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.")
Sunday, July 4
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.
Wednesday, June 30
On the eve of free agency, Knick fan panic alert levels on standby
If you look at my post from a few days ago, you can see I certainly am not in the camp that believes Lebron to Chicago or Miami is a "done deal." Who cares what other executives say? Why would they know anything more than media types? The only folks who know are the players, player managers, and teams, that's it. All this "an executive from another club, who has no intimate knowledge of the situation, said" nonsense is exactly that.
But, it got me thinking: what is the best case and worst case scenario for the Knickerbockers? To help, I wanted to use the terror alert color scheme. This, I believe, will accurately depict the feelings and emotions of the Knick fan.
Color Level Green - This is serene, wonderful, perfect. This is the ultimate. This is mana from heaven. This is Lebron James, Chris Bosh, and trading the Eddy Curry contract for another big time player, and life is good. This is exactly what the Knicks envisioned when they started heaving guys, and money, over the side of the ship two years ago. This is what Donnie Walsh imagines at night when he's having a hard time sleeping.
Color Level Light Green - Okay, this isn't a real terror color code (or maybe it is, who really knows) but this is the slightly less, but still near perfect scenario. Under this situation, Dwyane Wade leaves Miami for New York, joins with Chris Bosh, the bloated body of Eddy Curry is shipped off for some really good parts, and Knick fans spend the next three months convincing themselves that Wade was a better option than Lebron. Deep down, there would still be a little sadness that James went somewhere else, but Wade would quickly become the greatest consolation prize ever.
Color Level Blue - Here is where people start to become upset. Lebron gives the Knicks the proverbial middle finger and Wade gets all huggy-kissy with Pat Riley. With the two most exciting free agents off the market, fans will immediately go into anger/depression mode. However, all may not be lost. If the Knicks can convince Bosh that he needs no stinkin ring leader to make him a superstar and that New York is perfect for him to establish himself among the elite in the game, and then sign Joe Johnson, the team would have an elite big man and a terrific, albeit somewhat "shaky in the big game" shooting guard to build around. This is the definition of Plan B, but Bosh, who has a lot of Kevin Garnett in him, would be a great fit and is good enough to be a top dog himself. Johnson, under this scenario, would be a fine signing since he wouldn't have to carry the team and could settle comfortably into a number 2 role. Is it the ideal? Is it color green, or even light green? No way. Level Color Blue would have a lot of people tearing up the airways, but there would soon be some excitement mixed in with the disappointment.
Color Level Yellow - You know in the movies, when you begin to hear that loud monotone sound and everyone starts running as a computer dryly announces "this ship will self destruct in 10 minutes"? Well, Yellow is about when the warning alarms start going off in Knick land. This is the scenario sort of being floated right now, which is the Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudemire tandum. There aint no Lebron, Wade, or Bosh in this story, only two guys who have a habit of disappearing in big games; two guys who don't really inspire alot of excitement. This would anger Knicks fans in a few ways, the first, and obvious being that Lebron isn't involved, the second being that it would probably entail giving these two players max contracts when most people don't necessarily believe they are deserving, and finally that these two players are, not shockingly, the ones who played under Mike D'Antoni before. I'm sure there will be a lot of fans who smell a rat in this scenario.
The only saving grace will be that, under this scenario, the Knicks would be a much improved team. Johnson and Stoudemire both have flaws, and neither one is a transcendant player like James or Wade or, potentially, Bosh. However, they are very, very good players and, if you add in a player or two you get back from Eddy Curry, the Knicks would be a playoff team and, potentially, a few lucky breaks away from an Eastern Conference/NBA Finals appearance. It wouldn't quell the anger at first, but it would start to turn people in the middle of the season.
Color Level Orange - This is after all the attempts by are heros to stop the self-destruct countdown has failed and there doesn't seem like enough time to escape. This is when the Knicks sign one, and only one, of Johnson or Stoudemire. You know how this plays out. They get shut out of all but one of the big guns, end up overpaying for another good, but certainly not great player, introduce their second-tier star as the guy they targeted "all along" and start to leak stories to the press about how they really wanted to jump into the fray of free agency next year. They'll come out of it with a good player, be an improved team, maybe even make a run at the playoffs, but when it comes time to select a championship caliber team, no one will be throwing in with the Knicks. They'll have a piece to the puzzle, but they'll still be looking for a real star come 2011 and beyond.
Color Level Red - Red means stop. It also means "Sonofabitch" or "Oh sh*t" in a lot of languages. This is the Knicks striking out on all the major players. This is Knicks fans staring at Dwyane and Amare in Miami, Lebron and Bosh in Chicago, Joe Johnson on the Nets, and the Knicks trying to convince the world that Carlos Boozer or Rudy Gay is the answer. This is where any love affair with Donnie Walsh and Mike D ends and ends tragically. This is the nightmare scenario and I don't know how they pull themselves out of it if they end up here.
For my two cents, I think green is a much more likely color outcome than red. Someone is going to be enticed by the idea of resurrecting the Knicks in New York. Someone is going to want their likeness on a building overlooking Broadway. I think it's Lebron but, even if not, someone really good is coming, and I think the Knicks will be a player next year, a serious player.
But, it got me thinking: what is the best case and worst case scenario for the Knickerbockers? To help, I wanted to use the terror alert color scheme. This, I believe, will accurately depict the feelings and emotions of the Knick fan.
Color Level Green - This is serene, wonderful, perfect. This is the ultimate. This is mana from heaven. This is Lebron James, Chris Bosh, and trading the Eddy Curry contract for another big time player, and life is good. This is exactly what the Knicks envisioned when they started heaving guys, and money, over the side of the ship two years ago. This is what Donnie Walsh imagines at night when he's having a hard time sleeping.
Color Level Light Green - Okay, this isn't a real terror color code (or maybe it is, who really knows) but this is the slightly less, but still near perfect scenario. Under this situation, Dwyane Wade leaves Miami for New York, joins with Chris Bosh, the bloated body of Eddy Curry is shipped off for some really good parts, and Knick fans spend the next three months convincing themselves that Wade was a better option than Lebron. Deep down, there would still be a little sadness that James went somewhere else, but Wade would quickly become the greatest consolation prize ever.
Color Level Blue - Here is where people start to become upset. Lebron gives the Knicks the proverbial middle finger and Wade gets all huggy-kissy with Pat Riley. With the two most exciting free agents off the market, fans will immediately go into anger/depression mode. However, all may not be lost. If the Knicks can convince Bosh that he needs no stinkin ring leader to make him a superstar and that New York is perfect for him to establish himself among the elite in the game, and then sign Joe Johnson, the team would have an elite big man and a terrific, albeit somewhat "shaky in the big game" shooting guard to build around. This is the definition of Plan B, but Bosh, who has a lot of Kevin Garnett in him, would be a great fit and is good enough to be a top dog himself. Johnson, under this scenario, would be a fine signing since he wouldn't have to carry the team and could settle comfortably into a number 2 role. Is it the ideal? Is it color green, or even light green? No way. Level Color Blue would have a lot of people tearing up the airways, but there would soon be some excitement mixed in with the disappointment.
Color Level Yellow - You know in the movies, when you begin to hear that loud monotone sound and everyone starts running as a computer dryly announces "this ship will self destruct in 10 minutes"? Well, Yellow is about when the warning alarms start going off in Knick land. This is the scenario sort of being floated right now, which is the Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudemire tandum. There aint no Lebron, Wade, or Bosh in this story, only two guys who have a habit of disappearing in big games; two guys who don't really inspire alot of excitement. This would anger Knicks fans in a few ways, the first, and obvious being that Lebron isn't involved, the second being that it would probably entail giving these two players max contracts when most people don't necessarily believe they are deserving, and finally that these two players are, not shockingly, the ones who played under Mike D'Antoni before. I'm sure there will be a lot of fans who smell a rat in this scenario.
The only saving grace will be that, under this scenario, the Knicks would be a much improved team. Johnson and Stoudemire both have flaws, and neither one is a transcendant player like James or Wade or, potentially, Bosh. However, they are very, very good players and, if you add in a player or two you get back from Eddy Curry, the Knicks would be a playoff team and, potentially, a few lucky breaks away from an Eastern Conference/NBA Finals appearance. It wouldn't quell the anger at first, but it would start to turn people in the middle of the season.
Color Level Orange - This is after all the attempts by are heros to stop the self-destruct countdown has failed and there doesn't seem like enough time to escape. This is when the Knicks sign one, and only one, of Johnson or Stoudemire. You know how this plays out. They get shut out of all but one of the big guns, end up overpaying for another good, but certainly not great player, introduce their second-tier star as the guy they targeted "all along" and start to leak stories to the press about how they really wanted to jump into the fray of free agency next year. They'll come out of it with a good player, be an improved team, maybe even make a run at the playoffs, but when it comes time to select a championship caliber team, no one will be throwing in with the Knicks. They'll have a piece to the puzzle, but they'll still be looking for a real star come 2011 and beyond.
Color Level Red - Red means stop. It also means "Sonofabitch" or "Oh sh*t" in a lot of languages. This is the Knicks striking out on all the major players. This is Knicks fans staring at Dwyane and Amare in Miami, Lebron and Bosh in Chicago, Joe Johnson on the Nets, and the Knicks trying to convince the world that Carlos Boozer or Rudy Gay is the answer. This is where any love affair with Donnie Walsh and Mike D ends and ends tragically. This is the nightmare scenario and I don't know how they pull themselves out of it if they end up here.
For my two cents, I think green is a much more likely color outcome than red. Someone is going to be enticed by the idea of resurrecting the Knicks in New York. Someone is going to want their likeness on a building overlooking Broadway. I think it's Lebron but, even if not, someone really good is coming, and I think the Knicks will be a player next year, a serious player.
Sunday, June 27
Can't exactly put my finger on it, but something seems off with Yanks.
The Yankees have the best record in baseball and, yet, there seems to be something missing with this team, doesn't there?
I have tried to put my finger on it, but I can't come up with one singular thing that makes me say "oh, that's it." I think it is more a combination of that,flaws that, when gelled together, make you feel less confident that their record should indicate.
Here are a couple of things that have me worried:
The Bullpen - This is probably the biggest "uh oh" for the team right now. Take Rivera out of the equation, as we always do, and who do Yankee fans feel is a "lock" to get big outs? Dave Robertson is pitching very well as of late, but he isn't far enough removed from having pitched poorly to make you confident the corner has been turned permanently. Using Chan Ho Park in any meaningful situation is almost akin to sabotage, and Boone Logan's only saving grace is that he has a terrific Sci-Fi hero name. Besides that, his pitching is kinda crappy.
If and when Alfredo Aceves comes back, he should stabalize a portion of the back-end of the pen, but the larger, more important question will be whether Joba Chamberlain improves or stays the inconsistent tight-rope walker he has become.
Last year, Phil Hughes stabalized the set-up role and allowed the Yankees the opportunity to save Mariano for only one-inning stints. This year, Joba was suppose to return to the role and be just as good as Hughes last season and the Joba 2007 version. It hasn't happened.
The problems that plagued Joba in the rotation last year plague him in the eitghth inning. He can't locate. He can't keep his velocity consistent. His fastball goes straight all too often and become hittable right in the middle of the plate.
Sure, there are those moments when he dominates, but there have been way too many where he has walked in and turned three or four-run leads into one-run deficits. Joe Girardi likes to treat questions about Jobas struggles as reactionary or uninformed, reacting to questions with dismissive comments like "we wish everyone was perfect all the time, but it's not going to happen," or "he struggled, and that happens to everyone. It happens to the best." That's all nice and fine, but great players don't have 6 ERAs, especially out of the bullpen pitching one inning. Great pitchers rattle off great outing after great outing, not one great outing for every two bad ones. That's not a great pitcher, or even a reliable pitcher. That is a powder keg ready to go off any eighth inning.
If Joba can become not just good but close to lights out, that puts everything else in line. It makes Damaso Marte a lefty specialist for late-inning matchups, instead of possible setup man. It makes Robertson that seventh inning place-holder or middle-inning, big-moment stopper, rather than someone constantly being moved around like a chess piece. And, it allows for the Yankees to either stay away from Park or Logan in big spots or move them out and give younger pitchers a chance without fear of putting inexperienced guys in pressure-cooker situations.
However, if Joba continues to be a one good game, one bad game pitcher, it puts a lot of pressure on everyone else and probably puts the Yanks in serious trade talks for a reliever.
The Offense - Look, the Yankees are going to score runs. They have too many good players not to. And, I'll be the first to admit that, if one were so inclined, they could look at the offense as a "glass half full" symbol rather than a cause for concern. If you remove Robinson Cano from the arguement, you can make the case that there isn't one Yankee regular having what could be considered a top year, let alone a career year. Okay, maybe Nick Swisher and Brett Gardner fit the bill, but the big bats of Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Jorge Posada and Curtis Granderson have been mediocre at best and Mark Teixeira has looked like a shadown of himself through almost three months of the season. You have to expect that a few, if not all of those All-Star caliber players will produce at a much higher level from this point forward, right?
What concerns me is the lack of fundamentals I've seen in the Yankee offense as a whole. They don't move runners over. They don't get them in from third with less than two outs. They routinely strand runners after doubles and even triples. They ground into a lot of double plays and they run themselves out of innings with some bonehead base running from time to time.
Last year, one through nine knew how to play small ball and big ball. They hit homers and pounded pitchers, yes, but in tight games, they knew how to "manufacture" runs.
I believe that such "manufacturing" can be overrated a lot. With the type of hitters the Yankees have, your offense shouldn't really hinge on bunts and sacrifice flys. You should be able to keep the runners moving with doubles and homers. That's why so many of these guys get paid so much.
But, against good teams with good pitching, you have to be able to produce runs in different ways. If your leadoff man doubles, you have to be able to get him to third, then home, without the benefit of a hit. It is a must. Chances are you won't pound out 10 or 12 hits against the better teams, so runs are at a premium. Yes, I expect a lot of these guys to hit better from now through the rest of the season, and that might correct some of these fundamentals. Jeter has been uncharacteristically sloppy with his at bats, failing to take walks, swinging wildly at bad pitches, and not producing in those "situational" hitting moments. Considering he is one of the most fundamentally sound players in history, an improvement on his end would improve the team. However, sometimes teams develop a personality, and that personality stays with them throughout the year. Last year, it was that comeback mentality that prevailed. This year, the team's personality seems far less encouraging.
AJ Burnett - The reason why Burnett's monumental struggles represent a bigger problem than just personal statistics, or a tough matchup every five days, is because of the uncertainty of Javier Vazquez and Phil Hughes. Hughes has been wonderful all year, and Vazquez has been brilliant since April, but neither can be looked upon as givens in big games down the stretch or in the playoffs. Vazquez could just as easily blow up against top competition as shut the other team down, and Hughes has never taken the ball in a playoff spot as a starter and been asked to go 7 or 8 big innings against a formidable lineup (plus, Hughes was very shaky in the playoffs last year in his setup role, which doesn't bode well for his ability to handle pressure situations).
As absolutely frustrating Burnett can be, he is an ace-quality starter when right. He can handle any lineup, and hitter. He was a collection of good and bad in big games last year, but he did manage many clutch performances.
If he continues to be dreadful, it gives the Yankees no room to manuvear. It ensures that Hughes and Vazquez have to be top shelf every time out. It means at least one of the two has to be big in big games. It means less depth. It means more strain on the pen. In short, it means a lot of bad things.
Joe Girardi - I don't think I have been shy in saying I am not the biggest fan of Girardi. I'm sorry, I know he won a championship last year, but there are a lot of mediocre to down right shaky managers who have a ring on their finger. Is it any wonder why Bob Brenly isn't managing a team any longer, despite his run with the Arizona Diamondbacks in 2001?
Girardi, to me, has little feel for the game. He always seems to be making the wrong decision, in that his moves more times than not turn out to produce a negative result. He pinch hits and nothing happens. He pulls pitchers before they are done, and hands it off to ineffective relievers. Or, the next time, he leaves his pitchers in too long and they give up the house. It's almost as if Girardi is constantly trying to find the standard, the book answer: "In this situation you do the following, always an unequivically." Well, in baseball it doesn't always work that way.
You have to be able to have a gut, a natural feel for moments, and Girardi doesn't have that. He also seems to manage scared a lot more than someone in his position should, making what seem to be panic moves. In fact, his entire demeanor in the dugout, at times, seems to indicate an uneasiness, as if he is always waiting for the next shoe to drop.
As a fan, the manager is always an easy target. I criticized Joe Torre when he was bringing championships to New York, and still believe he had a difficult time handling a bullpen when it wasn't full of clutch veteran performers. And, I'll admit, Torre's grandfatherly approach seemed disconnected when the team wasn't winning, as opposed to stalwart and even-headed when they were. However, in the 12 years he was manager, I had more moments where I admired his ability to get something out of nothing than I did to criticize his approach. For a refresher course, go back and look at the teams Torre took to the playoffs in 2005 and 2006. There were a lot of holes on tjose rosters because of injury and underperformance. He was able to piece a lot together and get the most out of players.
Girardi, to me, is a guy much better suited for a younger team. His "always be positive" attitude seems to be more in line with a up-and-coming group than a veteran club that might need a swift kick in the butt from time to time. His inability to challenge and ultimately discipline Robinson Cano in 2008 until the season was lost showed a lack of back bone, his constantly juggling of his lineup to keep guys "fresh" or "ready" reeks of little league everyone-plays rules rather than smart strategy, and his "smile and a pat works better than a snarl and a smack" routine doesn't seem to hold people as accountable as one would like.
Last year, there was a magic to the team that, in my opinion, helped them overcome his quicky managerial style and his often counterproductive moves. I don't get the sense they can do the same this year. His moves have already helped to compound bad situations, and in a tight pennant race with Boston and Tampa, that could honestly be the difference.
I have tried to put my finger on it, but I can't come up with one singular thing that makes me say "oh, that's it." I think it is more a combination of that,flaws that, when gelled together, make you feel less confident that their record should indicate.
Here are a couple of things that have me worried:
The Bullpen - This is probably the biggest "uh oh" for the team right now. Take Rivera out of the equation, as we always do, and who do Yankee fans feel is a "lock" to get big outs? Dave Robertson is pitching very well as of late, but he isn't far enough removed from having pitched poorly to make you confident the corner has been turned permanently. Using Chan Ho Park in any meaningful situation is almost akin to sabotage, and Boone Logan's only saving grace is that he has a terrific Sci-Fi hero name. Besides that, his pitching is kinda crappy.
If and when Alfredo Aceves comes back, he should stabalize a portion of the back-end of the pen, but the larger, more important question will be whether Joba Chamberlain improves or stays the inconsistent tight-rope walker he has become.
Last year, Phil Hughes stabalized the set-up role and allowed the Yankees the opportunity to save Mariano for only one-inning stints. This year, Joba was suppose to return to the role and be just as good as Hughes last season and the Joba 2007 version. It hasn't happened.
The problems that plagued Joba in the rotation last year plague him in the eitghth inning. He can't locate. He can't keep his velocity consistent. His fastball goes straight all too often and become hittable right in the middle of the plate.
Sure, there are those moments when he dominates, but there have been way too many where he has walked in and turned three or four-run leads into one-run deficits. Joe Girardi likes to treat questions about Jobas struggles as reactionary or uninformed, reacting to questions with dismissive comments like "we wish everyone was perfect all the time, but it's not going to happen," or "he struggled, and that happens to everyone. It happens to the best." That's all nice and fine, but great players don't have 6 ERAs, especially out of the bullpen pitching one inning. Great pitchers rattle off great outing after great outing, not one great outing for every two bad ones. That's not a great pitcher, or even a reliable pitcher. That is a powder keg ready to go off any eighth inning.
If Joba can become not just good but close to lights out, that puts everything else in line. It makes Damaso Marte a lefty specialist for late-inning matchups, instead of possible setup man. It makes Robertson that seventh inning place-holder or middle-inning, big-moment stopper, rather than someone constantly being moved around like a chess piece. And, it allows for the Yankees to either stay away from Park or Logan in big spots or move them out and give younger pitchers a chance without fear of putting inexperienced guys in pressure-cooker situations.
However, if Joba continues to be a one good game, one bad game pitcher, it puts a lot of pressure on everyone else and probably puts the Yanks in serious trade talks for a reliever.
The Offense - Look, the Yankees are going to score runs. They have too many good players not to. And, I'll be the first to admit that, if one were so inclined, they could look at the offense as a "glass half full" symbol rather than a cause for concern. If you remove Robinson Cano from the arguement, you can make the case that there isn't one Yankee regular having what could be considered a top year, let alone a career year. Okay, maybe Nick Swisher and Brett Gardner fit the bill, but the big bats of Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Jorge Posada and Curtis Granderson have been mediocre at best and Mark Teixeira has looked like a shadown of himself through almost three months of the season. You have to expect that a few, if not all of those All-Star caliber players will produce at a much higher level from this point forward, right?
What concerns me is the lack of fundamentals I've seen in the Yankee offense as a whole. They don't move runners over. They don't get them in from third with less than two outs. They routinely strand runners after doubles and even triples. They ground into a lot of double plays and they run themselves out of innings with some bonehead base running from time to time.
Last year, one through nine knew how to play small ball and big ball. They hit homers and pounded pitchers, yes, but in tight games, they knew how to "manufacture" runs.
I believe that such "manufacturing" can be overrated a lot. With the type of hitters the Yankees have, your offense shouldn't really hinge on bunts and sacrifice flys. You should be able to keep the runners moving with doubles and homers. That's why so many of these guys get paid so much.
But, against good teams with good pitching, you have to be able to produce runs in different ways. If your leadoff man doubles, you have to be able to get him to third, then home, without the benefit of a hit. It is a must. Chances are you won't pound out 10 or 12 hits against the better teams, so runs are at a premium. Yes, I expect a lot of these guys to hit better from now through the rest of the season, and that might correct some of these fundamentals. Jeter has been uncharacteristically sloppy with his at bats, failing to take walks, swinging wildly at bad pitches, and not producing in those "situational" hitting moments. Considering he is one of the most fundamentally sound players in history, an improvement on his end would improve the team. However, sometimes teams develop a personality, and that personality stays with them throughout the year. Last year, it was that comeback mentality that prevailed. This year, the team's personality seems far less encouraging.
AJ Burnett - The reason why Burnett's monumental struggles represent a bigger problem than just personal statistics, or a tough matchup every five days, is because of the uncertainty of Javier Vazquez and Phil Hughes. Hughes has been wonderful all year, and Vazquez has been brilliant since April, but neither can be looked upon as givens in big games down the stretch or in the playoffs. Vazquez could just as easily blow up against top competition as shut the other team down, and Hughes has never taken the ball in a playoff spot as a starter and been asked to go 7 or 8 big innings against a formidable lineup (plus, Hughes was very shaky in the playoffs last year in his setup role, which doesn't bode well for his ability to handle pressure situations).
As absolutely frustrating Burnett can be, he is an ace-quality starter when right. He can handle any lineup, and hitter. He was a collection of good and bad in big games last year, but he did manage many clutch performances.
If he continues to be dreadful, it gives the Yankees no room to manuvear. It ensures that Hughes and Vazquez have to be top shelf every time out. It means at least one of the two has to be big in big games. It means less depth. It means more strain on the pen. In short, it means a lot of bad things.
Joe Girardi - I don't think I have been shy in saying I am not the biggest fan of Girardi. I'm sorry, I know he won a championship last year, but there are a lot of mediocre to down right shaky managers who have a ring on their finger. Is it any wonder why Bob Brenly isn't managing a team any longer, despite his run with the Arizona Diamondbacks in 2001?
Girardi, to me, has little feel for the game. He always seems to be making the wrong decision, in that his moves more times than not turn out to produce a negative result. He pinch hits and nothing happens. He pulls pitchers before they are done, and hands it off to ineffective relievers. Or, the next time, he leaves his pitchers in too long and they give up the house. It's almost as if Girardi is constantly trying to find the standard, the book answer: "In this situation you do the following, always an unequivically." Well, in baseball it doesn't always work that way.
You have to be able to have a gut, a natural feel for moments, and Girardi doesn't have that. He also seems to manage scared a lot more than someone in his position should, making what seem to be panic moves. In fact, his entire demeanor in the dugout, at times, seems to indicate an uneasiness, as if he is always waiting for the next shoe to drop.
As a fan, the manager is always an easy target. I criticized Joe Torre when he was bringing championships to New York, and still believe he had a difficult time handling a bullpen when it wasn't full of clutch veteran performers. And, I'll admit, Torre's grandfatherly approach seemed disconnected when the team wasn't winning, as opposed to stalwart and even-headed when they were. However, in the 12 years he was manager, I had more moments where I admired his ability to get something out of nothing than I did to criticize his approach. For a refresher course, go back and look at the teams Torre took to the playoffs in 2005 and 2006. There were a lot of holes on tjose rosters because of injury and underperformance. He was able to piece a lot together and get the most out of players.
Girardi, to me, is a guy much better suited for a younger team. His "always be positive" attitude seems to be more in line with a up-and-coming group than a veteran club that might need a swift kick in the butt from time to time. His inability to challenge and ultimately discipline Robinson Cano in 2008 until the season was lost showed a lack of back bone, his constantly juggling of his lineup to keep guys "fresh" or "ready" reeks of little league everyone-plays rules rather than smart strategy, and his "smile and a pat works better than a snarl and a smack" routine doesn't seem to hold people as accountable as one would like.
Last year, there was a magic to the team that, in my opinion, helped them overcome his quicky managerial style and his often counterproductive moves. I don't get the sense they can do the same this year. His moves have already helped to compound bad situations, and in a tight pennant race with Boston and Tampa, that could honestly be the difference.
Still like New York's chances
To quote one of my least favorite bands, "wish you would step back from that ledge, my friend."
That, of course, is directed to all my Knick fan bretheren who have been told over the last few days that the golden child, Lebron James, once thought to be a lock for Madison Square Garden, will soon be following in Michael Jordan's footsteps in Chicago. That's because Chicago, by trading away Kirk Henrich and their draft pick away to the Washington Wizards on draft night freed up enough cap space to offer two max contract players agreements this off season. Up until that point, the Knicks remained the only team with such maneuverability.
The logic behind Chicago's assumed victory when it comes James is that the Bulls can offer too much in terms of talent for him to turn down. Chicago, with their cap space, could legitimately offer James a lineup of Derrick Rose, Lebron James, Luol Deng, Chris Bosh, and Joakim Noah, plus a young and decent bench, a roster that probably puts the Bulls at the top of the list for championship favorites.
However, here is why I still believe Lebron is coming to New York: Eddy Curry.
There was a report a while back that Lebron had met with Eddy Curry, and it got people wondering whether James would like to play with Curry, who is represented by Lebron's agent. However, I doubt there is much thought in Lebron that he wants Eddy Idle as his teammate for the next however many years. Curry's lack of motivation is now notorious and, even if he were motivated by his reported debt and pending free agency, and the fact that this year is a must, in terms of performance, if he is to have any hope of regaining his career, what are the chances good play would last far beyond this year, and those factors? If Curry were to play well and earn another pay day, it stands to reason he would quickly be back to his old ways.
So, I don't hold out any hppe that Curry is an attractive piece for the Knicks to sell to Lebron. However, I believe his contract is what continues to give the Knicks an advantage over every other team, including the Bulls.
See, Curry's deal has been a weight tied to the neck of thise franchise for years now. No one wanted it and no one wanted him. Now, however, Curry's $11.3 million is good for this year only. That gives the Knicks what has become the NBA equaivalent of the Willy Wonka Golden Ticket: an expiring contract. If you're a team with a high-priced player, but no where near winning, and in need of cutting payroll, Curry is your ideal. He clears space and is off your books once next season starts. He is instant flexibility. Plus, considering everything I just mentioned, he might be an asset for a team in a backup role.
So, when the Knicks sit down with Lebron, yes they are going to tout New York, the glitz, the glamour, the marketing opportunities and the business connections he can make, and yes, they are going to market the fact that Lebron can join with Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire or Carlos Boozer right when the year starts, and yes, you're going to tout Danillo Galinari as a top young player who can shoot it from a mile away and grab some rebounds in the process. But what you can also offer is the chance to nab another top-flight player as early as mid-season or, at the latest, next season.
There are a lot of teams that would be looking to dump salary come this season. One can forsee the Suns, Warriors, Hornets, Rockets, and Pistons, to name a few, who would be interested in clearing space, and all of them have deals that would most certainly be attractive to the Knicks. You could also see a team like the 76ers being interested in the contract, as they look to build around newly-drafted Evan Turner. Names like Andre Igudola, Baron Davis, Emeka Okafor, Tayshaun Prince, or Al Jefferson should pretty much all be in the mix in terms of trades, and all would be a great compliment to Lebron. There is also the outside chance that Chris Paul could be on the market come the trade deadline, and Curry's contract would allow the Knicks the flexibility to be in the bidding for that. Also, if you were to add in Wilson Chandler's contract, which is about $1.3 million, you could imagine multiple player trades.
Let's look at some possibilities, in terms of Knick starting five, assuming they trade Curry: Lebron James, Andre Igudola, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Chris Bosh, or Baron Davis, James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, or James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Okafor, or (perhaps most attractive) James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Al Jefferson.
I would put those teams up against the possibilities for the Bulls any day of the week.
Now, I'm sure other players will come into the mix and, as I said, if you threw in Chandler, you could probably get a multiple deal done. If you traded Curry and Chandler to the Hornets, for instance, you might get Okafor and Darren Collison back. In that scenario, the Knicks would add a sharp-shooting, quick point guard and a tough, rebounding, good defensive center who can get up and down the court. I have to say, if the Knicks team at some point next year were Darren Collison (PG), Lebron James (SG), Danilo Gallinari (SF), Chris Bosh (PF), and Emeka Okafor (C), I'm liking that team a lot. They might run into serious problems with Dwight Howard, who gives Okafor fits, but at least they would have a guy who could compitently guard Howard one-on-one. It would also give Lebron two sharp-shooters to play with (Collison and Gallinari) along with the great player in Bosh. Wouldn't you be looking at that Knicks team, right there, to compete with the Celtics and Orlando as the best team?
Look, no one knows what is happening in Lebron's mind right now, except, I believe, Lebron. This weekend I have read the following reports: he is a lock to go to Chicago and he still doesn't want to play in the shadow of Jordan; his business manager and trusted friend want nothing to do with the Knicks, and that his best friends still insist that his desire, from the outset, has been to play in New York and that "nothing has changed." In essence, all of these teams vying for Lebron's services are pretty equal, in my opinion. You can create lineups and rosters for all of these teams that put Lebron in a position to win. If he goes to Chicago, his lineup could be the one mentioned above. If he goes to the Knicks, you can create several different lineups that give him a terrific chance to win. If he goes to the Nets, he can join his buddy Jay-Z, be plugged into a Russian billionaire, and can play with young, talented players. A lineup of Devin Harris (PG), James (SG), Terrence Williams (SF), Derrick Favors (PF), Brooke Lopez (C). That is pretty darn attractive in its own right.
Since one can only speculate, we all seem to simply project what we would do in his shoes. So, I'll offer my two cents. If I were Lebron, my top choice would be the Knicks, second would be the Nets, third would be the Bulls. I wouldn't want to play in the shadow of Michael Jordan, nor would I look at Rose as being an ideal compliment to his game. If I were he, I would want a terrific big man in the middle (Bosh) and another really good player on the wing, but no one who is looking to be the "big dog" on his own one day, and one can't imagine Rose being happy being the third wheel.
That, of course, is directed to all my Knick fan bretheren who have been told over the last few days that the golden child, Lebron James, once thought to be a lock for Madison Square Garden, will soon be following in Michael Jordan's footsteps in Chicago. That's because Chicago, by trading away Kirk Henrich and their draft pick away to the Washington Wizards on draft night freed up enough cap space to offer two max contract players agreements this off season. Up until that point, the Knicks remained the only team with such maneuverability.
The logic behind Chicago's assumed victory when it comes James is that the Bulls can offer too much in terms of talent for him to turn down. Chicago, with their cap space, could legitimately offer James a lineup of Derrick Rose, Lebron James, Luol Deng, Chris Bosh, and Joakim Noah, plus a young and decent bench, a roster that probably puts the Bulls at the top of the list for championship favorites.
However, here is why I still believe Lebron is coming to New York: Eddy Curry.
There was a report a while back that Lebron had met with Eddy Curry, and it got people wondering whether James would like to play with Curry, who is represented by Lebron's agent. However, I doubt there is much thought in Lebron that he wants Eddy Idle as his teammate for the next however many years. Curry's lack of motivation is now notorious and, even if he were motivated by his reported debt and pending free agency, and the fact that this year is a must, in terms of performance, if he is to have any hope of regaining his career, what are the chances good play would last far beyond this year, and those factors? If Curry were to play well and earn another pay day, it stands to reason he would quickly be back to his old ways.
So, I don't hold out any hppe that Curry is an attractive piece for the Knicks to sell to Lebron. However, I believe his contract is what continues to give the Knicks an advantage over every other team, including the Bulls.
See, Curry's deal has been a weight tied to the neck of thise franchise for years now. No one wanted it and no one wanted him. Now, however, Curry's $11.3 million is good for this year only. That gives the Knicks what has become the NBA equaivalent of the Willy Wonka Golden Ticket: an expiring contract. If you're a team with a high-priced player, but no where near winning, and in need of cutting payroll, Curry is your ideal. He clears space and is off your books once next season starts. He is instant flexibility. Plus, considering everything I just mentioned, he might be an asset for a team in a backup role.
So, when the Knicks sit down with Lebron, yes they are going to tout New York, the glitz, the glamour, the marketing opportunities and the business connections he can make, and yes, they are going to market the fact that Lebron can join with Chris Bosh or Amare Stoudemire or Carlos Boozer right when the year starts, and yes, you're going to tout Danillo Galinari as a top young player who can shoot it from a mile away and grab some rebounds in the process. But what you can also offer is the chance to nab another top-flight player as early as mid-season or, at the latest, next season.
There are a lot of teams that would be looking to dump salary come this season. One can forsee the Suns, Warriors, Hornets, Rockets, and Pistons, to name a few, who would be interested in clearing space, and all of them have deals that would most certainly be attractive to the Knicks. You could also see a team like the 76ers being interested in the contract, as they look to build around newly-drafted Evan Turner. Names like Andre Igudola, Baron Davis, Emeka Okafor, Tayshaun Prince, or Al Jefferson should pretty much all be in the mix in terms of trades, and all would be a great compliment to Lebron. There is also the outside chance that Chris Paul could be on the market come the trade deadline, and Curry's contract would allow the Knicks the flexibility to be in the bidding for that. Also, if you were to add in Wilson Chandler's contract, which is about $1.3 million, you could imagine multiple player trades.
Let's look at some possibilities, in terms of Knick starting five, assuming they trade Curry: Lebron James, Andre Igudola, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Chris Bosh, or Baron Davis, James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, or James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Okafor, or (perhaps most attractive) James, Chandler, Gallinari, Bosh, Al Jefferson.
I would put those teams up against the possibilities for the Bulls any day of the week.
Now, I'm sure other players will come into the mix and, as I said, if you threw in Chandler, you could probably get a multiple deal done. If you traded Curry and Chandler to the Hornets, for instance, you might get Okafor and Darren Collison back. In that scenario, the Knicks would add a sharp-shooting, quick point guard and a tough, rebounding, good defensive center who can get up and down the court. I have to say, if the Knicks team at some point next year were Darren Collison (PG), Lebron James (SG), Danilo Gallinari (SF), Chris Bosh (PF), and Emeka Okafor (C), I'm liking that team a lot. They might run into serious problems with Dwight Howard, who gives Okafor fits, but at least they would have a guy who could compitently guard Howard one-on-one. It would also give Lebron two sharp-shooters to play with (Collison and Gallinari) along with the great player in Bosh. Wouldn't you be looking at that Knicks team, right there, to compete with the Celtics and Orlando as the best team?
Look, no one knows what is happening in Lebron's mind right now, except, I believe, Lebron. This weekend I have read the following reports: he is a lock to go to Chicago and he still doesn't want to play in the shadow of Jordan; his business manager and trusted friend want nothing to do with the Knicks, and that his best friends still insist that his desire, from the outset, has been to play in New York and that "nothing has changed." In essence, all of these teams vying for Lebron's services are pretty equal, in my opinion. You can create lineups and rosters for all of these teams that put Lebron in a position to win. If he goes to Chicago, his lineup could be the one mentioned above. If he goes to the Knicks, you can create several different lineups that give him a terrific chance to win. If he goes to the Nets, he can join his buddy Jay-Z, be plugged into a Russian billionaire, and can play with young, talented players. A lineup of Devin Harris (PG), James (SG), Terrence Williams (SF), Derrick Favors (PF), Brooke Lopez (C). That is pretty darn attractive in its own right.
Since one can only speculate, we all seem to simply project what we would do in his shoes. So, I'll offer my two cents. If I were Lebron, my top choice would be the Knicks, second would be the Nets, third would be the Bulls. I wouldn't want to play in the shadow of Michael Jordan, nor would I look at Rose as being an ideal compliment to his game. If I were he, I would want a terrific big man in the middle (Bosh) and another really good player on the wing, but no one who is looking to be the "big dog" on his own one day, and one can't imagine Rose being happy being the third wheel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
