For some reason, I have been wrapped up in the Knicks/NBA off season, but now that it is the second half of the baseball season, focus shifts back to the Yanks. It has been a weird week for the Yankees and a lot of things come to mind.
*I feel bad about George Steinbrenner and Bob Shepard but neither one was by any means a shock to the system. Shepard was 99-years-old and in bad health. Steinbrenner had reportedly had a series of strokes over the last few years, was all but hidden away from public view and, by all accounts, was somewhat out of it when people saw him (Bill Madden, while promoting his George book recently, all but stated that, when Jeter and Girardi went to deliver the world series ring to Big Stein before opening day at the Stadium this year, he didn't even really know who they were).
I have no problem paying tribute to both men, especially Steinbrenner. He was one of the most dominate sports figures of the last 40 years and someone who has changed baseball, and sports in general, from his treatment of free agency as a tool to redefine ones team to his establishment of the YES Network.
However, it seems that there was little middle ground when it came to Steinbrenner. I read only a handful of columnists who got the balance of business and owner visionary and impulsive and sometimes cruel owner who, at times, did as much to undermine his own team as he ultimately did to establish it as the greatest sports franchise in the world.
And, the coverage on YES was just over the top. I wouldn't expect YES people to discuss Steinbrenner's bad side. He owned the network, his sons now own it, and a sense of diplomacy and even reverance was appropriate. Considering how open the YES Network has been in allowing different points of view about the team and ownership, especially with the likes of Mike Francesa on the air, you would afford them a little bias when it comes covering the death of their founder.
But, it is one thing to focus on the good aspects, quite another to distort the record. In praising The Boss, Yes Network personnel went too far. Michael Kay glossed over the fact that Steinbrenner had tried to trade Any Pettitte on numerous occassions and was willing to let Bernie Williams walk to the Boston Red Sox before being convinced to sign his star outfielder when discussing the relationship the two players had with the owner. The memorial also replayed a Yankeeography of Steinbrenner, where it mentioned that he had "stood behind his new manager (Joe Torre)" when tabloid papers questioned the move. Such a statement is ironic considering it is now well known that Steinbrenner traveled to former manager Buck Showalter's house after having let him go and hired Torre to see if Showalter would return. Considering that, if Showalter had said he would have had to fire Torre before the man ever took the field, it is hard to comprehend how anyone could, with a straight face, pretend that Steinbrenner had "stood by his new manager."
Like I said, no one is asking the YES Network to spend 45 minutes on Howie Spira, but disfiguring the facts to hide the truth behind the man is a blantant abdication of journalistic responsibilty.
*A friend of mine made a very good point last night after watching Nick Swisher line a single into right field to win the game in the ninth: it wasn't that long ago, probably less than 12 months actually, where, had there been an emotionally charged game, the importance obvious to all, on the line in the ninth, Derek Jeter would have lined a double into right-center to end the game. Last night, after Tampa reliver Dan Wheeler delivered two meatballs that Jeter fouled away, he struck out on a pitch in the dirt.
Jeter is having argueably the worst season of his professional career. He is batting .270, nearly 50 points lower than his career average. His home runs and RBI are about on target, but his OBP is a paltry .336, again about 50 points lower than average, and his SLG is holding at only .386, 70 points off his normal numbers.
Even more disturbing are his splits. Jeter started the year in usual fashion, with a .330 average in April. A late surge helped salvage Jeter's May, where he hit .280, but June saw his swoon continue hitting on .243. Things have gotten much worse in July, where he is batting only .178 and only has two multi-hit games the entire month.
To give you a sense of how bad this season has been so far, in 2004 when Jeter got off to his historically slow start and was hitting only .220 by the end of May, he was up to .281 by July 17 after a torrid June where he had hit .396, and all of his numbers were significantly higher. Jeter's July and August were average after that, but his September was fantastic and he finished with a .292 average and above average power numbers.
So far this year, a long streak of great hitting has been nonexistent and there is no burst of power, as there had been in 2004, to mitigate the slow start.
I don't know what to make of it at this point. On the positive side, 2004 showed that Jeter could suffer through inconsistency and still play to the back of his baseball card at the end of the year. Also, after a very mediocre 2008 campaign, when some began to question his status as an elite player, Jeter rattled off a 2009 season that was one of his career best. With half of July, and then two months of baseball to go after that, Jeter's numbers could be fairly even when all is said and done.
Yet, he is 36, has played in more games and put his body through more beatings than most because he has been in the playoffs all but one of his professional careers, and eventually ever player begins to show his age.
Jeter has earned the right to play until he wants to sit down, and has also earned the benefit of the doubt that he will turn it around. But, you would have to be blind not to be concerned about this slump and what it could mean for the Yankees. Jeter has always been extremely important to the Yankee offense. They are not the same without him producing. If he is now going to be a .270 hitter, that doesn't bode well for consistency against the better teams.
Here's to hoping the Captain still has it in him and that this is a hiccup.
*I, for one, am glad the Cliff Lee deal failed for two reasons: first, while I care little for the opinions of the Yankee-haters in this country, getting Lee would have been overkill the likes even a fan like me would have been hard pressed to defend. You can make an arguement the Yankees need a bullpen arm to bridge the gap to Mo. You could even make somewhat of an arguement for another bat to take on the DH role because it is hard to feel confident that Nick Johnson will be anything other than a spectator this season. But a rotation ace? The Yankees don't need him. Getting him simply would have incensed the entire league for nothing. I am all for the Yankees being the best they can, but it is better for baseball that some of the other great players play in a different market.
The second reason is Jesus Montero. This kid could be special. Taking a look at him in spring training told everything you needed to know. He could be Manny Ramirez. He could be Miguel Cabrera. He could be a homegrown slugger the likes of which the Yankees haven't produced on their own in years.
Sure, there are questions about his defense, but those question marks seem to always be raised by people with limited knowledge of his abilities. What the heck does Joel Sherman know about this kid behind the plate? How many Scranton games and, before that, Trenton games do you think Slimy Shermy took in the last two years? My guess would be under one.
Montero is 20-years-old. He is the full-time AAA catcher. He started off slowly and everyone seemed ready to say "goodbye" because he wasn't producing prodigeous numbers.
Yet, he is still batting .262 with 8 homers and 39 RBI and, in his last 10 games, he is batting .350 with very good power numbers. That's at AAA. That's at 20.
I don't think you give up on a kid like that, even for Lee. This team isn't getting any younger out in the field. Posada probably has, what, another year left? Jeter may already be slowing down. A-Rod should remain at the top of his game for at least a few more years, but he will begin to see a decline sooner rather than later as well.
The Yankees will get top quality out of Teixeira and Cano for years to come and I believe that Granderson will show himself to be a part of that younger core before the end of the year. But, they are going to need to bring along another big bat and Montero can be that guy to join with Cano and Tex to keep the potent lineup going for years.
*If Montero does become that kind of top offensive player, it will allow the Yankees to do what I believe they should: avoid going after Carl Crawford and hang on to Brett Gardner.
Crawford is the better player and he has the resume to indicate he is a consistent player rather than a flash in the pan. But, look at Gardner's numbers this year compared to Crawford:
Crawford - .322 11 50 ..380 .519 31BB 31SB 70 runs
Gardner - .307 5 29 .398 .412 39BB 25SB 57 runs
Crawford has the clear advantage when it comes to power, with more homers and a better SLG. Forget the RBI because Crawford hits at the top/middle of the lineup while Gardner is at the bottom. But, look at everything else. The batting average is about the same, Gardner has a better eye and better OBP, both guys are on pace to score over 100 runs, and both guys are about the same when it comes to stolen bases. Plus, this is Gardner's first full year in the majors and he is almost 3 years younger than Crawford.
As I stated above, Crawford is the better player, but the gap between the two is by no means as pronouced as their salary will be next year. Crawford will geta BIG contract. Gardner is making $452,000 this year.
For what the Yankees need, is Crawford enough of a lift to justify the money? Another team might need him as a table setter or as a three-hole hitter, but the Yankees don't need that. They need what Gardner brings.
I would prefer that, next year, Gardner be your left fielder and the Yanks focus on Lee, who might be more needed next season as Javier Vazquez will probably be allowed to leave via free agency and Andy Pettitte might retire.
Keep gritty, gutty Brett Gardner as a starter. He's younger, cheaper, and he might even have room to improve and close that gap between he and Crawford even more.
Saturday, July 17
Looking for leaders, not followers
On Saturday, Carmelo Anthony, the 26-year-old Brooklyn native and current Denver Nugget small forward, got married in NYC. Some usual suspects, including one Lebron James, showed up to take part in the festivities.
The New York Post had a few shots of the wedding, and the litany of stars that showed up.
A couple of thoughts came to mind.
First, Lebron evidently ignored all questions from reporters and all shouts, good or bad, from fans as he entered. The pictures shown of him tell the story. He looks a lot more like a guy that just got charged with a felony, rather than one "ready to make history" in South Beach.
It was somewhat amazing considering not just two days before Lebron had orchestrated his own media circus, all with the express intent of promoting himself. I guess, when you don't get to hand pick the people who will ask you questions and dictate terms, it isn't as interesting to deal with the media.
But, besides Lebron, the spectacle got me thinking.
Are there any leaders in the league anymore, or just followers?
We know Kobe Bryants not a follower, or any of the real Big Three in Boston. And, we know that Dwayne Wade was only taking people to his team, not following anyone to theirs.
But, who else?
Is Kevin Durant a guy who wants the attention, the bright lights and the big stage, and the responsibility of leading his team, and talented teammates, to a championship? How about Chris Paul? He was one of the guys who came in the car with Lebron to Melo's wedding. Does Paul look at the marriage of Wade, Lebron, and Bosh and think "all right, I am going to beat their asses when we play" or is he thinking "I wonder if there's a way they could clear some more cap space for me?"
Do you think Derrick Rose was itching to have Lebron or Wade come to Chicago to lead them to victory or do you think he was quietly sitting back stewing at the notion that anyone would have to come in and help "hold his hand" while leading him to the promise land?
And while neither guy has enough time in the league to warrant such questions, it will be interesting to see if Tyreke Evans and John Wall are basketball killers or simply pretenders.
That leaves Carmelo Anthony.
I have a feeling that Melo is the most lilkely player to be dealt this offseason, and the Knicks the most likely suitor.
It makes sense. The Nuggets are on the downward spiral. Two of their most important players - Chauncey Billups and Kenyon Martin - are on the wrong side of 30 and both have shown downward decline. They can both be productive players for a few more years, I'm sure, but not as the focus of the offense. The mix on the team has seemingly gone bad, with JR Smith and Carmelo exchanging jabs last year in the playoffs against Utah. Above all else, it is uncertain as to the future of George Karl, who is battling cancer, and it has to be a concern of Carmelo's that Karl will not return, or will for only a short time.
Plus, with Anthony coming up on free agency next year, and the Nuggets having just "witnessed" the spectacle of that process this year, it is doubtful they would want to go through something similar.
While they have insisted that they have no intention of trading their best player, if Melo continues to balk at their contract extension offer, wouldn't it be only smart for them to make a trade now and get something good back?
So let's say the basketball gods smile on New York after losing Lebron, and the Nuggets give Donnie Walsh a call to play a round of "let's make a deal." It would, no question, makes the Knicks one of the best teams in the East, but my question would be, is Carmelo a Kobe or is he a Lebron?
Like with Chris Paul, another extremely talented player who may be on the Knicks radar screen, the question remains, how does Carmelo look at what just happened in Miami? What was his response when he saw his buddy, Lebron, at his wedding? Did he ask about cap space on the Heat roster? Did he question what kinds of villas are available on the beach in Miami? Or, did he walk up to Lebron, pat him on the shoulder, congratulate him, and then say something to the effect of "but, if you guys see me in the playoffs, you're gonna be waiting for that ring a long time."
After the Lebron saga, that remains my biggest question about current athletes. If there was ever a player who should have been wired with the same Jordan, Bird, Magic, Russell, West kind of hardware, it should have been Lebron. He should have wanted to beat Wade's brains out, not run and follow him like a scared puppy. He should have watched Kobe in the finals, watched as the world debated whether he was the greatest Laker or not, and thought "I am gonna be in that kind of conversation one day." Instead, he chose some sort of frat party, South Beach free-for-all with his buddies, in his buddies town, on his buddies team, than carving out some sort of legacy.
Is Melo different? Is he a killer? Is he the guy who wants to build something special on his own or does he want to follow the crowd, look to share the responsibilty, deflect the blame, and ride a winning player's coattails to a ring?
It's hard to tell whether Anthony is a "big game" player or not. He has been in the playoffs every single year he has been in the league, getting knocked out in the first round in each of his first five years in the league. Last year, the Nuggets went all the way to the conference finals, getting knocked out by the Lakers. This year, it was another first-round knockout at the hands of the Jazz.
The results have not been great. However, the Nuggets have been sent home by the Lakers twice, and Melo has progressively gotten better in the playoff runs. It is also difficult to tell how good Carmelo could be considering he really only got help in the form of Kenyon Martin and Chauncey Billups two years ago while, before that, it had essentially been a one-man show for Melo.
Perhaps Anthony is a fader; a guy who shrinks away when the heat (no pun intended) is turned on. But, maybe he is a caged lion, waiting to get a chance to control his own destiny.
What I would want to know at this point, if I were the Nuggets or the Knicks, or even the Nets, is does Melo even want the responsibilty of finding that out? Is he ready for the challenge, or does he want to join Lebron and Dwayne in easy-ville.
I hope, for the league's sake, Melo is one of the guys who wants to establish his own legacy. I hope Durant and Paul and Wall and Evans and any of the other soon-to-be stars of the league do as well. I hope we get a time when rivalries are established, when players are less friendly and more competitive, and when "team" means more than three buddies playing alley oop for paychecks.
We'll see what the Knicks do in the coming months. What I want to see, what I want to hear from anyone at all, is for someone to stand up and say "oh, that's nice for the Heat. Now I'm going to go out there and beat the sh*t out of them."
Anyone ready to step up to the challenge?
The New York Post had a few shots of the wedding, and the litany of stars that showed up.
A couple of thoughts came to mind.
First, Lebron evidently ignored all questions from reporters and all shouts, good or bad, from fans as he entered. The pictures shown of him tell the story. He looks a lot more like a guy that just got charged with a felony, rather than one "ready to make history" in South Beach.
It was somewhat amazing considering not just two days before Lebron had orchestrated his own media circus, all with the express intent of promoting himself. I guess, when you don't get to hand pick the people who will ask you questions and dictate terms, it isn't as interesting to deal with the media.
But, besides Lebron, the spectacle got me thinking.
Are there any leaders in the league anymore, or just followers?
We know Kobe Bryants not a follower, or any of the real Big Three in Boston. And, we know that Dwayne Wade was only taking people to his team, not following anyone to theirs.
But, who else?
Is Kevin Durant a guy who wants the attention, the bright lights and the big stage, and the responsibility of leading his team, and talented teammates, to a championship? How about Chris Paul? He was one of the guys who came in the car with Lebron to Melo's wedding. Does Paul look at the marriage of Wade, Lebron, and Bosh and think "all right, I am going to beat their asses when we play" or is he thinking "I wonder if there's a way they could clear some more cap space for me?"
Do you think Derrick Rose was itching to have Lebron or Wade come to Chicago to lead them to victory or do you think he was quietly sitting back stewing at the notion that anyone would have to come in and help "hold his hand" while leading him to the promise land?
And while neither guy has enough time in the league to warrant such questions, it will be interesting to see if Tyreke Evans and John Wall are basketball killers or simply pretenders.
That leaves Carmelo Anthony.
I have a feeling that Melo is the most lilkely player to be dealt this offseason, and the Knicks the most likely suitor.
It makes sense. The Nuggets are on the downward spiral. Two of their most important players - Chauncey Billups and Kenyon Martin - are on the wrong side of 30 and both have shown downward decline. They can both be productive players for a few more years, I'm sure, but not as the focus of the offense. The mix on the team has seemingly gone bad, with JR Smith and Carmelo exchanging jabs last year in the playoffs against Utah. Above all else, it is uncertain as to the future of George Karl, who is battling cancer, and it has to be a concern of Carmelo's that Karl will not return, or will for only a short time.
Plus, with Anthony coming up on free agency next year, and the Nuggets having just "witnessed" the spectacle of that process this year, it is doubtful they would want to go through something similar.
While they have insisted that they have no intention of trading their best player, if Melo continues to balk at their contract extension offer, wouldn't it be only smart for them to make a trade now and get something good back?
So let's say the basketball gods smile on New York after losing Lebron, and the Nuggets give Donnie Walsh a call to play a round of "let's make a deal." It would, no question, makes the Knicks one of the best teams in the East, but my question would be, is Carmelo a Kobe or is he a Lebron?
Like with Chris Paul, another extremely talented player who may be on the Knicks radar screen, the question remains, how does Carmelo look at what just happened in Miami? What was his response when he saw his buddy, Lebron, at his wedding? Did he ask about cap space on the Heat roster? Did he question what kinds of villas are available on the beach in Miami? Or, did he walk up to Lebron, pat him on the shoulder, congratulate him, and then say something to the effect of "but, if you guys see me in the playoffs, you're gonna be waiting for that ring a long time."
After the Lebron saga, that remains my biggest question about current athletes. If there was ever a player who should have been wired with the same Jordan, Bird, Magic, Russell, West kind of hardware, it should have been Lebron. He should have wanted to beat Wade's brains out, not run and follow him like a scared puppy. He should have watched Kobe in the finals, watched as the world debated whether he was the greatest Laker or not, and thought "I am gonna be in that kind of conversation one day." Instead, he chose some sort of frat party, South Beach free-for-all with his buddies, in his buddies town, on his buddies team, than carving out some sort of legacy.
Is Melo different? Is he a killer? Is he the guy who wants to build something special on his own or does he want to follow the crowd, look to share the responsibilty, deflect the blame, and ride a winning player's coattails to a ring?
It's hard to tell whether Anthony is a "big game" player or not. He has been in the playoffs every single year he has been in the league, getting knocked out in the first round in each of his first five years in the league. Last year, the Nuggets went all the way to the conference finals, getting knocked out by the Lakers. This year, it was another first-round knockout at the hands of the Jazz.
The results have not been great. However, the Nuggets have been sent home by the Lakers twice, and Melo has progressively gotten better in the playoff runs. It is also difficult to tell how good Carmelo could be considering he really only got help in the form of Kenyon Martin and Chauncey Billups two years ago while, before that, it had essentially been a one-man show for Melo.
Perhaps Anthony is a fader; a guy who shrinks away when the heat (no pun intended) is turned on. But, maybe he is a caged lion, waiting to get a chance to control his own destiny.
What I would want to know at this point, if I were the Nuggets or the Knicks, or even the Nets, is does Melo even want the responsibilty of finding that out? Is he ready for the challenge, or does he want to join Lebron and Dwayne in easy-ville.
I hope, for the league's sake, Melo is one of the guys who wants to establish his own legacy. I hope Durant and Paul and Wall and Evans and any of the other soon-to-be stars of the league do as well. I hope we get a time when rivalries are established, when players are less friendly and more competitive, and when "team" means more than three buddies playing alley oop for paychecks.
We'll see what the Knicks do in the coming months. What I want to see, what I want to hear from anyone at all, is for someone to stand up and say "oh, that's nice for the Heat. Now I'm going to go out there and beat the sh*t out of them."
Anyone ready to step up to the challenge?
Monday, July 12
Gilbert played his own part in Lebron mess
I find Lebron James to be about as vile a testament to self-absorption and unprofessionalism as there possibly could be in our society.
His one-hour ESPN farce to announce where he was taking his “talents” showed him to be a 12-year-old boy in a 25-year-old man's body, and revealed the once revered athlete as nothing more than a egotist either unaware or uncaring of what his actions might do to others.
His refusal to take on the challenge of being the focal point of a championship run in Cleveland, New York, or Chicago show's him to be a basketball follower, ready to hand the responsibility of winning a ring to his friend Dwayne Wade. But, his decision to not even look his former employer, Dan Gilbert, in the eye to inform him he was leaving the Cavaliers after seven years where James was treated like a god, given every perk he could imagine, and paid hansomely for his services, reveals him to be a coward. The fact that he didn't even give the team a heads up before his “surprise” announcement and had a lacky hanger-on call Gilbert only minutes before announcing it live to the world, is further evidence that Bron Bron doesn't have the stomach to stand face to face with another man and deliver difficult news.
In response, Gilbert delivered what will go down in history as one of the most explosive rants against a former player. The message was so rambling, cutting from accusations against Lebron that he quit on games to calling down curses and hexes from the heavens, that it appeared at times to have been a stream-of-consciouness email that was never intended for the light of day. In fact, ESPN reporters were forced to do something they hadn't bothered with for more than a month: they confirmed the letter actually came from Gilbert before releasing its contents.
In one way, I understand and applaud Gilbert. That was a letter that represented Cleveland fans everywhere. Gilbert, the owner, said what his paying customers were feeling. As a football Giants fan, myself, the most encouraged I have been in my team was when, after last year's collapse at the end of the season, owner John Marra came out and essentially said “we will never see something like that happen again while I am here.” Too many owners check data sheets and bottom lines at the end of the season. It's why franchises like the Pittsburgh Pirates in baseball, or Detroit Lions in football, have wallowed in mediocrity for so long. Owners rarely show the type of emotion Gilbert did last week and when it is revealed that ownership cares as much about winning as the fans, it is heartening.
However, there is also a part of me that looks at Gilbert and wonders if he understands the part he may have played in what transpired last week.
From all accounts, Lebron James was essentially given free rein to do whatever it was he wanted to do while with the Cavs. He had little or no rules which had to be followed. Unqualified friends were given high-paying jobs within the organization, and other Lebron lackies were allowed to fly with the team, and live the NBA life, all to appease The King. While no specifics have been provided, it is believed that Lebron influenced player acquisitions, pushing for certain guys to be signed or even traded. That kind of ill-informed influence may have ended up putting the Cavs in a position where their roster was both shaky and inflexible, making winning a difficult proposition.
The more glaring problem is the attitude that was cultivated under Cavs management. By allowing Lebron to “rule the roost” it also allowed him to essentially remain perpetually a teenager. He was living his high-school life. No one was there to smack him on the hand and say “no.” If he wanted a new teammate, he got one. If he wanted a job for a buddy, they got one. If he wanted anything, Gilbert and the Cavs bent over themselves to make it happen.
While Gilbert might have thought such actions would engender loyalty or appreciation, all it did was empower Lebron to feel even more indispensible and entitled. Considering James had been handed everything he could want since his days in middle school, it didn't take much cow-cowing on the part of Gilbert to turn him into self-absorbed monster.
There's not a doubt in my mind that Gilbert would have had a better chance of keeping Lebron if he had played father rather than brown-nose friend. James has enough of those and could easily discard one and pick up another like he were going through Kleenex. If Gilbert had layed down the law, put some shackles on Lebron, brought in some respected veterans to show the “kid” right from wrong, and made it clear that greatness was inside Lebron, but with that came great responsibility, it seems far more likely he would have been showed a level of respect James, on his own, was incapable of showing.
Gilbert's letter, while striking a cord with so many that found the Lebron spectacle utterly distasteful, and while being thuroughly entertaining, also can't be taken that seriously. It reaks of a scorned lover, who showered praise and gifts upon their partner, only to find that person escaping to the arms of another.
Gilbert fed the Lebron ego. He catered to it. He never questioned it or tried to contain it for fear that any dissent would force James and his entourage out the door. Yet, after all that was handed to him, he still left because, just like it was with the Cavs, it was about James and no one else in the end.
Sunday, July 11
Two trade the Knicks should make
It seems all the focus has been on the Knicks either trading for or signing Carmelo Anthony the last few days in Knicks land, as the attention slowly moves from the 2010 free agent debacle to the future possibilities.
However, I would still prefer the Knicks trade for Chris Paul and I think it could be done.
Now, both the Nuggets and Hornets have said their top stars are off limits, however it may become very clear that neither team can surround their guys with the types of teams that will convince them to sign extensions in the next month to a year. The Hornets seem to be more cash strapped than the Nuggets, and Paul has been the more vocal about wanting to "see something" from his front office or possibly demanding a trade. Something just tells me that Paul might be the first one to make such a stink about leaving, the Hornets have no choice but to listen.
If that happened, here is what I would do:
I would trade Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph, and Eddy Curry for Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending the Hornets about $18.6 million and getting back $26.3 million.
Why would the Hornets do this?
It gives them two very good young players in Gallinari and Randolph, but guys around 20-years-old who have a lot of upside, a solid young guy in Chandler, and the expiring contract of Eddy Curry. It gives them salary cap flexibility. They also have Darren Collison, who was sensational last year when Paul was out, so it would allow them to cushion the blow of losing Paul by promoting Collison as a possible star in his own right.
Why would the Knicks do this?
They get the best point guard in the league, when healthy. Under Mike D'Antoni, Paul could equal Steve Nash in terms of production and maturation. His numbers could be off the charts, and one could only salivate at the thought of Paul and Amare Stoudemire running the pick and roll to perfection game in and game out. Plus, it gives the Knicks their face of the organization. Paul, by all accounts, is a good guy with a killer desire to win and a tendency to get intimately involved with the community. You could plaster Paul's face all over the city and he would instantly become one of the biggest sports stars around.
You would also get a borderline all star in Okafor. I had thought Okafor would be a better player by this time, putting up Al Jefferson numbers of 20/10 on a regular basis, but, besides last year in New Orleans, he has been a 14/11 guy with two blocks a game. In D'Antoni's offense, Okafor wouldn't get a lot of looks, but he is a terrific rebounder, very good defender, and he can easily run the floor in a high-powered offense (he comes from Uconn, which was a transition-style offense in college, where he helped win a national title). He is also a great put-back offensive player and would probably average a double-double in a more up tempo offense.
Bringing in Paul would mean that newly-signed Raymond Felton wouldn't have a position (he doesn't shoot it well enough to play the two) so I would follow the Paul trade with this:
Trade Raymond Felton and Ronny Turiaf for Andre Igudola and Marreese Speights. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending $15.3 million to the 76ers and getting $13.8 million in return.
Why would the 76ers do this deal?
While the 76ers would be taking back more money then they would be sending, Felton's deal is only for two years so, in the long run, it would provide more cap flexibility as the Igudola contract is for, I believe, another four years. Plus, it would allow the 76ers to move everyone to their more obvious spots on the floor. Jrue Holiday, slated to be the point guard, is a more natural two, as is Igudola. This trade would allow the 76ers to play Felton at the point, Holiday at the two, and top draft pick Evan Turner at the three. Since Holiday and Turner are similar in style and size, they can move back and forth between the two and three, depending on matchups. It would also give them a tough, veteran center to play along side Elton Brand at power forward.
Why would the Knicks do this deal?
Felton becomes expendable once Paul joins the team. Turiaf is a nice fit for the Knicks but, with Okafor, the only thing the Knicks would need is a serviceable big man to spell him and, perhaps, play some power forward, which Speights would provide.
With Igudola, he was billed in Philly as the go-to option, but he hasn't shown the kind of consistency to do that. However, with the Knicks, he would slide in as the third option on the team, an athletic two-guard to complement Paul and Stoudemire. He is a slasher, is wonderful in the open, and would thrive in the run and gun style of D'Antoni.
Under this scenario, the Knicks would be a few hundred thousand beyond the salary cap, which could easily be maneuvered around by Walsh (a little cash sent here, there, and that should be fine). It would leave the bench suspect unless guys like Tony Douglas and Jerome Jordan showed they were top players, but the starting five would be Chris Paul (PG), Andre Igudola (SG), Keleena Azubuike (SF), Amare Stoudemire (PF), Emeka Okafor (C). Your bench would be Tony Douglas (PG), Bill Walker (SG/SF), Jerome Jordan (PF/C), Marreese Speights (PF/C), Andy Rautins (SG).
Like I said, the bench on that team is suspect, although I like what you saw from Douglas last year and Walker, both of whom could be major contributors. However, that starting five could be as explosive as any in the entire league, and I believe could challenge for a spot in the East Finals. You would worry a little about defense, although Igudola would be a terrific defender and Azubuike can be a top defender as well, but it would be hard to name teams better than that squad.
However, I would still prefer the Knicks trade for Chris Paul and I think it could be done.
Now, both the Nuggets and Hornets have said their top stars are off limits, however it may become very clear that neither team can surround their guys with the types of teams that will convince them to sign extensions in the next month to a year. The Hornets seem to be more cash strapped than the Nuggets, and Paul has been the more vocal about wanting to "see something" from his front office or possibly demanding a trade. Something just tells me that Paul might be the first one to make such a stink about leaving, the Hornets have no choice but to listen.
If that happened, here is what I would do:
I would trade Danillo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Anthony Randolph, and Eddy Curry for Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending the Hornets about $18.6 million and getting back $26.3 million.
Why would the Hornets do this?
It gives them two very good young players in Gallinari and Randolph, but guys around 20-years-old who have a lot of upside, a solid young guy in Chandler, and the expiring contract of Eddy Curry. It gives them salary cap flexibility. They also have Darren Collison, who was sensational last year when Paul was out, so it would allow them to cushion the blow of losing Paul by promoting Collison as a possible star in his own right.
Why would the Knicks do this?
They get the best point guard in the league, when healthy. Under Mike D'Antoni, Paul could equal Steve Nash in terms of production and maturation. His numbers could be off the charts, and one could only salivate at the thought of Paul and Amare Stoudemire running the pick and roll to perfection game in and game out. Plus, it gives the Knicks their face of the organization. Paul, by all accounts, is a good guy with a killer desire to win and a tendency to get intimately involved with the community. You could plaster Paul's face all over the city and he would instantly become one of the biggest sports stars around.
You would also get a borderline all star in Okafor. I had thought Okafor would be a better player by this time, putting up Al Jefferson numbers of 20/10 on a regular basis, but, besides last year in New Orleans, he has been a 14/11 guy with two blocks a game. In D'Antoni's offense, Okafor wouldn't get a lot of looks, but he is a terrific rebounder, very good defender, and he can easily run the floor in a high-powered offense (he comes from Uconn, which was a transition-style offense in college, where he helped win a national title). He is also a great put-back offensive player and would probably average a double-double in a more up tempo offense.
Bringing in Paul would mean that newly-signed Raymond Felton wouldn't have a position (he doesn't shoot it well enough to play the two) so I would follow the Paul trade with this:
Trade Raymond Felton and Ronny Turiaf for Andre Igudola and Marreese Speights. Money wise, the Knicks would be sending $15.3 million to the 76ers and getting $13.8 million in return.
Why would the 76ers do this deal?
While the 76ers would be taking back more money then they would be sending, Felton's deal is only for two years so, in the long run, it would provide more cap flexibility as the Igudola contract is for, I believe, another four years. Plus, it would allow the 76ers to move everyone to their more obvious spots on the floor. Jrue Holiday, slated to be the point guard, is a more natural two, as is Igudola. This trade would allow the 76ers to play Felton at the point, Holiday at the two, and top draft pick Evan Turner at the three. Since Holiday and Turner are similar in style and size, they can move back and forth between the two and three, depending on matchups. It would also give them a tough, veteran center to play along side Elton Brand at power forward.
Why would the Knicks do this deal?
Felton becomes expendable once Paul joins the team. Turiaf is a nice fit for the Knicks but, with Okafor, the only thing the Knicks would need is a serviceable big man to spell him and, perhaps, play some power forward, which Speights would provide.
With Igudola, he was billed in Philly as the go-to option, but he hasn't shown the kind of consistency to do that. However, with the Knicks, he would slide in as the third option on the team, an athletic two-guard to complement Paul and Stoudemire. He is a slasher, is wonderful in the open, and would thrive in the run and gun style of D'Antoni.
Under this scenario, the Knicks would be a few hundred thousand beyond the salary cap, which could easily be maneuvered around by Walsh (a little cash sent here, there, and that should be fine). It would leave the bench suspect unless guys like Tony Douglas and Jerome Jordan showed they were top players, but the starting five would be Chris Paul (PG), Andre Igudola (SG), Keleena Azubuike (SF), Amare Stoudemire (PF), Emeka Okafor (C). Your bench would be Tony Douglas (PG), Bill Walker (SG/SF), Jerome Jordan (PF/C), Marreese Speights (PF/C), Andy Rautins (SG).
Like I said, the bench on that team is suspect, although I like what you saw from Douglas last year and Walker, both of whom could be major contributors. However, that starting five could be as explosive as any in the entire league, and I believe could challenge for a spot in the East Finals. You would worry a little about defense, although Igudola would be a terrific defender and Azubuike can be a top defender as well, but it would be hard to name teams better than that squad.
Saturday, July 10
Goodnight, NBA
Could there have been a worse couple of weeks for the NBA than what we just "witnessed"?
It sounds strange because, for the first time since Shaquille O'Neill decided to abandon Orlando for the Lakers, we were talking about The Association in the beginning of summer.
Usually, around this time of year, the NBA would be mentioned only as an afterthought, with the occassional trade news or extension announcement. Instead, from the end of the playoffs till now, it has been all NBA, and all free agency, all the time.
But, despite pithy cliched sayings to the contrary, not all publicity is good publicity.
In America today, it is fairly easy to single out the NFL as the most popular sport in the land. It is the nation's passion. It is an every-Sunday event in the fall and winter, and no other sport comes close to matching its interest at the national level.
Coming in a strong second is the nation's passtime. Baseball, despite the much talked about "competitive imbalance" generates interest at an astounding rate, especially in the nation's biggest markets and cities. Despite a lagging economy, ratings remain high, attendance has not bottomed out, and people still follow their teams every move.
The NBA has been wallowing in third place, a distant third, in terms of interest, for a long time.
The nation's overall apathy has been linked to several different factors over the years. Some claim that the departure of Michael Jordan, who took the baton of excellence from Larry Bird and Magic Johnson and kept the NBA interesting and provocative, set the league back and a lack of another "successor" to that excellence has made the sport less interesting. Others point to a more insidious reason, believeing that white America remains turned off to a sport that is dominated by African American players.
Whatever the reason, the NBA has remained a strong presence in American sports, and its top players have continued to be marketable and recognizable, but the sports overall popularity has trailed the other two leagues.
There has been great hope at the end of the tunnel, however.
The Lakers have remained a dominate force, employing, first, the charismatic big man Shaq and, now, the controversial yet splendidly talented Kobe Bryant. The Celtics pulled off one of the great double moves of all time, and paired Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, and Paul Pierce together to form an incredible threesome that brought the stories Celtics team back to prominence. Oh, by the way, the Lakers and Celtics, by far the best rivalry in the NBA, have played against each other in two of the last three finals.
And then you had the new face of the NBA.
Lebron James was the basketball playing version of The Natural. His talents are off the charts. He is a 6'9" freight train with shooting touch and one of the great finishing moves the game has ever seen. There is both a grace and a brutality to his talent that makes him unique.
He also has been relatively free from controversy in his seven years in the league. Unlike Kobe Bryant, who appeared surly and selfish on the court, and had a dark allegation thrown at him off the court, James appeared to be the epitome of unselfish, team-first play on the court, a good teammate and model citizen off it. Add to that his "home town boy makes good" story and his supposed allegiance to Cleveland, a city that has known nothing but sports heartbreak, and it was easy to root for Lebron.
Though Kobe has proven time and time again that he, not Lebron, is the guy you want taking the last shot and playing in the big game, Lebron remained the most popular and well-liked, and ultimately marketable, player in the sport, and one of the most recognizable celebrity faces in the world.
That was yesterday.
Today, in the NBA, is very different. Lebron is no longer the face of the NBA so much as he is the villian. His decision, and more consequentially the process by which he came to his decision, has cast him as everything wrong with sports while, for so long, he was depicted as everything right with them. His playful attitude now, suddenly, seems self indulgent and borderline unprofessional.
Perhaps it was inevitable that, after choosing Miami over Cleveland, the negative stories would emerge. The Cavs painted Lebron as the "savior" and their near divine worship of his talents were punctuated by the semi-insulting "We Are All Witnesses" billboards that lined their city's skyline. So, when we hear that Lebron was a "quitter" or that his actions were always selfish and narcissistic, one has to wonder how much of the information is true and how much is sour grapes.
Yet, after the display of the last few weeks, it is difficult to give Lebron the benefit of the doubt. The stories of Lebron's influence on the Cavs decisions, and his insistence on special treatment for he and his friends, seem to fit nicely in the story we have watched unfold before us.
Whatever the case, no one is truly in a position to WANT to believe the best about Lebron now, anyway. So, the face of the NBA, the needed successor to Michael Jordan, both in wins and popularity has been more than stained: he has been utterly dismantled.
If you add to that the shaky performance of Dwayne Wade, who made the same comical tour of franchises, though it appears likely now that he had no intention of leaving Miami, introduced his family as an element in his decision making process, then seemed to forget all about that factor when resigning with Miami, and hired a documentary crew to follow he and Chris Bosh around as they made their "decision," and argueably the NBA's two most likeable stars presented themselves as the most egotistical of athletes the nation has ever seen.
There are obviously practical problems for the NBA latent in Lebron's decision.
The lack of James in Cleveland all but devastates the Cavaliers and basketball in that city, and nearly does the same in New York, the NBA's biggest and argueably most important market. It puts two of the top three or four players in the league on the same team. And, in a sport so completely dominated by stars, it pitches the balance of power substantially in one direction, and onto a team and a city that has little basketball tradition and a notoriously apathetic fanbase.
Some will say that this move is little different than the Yankees and their "all star at every position" philosophy in baseball, but the difference is pronounced. In baseball, the playoffs are a crapshoot every season. Being the best team guarantees nothing. Despite their talent, the Yankees or Red Sox or Rays or Phillies could easily be picked off by a "lesser" team, especially if they have top starting pitching and reliable bullpen guys.
In basketball, the better, more talented team almost always wins. That's why, in a league that has designed, both in terms of the draft and salary cap structure, to help small markets compete with big ones, there is little parity in terms of competition. While it is rare teams win back-to-back titles in baseball, and almost unheard of in football, basketball produces back-to-back champs on a fairly consistent basis. In the last 30 years, there have been 13 separate occassions where one team has one two or more straight titles, and, even more startling, in those 30 years only seven different teams have won titles.
Compare that to baseball where, in the past 30 years, 20 different teams have won, and it becomes clear that the best team, with the most talent, rarely loses in the NBA.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, and if the Heat can turn a fantasy league lineup of three guys into an actual "team," but there is a good chance this group could dominate, and do so for a long time.
Considering the tarnish that is now on Wade and Lebron, how many people are going to care that the Heat are the beasts of the NBA in two years? No one outside of Miami, and that isn't exactly exciting news for David Stern.
Perhaps this lights a fire under certain teams. Maybe the Knicks, after licking their wounds from not getting Lebron, make a deal to bring in Chris Paul and build a team that can topple the Heat troika. Maybe Derrick Rose, sick of being referred to simply as a piece that would help James or Wade attain greatness, helps the Bulls mature into a juggernaut. Maybe the allure of playing in his hometown of Brooklyn entices Carmelo Anthony to join the Nets, with their cast of young players, and maybe the Celtics old guard has one more run in them and Kobe and the Lakers show that it takes more than just three guys to win.
Regardless, what has happened here will seriously dampen any momentum the league had obtained over the last few years, and it won't take long to notice. Stern and his minions might have been dancing over the extraordinary interest their league generated, but it will have been a very large price to pay.
If you want to know why, in three years, the NBA is talking about having to regenerate interest in its league, look to June 22-July 8 for the answer.
It sounds strange because, for the first time since Shaquille O'Neill decided to abandon Orlando for the Lakers, we were talking about The Association in the beginning of summer.
Usually, around this time of year, the NBA would be mentioned only as an afterthought, with the occassional trade news or extension announcement. Instead, from the end of the playoffs till now, it has been all NBA, and all free agency, all the time.
But, despite pithy cliched sayings to the contrary, not all publicity is good publicity.
In America today, it is fairly easy to single out the NFL as the most popular sport in the land. It is the nation's passion. It is an every-Sunday event in the fall and winter, and no other sport comes close to matching its interest at the national level.
Coming in a strong second is the nation's passtime. Baseball, despite the much talked about "competitive imbalance" generates interest at an astounding rate, especially in the nation's biggest markets and cities. Despite a lagging economy, ratings remain high, attendance has not bottomed out, and people still follow their teams every move.
The NBA has been wallowing in third place, a distant third, in terms of interest, for a long time.
The nation's overall apathy has been linked to several different factors over the years. Some claim that the departure of Michael Jordan, who took the baton of excellence from Larry Bird and Magic Johnson and kept the NBA interesting and provocative, set the league back and a lack of another "successor" to that excellence has made the sport less interesting. Others point to a more insidious reason, believeing that white America remains turned off to a sport that is dominated by African American players.
Whatever the reason, the NBA has remained a strong presence in American sports, and its top players have continued to be marketable and recognizable, but the sports overall popularity has trailed the other two leagues.
There has been great hope at the end of the tunnel, however.
The Lakers have remained a dominate force, employing, first, the charismatic big man Shaq and, now, the controversial yet splendidly talented Kobe Bryant. The Celtics pulled off one of the great double moves of all time, and paired Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, and Paul Pierce together to form an incredible threesome that brought the stories Celtics team back to prominence. Oh, by the way, the Lakers and Celtics, by far the best rivalry in the NBA, have played against each other in two of the last three finals.
And then you had the new face of the NBA.
Lebron James was the basketball playing version of The Natural. His talents are off the charts. He is a 6'9" freight train with shooting touch and one of the great finishing moves the game has ever seen. There is both a grace and a brutality to his talent that makes him unique.
He also has been relatively free from controversy in his seven years in the league. Unlike Kobe Bryant, who appeared surly and selfish on the court, and had a dark allegation thrown at him off the court, James appeared to be the epitome of unselfish, team-first play on the court, a good teammate and model citizen off it. Add to that his "home town boy makes good" story and his supposed allegiance to Cleveland, a city that has known nothing but sports heartbreak, and it was easy to root for Lebron.
Though Kobe has proven time and time again that he, not Lebron, is the guy you want taking the last shot and playing in the big game, Lebron remained the most popular and well-liked, and ultimately marketable, player in the sport, and one of the most recognizable celebrity faces in the world.
That was yesterday.
Today, in the NBA, is very different. Lebron is no longer the face of the NBA so much as he is the villian. His decision, and more consequentially the process by which he came to his decision, has cast him as everything wrong with sports while, for so long, he was depicted as everything right with them. His playful attitude now, suddenly, seems self indulgent and borderline unprofessional.
Perhaps it was inevitable that, after choosing Miami over Cleveland, the negative stories would emerge. The Cavs painted Lebron as the "savior" and their near divine worship of his talents were punctuated by the semi-insulting "We Are All Witnesses" billboards that lined their city's skyline. So, when we hear that Lebron was a "quitter" or that his actions were always selfish and narcissistic, one has to wonder how much of the information is true and how much is sour grapes.
Yet, after the display of the last few weeks, it is difficult to give Lebron the benefit of the doubt. The stories of Lebron's influence on the Cavs decisions, and his insistence on special treatment for he and his friends, seem to fit nicely in the story we have watched unfold before us.
Whatever the case, no one is truly in a position to WANT to believe the best about Lebron now, anyway. So, the face of the NBA, the needed successor to Michael Jordan, both in wins and popularity has been more than stained: he has been utterly dismantled.
If you add to that the shaky performance of Dwayne Wade, who made the same comical tour of franchises, though it appears likely now that he had no intention of leaving Miami, introduced his family as an element in his decision making process, then seemed to forget all about that factor when resigning with Miami, and hired a documentary crew to follow he and Chris Bosh around as they made their "decision," and argueably the NBA's two most likeable stars presented themselves as the most egotistical of athletes the nation has ever seen.
There are obviously practical problems for the NBA latent in Lebron's decision.
The lack of James in Cleveland all but devastates the Cavaliers and basketball in that city, and nearly does the same in New York, the NBA's biggest and argueably most important market. It puts two of the top three or four players in the league on the same team. And, in a sport so completely dominated by stars, it pitches the balance of power substantially in one direction, and onto a team and a city that has little basketball tradition and a notoriously apathetic fanbase.
Some will say that this move is little different than the Yankees and their "all star at every position" philosophy in baseball, but the difference is pronounced. In baseball, the playoffs are a crapshoot every season. Being the best team guarantees nothing. Despite their talent, the Yankees or Red Sox or Rays or Phillies could easily be picked off by a "lesser" team, especially if they have top starting pitching and reliable bullpen guys.
In basketball, the better, more talented team almost always wins. That's why, in a league that has designed, both in terms of the draft and salary cap structure, to help small markets compete with big ones, there is little parity in terms of competition. While it is rare teams win back-to-back titles in baseball, and almost unheard of in football, basketball produces back-to-back champs on a fairly consistent basis. In the last 30 years, there have been 13 separate occassions where one team has one two or more straight titles, and, even more startling, in those 30 years only seven different teams have won titles.
Compare that to baseball where, in the past 30 years, 20 different teams have won, and it becomes clear that the best team, with the most talent, rarely loses in the NBA.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, and if the Heat can turn a fantasy league lineup of three guys into an actual "team," but there is a good chance this group could dominate, and do so for a long time.
Considering the tarnish that is now on Wade and Lebron, how many people are going to care that the Heat are the beasts of the NBA in two years? No one outside of Miami, and that isn't exactly exciting news for David Stern.
Perhaps this lights a fire under certain teams. Maybe the Knicks, after licking their wounds from not getting Lebron, make a deal to bring in Chris Paul and build a team that can topple the Heat troika. Maybe Derrick Rose, sick of being referred to simply as a piece that would help James or Wade attain greatness, helps the Bulls mature into a juggernaut. Maybe the allure of playing in his hometown of Brooklyn entices Carmelo Anthony to join the Nets, with their cast of young players, and maybe the Celtics old guard has one more run in them and Kobe and the Lakers show that it takes more than just three guys to win.
Regardless, what has happened here will seriously dampen any momentum the league had obtained over the last few years, and it won't take long to notice. Stern and his minions might have been dancing over the extraordinary interest their league generated, but it will have been a very large price to pay.
If you want to know why, in three years, the NBA is talking about having to regenerate interest in its league, look to June 22-July 8 for the answer.
Thursday, July 8
No matter what, this isn't a positive for the NBA
The current word, which follows so many meaningless and mind-numbing words that have come before, is that Lebron James is joining Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh in Miami for some sort of South Beach career party, that is expected to begin tonight in Greenwich, CT, and end sometime in June 2011, with a Championship parade.
That's the word.
Now, if you've been following “the word” over the last several weeks, you'll know that the current word probably doesn't carry any more water than the previous word. It is just another in a long line of unconfirmed rumors about where King James might play next. People are using the phrase “done deal” for what might be the 300th time in this process,. We have heard it was a “done deal” Lebron was headed to Chicago, then back home to Cleveland, now to Miami. The only time this will be “done” will be when James announces it all himself.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say Lebron has made up his mind to go to Miami. Let's say he is joining Wade and Bosh. How will that come off tonight?
It makes a man who has represented himself as a meglomaniacal middle-school kid look more like a heartless villian, and a coward.
No matter where Lebron decides to go, if it isn't the Cavs, he will justifiably be crucified for holding an hour-long special just to break the hearts of Cleveland faithful. This has been detailed already. It's one thing to decide Cleveland no longer is the place for him. I can understand that. It is another thing to break your former fans' hearts on national television, after letting them twist in the wind for weeks. It is more than just childishly self-absorded. It is mean spirited. No matter how full of oneself a person is, they have to recognize how their actions will effect others. In this case, it would be obvious that James just doesn't care.
Now, the other team in this mix, the other franchise that has done all to land Lebron, is the Knicks. Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni sold an entire New York fanbase on the idea of a two-year plan that would involve blowing up the roster more times than a scene from The Hurt Locker in order to clear cap space. While a Lebron snub wouldn't devastate New York the way it would Cleveland, they are a close second. Chicago has Derrick Rose, Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, and just added Carlos Boozer. The Nets have a talented group of young players, a new billionaire Russian owner, and a pending move to Brooklyn. The Clippers never really thought they were in this to begin with.
The Knicks, on the other hand, have literally no where to go if Lebron chooses somewhere else.
Now, what would make the snub even worse is the site of tonight's nonsense. If you don't plan to spend the next decade of your life trying to bring a championship back to New York, why in the world would you hold the press conference in Greenwich, which is literally miles away from the Knicks home and might as well be a suburb of New York? Why come to that team's backyard just to pledge allegiance to the Heat? Why rub in the overwhelming disappointment in that way?
The idea that, well, Carmelo Anthony's wedding is in New York this weekend, so he was coming here anyway is absurd. This is a multi millionaire. If he had plans to come to the New York area this weekend, he could have held his press conference in Akron, or, heck, in Des Moines, and been on a plane to the Big Apple before midnight struck. Why does this need to be in Greenwich if he doesn't intend on playing anywhere near Greenwich in the future? (Oh, and by the way, there are plenty of Boys and Girls clubs in the country to choose from, so landing at that one isn't an excuse either.)
If, tonight, Lebron announces it's Miami, he will have needlessly insulted the two fan bases that have suffered the most in anticipation of his decision. The Cavs would be devastated. The Knicks would almost equal in their despair. Both cities would have little on which to hang their hope. And, by Lebron doing this so publically, and doing it from such a telling location, it would be the ultimate slap in the face.
But, that's about Lebron the man. What about Lebron, the player?
To me, going to Miami would be the ultimate coward move.
It is gutless.
Is there a bigger “I can't be the man” statement than running after your buddy, Dwayne Wade, to let him do all the heavy lifting in a run to the championship, while you sit back, collect a few double-doubles, and high-five Chris Bosh when Wade makes a clutch shot?
And please, spare us the “this proves Lebron only wants to win” nonsense. If he had guts, he would go someplace and compete AGAINST Wade and Bosh, try and carve out his own niche, and not try and ride on their coattails.
This isn't the NFL or MLB. In those sports, one guy doesn't make the difference. The Pittsburgh Pirates would still be a woeful team, even if they signed Albert Pujols tomorrow. The Cleveland Browns would maybe win a few more games, but not a playoff game, even if they signed Tom Brady. You have to build teams there.
In the NBA, one player can make a world of difference. Put Lebron on ANY team in the league and they are a winner. That's how much one guy can mean.
Now, great players are well within their right to demand some help. As has been said numerous times, Jordan didn't win without Pippen, Bryant didn't win without Shaq or Gasol. You need that second guy, and then role players, in order to truly be a championship team.
No one should blame Lebron if, ultimately, he either left Cleveland, or demanded action in Cleveland, in order to play along side another top teammate. But, running after someone who is argueably just as good, another alpha dog, to his city, to try and ride his coattails to victory? That is simply resignation to the fact that you will not be able to do it as the main cog. That is turning in your Batman outfit for the Robin yellow and red because it is a lot less stressful.
So, if Lebron announces Miami tonight, what do we know?
We know he is an egotist the likes of which would make Terrell Owens blush. We know he is heartless because, with his one-hour special and designated location, he will have willfully, and unnecessarily middle fingered the two organizations who sacrificed the most to try and earn his services, and we know he is gutless because he will have tamely followed his championship-pedigree friend to Miami to try and pick up a few championships as they fall from Wade's fingers.
What a sad day for the NBA if Lebron is making South Beach his home.
That's the word.
Now, if you've been following “the word” over the last several weeks, you'll know that the current word probably doesn't carry any more water than the previous word. It is just another in a long line of unconfirmed rumors about where King James might play next. People are using the phrase “done deal” for what might be the 300th time in this process,. We have heard it was a “done deal” Lebron was headed to Chicago, then back home to Cleveland, now to Miami. The only time this will be “done” will be when James announces it all himself.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say Lebron has made up his mind to go to Miami. Let's say he is joining Wade and Bosh. How will that come off tonight?
It makes a man who has represented himself as a meglomaniacal middle-school kid look more like a heartless villian, and a coward.
No matter where Lebron decides to go, if it isn't the Cavs, he will justifiably be crucified for holding an hour-long special just to break the hearts of Cleveland faithful. This has been detailed already. It's one thing to decide Cleveland no longer is the place for him. I can understand that. It is another thing to break your former fans' hearts on national television, after letting them twist in the wind for weeks. It is more than just childishly self-absorded. It is mean spirited. No matter how full of oneself a person is, they have to recognize how their actions will effect others. In this case, it would be obvious that James just doesn't care.
Now, the other team in this mix, the other franchise that has done all to land Lebron, is the Knicks. Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni sold an entire New York fanbase on the idea of a two-year plan that would involve blowing up the roster more times than a scene from The Hurt Locker in order to clear cap space. While a Lebron snub wouldn't devastate New York the way it would Cleveland, they are a close second. Chicago has Derrick Rose, Luol Deng, Joakim Noah, and just added Carlos Boozer. The Nets have a talented group of young players, a new billionaire Russian owner, and a pending move to Brooklyn. The Clippers never really thought they were in this to begin with.
The Knicks, on the other hand, have literally no where to go if Lebron chooses somewhere else.
Now, what would make the snub even worse is the site of tonight's nonsense. If you don't plan to spend the next decade of your life trying to bring a championship back to New York, why in the world would you hold the press conference in Greenwich, which is literally miles away from the Knicks home and might as well be a suburb of New York? Why come to that team's backyard just to pledge allegiance to the Heat? Why rub in the overwhelming disappointment in that way?
The idea that, well, Carmelo Anthony's wedding is in New York this weekend, so he was coming here anyway is absurd. This is a multi millionaire. If he had plans to come to the New York area this weekend, he could have held his press conference in Akron, or, heck, in Des Moines, and been on a plane to the Big Apple before midnight struck. Why does this need to be in Greenwich if he doesn't intend on playing anywhere near Greenwich in the future? (Oh, and by the way, there are plenty of Boys and Girls clubs in the country to choose from, so landing at that one isn't an excuse either.)
If, tonight, Lebron announces it's Miami, he will have needlessly insulted the two fan bases that have suffered the most in anticipation of his decision. The Cavs would be devastated. The Knicks would almost equal in their despair. Both cities would have little on which to hang their hope. And, by Lebron doing this so publically, and doing it from such a telling location, it would be the ultimate slap in the face.
But, that's about Lebron the man. What about Lebron, the player?
To me, going to Miami would be the ultimate coward move.
It is gutless.
Is there a bigger “I can't be the man” statement than running after your buddy, Dwayne Wade, to let him do all the heavy lifting in a run to the championship, while you sit back, collect a few double-doubles, and high-five Chris Bosh when Wade makes a clutch shot?
And please, spare us the “this proves Lebron only wants to win” nonsense. If he had guts, he would go someplace and compete AGAINST Wade and Bosh, try and carve out his own niche, and not try and ride on their coattails.
This isn't the NFL or MLB. In those sports, one guy doesn't make the difference. The Pittsburgh Pirates would still be a woeful team, even if they signed Albert Pujols tomorrow. The Cleveland Browns would maybe win a few more games, but not a playoff game, even if they signed Tom Brady. You have to build teams there.
In the NBA, one player can make a world of difference. Put Lebron on ANY team in the league and they are a winner. That's how much one guy can mean.
Now, great players are well within their right to demand some help. As has been said numerous times, Jordan didn't win without Pippen, Bryant didn't win without Shaq or Gasol. You need that second guy, and then role players, in order to truly be a championship team.
No one should blame Lebron if, ultimately, he either left Cleveland, or demanded action in Cleveland, in order to play along side another top teammate. But, running after someone who is argueably just as good, another alpha dog, to his city, to try and ride his coattails to victory? That is simply resignation to the fact that you will not be able to do it as the main cog. That is turning in your Batman outfit for the Robin yellow and red because it is a lot less stressful.
So, if Lebron announces Miami tonight, what do we know?
We know he is an egotist the likes of which would make Terrell Owens blush. We know he is heartless because, with his one-hour special and designated location, he will have willfully, and unnecessarily middle fingered the two organizations who sacrificed the most to try and earn his services, and we know he is gutless because he will have tamely followed his championship-pedigree friend to Miami to try and pick up a few championships as they fall from Wade's fingers.
What a sad day for the NBA if Lebron is making South Beach his home.
Sunday, July 4
Teams that should be good.
Before I get to my main point, let me say one thing about the Lebron James sweepstakes. I hope, with all my heart, that he leaves Cleveland and goes someplace else.
I can't tell you how utterly absurd I find the Cleveland "pitch" to Lebron. Essentially, the Cavaliers have said "come back to us, or you'll have blood on your hands." Their entire sales pitch to this man has been to try and guilt him into coming back, as if Lebron owes Cleveland or the Cavs something.
To me, Cleveland is now that mentally unstable girlfriend (or boyfriend, depending on who is reading this:) who senses the breakup is coming, so threatens to do bodily harm to his or herself if it does happen. The relationship continues, not because both sides want it, but because one side is afraid of "hurting" the other.If Lebron returns to Cleveland, I fully believe it will be because, and only because, he has been convinced he "has to do it" for the sake of the town. What a despicable way to try and appeal to someone.
Obviously, they can't appeal to their roster, or their ability to make moves because, well, they don't have a great roster or the ability to make moves. They also don't have a city that has ever shown an ability to not only build a championship team, but sustain such a team. So, when all else fails, try and make the person feel so bad about leaving, they end up staying. You know how long that works? It works right up to the point where guilt turns into resentment.
I have wanted to see Lebron head East because, if he played for the Knicks or the Nets, it would make the NBA a whole lot more interesting for me. I can't really tell you that, if the Knicks trot out Amare Stoudemire and Tony Parker next year, along with Mike Miller, that I will suddenly be looking into season tickets.
But, after hearing how pathetically desparate the Cavs pitch sounded, and how they seem to be the only team to use guilt (and also the only team seemingly willing to disparage other teams and their officials) I hope he goes anywhere else. Sign with New Jersey, Knicks, Chicago, Miami, heck, even the Clippers. Just, don't go back to Cleveland, Lebron. Don't let the NBA equivalent of the psycho girlfriend win your services.
Okay, enough of my rant.
The Lebron thing got me thinking about teams looking for a new start. See, the Knicks are a team that has been down on its luck for a very long time now, yet is an essential part of the NBA landscape. The Knicks have the history, the arena, and the fan base. What they haven't had is the success.
So, I began to contemplate which teams are in most need of a turn around in each of the major American sports. If I sat Roger Goodell, David Stern, Bud Selig, and Gary Bettman down in a secret room and asked them "which teams would you most like to see back on top" I think they would all have a list of teams.
For this post, I have limited it to the two franchises per sport I believe are most important to the league, and more in need of improvement (along with some honorable mentions).
NBA
1.) New York Knicks - The Celtics are good and should be at least for a few more years. The Lakers are at the top of the league. The Bulls are up and coming and could improve dramatically this offseason. The Mavericks always seem to be one break, or one personnel move away from being a top team.
The NBA has had a revival of sorts lately because a.) for the first time in years their young, talented players have been interesting and charismatic (and relatively free from any off-the-court problems) and b.) they have some very good teams in large markets.
Yes, the NBA is star-driven, meaning that they don't necessarily have to have their big market clubs succeed in order to prosper. However, despite the fact that Tim Duncan is one of the all-time great players in league history, and Dwight Howard is as exciting a young player as we have seen in years, the league ratings, especially in the playoffs, have been hurt by having smaller market clubs dominate.
That's why, despite what David Stern might say publically, it is hard to believe that, privately, he isn't rooting for the Knicks to come up winners in this free agent sweepstakes. Cleveland is a nice city and all, but the NBA has survive quite nicely over the years by having a less than competitive team in that area, as has every other sports league. Let's face it, few, if any analysts have ever uttered the words "the league could really use a big-time team/player in Cleveland."
If Lebron James were to defect to New York, people would lament the death of basketball in the Cleveland area, and villify James for "taking the money" in New York. However, after a few weeks, it would become clear that everyone in the league was doing hand stands.
New York is the biggest market in the world, Madison Square Garden one of the most famous in sports, and the Knicks are one of the teams, even after years of futility, that springs to mind when talking about the NBA. Having exciting games in MSG come May and June would be a huge boon to the league. You can have your Oklahoma City's and San Antonio's and Utah's playing top basketball, as long as your big markets are also at the top. The league needs the Knicks and, for their sake, hopefully they get a nice Fourth of July present this season.
2.) Philadelphia 76ers - It hasn't been that long since the 76ers were a playoff team, but it feels like it. The team made the playoffs in the 2004/05 season, but were swept out by the Detroit Pistons. Since then, and the trade of Allen Iverson to the Denver Nuggets, Philly has been devoid of basketball excitement and, just as important, devoid of any big-time players.
Philadelphia, even though they have not won a championship in many years, has been the home to some of the greats of the game. Wilt Chamberlain was a 76er, as was Moses Malone, as was Charles Barkley, as was Allen Iverson. These are not just nice players who put up good numbers, these are, all of them, hall of famers who helped shape the league at different stages of its maturation.
Having the 76ers struggle now for the league is somewhat like having the Celtics struggling, as they did, a few years back. Now, the C's are one of the two signature franchises in the sport, so having them on track is of utmost importance, but getting the 76ers back up to speed would certainly help as well.
We will see whether Evan Turner, Philly's most current draft pick, helps to rebuild the franchise or if he turns into a nice piece to the eventual puzzle, but the NBA is certainly hoping that, in the next few years, there is, once again, excitement for basketball in Philly.
Honorable mentions - Indiana Pacers (not a big market, but nothing says basketball like the state of Indiana), Portland Trailblazers (well on their way to being a contender again), New Orleans Hornets (after the success of the Saints in the NFL, no doubt the NBA would love to see its product turn into a success in the Big Easy).
NFL
1.) Oakland Raiders - We all know that the league still hates Al Davis. There are a bunch of former coaches and players who hate Al Davis. There is a good chance that God hates Al Davis. However, for the biggest, most successful sports league in perhaps the world, having a bad team in the Los Angeles/California Bay area is not good.
The Raiders are one of the most marketable and recognizable teams in the NFL. That skull and bones logo, by itself, is enough to ship a few million jerseys and hats. Yet, since John Gruden left and Rich Gannon retired years ago, the Raiders have become a laughing stock. Their draft picks have been utterly useless and the latest disaster, JeMarcus Russell, joins Ryan Leaf as perhaps the worst draft pick of the last 30 years. There might a little excitement now that the Raiders grabbed a decent quarterback, Jason Campbell, who might bring stability to that offense, but they still seem a long way from being major national contenders.
2.) San Francisco 49ers - What is amazing is that, when I contemplated the teams to include on this list, a good amount came to mind, which really tells you how teflon the NFL has become when it can thrive on teams like the Indianapolis Colts being a top draw. For the NBA I went East-Coast centric, here is is West Coast.
The 49ers might make the jump back into promience this season but, for a team that went from Joe Montana to Steve Young without missing a beat, and dominated the league for more than a decade. Now, they have to find a way to turn Alex Smith into a top quarterback and get their offense running smoothly. It might end up happening this season, but the NFL would sure love some exciting games in Candlestick in the near future.
Honorable mentions - Washington Redskins (this was my other obvious choice to make the top two, but I went with the 49ers instead), Chicago Bears (were in the Super Bowl a few years later, so avoid top two consideration, but still a team looking for a return to dominance), Miami Dolphins (they have been a playoff team a few times here, but haven't been a franchise challenging for a title in many, many years).
MLB
1.) Chicago Cubs - There is no stranger team in sports than the Cubs. Think about it; their entire history is one of losing. They are the Clippers or, before recently, the Arizona Cardinals of the NFL. They are a team going on 102 years of futility.
Yet, they are one of the most popular, and important teams in baseball. They, along with the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox, are the team you think of when major league baseball is mentioned in passing.
If the Cubs could ever become a team challenging for a title every year, what a boom that would be for MLB. The interest in the team is already there. How much more would it shoot up if they were actually good?
MLB did, in my opinion, a horrid thing a few years back when it essentially blocked Mark Cuban from buying the organization. Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, has proven to be one of the best business men in sports, a players kind of guy willing to spend to help a team win and, ultimately, make himself money. Is there any doubt Cuban would have turned the Cubs into a winner?
Instead, the Cubbies are left out to dangle with another "corporate" ownership group which is likely to run the team with a constant eye on bottom line.
What a shame.
The Red Sox got their championship after nearly 100 years of futility, as did the White Sox. The last kid on the loser block remains the Cubs. Baseball would love to see them get off the hump.
2.) Baltimore Orioles - Couple of teams to choose from for the second selection here, but I am going with the Orioles for a couple of reasons. First, they have a great baseball town, one of the best in the sport. Second, they still have one of the best ballparks in baseball that, when the team is good, will be sold out every single time. Third, they are in a market that should support a team producing a high payroll. Fourth, this is a team with a lot of history.
There are certain teams in baseball that, in my opinion, are in a desparate need of relocation (Rays, A's), but the Orioles could be easily successful right where they are. They are a product of horrid management and decision making and the people of that terrific baseball season deserve a lot better.
Honorable mentions - Kansas City Royals (the years of George Brett seem a long time ago and, despite their inclusion in the small market discussion, should be able to support a much better team), Pittsburgh Pirates (17 years of futility, but a good baseball town, great park, and a tradition of winning), Seattle Mariners (not a team you think of as being one of the traditional powers, but another team in a very good market, great city, great ballpark, great fanbase, and one that could easily have consistent success if run correctly).
NHL
1.) New York Rangers - I will readily admit that this is the sport where I have the least historical knowledge, but it doesn't take Bobby Ore's son to know the Rangers don't exactly have a stacked trophy case when it comes to Lord Stanley. Yet, as 1994 showed the world, the Rangers being a top team and winning can do wonders for the NHL as a whole.
Also, for a sport desparate to grow its product, not having the largest market in America is not something easily overcome. The NHL needs New York in play in order to kick start any emergence. That probably won't happen with the Panthers or the Ducks leading the way.
2.) Edmonton Oilers - I know they went to the finals in 2006, but it has been 16 years since the last time they had reached that stage, and it has now been 20 years since the team Wayne Gretzky made famous in the late 70s, early 80s won a title. NHL hockey is as much, or more Canada's game as it is Americas, and having a top teams in that part of the world is important to the league's overall success. They need big markets in America, and their Canadien teams to be good, and the Oilers are one of those teams that has tradition and fan passion. Having them return to the point where they routinely challenge for a title would be nothing but good for the league.
Honorable mentions - New York Islanders (Long Island's only team has tradition and brings with it parts of New York which, as already explained, is important), LA Kings (Gretzky's second home, would potentially bring the LA market).
(Note: only went with two because some of the leagues most important teams, such as the Boston Bruins, Montreal Canadiens, Philadelphia Flyers, and Chicago Blackhawks, all had big runs in the playoffs this year, so it was impossible to rate them as teams that "need to improve.")
I can't tell you how utterly absurd I find the Cleveland "pitch" to Lebron. Essentially, the Cavaliers have said "come back to us, or you'll have blood on your hands." Their entire sales pitch to this man has been to try and guilt him into coming back, as if Lebron owes Cleveland or the Cavs something.
To me, Cleveland is now that mentally unstable girlfriend (or boyfriend, depending on who is reading this:) who senses the breakup is coming, so threatens to do bodily harm to his or herself if it does happen. The relationship continues, not because both sides want it, but because one side is afraid of "hurting" the other.If Lebron returns to Cleveland, I fully believe it will be because, and only because, he has been convinced he "has to do it" for the sake of the town. What a despicable way to try and appeal to someone.
Obviously, they can't appeal to their roster, or their ability to make moves because, well, they don't have a great roster or the ability to make moves. They also don't have a city that has ever shown an ability to not only build a championship team, but sustain such a team. So, when all else fails, try and make the person feel so bad about leaving, they end up staying. You know how long that works? It works right up to the point where guilt turns into resentment.
I have wanted to see Lebron head East because, if he played for the Knicks or the Nets, it would make the NBA a whole lot more interesting for me. I can't really tell you that, if the Knicks trot out Amare Stoudemire and Tony Parker next year, along with Mike Miller, that I will suddenly be looking into season tickets.
But, after hearing how pathetically desparate the Cavs pitch sounded, and how they seem to be the only team to use guilt (and also the only team seemingly willing to disparage other teams and their officials) I hope he goes anywhere else. Sign with New Jersey, Knicks, Chicago, Miami, heck, even the Clippers. Just, don't go back to Cleveland, Lebron. Don't let the NBA equivalent of the psycho girlfriend win your services.
Okay, enough of my rant.
The Lebron thing got me thinking about teams looking for a new start. See, the Knicks are a team that has been down on its luck for a very long time now, yet is an essential part of the NBA landscape. The Knicks have the history, the arena, and the fan base. What they haven't had is the success.
So, I began to contemplate which teams are in most need of a turn around in each of the major American sports. If I sat Roger Goodell, David Stern, Bud Selig, and Gary Bettman down in a secret room and asked them "which teams would you most like to see back on top" I think they would all have a list of teams.
For this post, I have limited it to the two franchises per sport I believe are most important to the league, and more in need of improvement (along with some honorable mentions).
NBA
1.) New York Knicks - The Celtics are good and should be at least for a few more years. The Lakers are at the top of the league. The Bulls are up and coming and could improve dramatically this offseason. The Mavericks always seem to be one break, or one personnel move away from being a top team.
The NBA has had a revival of sorts lately because a.) for the first time in years their young, talented players have been interesting and charismatic (and relatively free from any off-the-court problems) and b.) they have some very good teams in large markets.
Yes, the NBA is star-driven, meaning that they don't necessarily have to have their big market clubs succeed in order to prosper. However, despite the fact that Tim Duncan is one of the all-time great players in league history, and Dwight Howard is as exciting a young player as we have seen in years, the league ratings, especially in the playoffs, have been hurt by having smaller market clubs dominate.
That's why, despite what David Stern might say publically, it is hard to believe that, privately, he isn't rooting for the Knicks to come up winners in this free agent sweepstakes. Cleveland is a nice city and all, but the NBA has survive quite nicely over the years by having a less than competitive team in that area, as has every other sports league. Let's face it, few, if any analysts have ever uttered the words "the league could really use a big-time team/player in Cleveland."
If Lebron James were to defect to New York, people would lament the death of basketball in the Cleveland area, and villify James for "taking the money" in New York. However, after a few weeks, it would become clear that everyone in the league was doing hand stands.
New York is the biggest market in the world, Madison Square Garden one of the most famous in sports, and the Knicks are one of the teams, even after years of futility, that springs to mind when talking about the NBA. Having exciting games in MSG come May and June would be a huge boon to the league. You can have your Oklahoma City's and San Antonio's and Utah's playing top basketball, as long as your big markets are also at the top. The league needs the Knicks and, for their sake, hopefully they get a nice Fourth of July present this season.
2.) Philadelphia 76ers - It hasn't been that long since the 76ers were a playoff team, but it feels like it. The team made the playoffs in the 2004/05 season, but were swept out by the Detroit Pistons. Since then, and the trade of Allen Iverson to the Denver Nuggets, Philly has been devoid of basketball excitement and, just as important, devoid of any big-time players.
Philadelphia, even though they have not won a championship in many years, has been the home to some of the greats of the game. Wilt Chamberlain was a 76er, as was Moses Malone, as was Charles Barkley, as was Allen Iverson. These are not just nice players who put up good numbers, these are, all of them, hall of famers who helped shape the league at different stages of its maturation.
Having the 76ers struggle now for the league is somewhat like having the Celtics struggling, as they did, a few years back. Now, the C's are one of the two signature franchises in the sport, so having them on track is of utmost importance, but getting the 76ers back up to speed would certainly help as well.
We will see whether Evan Turner, Philly's most current draft pick, helps to rebuild the franchise or if he turns into a nice piece to the eventual puzzle, but the NBA is certainly hoping that, in the next few years, there is, once again, excitement for basketball in Philly.
Honorable mentions - Indiana Pacers (not a big market, but nothing says basketball like the state of Indiana), Portland Trailblazers (well on their way to being a contender again), New Orleans Hornets (after the success of the Saints in the NFL, no doubt the NBA would love to see its product turn into a success in the Big Easy).
NFL
1.) Oakland Raiders - We all know that the league still hates Al Davis. There are a bunch of former coaches and players who hate Al Davis. There is a good chance that God hates Al Davis. However, for the biggest, most successful sports league in perhaps the world, having a bad team in the Los Angeles/California Bay area is not good.
The Raiders are one of the most marketable and recognizable teams in the NFL. That skull and bones logo, by itself, is enough to ship a few million jerseys and hats. Yet, since John Gruden left and Rich Gannon retired years ago, the Raiders have become a laughing stock. Their draft picks have been utterly useless and the latest disaster, JeMarcus Russell, joins Ryan Leaf as perhaps the worst draft pick of the last 30 years. There might a little excitement now that the Raiders grabbed a decent quarterback, Jason Campbell, who might bring stability to that offense, but they still seem a long way from being major national contenders.
2.) San Francisco 49ers - What is amazing is that, when I contemplated the teams to include on this list, a good amount came to mind, which really tells you how teflon the NFL has become when it can thrive on teams like the Indianapolis Colts being a top draw. For the NBA I went East-Coast centric, here is is West Coast.
The 49ers might make the jump back into promience this season but, for a team that went from Joe Montana to Steve Young without missing a beat, and dominated the league for more than a decade. Now, they have to find a way to turn Alex Smith into a top quarterback and get their offense running smoothly. It might end up happening this season, but the NFL would sure love some exciting games in Candlestick in the near future.
Honorable mentions - Washington Redskins (this was my other obvious choice to make the top two, but I went with the 49ers instead), Chicago Bears (were in the Super Bowl a few years later, so avoid top two consideration, but still a team looking for a return to dominance), Miami Dolphins (they have been a playoff team a few times here, but haven't been a franchise challenging for a title in many, many years).
MLB
1.) Chicago Cubs - There is no stranger team in sports than the Cubs. Think about it; their entire history is one of losing. They are the Clippers or, before recently, the Arizona Cardinals of the NFL. They are a team going on 102 years of futility.
Yet, they are one of the most popular, and important teams in baseball. They, along with the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox, are the team you think of when major league baseball is mentioned in passing.
If the Cubs could ever become a team challenging for a title every year, what a boom that would be for MLB. The interest in the team is already there. How much more would it shoot up if they were actually good?
MLB did, in my opinion, a horrid thing a few years back when it essentially blocked Mark Cuban from buying the organization. Cuban, the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, has proven to be one of the best business men in sports, a players kind of guy willing to spend to help a team win and, ultimately, make himself money. Is there any doubt Cuban would have turned the Cubs into a winner?
Instead, the Cubbies are left out to dangle with another "corporate" ownership group which is likely to run the team with a constant eye on bottom line.
What a shame.
The Red Sox got their championship after nearly 100 years of futility, as did the White Sox. The last kid on the loser block remains the Cubs. Baseball would love to see them get off the hump.
2.) Baltimore Orioles - Couple of teams to choose from for the second selection here, but I am going with the Orioles for a couple of reasons. First, they have a great baseball town, one of the best in the sport. Second, they still have one of the best ballparks in baseball that, when the team is good, will be sold out every single time. Third, they are in a market that should support a team producing a high payroll. Fourth, this is a team with a lot of history.
There are certain teams in baseball that, in my opinion, are in a desparate need of relocation (Rays, A's), but the Orioles could be easily successful right where they are. They are a product of horrid management and decision making and the people of that terrific baseball season deserve a lot better.
Honorable mentions - Kansas City Royals (the years of George Brett seem a long time ago and, despite their inclusion in the small market discussion, should be able to support a much better team), Pittsburgh Pirates (17 years of futility, but a good baseball town, great park, and a tradition of winning), Seattle Mariners (not a team you think of as being one of the traditional powers, but another team in a very good market, great city, great ballpark, great fanbase, and one that could easily have consistent success if run correctly).
NHL
1.) New York Rangers - I will readily admit that this is the sport where I have the least historical knowledge, but it doesn't take Bobby Ore's son to know the Rangers don't exactly have a stacked trophy case when it comes to Lord Stanley. Yet, as 1994 showed the world, the Rangers being a top team and winning can do wonders for the NHL as a whole.
Also, for a sport desparate to grow its product, not having the largest market in America is not something easily overcome. The NHL needs New York in play in order to kick start any emergence. That probably won't happen with the Panthers or the Ducks leading the way.
2.) Edmonton Oilers - I know they went to the finals in 2006, but it has been 16 years since the last time they had reached that stage, and it has now been 20 years since the team Wayne Gretzky made famous in the late 70s, early 80s won a title. NHL hockey is as much, or more Canada's game as it is Americas, and having a top teams in that part of the world is important to the league's overall success. They need big markets in America, and their Canadien teams to be good, and the Oilers are one of those teams that has tradition and fan passion. Having them return to the point where they routinely challenge for a title would be nothing but good for the league.
Honorable mentions - New York Islanders (Long Island's only team has tradition and brings with it parts of New York which, as already explained, is important), LA Kings (Gretzky's second home, would potentially bring the LA market).
(Note: only went with two because some of the leagues most important teams, such as the Boston Bruins, Montreal Canadiens, Philadelphia Flyers, and Chicago Blackhawks, all had big runs in the playoffs this year, so it was impossible to rate them as teams that "need to improve.")
Saturday, July 3
What about Joba?
Joba Chamberlain has been anything but mesmorizing this season. He is sporting an above-5 ERA, has given up 37 hits in 33+ innings or work, and batters are hitting a whopping .334 with runners in scoring position off him. Those aren't exactly the types of numbers you want to see from a guy expected to pitch only one inning at a time, and routinely secure relatively small leads.
But, Joba's struggles are not unique to this season. It isn't as if Chamberlain fell off a cliff once the calendar shifted to 2010. Joba's performance has been on a steady decline ever since he left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1, 2008, with an injury.
In 2007, Chamberlain was a phenom. He came in throwing 100 MPH, hitting the black on the corners, and dropping a wicked slider that seemed to drop off the end of the Earth. He was a main reason why the Yankees, looking to solidify their bullpen at the time, was able to make the playoffs.
In 2008, the Yankees decided on what I believe to be an ill-fated program to "transition" Joba from the pen to the rotation in the middle of the season, at the MLB level. I firmly believed that Joba needed to be tested as a starter, since starting pitcher remains the most valuable commodity in baseball, but doing it in some haphazard way, in-season, was just peculiar.
In April of 2008, while in the pen, Joba pitched to a 1.92 ERA, giving up 2 runs in 11.1 innings, striking out 14. In May, he pitched to a 2.92 ERA, mostly based on one bad outing where he gave up 3 runs, and struck out 16 batters in 12 innings. In June, the transition began, and Joba began his quest for the rotation with a 2.1 inning stint on June 3, and finished the month with a 6.2 inning effort on June 25. All in all, his assention had gone well up to that point, with a 1.80 ERA in 25 innings of work, where he recorded 26 strike outs and gave up 22 hits.
In July, it appeared everything was on the right track. Joba, in 6 starts, failed to go less than 6 innings only once, and had a 2.52 ERA in the month, pitching 35.2 innings, striking out 43, walking 10. Then, he was injured on Aug. 1.
When Joba returned, he headed back to the bullpen. His numbers were fine (2.32 ERA, 11.1 innings pitched, 14 strike outs) but he did give up as many hits as innings pitched for the first time as a reliever and his velocity seemed far more inconsistent during each outing. Instead of living at 98-100, he seemed to be at 94 or 95 some nights, at the most.
Then came Chamberlain's 2009 season, which he started in the rotation. Gone was the explosive fastball. Gone was the pinpoint control. Gone was the intimidating presence 60 feet, 6 inches away from each batter. The numbers, by the end, were pedestrian: 4.75 ERA, 157.1 innings pitched, 167 hits, 133 strike outs, 76 walks, and 21 home runs allowed. Joba had gone from one of the prized young pitchers in the game to a huge question mark, and the debate over his useage raged.
Many, who had firmly believed Joba was misused in the rotation, argued that his true talent lay in the pen. There, those who wanted Joba as a reliever argued, he would regain the aura he had a few years before. But, what Flaherty and others refused to accept was that, for whatever reason, Joba was no longer the same pitcher. Whether he was in the rotation or the pen, one only got small glimpses of the original power-pitcher that had so taken the city by storm in 2007. Joba to the pen promoters turned a blind eye to the fact that his relief appearances, which dominated his September, when he was transitioned away from the rotation to keep his innings down (a horrendous idea that hurt every bit as much as his transition to the rotation the year before) took on the same feel as his starts. In September, where he averaged about 3 innings a game, he pitched to a 7.15 ERA.
In the playoffs, those wishing for the Joba Reliever, got their wish, and he was placed back in the pen. However, it was obvious manager Joe Girardi didn't have a tremendous amount of faith in him, only allowing him to pitch a full inning only three times, and while Joba ended up only giving up 2 runs in 6.1 innings, he allowed 9 hits. Not exactly dominant.
This year, the decline has been even more pronounced, and it doesn't appear he is getting any better. While his fastball stays at about 96 MPH, it no longer crackles with the same explosiveness and is routinely hit hard, even by mediocre players. His control remains elusive and his aggresiveness within games waivers, a problem he has acknowledged now more times than I am sure anyone would care to remember.
Simply put, since Joba Chamberlain left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1 2008, he has been ordinary. This year, you can make the case he has been downright bad.
Joe Girardi, who never fails to try and imitate a soccer mom after games in defending his players, continues to insist that Joba "has gotten the job done" more times than not and that his struggles "are going to happen." There is something so annoying about Girardi's simplistic yet condescending explanation for players struggles as "something that happens." We all understand that players will struggle. We get that. But, there is a difference between struggling and not being able to perform up to par. There is a difference between struggling and getting pummeled. When you have a 5.4 ERA as a one-inning-at-a-time reliever, where people are hitting .334 off you with runners in scoring position, that's not isolated struggles, that putrid performance on a season-long scale.
Girardi's comments are even more frustrating when one ponders what he views the job of the manager to be. All players are going to struggle. Isn't the job of the manager, and coaches, to get players out of those struggles as quickly as possible, or to manage those players in a way that shields the team from their problems as best as possible?
Girardi continues to put Joba out there despite his now year and a half resume which suggests he isn't up to the task. Perhaps Girardi sees himself as a minor-league manager worried about the psyche of younger players above all else. However, Girardi is there to win games, and Joba isn't helping do that at all.
Something needs to change. In three months, it is absolutely inexcuseable that the Yankees have not addressed their pen. The idea that they continue to run Chamberlain and Chan Ho Park out in important games is absolutely mystifying. The fact that some younger pitchers have not been brought up to try and prove themselves is equally inexcuseable.
Girardi likes to throw his hands up and say "this is what we have." Well, then change what you have. Try Dave Robertson in the eighth. It might fail, or it might work. Get rid of Chan Ho Park, who doesn't have a resume which would suggest he is doing anything other than what you would and should expect. Bring up some younger relievers and give them a chance. You might catch lightning in a bottle.
Continuing to trot these guys out there is on the manager, and within he and Brian Cashman's power to change. And, realizing that Chamberlain is who he is, and has been for some tome, would help everyone involved.
But, Joba's struggles are not unique to this season. It isn't as if Chamberlain fell off a cliff once the calendar shifted to 2010. Joba's performance has been on a steady decline ever since he left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1, 2008, with an injury.
In 2007, Chamberlain was a phenom. He came in throwing 100 MPH, hitting the black on the corners, and dropping a wicked slider that seemed to drop off the end of the Earth. He was a main reason why the Yankees, looking to solidify their bullpen at the time, was able to make the playoffs.
In 2008, the Yankees decided on what I believe to be an ill-fated program to "transition" Joba from the pen to the rotation in the middle of the season, at the MLB level. I firmly believed that Joba needed to be tested as a starter, since starting pitcher remains the most valuable commodity in baseball, but doing it in some haphazard way, in-season, was just peculiar.
In April of 2008, while in the pen, Joba pitched to a 1.92 ERA, giving up 2 runs in 11.1 innings, striking out 14. In May, he pitched to a 2.92 ERA, mostly based on one bad outing where he gave up 3 runs, and struck out 16 batters in 12 innings. In June, the transition began, and Joba began his quest for the rotation with a 2.1 inning stint on June 3, and finished the month with a 6.2 inning effort on June 25. All in all, his assention had gone well up to that point, with a 1.80 ERA in 25 innings of work, where he recorded 26 strike outs and gave up 22 hits.
In July, it appeared everything was on the right track. Joba, in 6 starts, failed to go less than 6 innings only once, and had a 2.52 ERA in the month, pitching 35.2 innings, striking out 43, walking 10. Then, he was injured on Aug. 1.
When Joba returned, he headed back to the bullpen. His numbers were fine (2.32 ERA, 11.1 innings pitched, 14 strike outs) but he did give up as many hits as innings pitched for the first time as a reliever and his velocity seemed far more inconsistent during each outing. Instead of living at 98-100, he seemed to be at 94 or 95 some nights, at the most.
Then came Chamberlain's 2009 season, which he started in the rotation. Gone was the explosive fastball. Gone was the pinpoint control. Gone was the intimidating presence 60 feet, 6 inches away from each batter. The numbers, by the end, were pedestrian: 4.75 ERA, 157.1 innings pitched, 167 hits, 133 strike outs, 76 walks, and 21 home runs allowed. Joba had gone from one of the prized young pitchers in the game to a huge question mark, and the debate over his useage raged.
Many, who had firmly believed Joba was misused in the rotation, argued that his true talent lay in the pen. There, those who wanted Joba as a reliever argued, he would regain the aura he had a few years before. But, what Flaherty and others refused to accept was that, for whatever reason, Joba was no longer the same pitcher. Whether he was in the rotation or the pen, one only got small glimpses of the original power-pitcher that had so taken the city by storm in 2007. Joba to the pen promoters turned a blind eye to the fact that his relief appearances, which dominated his September, when he was transitioned away from the rotation to keep his innings down (a horrendous idea that hurt every bit as much as his transition to the rotation the year before) took on the same feel as his starts. In September, where he averaged about 3 innings a game, he pitched to a 7.15 ERA.
In the playoffs, those wishing for the Joba Reliever, got their wish, and he was placed back in the pen. However, it was obvious manager Joe Girardi didn't have a tremendous amount of faith in him, only allowing him to pitch a full inning only three times, and while Joba ended up only giving up 2 runs in 6.1 innings, he allowed 9 hits. Not exactly dominant.
This year, the decline has been even more pronounced, and it doesn't appear he is getting any better. While his fastball stays at about 96 MPH, it no longer crackles with the same explosiveness and is routinely hit hard, even by mediocre players. His control remains elusive and his aggresiveness within games waivers, a problem he has acknowledged now more times than I am sure anyone would care to remember.
Simply put, since Joba Chamberlain left the mound in Texas on Aug. 1 2008, he has been ordinary. This year, you can make the case he has been downright bad.
Joe Girardi, who never fails to try and imitate a soccer mom after games in defending his players, continues to insist that Joba "has gotten the job done" more times than not and that his struggles "are going to happen." There is something so annoying about Girardi's simplistic yet condescending explanation for players struggles as "something that happens." We all understand that players will struggle. We get that. But, there is a difference between struggling and not being able to perform up to par. There is a difference between struggling and getting pummeled. When you have a 5.4 ERA as a one-inning-at-a-time reliever, where people are hitting .334 off you with runners in scoring position, that's not isolated struggles, that putrid performance on a season-long scale.
Girardi's comments are even more frustrating when one ponders what he views the job of the manager to be. All players are going to struggle. Isn't the job of the manager, and coaches, to get players out of those struggles as quickly as possible, or to manage those players in a way that shields the team from their problems as best as possible?
Girardi continues to put Joba out there despite his now year and a half resume which suggests he isn't up to the task. Perhaps Girardi sees himself as a minor-league manager worried about the psyche of younger players above all else. However, Girardi is there to win games, and Joba isn't helping do that at all.
Something needs to change. In three months, it is absolutely inexcuseable that the Yankees have not addressed their pen. The idea that they continue to run Chamberlain and Chan Ho Park out in important games is absolutely mystifying. The fact that some younger pitchers have not been brought up to try and prove themselves is equally inexcuseable.
Girardi likes to throw his hands up and say "this is what we have." Well, then change what you have. Try Dave Robertson in the eighth. It might fail, or it might work. Get rid of Chan Ho Park, who doesn't have a resume which would suggest he is doing anything other than what you would and should expect. Bring up some younger relievers and give them a chance. You might catch lightning in a bottle.
Continuing to trot these guys out there is on the manager, and within he and Brian Cashman's power to change. And, realizing that Chamberlain is who he is, and has been for some tome, would help everyone involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
