Category: Sports

The NBA executed its largest trade ever last week, involving 13 players. The prevalent opinon is that the Miami Heat, by adding Antoine Walker and Jason Williams (white chocolate), were the clear winners — taking a team that came within one game of the NBA Finals and adding two high profile talents to their squad.

Personally, I think this was a huge mistake for the Heat. Both Walker and Williams are me first stars in what may someday be known as the NBA’s ego era — neither has shown at any time during their careers that they can put the team’s fate in front of their own stats or highlight reel. The Heat were just beginning to gel under D-Wade and Shaq; Adding guys who could easily throw that out of balance is a highly risky move for Pat Riley.

Of course, if anyone can whip these two into shape it is Shaq, so if the big fella has his way he could easily prove me wrong come playoff time.

Palmiero became only the sixth player to reach 500 home runs and 3000 hits. Karl Malone is statistically the greatest forward in the history of NBA basketball.

During the Palmiero era, I never once considered myself lucky to have watched his greatness. I never really even cared. (Same goes for Malone.)

Longevity does not equal greatness.

Next up: Aerosmith is the Karl Malone of rock n’ roll…

I received the following IM from a friend today:

What is your all time nba team? Mine is kobe bryant at point; michael jordan as 2; tracy mcrady at 3; hakeem olajuwon at 4; shaq oneal as center.

I don’t even think it is necessary to comment on the absurdity of this list, but I will anyway.

Um, Larry Bird and Magic Johnson are omitted. Enough said. (But I’ll continue)

Tracy McGrady is a fraud until proven otherwise. Play for a winner and then we’ll talk. Kobe is a great champion, but only as second banana. He needs to win one as the undisputed leader on a team, and then we’ll talk. (He’s also not a point guard, but that is so minor I’ll choose to overlook it)

Essentially, positions 1-3 are locks: Magic, Michael and Larry. It does get interesting once you get to 4 and 5. The most dominant centers of their time are obviously Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain, but the game has changed so much since they played; It is extremely hard to compare these guys to modern day greats like Shaq. Perhaps 70’s stars Kareem or Bill Walton are the ultimate compromise — skilled enough to play a finesse game but tough enough to handle today’s centers. The statistical factor comes into play here as well — Karl Malone, for example, is the greatest power forward of all time based on statistics, but if I were putting together a team I’d much rather have Kevin McHale, Hakeem or even Charles Barkley playing the 4.

To answer my friend, I told him that my team of Magic, The Big O, Larry Legend, McHale and Kareem would blow his team off the court. Even though Jordan is the greatest competitor and winner of all time, there is no way he could overcome the selfishness of Kobe and T-Mac to keep his team in the game.

Marvin Williams is sure to be one of the top three picks in this year’s NBA Draft, but whoever does this will be making a huge mistake. Sure, Williams is an enormous raw talent who will probably become a good NBA player, but he still shouldn’t be drafted this high.

One thing NBA scouts don’t look at often enough is the players actual performance at the previous level. Wait a second — of course they do, you’re thinking. They do, obviously, but not enough. Too much is spent looking at the guys body, his individual skills, his length, speed, quickness, etc. All important things, but if you can’t put them together, they are useless. Marvin Williams was a bench player for UNC last year. Yes, I know — they were an incredible team and he filled his role nicely. He did, not, however, dominate. At all. How is a guy who could not dominate at the college level going to do so in the pros? There is not a chance. If he was really the best player in college, how did he not crack the starting lineup? Because Roy was being loyal to 4-year starter Jawad Williams? Come ON, if Marvin was really that good, he’d have been starting. This guy has talent, no doubt, but it is raw and he clearly has a lot to learn.

Which brings me to my next point — by the time Marvin Williams is ready to become a star in the NBA, (probably about 3-5 years based on his current age), his initial contract with whoever drafts him will be up. If they aren’t happy with his development, they will have traded him or will just let him go, and if they like him they’ll have to compete for him on the free agent market. Obviously the cap will favor them, but the circumstances for this to work out for the team that actually drafted him seem to get slimmer and slimmer as the years go by.

From all accounts, Marvin has a good head on his shoulders and a great work ethic. If things fall right for him, he may very well become a great NBA all-star someday. I just doubt it’ll be with the team that drafts him tonight.

For some reason the NBA Draft is one of my favorite sports events of the year. Last night I stayed up late watching the ’86, ’88 and ’89 draft replays on NBATV — It’s hilarious to watch moments such as when the announcers lambasted the Heat for taking Glen Rice while Stacey King was still on the board, because “in basketball size is the most important thing”. (Rice became arguably the best player in this draft.)

Tonight’s draft looks to be one of the weakest in recent memory — without one “can’t miss” prospect. Last year we knew that Emeka Okeafor and Ben Gordon were destined to be solid NBA players (and thus far they are), and the year before brought us LeBron and Carmello. This year the two big names are Andrew Bogut of Utah, destined to be the next Will Purdue, and Marvin Williams of UNC, a raw talent packed with “P” — potential, but who didn’t even start in college. This year actually reminds me a bit of the ’89 draft I watched last night, where there was not a clear cut top player. (Pervis Ellison was picked first by the Kings over Danny Ferry and Sean Elliot.) The Spurs clearly got the best player in Elliot, but he dropped to #3 because of questions about his knee.

Looking back at the ’89 draft today, the most notable players showed up in the late first and even second rounds — Tim Hardaway at #14, Shawn Kemp at #17, Vlade Divac at #26, Cliff Robinson at #36 and Doug West at #38. I predict that the same trend will occur with the ’05 draft — only trick is picking which players will have an impact.

Since I really don’t know anything about the international players or the high school players, I’ll have to stick with college players. My sleeper picks:

– Hakim Warrick, Syracuse: As long and atheletic as Marvin Williams, with experience carrying a quality team on his back. Warrick is a sick athelete who could become a great NBA player if he develops his jumper. Should go around #15.

– Nate Robinson, Washington: Once again NBA scouts will be turned off by Nate’s diminutive size, but this guy is quick and strong enough to overcome it. He reminds me a bit of Iverson: not quite as quick but much stronger (played free safety for one year at UW), so he’ll be able to respond better to the nightly grind of the NBA. Should go early second round.

– Jarret Jack, Georgia Tech: Everyone called Chris Paul the best point guard in the ACC the past two years, but I’d rather have Jack. He is clearly a pass first player who understands how to run a team and get everone involved, but who also isn’t afraid to take and make the last shot. Jack probably won’t become a standalone superstar, but I do see him quarterbacking a championship squad. Should go late first/early second.

The first Saturday in May is one of the great days in American sport, home of the “most exciting two minutes in sports”, the Kentucky Derby. For me the beauty of this day is that it combines three of the great pastimes in our country: spectator sports, gambling and tailgating (Ok, so there isn’t actually a car, but you’re drinking in the sun with friends, so it’s close enough).

In 2002 I attended all 3 Triple Crown Races, coming a War Emblem bobble at the start of the third leg from witnessing the first trifecta since 1979. (I’ve been to the Preakness 6 times and the Belmont twice.) Before I’d attended any of the races, I scoured the web for a better guide to attending, and had trouble finding the straight dope. I realize it’s too late for this year’s Derby, but I just thought of providing this info. Perhaps it’ll help your journey next year. (more…)

The rallying cry in the NBA seems to be “Vince Carter is back!” after he’s scored 39 points or more in 3 of his last 4 games. My question is this: what has Carter ever actually done? We know this: He’s scored a lot of points, won the slam dunk title, and gone absolutely nowhere in the playoffs. In addition, it seems this season that he purposely tanked games in order to be traded. How is this guy a great player?

A few years back he had that phenomenal series against Philly and seemed to be on the verge of ‘The Leap”, but nothing ever came of it. Oh, and they LOST the series against Philly. Since then, he’s acted like an immature prima donna and hasn’t even helped his team win games. Now he’s back playing well for a short stretch, and all of a sudden he’s a superstar again?

So much emphasis is placed on individual stats and highlight reel plays in the public’s perception of NBA players, but at the end of the day, great players win games. No great player would EVER tank a game for any reason, especially for his own selfish motives. (Can you imagine Bird or Jordan doing that?). Until Vince proves himself with some meaningful Wins, he’s still an also-ran in my book.

There’s episode of ESPN’s Outside the Lines on right now regarding incentives being added to players contracts. The first case that they discussed is Curt Schilling’s $3 million dollar incentive for winning the World Series. The ever-pompous Jeremy Schapp (or was it Steve Nelson?) suggests that Schilling’s incentive is ridiculous because it essentially pays him extra for doing his job.

There are certainly many issues that arise when incentives are tied to particular statistics or individual awards, but I see no problem with a player being given a bonus for the performance of his team. In fact, this is preferable. When incentives are tied to individual performance, players and teams can be forced to make decisions that do not reflect the best interests of the team. When bonuses are tied to team performance, a player is encouraged to do everything he can to win. (Seen any bloody “sox” lately?)

A perfect example of what can happen with individual statistical goals happened this year with Corey Dillon and the Patriots — Dillon was 29 yards shy of his $375K bonus for reaching 1600 yards with one game to go — a meaningless game that had no playoff implications. Dillon, who was pretty banged up at the time, really could have used the week off to prepare for the playoffs, but instead played the game and got his bonus. You can bet Pats fans would have been up in arms if Dillon had further injured himself during this meaningless game, and they’d have every right to be. Perhaps the Pats brass should have sat Dillon and given him the money anyway — that would have been the best thing for the team.

Back to Schilling — in his situation, the bonus is not technically tied to anything he does individually, but instead to the team’s overall performance (which in reality is the true merit of any great player). The fact that major league baseball took issue with Schilling’s bonus structure in particular (while his contract was initially approved, MLB banned team-based performance bonuses shortly afterwards) is particularly ridiculous. It is still ok as far as the MLB is concerned to offer an incentive based on number of starts, strikeouts or homeruns, but paying a guy extra for winning the ultimate prize is not allowed?

The fact of the matter is this: a players regular salary carries the expression that the player will work as hard as he can to be the best player possible, but carries no guarantee in line with performance. Sure, it makes sense that a player can only do so much (especially in a sport like baseball), but when it comes down to it, the greatest players win games. Good players on mediocre teams (Jim Thome on the Phillies, for example), may never have the ability to claim a championship bonus, but this is no reason to prevent a team from rewarding players based on overall team performance. In the end, individual players sell jerseys and put fans in the seats, but nothing brings in the cash like a winner. Why shouldn’t players be rewarded for doing what it takes to win instead of what it takes to pad their own stats?

What a shame that one of the best tournaments of my lifetime ends with flippin’ Carolina (the Yankees of college hoops) as champs. Cry Roy, Cry.

By the way, did anyone notice that Felton stepped on the halfcourt line with about 10 seconds left, then stepped back into the backcourt? I’m not sure what the actual rules on this are, but since noone seemed to notice I suppose it was the right call. Does the ball need to advance into the frontcourt for a backcourt violation to occur?

Billy Packer just said “that was in Seattle, the first year four teams made the final four.”