Telfair to the Cleveland Cavaliers; the Los Angeles Clippers traded Al Thornton to the Washington Wizards; the Washington Wizards traded Antawn Jamison to the Cleveland Cavaliers; and the Washington Wizards traded Drew Gooden to the Los Angeles Clippers.

And your last ditch effort to keep Lebron James in Cleveland is...drum roll please...Antawn Jamison!  Wait...Antawn Jamison?  When Kobe complains about playing with awful players in Los Angeles, Mitch Kupchak gets him the most dominant player of all-time, Shaquille O'Neal.  And then after Shaq left Los Angeles and the Lakers started to surround Kobe with terrible players, Kupchak again brought in one of the best centers in the league in Pau Gasol.  Kupchak clearly understands how to keep a superstar in his city. 

And I know that Kupchak is the GM in Los Angeles and Jerry Buss is the owner, but you have to give Buss credit for bringing in someone that can actually get the job done.  Gilbert, on the other hand, did almost nothing to keep to Lebron in Cleveland even though he would make you believe otherwise.  He would make you believe that Lebron committed the biggest travesty of all-time.  That he betrayed the city of Cleveland.  That he was a terrible person.  All the while not mentioning that Cleveland did almost nothing to keep Lebron in Cleveland, but who really cares about that?

Now back to the original question.  Has Dan Gilbert sabotaged the best the NBA has to offer from 2010-2015?

I say yes.  If the Cavaliers give Lebron a legitimate second option during his time in Cleveland, he would have likely resigned.  I tend to believe that even without Lebron in Miami, Bosh would still have likely gone to the Heat.  So now instead of the Heat and Bulls contending in the East every year, the Cavaliers would also be in the mix adding to the overall strength of the Eastern Conference.  Along with another contending team in the East, basketball fans would also have been able to watch Lebron and Wade put together unbelievable individual seasons on their respective teams.  Both players would have battled year in and year out for scoring titles and MVPs.  It's certainly a shame that we were never able to see it, but I don't think you can really blame either player for joining forces.

(And don't even get me started about the travesty that is Kyrie Irving only playing 27 minutes a game in his rookie season on an awful Cavaliers team this year.)

Is Kobe Bryant certifiably insane?

This has been on my mind since the beginning of this season.  Kobe Bryant is averaging 30.5 points per game and putting together a MVP season.  He had four consecutive 40 point games this season and is scoring nearly at will.

While discussing the Lakers win over the Suns in which Bryant scored 48 points,Bryant said, "Not bad for the seventh-best player in the league."

This quote seemed a little unneccesary.  In this quote, Kobe was referring to the #NBArank poll ESPN held this past offseason in which they asked 91 experts to rank the best players in the league.  Kobe ended up finishing seventh in the rankings behind Kevin Durant, Dirk Nowitzki, Chris Paul, Dwyane Wade, Dwight Howard, and Lebron James.  Is Kobe Bryant the seventh best player in the league?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  Is it worth getting upset over?  I would think not, but not in Kobe's mind.

Not only did this upset Kobe, it upset him to such an extent that after having his best game of the season he felt it necessary to comment on the ranking.  This would tend to make me believe that he used this insignificant slight to motivate himself during the offseason and before each and every game.  And honestly, I envy this about Kobe.  I know it may sound crazy, but I really do envy that ability.  Being able to turn the most insignificant and irrelevant comment into the motivation you need to work harder than you ever have before is what seperates the good players from the great players.  Some players would react to a slight like this in a much different way (cough***Lebron***cough) and would cower or fear becoming the villain.  Instead of attempting to get people to like him, Kobe has always used the hate from his critics to motivate himself to become a better player and that is something that should be envied in a sports culture where the modern athlete is more consumed with their media image than actual performance.

How long must I wait to see Sam Cassell prancing around on the sidelines of an NBA court after drawing up the play that won his team the game?



Too long.

How can you not make him the coach of your team?  I can't believe the Wizards screwed this one up.  Nevermind.  I thought for a second that the Wizards were a well-run NBA organization.  My mistake.

Stuck in a Rut: The Life of a Badger

This has been a trying time to be a Badger fan. 

You probably think I am talking about the heartbreaking loss the Badgers basketball team suffered at the hands of Michigan State and two mismatched game clocks Tuesday night.  Or maybe the Rose Bowl loss against Oregon in which time ran out on the Badgers down by only a touchdown.  Actually, you're probably thinking I will complain about the home loss the basketball team had against a mediocre Iowa team at the Kohl Center on Saturday.  Or the back-to-back regular season losses against Michigan State and Ohio State on last second Hail Marys.

I am actually talking about my entire experience as a Badger fan.  All of these heartbreaking losses are part of a much larger, much more depressing picture.

---------------------------

Coming in to each and every year, I know that the Badgers will have the biggest and best offensive line in the nation and likely a large running back that will rack up yards and touchdowns all year.  Unfortunately, the guy standing between that offensive line and running back have included: Jim Sorgi, Matt Schabert, John Stocco, Tyler Donovan, Allan Evridge, Dustin Sherer, and Scott Tolzien.  Not exactly All-Americans.  This has always made me wonder what a Badgers team would look like with an elite quarterback.

This year was supposed to give me that answer.  In June, Russell Wilson announced that he would be attending Wisconsin in the fall.  Wilson was a great QB at North Carolina State and Badger fans throughout Sconnie Nation could not have been more excited about the prospects of pairing a great QB with an already powerful offense led by Montee Ball and James White.  I didn't receive the answer I wanted.

Instead of seeing the Badgers compete for a national championship, I was forced to watch the Badgers blow two games they had no business losing at Michigan State and Ohio State.  In both games, the Badgers managed the clock and their timeouts poorly and found a way to lose games that they should have won.  This is something that has consistently occurred in the Bret Bielema Era.

Don't get me wrong. I think what Bielema has done for the program is great.  Back-to-back Rose Bowl appearances are a step in the right direction for the program.  Consistently appearing in BCS Bowls will help the Badgers improve and come closer to becoming an elite program.  The only problem is that elite programs win their bowl games.  Appearing in the Rose Bowl is not enough.  For the Badgers to become an elite football program they need to win BCS bowls.

At this point, it just seems like Bret Bielema can't win big games.  Maybe Bielema will win these big games in the future, but at this point I believe his seat should start feeling a little hot.  I know its crazy to say that a coach coming off of back-to-back Rose Bowl appearances should be on the hot seat, but that is just the evolution of every sports program.  Barry Alvarez took the first step for the Badgers in making them nationally relevant with his three Rose Bowl appearances.  Now, Bielema has taken the next step in making the Badgers one of the best football programs in the Big Ten year in and year out, but this might be as far as he can take them.

There's only one problem though.  If Bielema is able to continue pumping out teams that win the Big Ten and win 10-11 games a year, Barry Alvarez (Wisconsin's Athletic Director) will find it very hard to justify firing Bielema.  As a Badger fan, I don't think there is any way that Bielema can win a national championship here at Wisconsin, but yet I also think that he should easily win at least 10 games every single year.  Where does the football program go from here?

---------------------------

Being a Wisconsin native and basketball junkie, people will typically ask me before each college basketball season how I think the Badgers will be in the upcoming season.  My response is always the same.

Good.

Badgers basketball teams will always be good.  That is an absolute guarantee.  Going into the past few seasons, I have had friends ask me what I thought about the basketball team and have told them that they will be good and nothing more.  When asked about the possibility of a national championship, I typically laugh.  Last year, they asked how I could laugh at that with Jon Leuer, Keaton Nankivil, and Jordan Taylor on the team.  This year they asked how I could laugh with an All-American point guard returning.  It's all very simple.  Badgers basketball teams coached by Bo Ryan will just always be good.

Since Bo Ryan has taken over the Wisconsin basketball program, the Badgers have not missed the tournament.  Even in Bo Ryan's worst season as head coach in 2005, the Badgers were able to finish 19-12 and still make the NCAA Tournament.  Every single year as a Badgers fan, you know that Wisconsin will finish in the top half of the Big Ten and typically the top three.  It doesn't matter if the Badgers have just lost the fourth pick of the NBA draft or are returning all five starters, they will be one of the best basketball teams in the Big Ten simply because of Bo Ryan's presence.

Now, it may seem a little curious that I laugh at the idea of a National Championship for the Badgers.  With such a seemingly good basketball coach, how does a National Championship seem so far out of reach?

It has everything to do with Bo Ryan.  This was covered earlier this year after Wisconsin narrowly lost to North Carolina, but Bo Ryan preaches a very methodical pace on offense.  And when I say methodical, I mean boring.  Don't get me wrong as a Badger fan, I love watching other teams suffer as Ryan's teams slowing take the air out of the ball and slow the game down to a snail's pace, but it does get rather annoying after a while. 

The most frustrating thing for me as a fan has been the lack of hope that it brings about.  There is no looking to next year.  There is no excitement on signing day.  While other Top 10 teams are signing the nation's brightest young high school stars, Bo Ryan signs guys like Jared Berggren.  He was the Badgers' top signee four years ago!  Jared Berggren!  A slow, plodding 6'10" four-star center from Minnesota.  That's the best a team that is consistently in the Top 25 and typically the Top 10 can do?  Give me a break.

That's the thing though.  Bo Ryan doesn't care about recruiting the best players.  All he cares about is recruiting players to play in his system.  I have often said that Bo Ryan could turn a team full of three-star recruits into a Top 25 team, but he could also turn a team of McDonald's All-Americans into a Top 25 team.  As much as his system brings out the absolute best from mediocre players, it limits the abilities of supremely talented players.

Obviously, here inlies the problem.  Bo Ryan will continue to produce very productive basketball teams until the day he dies, but among those very productive teams there will never be a national champion.  At what point is winning not enough?  At some point, Badger fans have to ask themselves if they would rather have 20 years of winning with no national championships or fluctuating winning percentages with the possibility of putting together a team that can actually win a national championship?