In a world where a three-hour shutdown of Starbucks is front-page news, it is understandable how real news, real tragedies, and support of worthwhile causes get swept under the rug of big business and televised singing competitions.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again: what's happening to the Seattle Supersonics is criminal. Criminal, as in Clay Bennett and company should go to prison. Their complete disregard for ethics, laws, and abject malevolence is appalling, and the NBA's complicity illustrates perfectly the league's corrupt existence.
I suppose I am old-fashioned, as suggested by my steadfast faith in honest-to-goodness human decency having more power and influence than:
a) money,
b) fame, and
c) Republicans (see item a)
But I digress...
Save Our Sonics is a group whose aim is to, well, save the Sonics. On Monday they released a statement regarding a letter that they sent to the NBA Board of Governors, who will be voting soon on whether to allow the relocation of the Sonics to Oklahoma City. The statement and letter are reproduced here, with absolutely no permission from anybody, and with an unabashed realization that posting it on this website will alter the course of events in any way. I just think it's a good cause. Even though they are rivals, they are our basketball brethren, and they're fighting to survive.
25th February, 2008
We hope the Board of Governors, media and members of the national sports community read the attached information and carefully consider the ramifications of a potential SuperSonics move to Oklahoma City. The upcoming court case set for June is too important to hold a vote on this matter presently because the current ownership group will likely be forced to honor the last two years of its lease agreement with Key Arena. The Board of Governors (BOG) should vote "No" on the Sonics relocation or postpone a vote until the pending court case is resolved.
In light of recent disheartening comments by Commissioner David Stern, the BOG is faced with an extremely important decision that not only affects millions of Seattle area residents, but stands to significantly change both the NBA and the entire professional sports landscape. Members of the Sonics ownership group must work with Seattle's city leadership to come forth with a reasonable plan for the future sustainability of Seattle Center, Key Arena and the Sonics.
Please direct any media inquiries to the contacts at the end of the letter, Adam Brown, Steven Pyeatt and Brian Robinson of Save Our Sonics.
To NBA team owners and vested interests:
Outlined herein are the five most compelling reasons why voting "Yes" on the Seattle SuperSonics relocation to Oklahoma City is the wrong decision for an NBA team owner. Please consider the following information and endorse a "No" vote on relocation this April.
The Sonics have represented the city of Seattle through the best of times, including a 1979 World Championship and success throughout the 1990s culminating in a 1996 Finals appearance, and also through the worst of times, which came under the last two ownership groups led by Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz and Oklahoma City mogul Clayton Bennett, respectively. As you are surely aware, Schultz sold the Sonics to Bennett's Oklahoma-based ownership group in July 2006. After only one year of attempting to secure a brand new, $500 million, state- of-the-art arena in the region, Bennett officially filed for relocation to Oklahoma City on November 1, 2007.
As an NBA team owner, you have a responsibility to make decisions that will ultimately lead to a thriving league for years to come. Unlike other leagues, the NBA's owners are closely connected through revenue streams that allow profitable markets to share the wealth. As primary decision makers in the league, your votes in this matter will have critical impact on the future economic growth of the NBA.
Fans have supported this organization for 41 years. It will be a devastating blow to both the city of Seattle and the entire NBA if we lose this prominent market for the following reasons:
1. Fan Support Determines a Sports League's Profits
Seattle has been one of the NBA's most celebrated markets since its inaugural year in 1967. By allowing this move, David Stern is disrespecting one of his most loyal fan bases and disregarding 41 years of local support for the league, opting instead to mortgage the future financial sustainability of the NBA in order to please his friend, Clay Bennett.
NBA fans in Seattle will obviously be crushed by the move, but the impact will ripple into other markets across the nation. Fans will wonder: If this can happen in an historic NBA market like Seattle, couldn't it happen to my favorite team as well?
Hoops fans across the nation will sense a widening disconnect from team ownership and become apathetic about supporting a league that could show such contempt for fans. This move would signify the beginning of the end for a fan's league. The NBA may not recover from such a massive public relations disaster, as the league has recently struggled to reconnect to fans the way it did in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
2. Seattle is the Gateway to the Surging Asian Market
One of the highest rated NBA games this season was between the Milwaukee Bucks and the Houston Rockets - or the matchup of Chinese superstars Yao Ming and Yi Jianlian. Commissioner Stern opened the revenue floodgates by pouring NBA marketing dollars into China, and the country responded with record interest in the league. In December 2007, more than 200 million Chinese tuned in to watch the battle of its homeland stars, as 16 of 19 Chinese television stations carried the live broadcast in mainland China. [1]
Seattle is a leading center of Asian culture in the United States, with more than 507,000 Asian citizens (14.4% of the population)[2] contributing to the area's booming business, engineering and technology industries. Why would the league choose to uproot one of its primary gateways to the blossoming Asian market?
Major League Baseball's Seattle Mariners established the international sports business model by marketing its Japanese star outfielder Ichiro Suzuki to national and international success, but the potential revenue ceiling in China is significantly higher if the NBA takes advantage of its cornerstone Asian market in Seattle.
The league certainly won't gain any international revenue from having a team in Oklahoma City.
3. Seattle is a Superior Market to Oklahoma City
The following statistics demonstrate the advanced revenue potential of the Seattle market compared with the Oklahoma City market:
Population:[3]
o Greater Seattle: 3,524,000
o Greater OKC: 1,240,967
Median Family Income:[4]
o Seattle: $70,133
o OKC: $48,162
Seattle is consistently named as one of the best cities in America, and Forbes recently ranked it fourth among the Fastest Growing Cities in America,[5] with a 22.7% projected GMP growth by 2012. To abandon this market would be akin to moving the Boston Celtics, New York Knicks or Los Angeles Lakers to smaller cities. The league simply wouldn't be the same, and David Stern has already stated that Seattle will not get another team if the Sonics move under Bennett.[6]
Journalists across the nation published their disapproval of losing the Seattle market, repeatedly coming to the conclusion that "there is no conceivable way the NBA would benefit from having the Sonics move from the nation's 14th-largest market to the 45th. [7]"
4. Fans in Seattle Deserve a Chance to Keep Their Team
Clay Bennett and his Oklahoma City-based ownership group purchased the Sonics with the full intention of moving the team to Oklahoma City, as stated publicly by minority owner Aubrey McLendon.[8] This contradicts numerous public statements made by Bennett stating his desire to find a solution to keep the team in Seattle.
"[Clay Bennett and I] didn't buy the team to keep it in Seattle, we hoped to come here [to Oklahoma City]," McLendon told the Oklahoma City Journal Record in August 2007. "We know it's a little more difficult financially here in Oklahoma City, but we think it's great for the community and if we could break even we'd be thrilled."
The NBA and its team owners should not settle for "just breaking even." Commissioner Stern fined McLendon $250,000 for these comments, but even more telling are the other dealings of this ownership group since purchasing the Sonics.
While asking for $400 million from taxpayers to build an exclusive, world-class arena in Renton, a Seattle area suburb located 12 miles south of the city and its season ticketholder base, the Bennett ownership group repeatedly touted the economic and community benefits of having an NBA team in the region.
Bennett's group even conducted its own economic feasibility study to convince legislators to vote for its last-minute arena proposal.[9]
Unfortunately, the proposal did not receive a vote after Bennett refused to provide key financial details deemed necessary by the legislature. Unlike Blazers and Seahawks owner Paul Allen, Bennett's plan did not include any stated investment from the team itself, leaving a huge gap in the feasibility of the proposal. Bennett then filed for relocation with the NBA, attempting to void the final two years of the team's lease at Seattle Center's Key Arena, which runs through 2010.
The city of Seattle filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against Bennett in order to hold him to the Key Arena lease, and Bennett's group contradicted itself yet again in court, stating: "There will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle."[10] Which is it, Clay?
The NBA should not look kindly upon one of its owners stating that its teams have no benefit to local communities.
While the Sonics current home, Key Arena, is the league's smallest venue, the city has expressed interest in re-working the terms of the lease and expanding the building to become a world-class venue. The city built Key Arena for $104 million in 1994 with 80% taxpayer-appropriated funds, following guidelines specifically approved by the NBA and team officials in the Ackerley ownership group, which said "[Key Arena] is going to be as good as any building in the NBA." And it was - for a few years, while the team perennially finished at the top of the Western Conference in front of sold out home crowds. [11]
It is simply unfortunate timing that other cities began building huge, more advanced arenas such as Chicago's United Center and Denver's Pepsi Center shortly thereafter, putting Key Arena behind the curve almost immediately after its construction. These and other new world-class arenas, however, were built using private funds or as a partnership between ownership and the city - something Bennett has declined to approach.
Despite the city's numerous attempts to reach out to Sonics ownership and broker a deal that works to keep the Sonics in Seattle, Bennett refused to even meet with Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels regarding any plan besides his own.
Adding insult to injury, Bennett & Co. decimated the Sonics chances to be successful on the court by trading its two All-Star players, fan favorites Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis. These moves effectively ensured the team would be terrible, driving local fans out of the arena, intentionally minimizing revenues to facilitate relocation and making a mockery of the team. In 2007, Bennett's group fired Sonics legends Lenny Wilkins, Jack Sikma and Detlef Schrempf from their positions with the team, further distancing the current organization from anything that could be considered part of the Sonics celebrated past.
"They didn't give it a chance," former Sonic and current Celtic Ray Allen told the Chicago Tribune. "You need good veterans around to be successful. But it was a decision they made." [12]
On the same day the Sonics miraculously drew the second pick in the 2007 NBA Draft and the rights to prodigal forward Kevin Durant, Bennett was in Kansas City exploring arena options to move the team. He has no respect for the city of Seattle and its thousands of loyal Sonics fans.
It is now abundantly clear that Bennett only wanted to rob Sonics fans from the start, with no regard for the team's history and 41 years of support. A great NBA owner builds ties with the community; he doesn't sever them and then pour salt on the wounds.
When Mark Cuban purchased the struggling Dallas Mavericks in 2000, he invested heavily in the team and the city, building the franchise into a dominant force and a pillar of the community. Other NBA owners have also made sizable investments in their host communities, strategically developing political and business relationships to help secure public funding for arenas. Prior to filing for relocation, Bennett spent only a few months actively attempting to secure a local arena. During this period, he failed to evaluate the political landscape or engage the fan base, refusing to hold a single meeting with the Seattle mayor's office to discuss options within the Seattle city limits. Bennett never employed a local advertising agency, and he never took reasonable steps to convey a hopeful message to the general public and fans. The Sonics have not made even a pretense of looking for local options since May of 2007.
As business partners, it is appropriate for NBA owners to expect a somewhat equitable effort on the part of all parties. Owners in markets such as New Jersey, Sacramento and Orlando worked hard in recent attempts to secure venues, but Sonics ownership is attempting to shortcut the process and put its own interests above that of the league as a whole by engaging in a high publicized legal battle to void the final years of its lease. As part of this process, the Bennett ownership group has risked the goodwill of the fans and publicly stated that NBA teams bring no value to this community.
A legitimate local ownership group would be willing to work with the city and find a constructive solution to keep the Sonics in Seattle.
5. The New Orleans Hornets are Struggling to Survive
In the wake of the tragedy Hurricane Katrina inflicted upon the city of New Orleans, the Hornets were transplanted to Oklahoma City, where fans embraced the team for two seasons. As New Orleans rebuilds, the Hornets moved back to play at New Orleans Arena at the start of the 2007-08 season.
(Save Our Sonics would never want to deny New Orleans fans their team or encourage a Hornets move to save our own team. We do, however, see the need to present the following facts so NBA interests can make the most informed decision possible on this matter.)
At the time this letter was pressed, the Hornets held a record of 33-15, good for second best in the tough Western Conference. Yet the team is second to last in the league in attendance, drawing a meager 12,453 fans per game on average,[13] a number that is further inflated by free tickets given away within a business model that relies heavily on subsidies. This is a young, exciting team with an MVP candidate in Chris Paul, but the city cannot seem to rally behind them as it has for the NFL's Saints before and after Katrina.
The Hornets recently signed a lease that allows them to relocate after the 2009-2010 season if they fail to reach an average attendance benchmark of 14,735 through that portion of the contract.[14] At this rate, there is no doubt that attendance will be lower than this figure, and the Hornets will be looking for a new home in 2010, conveniently also when the Sonics lease at Key Arena officially expires.
The Sonics, by contrast, are the third worst team in the NBA at 13-36, yet they are only fifth-worst in attendance figures, averaging 13,476 fans despite widespread doubt that the team will even play in Seattle past 2008. This Sonics team, without its two recognizable All-Stars − and with out-of-town ownership insulting the community while publicly facilitating the OKC move ¬− still outdraws the Memphis Grizzlies, Philadelphia 76ers, Indiana Pacers and New Orleans Hornets on a nightly basis. More importantly, Key Arena is filled to 79.3% capacity each night versus 65.8% in New Orleans − this figure also puts the Sonics ahead of the Charlotte Bobcats (74.7%), Minnesota Timberwolves (77.8%), and New Jersey Nets (76.1%) in attendance.
Make no mistake about it: Seattle is a basketball city and Washington is a basketball state, with such NBA stars as Brandon Roy, Jason Terry, Jamal Crawford, Nate Robinson, Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Luke Ridnour, Spencer Hawes, John Stockton, Detlef Schrempf, Michael Dickerson, Aaron Brooks and Doug Christie having grown up in the area. By voting to allow Seattle's longest running professional team to move, owners are denying themselves a city full of talent and potential billions in financial support. This is the city that set NBA attendance records by drawing more than 39,000 fans to a 1979 game in the Kingdome.[15] This is the city that rocked for the Sonics throughout the 1990s, as teams led by Gary Payton and Shawn Kemp dominated for much of the decade.
Recent NBA team moves and expansions to smaller markets have unequivocally failed financially (Vancouver to Memphis, Charlotte to New Orleans). If Oklahoma City has truly earned an NBA franchise, however, it makes sense to either grant it an expansion team (SOS's preferred solution) or move the Hornets, only since the latter is likely to move and already won the adoration of OKC fans.
The battle for the Sonics is still in U.S. District Court, which set a date of June 16, 2008 to hear the case - right in the middle of the NBA Finals. In light of recent scandals (Tim Donaghy and Malice at the Palace), the NBA cannot afford this bitter fight causing another public relations disaster, which would only soil its credibility and evoke outrage from disrespected fans around the nation. The NBA is a business, but this business can only be run with the full trust and support of its paying customers - the fans.
Please carefully consider the above arguments when casting your vote on the Seattle SuperSonics relocation issue. The facts are clear: Seattle has earned its team through decades of loyal support, and fans deserve more than Bennett has given them. If the involved parties swallow their pride and sit down at the negotiation table, a reasonable agreement to keep the team in Seattle can surely be reached. Key Arena is a beautiful venue for fans to watch basketball, and an efficient remodel can implement the proper revenue streams for ownership to profit financially in this top quality market.
Feel free to contact our organization with any questions on this matter. Vote "No" on a Sonics to Oklahoma City move this April. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincere regards,
Adam Brown - Brian Robinson - Steven Pyeatt
Media Advisor Co-Founder Co-Founder
"(Clay Bennett) doesn't care if the Supersonics are Seattle's most successful and storied franchise. Or that the team has 40 years of history and heritage and Hall-of-Famers. Or that the league will suffer greatly if a franchise moves from one of its most cultured and cosmopolitan markets to - - - Oklahoma City! Good lord, this is like the Rockettes leaving Radio City Music Hall for their new permanent home at the Mystery Dinner Theatre on I-Drive!"
- columnist Mike Bianchi of the Orlando Sentinel, November 2007.
SOURCES
[1] Source: "Yao vs. Yi Matchup to Set Record TV Ratings." Dec. 9, 2007. www.crienglish.com
[2] Source: "The Greater Seattle Datasheet." 2006. www.cityofseattle.net
[3] Source: "U.S. Census." 2006.
[4] Source: "Best Places to Live." Money Magazine. 2006. www.cnnmoney.com.
[5] Source: "In Pictures: America's Fastest Growing Large and Small Metros." www.forbes.com. Jan. 30, 2008.
[6] Source: "Stern: NBA Won't Return to Seattle if Sonics Leave." Associated Press/Seattle Times. Nov. 8, 2007.
[7] Source: "Oklahoma City Sonics? NBA should just say no." The Daily Herald. Feb. 3, 2008.
[8] Source: "Sonics co-owner McClendon fined $250K." Seattle Times. Aug. 23, 2007.
[9] Source: "Economic Benefits of the King County Events Center." April 2007. www.eventscenterfacts.com.
[10] Source: "Sonics: City Wouldn't Miss Us." The Seattle Times. Jan. 18, 2008.
[11] Source: "Nothin' But Profit: Winning no longer key to new NBA." The Seattle P-I. May 15, 2006.
[12] Source: "Sonics Choose Low Road." The Chicago Tribune. December 10, 2007.
[13] Source: "NBA Attendance Report." January 24, 2007. www.ESPN.com.
[14] Source: "Hornets Sign Lease Extension." The Oklahoman. January 10, 2008. www.newsok.com.
[15] Source: "Relocations Hurt the NBA." The Daily of the UW. January 11, 2008.
26 February 2008
24 February 2008
Trade Talk and Outlaw
I love the trade deadline. I love that Von Wafer is a Blazer, we don't need another freaking point guard on our team, or on our D-League team. And the great thing about Wafer is that he will score 30 a game in the summer leagues for the next 5 years.
I watched a little of the Suns blowout loss to the Pistons today and felt bad for the Suns fans. Hopefully they know that they couldn't win the big one with Marion, after three straight Conf. Finals trips you kinda gotta concede that, but like you Ty, I really have a hard time seeing how the Big Brick is going to help them win it either. Who knows, stranger things have happened. Eli Manning won a Superbowl.
The trade I think is getting overlooked though, or at least the part of a trade that I think is getting overlooked is Joe Smith in the Cleveland trade. He is the best part of that trade in my eyes. He can shoot from the wing, defend, and rebound. Remember the game a few months back when Joe Smith went off on the Blazers? He can play, moreso than Gooden ever will be able to, even if he lets his beard reach his waist, and other than Wally's good looks and outside shooting, I think Joe Smith will prove to be the difference maker in making them a force again in the East.
On a side note, I'm with you Ty, why not start Outlaw? He's incredible. I'm a big fan. 6th man of the year considerations? The next Uncle Cliffy, but with the added bonus of not missing every clutch shot?! I'm in.
KT
I watched a little of the Suns blowout loss to the Pistons today and felt bad for the Suns fans. Hopefully they know that they couldn't win the big one with Marion, after three straight Conf. Finals trips you kinda gotta concede that, but like you Ty, I really have a hard time seeing how the Big Brick is going to help them win it either. Who knows, stranger things have happened. Eli Manning won a Superbowl.
The trade I think is getting overlooked though, or at least the part of a trade that I think is getting overlooked is Joe Smith in the Cleveland trade. He is the best part of that trade in my eyes. He can shoot from the wing, defend, and rebound. Remember the game a few months back when Joe Smith went off on the Blazers? He can play, moreso than Gooden ever will be able to, even if he lets his beard reach his waist, and other than Wally's good looks and outside shooting, I think Joe Smith will prove to be the difference maker in making them a force again in the East.
On a side note, I'm with you Ty, why not start Outlaw? He's incredible. I'm a big fan. 6th man of the year considerations? The next Uncle Cliffy, but with the added bonus of not missing every clutch shot?! I'm in.
KT
Trade Frenzy
This has been the most exciting season for trades for as long as I can remember. It seemed like everybody was making moves, either in last-second desperation or in level-minded "planning for the future", which basically entails trading for expiring contracts and future draft picks, which will likely be wasted on players from Duke.
Example:
Wait, I'm sorry, I meant:
This is Shelden Williams, who incredibly was picked before Brandon Roy in the 2006 Draft. He is on pace to have a long, successful career, if by "long" you mean "short", and if by "successful career" you mean "time spent being a trade throw-in to make salaries match". As it happens, Williams did play a bit part in the 2008 Trade Frenzy, getting shipped to Sacramento with others for Mike Bibby. We'll get to that in a sec.
Almost all the big trades can be summed up as "win now" v. "win later". Many Western Conference teams want to "win now", as suggested by the acquisition of old superstars with little gas left in the tank. Most Eastern Conference teams want to "win later", because at least that's better than "win never", which is where too many of them are headed anyways. Many Western contenders know that their window of opportunity is closing fast, and they want to reach in and grab that pie before Mom slams it down on their fingers.
The catch:
The West is stacked. This is probably the strongest Western Conference ever. Even if you improve tremendously, you still probably won't win the title. Who's the best team? Who's the favorite? Can there be six favorites? This is a conference where a team might win 50 games in the regular season and fail to make the playoffs. That has never happened before, and will likely never happen again... at least not until next year, when the new superstars are better adjusted to their environment and their teammates and the general consensus is:
"Yes! This is the year!"
Here's a rundown of the trades, and the big winners and losers:
Trade #1
Utah gets: Kyle Korver.
Philadelphia gets: Gordon Giricek, 1st round pick.
Both teams have improved since making the trade, but Utah's clip (20-3) is best in the league in that period. Insert your own "White Guy Traded To Utah - What A Surprise!" joke here.
Winner: Utah.
Trade #2
LA Lakers gets: Pau Gasol, 2nd round pick.
Memphis gets: Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, Aaron McKie, Marc Gasol, two 1st round picks.
This trade was so good for the Lakers that Spurs coach Gregg Popovich suggested the NBA create a group that oversees trades and makes sure they are fair. Teams in the West are legitimately scared of the Lakers, so much so that they openly claimed the trade should be rejected because of the impact it made on the rest of the league.
First off, there's no surprise that this complaint came primarily from the Spurs, possibly the most unprofessional sports franchise in modern history. But it's not that easy. Memphis got picks and two solid young players in Gasol and Crittenton. Memphis could have gotten more to help the team win now, and they chose to dump salary and go young.
Winner: LA Lakers.
Trade #3
Miami gets: Shawn Marion, Marcus Banks.
Phoenix gets: Shaquille O'Neal.
I thought this was a horrible trade for the Suns at first, and now I only think it's a little less horrible than I originally thought. Shawn Marion was unhappy and wasn't focused on the task at hand, and Shaq provides a big body to bang with the Spurs and Lakers, sure playoff opponents.
But seriously, Shaq on the Suns?? Shaq is old and slow, and he won't be able to keep up with Nash and Stoudemire. Does Phoenix's whole offensive system, honed so sharply over the years by D'Antoni and crew, get trashed now that Shaq's there? I wonder what Suns supporters think about this. By most accounts, they're really happy, but I seem to think it'd be like being friends with the kid who has the ping-pong table at his house in fourth grade. Sure, nobody really likes the kid, but he's the only person with a ping-pong table in the whole school. You have to be friends with him, or else you don't get to play ping-pong. You have no choice.
Winner: Miami.
Trade #4
Atlanta gets: Mike Bibby.
Sacramento gets: Shelden Williams, Lorenzen Wright, Anthony Johnson, Tyronn Lue, 2nd round pick.
Atlanta wanted playoff action this season, and they'll surely get it, especially in the weak East. Sacramento wanted to get young and play for the future, but that will be hard with the assortment of players they got from Atlanta. There isn't one player in that group that Atlanta probably thought twice about getting rid of. Plus, they only got one pick out of the deal, and that's a second rounder. Bibby's getting older, but he should fit in well with the Hawks and deliver to the city of Atlanta the glory of a first round flameout.
Winner: Atlanta.
Trade #5
New Jersey gets: Devin Harris, Desagana Diop, Trenton Hassell, Maurice Ager, Keith Van Horn, 2 1st round picks.
Dallas gets: Jason Kidd, Malik Allen, Antoine Wright.
The Nets are hoping to be competitive when they finally move into their new building in Brooklyn. This trade is a big step in that direction. The agonizing thing about this trade for Nets supporters is that they still could have gotten alot more if they traded Kidd two years ago, which is when it was abundantly clear that his time in New Jersey would not even come close to producing a championship. They should have traded Kidd earlier, and they shouldn't have re-signed Vince Carter, and they should have traded Richard Jefferson when he still had value, but...
Still, the joke's on Dallas. I'm not even convinced Kidd is an upgrade over Devin Harris, all things considered. Again, if it was two years ago, this would have made sense for Dallas. But they felt like they needed to do something, because everybody else in the West were making trades, and if they didn't they might be viewed as that guy who stayed in town after high school while all of his friends moved away to go to college, and then all the other guys come back on Christmas Break and tell him that he should have left.
Winner: New Jersey.
Trade #6
Portland gets: Von Wafer.
Denver gets: Taurean Green.
Winner: Who cares.
Trade #7
Seattle gets: Brent Barry, Francisco Elson, 1st round pick.
San Antonio gets: Kurt Thomas.
This wouldn't have happened if Phoenix didn't get Shaq and the Lakers didn't get Pau Gasol. Thomas gives the Spurs another big guy who may or may not provide elbows and knees into the groins of Western Conference foes. Seattle/Oklahoma City/Las Vegas/Virginia/West Virginia gets yet another first round draft pick.
Winner: Seattle.
Trade #8
Cleveland gets: Ben Wallace, Wally Szczerbiak, Joe Smith, Delonte West, 2nd round pick.
Seattle gets: Ira Newble, Donyell Marshall, Adrian Griffin.
Chicago gets: Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Cedric Simmons, Shannon Brown.
This trade left Cleveland so temporarily depleted that they had to sign two D-leaguers to 10-day contracts. A gutsy but necessary move by the Cavs, who are under an increasing amount of pressure to convince LeBron to stay. It's wasn't enough for King James, who expressed his dismay at not being able to land a quality point guard, but it does increase Cleveland's chances as repeating as Eastern Conference Champs.
Chicago was able to purge Ben Wallace's terrible contract, but they weren't able to improve their team in the process. Hughes and Gooden might benefit from a change of scenery, but the reality is that they are moody and inconsistent and are signed to bad contracts. Chicago's not going anywhere anytime soon.
Seattle, yet again, are the quiet victors, slimming down their payroll and looking into their glorious future. Too bad they don't even know what city they'll be playing in.
Winner: Seattle.
The biggest winners in this whole process might have actually been teams like Portland, a team on the rise in a conference that generally isn't looking past 2009. By the time the Blazers hit their stride, as suggested by popular theory, current contenders will be looking to start over from scratch themselves. Of course, this optimism would have been completely destroyed if the Jason Kidd-to-Portland or Travis Outlaw-to-anywhere trade talk became a reality.
TJH
Example:
Wait, I'm sorry, I meant:
This is Shelden Williams, who incredibly was picked before Brandon Roy in the 2006 Draft. He is on pace to have a long, successful career, if by "long" you mean "short", and if by "successful career" you mean "time spent being a trade throw-in to make salaries match". As it happens, Williams did play a bit part in the 2008 Trade Frenzy, getting shipped to Sacramento with others for Mike Bibby. We'll get to that in a sec.
Almost all the big trades can be summed up as "win now" v. "win later". Many Western Conference teams want to "win now", as suggested by the acquisition of old superstars with little gas left in the tank. Most Eastern Conference teams want to "win later", because at least that's better than "win never", which is where too many of them are headed anyways. Many Western contenders know that their window of opportunity is closing fast, and they want to reach in and grab that pie before Mom slams it down on their fingers.
The catch:
The West is stacked. This is probably the strongest Western Conference ever. Even if you improve tremendously, you still probably won't win the title. Who's the best team? Who's the favorite? Can there be six favorites? This is a conference where a team might win 50 games in the regular season and fail to make the playoffs. That has never happened before, and will likely never happen again... at least not until next year, when the new superstars are better adjusted to their environment and their teammates and the general consensus is:
"Yes! This is the year!"
Here's a rundown of the trades, and the big winners and losers:
Trade #1
Utah gets: Kyle Korver.
Philadelphia gets: Gordon Giricek, 1st round pick.
Both teams have improved since making the trade, but Utah's clip (20-3) is best in the league in that period. Insert your own "White Guy Traded To Utah - What A Surprise!" joke here.
Winner: Utah.
Trade #2
LA Lakers gets: Pau Gasol, 2nd round pick.
Memphis gets: Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, Aaron McKie, Marc Gasol, two 1st round picks.
This trade was so good for the Lakers that Spurs coach Gregg Popovich suggested the NBA create a group that oversees trades and makes sure they are fair. Teams in the West are legitimately scared of the Lakers, so much so that they openly claimed the trade should be rejected because of the impact it made on the rest of the league.
First off, there's no surprise that this complaint came primarily from the Spurs, possibly the most unprofessional sports franchise in modern history. But it's not that easy. Memphis got picks and two solid young players in Gasol and Crittenton. Memphis could have gotten more to help the team win now, and they chose to dump salary and go young.
Winner: LA Lakers.
Trade #3
Miami gets: Shawn Marion, Marcus Banks.
Phoenix gets: Shaquille O'Neal.
I thought this was a horrible trade for the Suns at first, and now I only think it's a little less horrible than I originally thought. Shawn Marion was unhappy and wasn't focused on the task at hand, and Shaq provides a big body to bang with the Spurs and Lakers, sure playoff opponents.
But seriously, Shaq on the Suns?? Shaq is old and slow, and he won't be able to keep up with Nash and Stoudemire. Does Phoenix's whole offensive system, honed so sharply over the years by D'Antoni and crew, get trashed now that Shaq's there? I wonder what Suns supporters think about this. By most accounts, they're really happy, but I seem to think it'd be like being friends with the kid who has the ping-pong table at his house in fourth grade. Sure, nobody really likes the kid, but he's the only person with a ping-pong table in the whole school. You have to be friends with him, or else you don't get to play ping-pong. You have no choice.
Winner: Miami.
Trade #4
Atlanta gets: Mike Bibby.
Sacramento gets: Shelden Williams, Lorenzen Wright, Anthony Johnson, Tyronn Lue, 2nd round pick.
Atlanta wanted playoff action this season, and they'll surely get it, especially in the weak East. Sacramento wanted to get young and play for the future, but that will be hard with the assortment of players they got from Atlanta. There isn't one player in that group that Atlanta probably thought twice about getting rid of. Plus, they only got one pick out of the deal, and that's a second rounder. Bibby's getting older, but he should fit in well with the Hawks and deliver to the city of Atlanta the glory of a first round flameout.
Winner: Atlanta.
Trade #5
New Jersey gets: Devin Harris, Desagana Diop, Trenton Hassell, Maurice Ager, Keith Van Horn, 2 1st round picks.
Dallas gets: Jason Kidd, Malik Allen, Antoine Wright.
The Nets are hoping to be competitive when they finally move into their new building in Brooklyn. This trade is a big step in that direction. The agonizing thing about this trade for Nets supporters is that they still could have gotten alot more if they traded Kidd two years ago, which is when it was abundantly clear that his time in New Jersey would not even come close to producing a championship. They should have traded Kidd earlier, and they shouldn't have re-signed Vince Carter, and they should have traded Richard Jefferson when he still had value, but...
Still, the joke's on Dallas. I'm not even convinced Kidd is an upgrade over Devin Harris, all things considered. Again, if it was two years ago, this would have made sense for Dallas. But they felt like they needed to do something, because everybody else in the West were making trades, and if they didn't they might be viewed as that guy who stayed in town after high school while all of his friends moved away to go to college, and then all the other guys come back on Christmas Break and tell him that he should have left.
Winner: New Jersey.
Trade #6
Portland gets: Von Wafer.
Denver gets: Taurean Green.
Winner: Who cares.
Trade #7
Seattle gets: Brent Barry, Francisco Elson, 1st round pick.
San Antonio gets: Kurt Thomas.
This wouldn't have happened if Phoenix didn't get Shaq and the Lakers didn't get Pau Gasol. Thomas gives the Spurs another big guy who may or may not provide elbows and knees into the groins of Western Conference foes. Seattle/Oklahoma City/Las Vegas/Virginia/West Virginia gets yet another first round draft pick.
Winner: Seattle.
Trade #8
Cleveland gets: Ben Wallace, Wally Szczerbiak, Joe Smith, Delonte West, 2nd round pick.
Seattle gets: Ira Newble, Donyell Marshall, Adrian Griffin.
Chicago gets: Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Cedric Simmons, Shannon Brown.
This trade left Cleveland so temporarily depleted that they had to sign two D-leaguers to 10-day contracts. A gutsy but necessary move by the Cavs, who are under an increasing amount of pressure to convince LeBron to stay. It's wasn't enough for King James, who expressed his dismay at not being able to land a quality point guard, but it does increase Cleveland's chances as repeating as Eastern Conference Champs.
Chicago was able to purge Ben Wallace's terrible contract, but they weren't able to improve their team in the process. Hughes and Gooden might benefit from a change of scenery, but the reality is that they are moody and inconsistent and are signed to bad contracts. Chicago's not going anywhere anytime soon.
Seattle, yet again, are the quiet victors, slimming down their payroll and looking into their glorious future. Too bad they don't even know what city they'll be playing in.
Winner: Seattle.
The biggest winners in this whole process might have actually been teams like Portland, a team on the rise in a conference that generally isn't looking past 2009. By the time the Blazers hit their stride, as suggested by popular theory, current contenders will be looking to start over from scratch themselves. Of course, this optimism would have been completely destroyed if the Jason Kidd-to-Portland or Travis Outlaw-to-anywhere trade talk became a reality.
TJH
23 February 2008
Fuzzy Logic
Kevin - I wish I had a good explanation for you, but I don't.
First, let me just say that I am happy that I'm not the only one who is dumbfounded by the recent replacement of Webster by Jarrett Jack in the starting lineup. It comes as no surprise that the Blazers have completely fallen out of the playoff picture at the same time that Jack has seen an increase in playing time. Although Webster's numbers had dropped and his shooting has really suffered as of late, we were still winning. At the very least, we were staying competitive.
These things are pretty simple. For example, when James Jones plays, the Blazers are 22-11. When he doesn't play, Portland is 7-14. It's safe to say that James Jones plays an important part in the success of the team, right? Last year, in the five games that Zach Randolph missed before April, when he sat out the rest of the season with a hand injury, Portland was 5-0. I thought that the Blazers were better without him, and this was proof positive. Turns out I was right.
We are not winning anymore, and we are not staying competitive. What's the reason? The loss of James Jones was a huge blow, that's for sure. But think about this: not only was Jack bumped up to the starting lineup, Roy was moved to small forward, where he hasn't played all season. When Roy and Blake split point guard duties, it usually works out great, as evidenced by the nice little 13-game winning streak Portland put together in December. Why stray from that formula? Why destroy Webster's confidence by demoting him? Why bring Jack back into the mix when he was essentially absent from our successes earlier in the season?
Moreover, why not use Outlaw as a small forward? If a change was necessary, why not just start Outlaw and bring Webster off the bench? Then Roy and Blake wouldn't have to play different positions and Jack would have less opportunities to dribble the ball off his feet or find new ways to come up short on 4-on-1 fast breaks. Those types of things don't show up in the box score: "missed opportunities", "unforced turnovers", and "momentum-killing bad shots". Mike Rice told us the other day that, per minute, Jarrett Jack leads the league in fourth quarter turnovers. That's right - he leads the league. If the franchise wants to increase his trade value, it might be a good idea to keep him off the basketball court.
TJH
First, let me just say that I am happy that I'm not the only one who is dumbfounded by the recent replacement of Webster by Jarrett Jack in the starting lineup. It comes as no surprise that the Blazers have completely fallen out of the playoff picture at the same time that Jack has seen an increase in playing time. Although Webster's numbers had dropped and his shooting has really suffered as of late, we were still winning. At the very least, we were staying competitive.
These things are pretty simple. For example, when James Jones plays, the Blazers are 22-11. When he doesn't play, Portland is 7-14. It's safe to say that James Jones plays an important part in the success of the team, right? Last year, in the five games that Zach Randolph missed before April, when he sat out the rest of the season with a hand injury, Portland was 5-0. I thought that the Blazers were better without him, and this was proof positive. Turns out I was right.
We are not winning anymore, and we are not staying competitive. What's the reason? The loss of James Jones was a huge blow, that's for sure. But think about this: not only was Jack bumped up to the starting lineup, Roy was moved to small forward, where he hasn't played all season. When Roy and Blake split point guard duties, it usually works out great, as evidenced by the nice little 13-game winning streak Portland put together in December. Why stray from that formula? Why destroy Webster's confidence by demoting him? Why bring Jack back into the mix when he was essentially absent from our successes earlier in the season?
Moreover, why not use Outlaw as a small forward? If a change was necessary, why not just start Outlaw and bring Webster off the bench? Then Roy and Blake wouldn't have to play different positions and Jack would have less opportunities to dribble the ball off his feet or find new ways to come up short on 4-on-1 fast breaks. Those types of things don't show up in the box score: "missed opportunities", "unforced turnovers", and "momentum-killing bad shots". Mike Rice told us the other day that, per minute, Jarrett Jack leads the league in fourth quarter turnovers. That's right - he leads the league. If the franchise wants to increase his trade value, it might be a good idea to keep him off the basketball court.
TJH
20 February 2008
Jack?!
I'm in the belly of the beast down here in LA. Pau Gasol made the Lakers an instant contender and the Blazers are falling apart at the seams. The last positive Blazer thought I've had lately, between thoughts of me being homeless at some point in the near future is, "wow, it's cool to see Roy play in the All-Star game," and "wow, he's actually really good."
But lets be honest Ty, were a late lottery pick, as Ken said, and were looking forward to next year. Explain to me ONE thing though, why the hell is Jack starting? If there is any reason that doesn't involve the Franchise showcasing him in order to make a trade, I don't want to hear it.
We just got beat by the Kings in Portland, and while James Jones not being on the court is a huge loss, that shouldn't mean Jack gets the nod over Webster or Outlaw. It disgusts me.
But we had our fun I guess, now we get to sit back and watch the playoffs with what might be the best Western Conference in the history of the league.
Back to the grind...
KT
But lets be honest Ty, were a late lottery pick, as Ken said, and were looking forward to next year. Explain to me ONE thing though, why the hell is Jack starting? If there is any reason that doesn't involve the Franchise showcasing him in order to make a trade, I don't want to hear it.
We just got beat by the Kings in Portland, and while James Jones not being on the court is a huge loss, that shouldn't mean Jack gets the nod over Webster or Outlaw. It disgusts me.
But we had our fun I guess, now we get to sit back and watch the playoffs with what might be the best Western Conference in the history of the league.
Back to the grind...
KT
16 February 2008
State of the Blazers
Although the Blazers are overacheiving this season, and the table seems to be set for at least a return to competitiveness, the future isn't as clear as it's made out to be. The Blazers are a trendy pick to make a deep playoff run as early as next year, but some issues need to be addressed.
I got together with my long-time friends/long-suffering Trail Blazers supporters Ken Poirier and Mark La Croix over All-Star Weekend to have a little discussion about the future of our hometown team. Yes, I purposely hang around people with foreign-sounding last names. And yes, there was beer...
Ty: OK, first of all, guys, there's no room for any more players! OK, we have three second round draft picks. We have Fernandez coming over. Freeland. The Koponen guy. How are these players gonna fit on the team?
Ken: Trades, man! It's all gonna be packaged in trades. Look, we'll end up getting a low lottery pick. Around tenth. And we're not gonna need that tenth pick. There's no way we'll need it. It won't help our team, but it will help somebody else's team, obviously. That, coupled with the other draft picks and the Europeans... I don't know. I don't know much about the Europeans anyway. Fernandez, the Finnish guy...
Ty: Fernandez? He's like the European player of the year! He averages like twenty a game, seven assists -
Mark and Ken at same time: In Europe!
Ty: Yeah, still, in Europe though!
Ken: OK, Ty, how bout this, we package the draft picks with Jarrett Jack.
Ty: OK, fine.
Mark: Ty's fine with that. So am I.
Ken: I know I can get anybody to agree to a trade if I put Jarrett Jack in there.
Ty: Well, you're gonna have to come up with some pretty creative trade scenarios, because again, four draft picks and three Europeans. That's seven players! In addition to the full roster we already have. Plus, I think everybody is under contract for next year.
Mark: First of all, get rid of Darius Miles.
Ty: How? How do we do that?
Ken: You just kick him off the team!
Ty: So you just pay him off?
Ken: No. We take some cocaine and hide it in his locker...
Mark: I can't believe people actually think he'll be good. Not even good, but just decent. The idea that he's gonna come back, play good so his stock will rise and other teams will want him, that's just stupid. It's not gonna happen. He'll be a terrible player if he comes back. He won't fit in. I agree with Canzano, he just wants the lifestyle. He doesn't care about the game. He can't even physically run up and down the court anymore.
Ty: So, OK, they don't want to pay him off - way too much money. Plus they just did that with Francis. They don't want to give him playing time because it would take away time from the younger players.
Mark: Allen's an idiot though, he's the one that gave him the money in the first place, he should pay him off.
Ty: You know, I feel bad though, knowing that I support a team whose owner can just pay people off. To be able to say, OK, here's twenty some million dollars, just take it and get the hell out of here... I don't know if I like that luxury very much.
Mark: Yeah, and Francis was more than that. Like thirty. Just like that.
Ty: Yeah, I feel that's like cheating. I would have liked to seen them just keep him "on the team", but not allow him anywhere near the team, and make him so miserable and embarrassed that he settle for less money.
Mark: We're not gonna be able to get rid of Miles without paying him off. Or, if he retires, which he says he's not gonna do...
Ken: We could put together an attractive package with the picks, Jack, even Webster maybe, I don't know...
Ty: But what are you looking to get back? Where are you gonna go? Alot of people are saying another point guard, but I don't know, I'm fine with somebody like Blake, unselfish, pretty cheap...
Mark: He doesn't need to get his numbers. He doesn't care. That's what's great about him.
Ty: If you make a play for Chris Paul, you've got an even bigger target on your back, and he'll be used to getting a certain number of shots in a game, and he won't be able to score much with Roy, Aldridge, Fernandez, Oden... I mean, even this year we've caught alot of people off-guard this year, especially earlier on. Now, you know, people know us better, they know our team better, so we're not gonna have an easy way of anybody from here on out. I'm not too optimistic about the rest of the season, to be honest.
Ken: Well, you were complaining when Greg Oden went down earlier this year -
Ty: I was??
Ken: Well, most everybody. I didn't care, I thought it was a good thing.
Ty: What??
Mark: Yeah, it was really great. He misses the whole season and it's a great thing for the team!
Ken: No, it was a great thing for the rest of the team, not Greg Oden. Look, there was so much hype, so much of this "what are we gonna do?" thing going around, when we already had LaMarcus Aldridge, and Brandon Roy, coming into their own, forcing the trade to get rid of Randolph. It gave them time to take the team over, to build success, without Oden! And now, we're adding Oden a year after this year!
Ty: OK, if it works out like that, great. But first of all, I wasn't complaining. Well, maybe I was. Of course I was. But my thing was that he was unproven, and the injury just proved that he was injury prone. I didn't think we should've taken him at number one, and I felt more vindicated than anything else. I wasn't shocked, really, I wasn't heartbroken either because I didn't think he'd be all that effective this season.
Ken: Greg Oden should have been number one. No question.
Mark: Common sense, Ty, common sense.
(long silence)
Mark: And speaking of common sense, whose idea was it to rebuild a city that's already below sea level?
I got together with my long-time friends/long-suffering Trail Blazers supporters Ken Poirier and Mark La Croix over All-Star Weekend to have a little discussion about the future of our hometown team. Yes, I purposely hang around people with foreign-sounding last names. And yes, there was beer...
Ty: OK, first of all, guys, there's no room for any more players! OK, we have three second round draft picks. We have Fernandez coming over. Freeland. The Koponen guy. How are these players gonna fit on the team?
Ken: Trades, man! It's all gonna be packaged in trades. Look, we'll end up getting a low lottery pick. Around tenth. And we're not gonna need that tenth pick. There's no way we'll need it. It won't help our team, but it will help somebody else's team, obviously. That, coupled with the other draft picks and the Europeans... I don't know. I don't know much about the Europeans anyway. Fernandez, the Finnish guy...
Ty: Fernandez? He's like the European player of the year! He averages like twenty a game, seven assists -
Mark and Ken at same time: In Europe!
Ty: Yeah, still, in Europe though!
Ken: OK, Ty, how bout this, we package the draft picks with Jarrett Jack.
Ty: OK, fine.
Mark: Ty's fine with that. So am I.
Ken: I know I can get anybody to agree to a trade if I put Jarrett Jack in there.
Ty: Well, you're gonna have to come up with some pretty creative trade scenarios, because again, four draft picks and three Europeans. That's seven players! In addition to the full roster we already have. Plus, I think everybody is under contract for next year.
Mark: First of all, get rid of Darius Miles.
Ty: How? How do we do that?
Ken: You just kick him off the team!
Ty: So you just pay him off?
Ken: No. We take some cocaine and hide it in his locker...
Mark: I can't believe people actually think he'll be good. Not even good, but just decent. The idea that he's gonna come back, play good so his stock will rise and other teams will want him, that's just stupid. It's not gonna happen. He'll be a terrible player if he comes back. He won't fit in. I agree with Canzano, he just wants the lifestyle. He doesn't care about the game. He can't even physically run up and down the court anymore.
Ty: So, OK, they don't want to pay him off - way too much money. Plus they just did that with Francis. They don't want to give him playing time because it would take away time from the younger players.
Mark: Allen's an idiot though, he's the one that gave him the money in the first place, he should pay him off.
Ty: You know, I feel bad though, knowing that I support a team whose owner can just pay people off. To be able to say, OK, here's twenty some million dollars, just take it and get the hell out of here... I don't know if I like that luxury very much.
Mark: Yeah, and Francis was more than that. Like thirty. Just like that.
Ty: Yeah, I feel that's like cheating. I would have liked to seen them just keep him "on the team", but not allow him anywhere near the team, and make him so miserable and embarrassed that he settle for less money.
Mark: We're not gonna be able to get rid of Miles without paying him off. Or, if he retires, which he says he's not gonna do...
Ken: We could put together an attractive package with the picks, Jack, even Webster maybe, I don't know...
Ty: But what are you looking to get back? Where are you gonna go? Alot of people are saying another point guard, but I don't know, I'm fine with somebody like Blake, unselfish, pretty cheap...
Mark: He doesn't need to get his numbers. He doesn't care. That's what's great about him.
Ty: If you make a play for Chris Paul, you've got an even bigger target on your back, and he'll be used to getting a certain number of shots in a game, and he won't be able to score much with Roy, Aldridge, Fernandez, Oden... I mean, even this year we've caught alot of people off-guard this year, especially earlier on. Now, you know, people know us better, they know our team better, so we're not gonna have an easy way of anybody from here on out. I'm not too optimistic about the rest of the season, to be honest.
Ken: Well, you were complaining when Greg Oden went down earlier this year -
Ty: I was??
Ken: Well, most everybody. I didn't care, I thought it was a good thing.
Ty: What??
Mark: Yeah, it was really great. He misses the whole season and it's a great thing for the team!
Ken: No, it was a great thing for the rest of the team, not Greg Oden. Look, there was so much hype, so much of this "what are we gonna do?" thing going around, when we already had LaMarcus Aldridge, and Brandon Roy, coming into their own, forcing the trade to get rid of Randolph. It gave them time to take the team over, to build success, without Oden! And now, we're adding Oden a year after this year!
Ty: OK, if it works out like that, great. But first of all, I wasn't complaining. Well, maybe I was. Of course I was. But my thing was that he was unproven, and the injury just proved that he was injury prone. I didn't think we should've taken him at number one, and I felt more vindicated than anything else. I wasn't shocked, really, I wasn't heartbroken either because I didn't think he'd be all that effective this season.
Ken: Greg Oden should have been number one. No question.
Mark: Common sense, Ty, common sense.
(long silence)
Mark: And speaking of common sense, whose idea was it to rebuild a city that's already below sea level?
15 February 2008
Hot Air Jordan
I opened my mailbox today to find Michael Jordan staring at me.
And here I was, thinking he was out of my life forever.
When I was a kid, Jordan made me miserable. His team always won, he always made the shots at the buzzer, and he did it so effortlessly. He destroyed the Blazers every time he played against us, knowing that we passed him up for a big man.
But that's for another time.
See, I never hated Jordan. I hated Karl Malone and John Stockton, and I hated everyone on the Spurs, and I HATED Bill Laimbeer. But not MJ. I never held any animosity towards him, which was odd considering how many times he broke my heart. I wondered why.
Now I know why.
#23 graced the cover of ESPN Magazine this week. Read this.
My favorite part:
"One thing to learn from me is that everything I've ever done has been me, not something that someone calculated me to be."
How stupid does he think we are?
Jordan's whole career was based on a persona that was created by Wall Street. Everything. The tongue wagging. The shaved head. Everything. Jordan Brand (yes, that's the actual name) is so big that they host Super Bowl parties. They make golfing apparel. They are environmentally friendly.
It's made Jordan rich beyond his wildest dreams. And he has the balls to now claim that he was being himself the whole time? The robotic press conferences, the by-the-book post game interviews? The complete absence of any political or social commentary or opinion? Space Jam???
Indeed, it was his unwillingness to take any stand for anything he truly believed him that made him millions. He was a sponsor's dream, always thinking about his image, always thinking about the shoes he peddled, or the drinks he pushed, or the highlight videos that stroked his ego, giving way to the LeBron Jameses of the world, guys who won't sign a Sudanese human rights petition for fear of scaring away his Chinese sponsors and investors.
Yikes.
And Jordan usually gets a free pass from media and fanboys alike. Why? And why are players like Allen Iverson constantly denied their much deserved reverence? It's not rings. It's image, coupled with racism, entwined with completely misplaced priorities. People selectively avoid the fact that Jordan cheated on his wife, had a huge gambling problem, and is a complete failure as an NBA executive. They avoid these things because they remember MJ as a squeaky clean ad-man, pitching underwear and hamburgers with a smile on his face.
I urge any basketball fan to read "The Jordan Rules", Sam Smith's incredible account of Chicago's first title run, or "Playing For Keeps", David Halberstam's take on Jordan's empire. Then ask yourself if the Jordan you know is the real Jordan.
Michael Jordan didn't give me reason to hate him when I was a kid. He liked basketball. I liked basketball. He liked McDonald's. I liked McDonald's. He seemed like a nice guy, a superhero in short pants.
That's why I didn't hate him then. And that's why I hate him now.
TJH
And here I was, thinking he was out of my life forever.
When I was a kid, Jordan made me miserable. His team always won, he always made the shots at the buzzer, and he did it so effortlessly. He destroyed the Blazers every time he played against us, knowing that we passed him up for a big man.
But that's for another time.
See, I never hated Jordan. I hated Karl Malone and John Stockton, and I hated everyone on the Spurs, and I HATED Bill Laimbeer. But not MJ. I never held any animosity towards him, which was odd considering how many times he broke my heart. I wondered why.
Now I know why.
#23 graced the cover of ESPN Magazine this week. Read this.
My favorite part:
"One thing to learn from me is that everything I've ever done has been me, not something that someone calculated me to be."
How stupid does he think we are?
Jordan's whole career was based on a persona that was created by Wall Street. Everything. The tongue wagging. The shaved head. Everything. Jordan Brand (yes, that's the actual name) is so big that they host Super Bowl parties. They make golfing apparel. They are environmentally friendly.
It's made Jordan rich beyond his wildest dreams. And he has the balls to now claim that he was being himself the whole time? The robotic press conferences, the by-the-book post game interviews? The complete absence of any political or social commentary or opinion? Space Jam???
Indeed, it was his unwillingness to take any stand for anything he truly believed him that made him millions. He was a sponsor's dream, always thinking about his image, always thinking about the shoes he peddled, or the drinks he pushed, or the highlight videos that stroked his ego, giving way to the LeBron Jameses of the world, guys who won't sign a Sudanese human rights petition for fear of scaring away his Chinese sponsors and investors.
Yikes.
And Jordan usually gets a free pass from media and fanboys alike. Why? And why are players like Allen Iverson constantly denied their much deserved reverence? It's not rings. It's image, coupled with racism, entwined with completely misplaced priorities. People selectively avoid the fact that Jordan cheated on his wife, had a huge gambling problem, and is a complete failure as an NBA executive. They avoid these things because they remember MJ as a squeaky clean ad-man, pitching underwear and hamburgers with a smile on his face.
I urge any basketball fan to read "The Jordan Rules", Sam Smith's incredible account of Chicago's first title run, or "Playing For Keeps", David Halberstam's take on Jordan's empire. Then ask yourself if the Jordan you know is the real Jordan.
Michael Jordan didn't give me reason to hate him when I was a kid. He liked basketball. I liked basketball. He liked McDonald's. I liked McDonald's. He seemed like a nice guy, a superhero in short pants.
That's why I didn't hate him then. And that's why I hate him now.
TJH
14 February 2008
Out of the Picture
It's All-Star Weekend, and the Blazers are out of the playoff race, with a brutal upcoming schedule and deflated optimism. Long gone are the days where being competitive with upper echelon teams was a given.
What went wrong? Why are the Blazers losing seemingly every time they take the floor?
Here's what I think:
Word got out - the Blazers are pretty good.
Teams used to come to Portland expecting an easy victory. No more. Remember, the Blazers won thirteen games in a row before the playoff race heated up. Now, with essentially 20 teams fighting for playoff position, every game matters, and every team is bringing at least their 'B' game.
James Jones is hurt.
Although Portland ranks top-five leaguewide in three-point shooting, Jones was the only player that was consistent. Webster is incredibly streaky, and Steve Blake doesn't shoot well under defensive pressure. Plus, everybody keeps talking about Jones' locker-room leadership and "presence", and his role as the elder statesman. I don't really put too much faith in that, but at the very least, I can imagine eyes rolling when the younger Blazers have to put up with listening to Jones talk about fishing all the time.
They're overplaying the youth angle.
I have a feeling that these losses aren't affecting the Blazers as much as they should. We are constantly playing the "we're young and inexperienced" card, when in fact we are playing with a lack of effort and, at times, complete carelessness. Also, when Roy missed a couple games due to a death in the family, we completely mailed it in, eliciting numerous "Well, that's what happens when you don't have Brandon Roy in the lineup!" excuses.
Jarrett Jack sucks.
Even I'm tired of reading myself complain about this guy, but Jarrett Jack has just been terrible. I need to find out what Portland's record is when Jack plays over 20 minutes a game. 1-15? 3-20?
I haven't written in a while because I am just outright disgusted after watching or listening to the Blazers this month. I got used to winning, and developed a mindset where if the Blazers won, it's what was supposed to happen; if they lost, it was the Blazers who were not living up to expectations. 28-24 after 52 games? I would have taken that at the beginning of the season in a heartbeat. But I would have been surprised to learn that the majority of our losses have been the result of a plain lack of effort. At times, the team looks like Maurice Cheeks is still at the helm, as evidenced by the outright lack of plays, nonsensical substitution patterns and outright favoritism by the coaching staff.
To have a shot at the playoffs, Portland will need to post at least a 20-10 record for the rest of the season.
Possible. Not bloody likely.
TJH
What went wrong? Why are the Blazers losing seemingly every time they take the floor?
Here's what I think:
Word got out - the Blazers are pretty good.
Teams used to come to Portland expecting an easy victory. No more. Remember, the Blazers won thirteen games in a row before the playoff race heated up. Now, with essentially 20 teams fighting for playoff position, every game matters, and every team is bringing at least their 'B' game.
James Jones is hurt.
Although Portland ranks top-five leaguewide in three-point shooting, Jones was the only player that was consistent. Webster is incredibly streaky, and Steve Blake doesn't shoot well under defensive pressure. Plus, everybody keeps talking about Jones' locker-room leadership and "presence", and his role as the elder statesman. I don't really put too much faith in that, but at the very least, I can imagine eyes rolling when the younger Blazers have to put up with listening to Jones talk about fishing all the time.
They're overplaying the youth angle.
I have a feeling that these losses aren't affecting the Blazers as much as they should. We are constantly playing the "we're young and inexperienced" card, when in fact we are playing with a lack of effort and, at times, complete carelessness. Also, when Roy missed a couple games due to a death in the family, we completely mailed it in, eliciting numerous "Well, that's what happens when you don't have Brandon Roy in the lineup!" excuses.
Jarrett Jack sucks.
Even I'm tired of reading myself complain about this guy, but Jarrett Jack has just been terrible. I need to find out what Portland's record is when Jack plays over 20 minutes a game. 1-15? 3-20?
I haven't written in a while because I am just outright disgusted after watching or listening to the Blazers this month. I got used to winning, and developed a mindset where if the Blazers won, it's what was supposed to happen; if they lost, it was the Blazers who were not living up to expectations. 28-24 after 52 games? I would have taken that at the beginning of the season in a heartbeat. But I would have been surprised to learn that the majority of our losses have been the result of a plain lack of effort. At times, the team looks like Maurice Cheeks is still at the helm, as evidenced by the outright lack of plays, nonsensical substitution patterns and outright favoritism by the coaching staff.
To have a shot at the playoffs, Portland will need to post at least a 20-10 record for the rest of the season.
Possible. Not bloody likely.
TJH
07 February 2008
Breakfast with an All-Star
Brandon Roy sat down with ESPN's LZ Granderson for an interview the other day. They ate breakfast and talked shop.
Some thoughts:
- People actually go to Shari's when it's light outside? Hmm. I don't think I've been there for an actual meal since 8th grade.
- Watch how Brandon decides to not bump fists with the guy, leaving Granderson hanging, after the requisite "handshake/half hug/fist clasp". Another reason to like Brandon Roy. Sometimes, enough is enough.
- LZ Granderson needs to drop the "you're black, so you should be interested in Barack Obama" nonsense. He wrote a whole story about it the other day. If he did any actual research (like talking to people outside of the sports world), he'd find that blacks are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea that a black person will automatically vote for another black person, simply because they're black.
TJH
Some thoughts:
- People actually go to Shari's when it's light outside? Hmm. I don't think I've been there for an actual meal since 8th grade.
- Watch how Brandon decides to not bump fists with the guy, leaving Granderson hanging, after the requisite "handshake/half hug/fist clasp". Another reason to like Brandon Roy. Sometimes, enough is enough.
- LZ Granderson needs to drop the "you're black, so you should be interested in Barack Obama" nonsense. He wrote a whole story about it the other day. If he did any actual research (like talking to people outside of the sports world), he'd find that blacks are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea that a black person will automatically vote for another black person, simply because they're black.
TJH
06 February 2008
Shaq
My friend called me right before the Blazer game started tonight and told me that Jarrett Jack would be starting.
Normally I would freak out at something like this. Simply put, it's a recipe for disaster, and at the very least it's an uncommon way to punish a player coming off a seven-turnover game by giving him a starting spot.
But I am still reeling from the Shaq news.
The Phoenix Suns traded Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for Shaquille O'Neal.
Umm... WHAT?!?!?
For the Suns, I guess the thinking was that they were willing to sacrifice their future in exchange for a chance to win now. But the thing is, bringing Shaq into the mix doesn't increase their chances to win. At all.
Phoenix, as everybody knows, is fun run-and-gun, a team whose offense thrives on athleticism and dynamic fast breaks. Shawn Marion was a pivotal part of this Suns team, and a player who typified Phoenix's unselfish game and fast pace. Moreover, the Suns had no real reason to make a big move, as they currently have the best record in the Western Conference.
I've never been to Phoenix. Maybe it's too hot to think rationally about anything, even in early February. They're obviously thinking about the Spurs after trading for Shaq, but they're thinking about the matchup the wrong way. If having Shaq makes them match up more evenly with the Spurs, which is highly unlikely, that just means you're playing how the Spurs want you to play: slow, physical, inside. Phoenix won't beat the Spurs that way. You beat the Spurs with energy, youth, a fast pace, and brass knuckles. Shaq, by the way, is old and slow. You do the math.
I think this may be the only time where I completely agree with John Hollinger.
That's saying something.
Good luck Suns - you'll surely need it.
TJH
Normally I would freak out at something like this. Simply put, it's a recipe for disaster, and at the very least it's an uncommon way to punish a player coming off a seven-turnover game by giving him a starting spot.
But I am still reeling from the Shaq news.
The Phoenix Suns traded Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for Shaquille O'Neal.
Umm... WHAT?!?!?
For the Suns, I guess the thinking was that they were willing to sacrifice their future in exchange for a chance to win now. But the thing is, bringing Shaq into the mix doesn't increase their chances to win. At all.
Phoenix, as everybody knows, is fun run-and-gun, a team whose offense thrives on athleticism and dynamic fast breaks. Shawn Marion was a pivotal part of this Suns team, and a player who typified Phoenix's unselfish game and fast pace. Moreover, the Suns had no real reason to make a big move, as they currently have the best record in the Western Conference.
I've never been to Phoenix. Maybe it's too hot to think rationally about anything, even in early February. They're obviously thinking about the Spurs after trading for Shaq, but they're thinking about the matchup the wrong way. If having Shaq makes them match up more evenly with the Spurs, which is highly unlikely, that just means you're playing how the Spurs want you to play: slow, physical, inside. Phoenix won't beat the Spurs that way. You beat the Spurs with energy, youth, a fast pace, and brass knuckles. Shaq, by the way, is old and slow. You do the math.
I think this may be the only time where I completely agree with John Hollinger.
That's saying something.
Good luck Suns - you'll surely need it.
TJH
04 February 2008
Common Sense
Denver won an overtime thriller tonight in Portland in a game full of playoff implications.
Of course, it shouldn't have been a thriller, considering the amount of chances Portland gave up in the fourth quarter and overtime.
The Blazers fought for the final possession in overtime, and the ball bounced to Jarrett Jack with twenty seconds left in the game. It was tied at this point, and so, obviously, the smart decision would be to slow it down and play for the last shot.
What does Jack do? Well, what do you think? He throws a behind-the-back pass into a group of Denver players, who recover the ball and get the ball to Allen Iverson, who buries a last-second dagger.
Why was he trying to throw fancy passes with the game on the line? What was he thinking? And what was Nate McMillan thinking, keeping him in the game so late? Why does he keep doing this? Jarrett Jack had seven turnovers tonight.
Seven!
A pathetic performance and yet another display of incompetence from our fearless leader.
Way to go, Nate - you just cost us a playoff spot.
TJH
Of course, it shouldn't have been a thriller, considering the amount of chances Portland gave up in the fourth quarter and overtime.
The Blazers fought for the final possession in overtime, and the ball bounced to Jarrett Jack with twenty seconds left in the game. It was tied at this point, and so, obviously, the smart decision would be to slow it down and play for the last shot.
What does Jack do? Well, what do you think? He throws a behind-the-back pass into a group of Denver players, who recover the ball and get the ball to Allen Iverson, who buries a last-second dagger.
Why was he trying to throw fancy passes with the game on the line? What was he thinking? And what was Nate McMillan thinking, keeping him in the game so late? Why does he keep doing this? Jarrett Jack had seven turnovers tonight.
Seven!
A pathetic performance and yet another display of incompetence from our fearless leader.
Way to go, Nate - you just cost us a playoff spot.
TJH
02 February 2008
Triple Double
The question was this:
How would Brandon Roy perform, on national television, the day after being selected for the all-star team?
The answer:
He fought his way past a bad shooting night, a surprisingly scrappy Knicks team, Nate McMillan being outcoached by Isiah Thomas, and absolutely atrocious referees to notch the first triple double of his short career.
It was a relatively quiet triple double, as far as triple doubles go. I went to the game last night and didn't realize he was close until two minutes into overtime. That's one thing that seperates him from guys like Baron Davis and Deron Williams - guys who can't sneak their way up the boxscores without making a racket and waking everybody up. Roy's numbers are so entwined with the overall flow and pace of the game that it makes it difficult - and pointless - to compare him with players like Davis and Williams. While those two players are probably the two toughest omissions from the all-star lineup, it is obvious that the coaches made the right decision in choosing Roy over them. Last night made it crystal clear.
Other observations from the game:
- While Zach Randolph was warming up before the game, he was hitting at least 80% of his shots. 90% is more like it. It was genuinely amazing, and it led to a pretty typical game for him. Typical Randolph games, of course, we are all unfortunately used to at this point. He got his 20 and 10, but looking at a close-up of his face on the JumboTron during the fourth quarter revealed not a drop of sweat on his face.
- He was soundly booed during pre-game introductions, and half-heartedly jeered every time he touched the ball in the first half. I would have joined in, save for the fact that he never spoke badly of Portland, and was genuinely disappointed when the Blazers traded him for, what it seemed to be at the time, fifty cents on the dollar. Look, on the court Randolph was selfish, lazy, and dumb. He's the only player to lead the club in scoring and rebounding four seasons in a row, but those seasons just happen to be the worst stretch in franchise history. He will never be a winner, will never be anything more than a cog in an inefficient, unsuccessful machine. But he didn't deserve to be booed.
- Yesterday was Pet Appreciation Day at the Rose Garden, and the highlight was some lady singing the national anthem holding the microphone in one hand and a scared little dog in the other. She even put the microphone up to the dog's mouth at one point during the song. I can't think of any joke or putdown that would even give this lady her just due.
- I have never seen more evidence of corrupt referees than last night. Ever. The fact that those three - Mike Callahan, Kevin Fehr, and Bill Kennedy - are at the top of their profession sickens me. I would call them incompetent, blind, and a general menace to society if it weren't for the plain and simple fact that the league pressures referees to determine outcomes of games. Calls favor the large market teams over small market teams 85% of the time. That is no coincidence. Also, you have to understand that Portland having a successful team, whether or not they have good citizens on their team or whatever their level of chemistry is, would be an outright disaster for the league. Plain and simple. Nobody outside of Portland cares about the Blazers, just like nobody outside of San Antonio cares about the Spurs.
- LaMarcus Aldridge already has more of a complete than Zach Randolph, and LMA is only 21. Randolph's a slightly better shooter, and he has a keen sense of angles and proper positioning for grabbing defensive rebounds. That's it. Aldridge was on pace to outplay Zach until he picked up a second stupid foul in the first.
- Jarrett Jack had his best game since early December, which leads me to believe that now would be the perfect time to trade him. Now, as in this second. Don't let him on the floor again. We have fifteen players under contract this season and next. This is the same team that has three European prospects waiting in the wings, plus two draft picks coming up this summer. The recent trade talk involving Portland has been ludicrous at best, but it's obvious why Portland would be engaged with teams in trade talks to begin with. Outlaw is not expendable, and absolutely should not be traded now or next summer. But Jack, Frye, and even Martell Webster might not be Blazers in a couple weeks. Who knows what will happen.
TJH
How would Brandon Roy perform, on national television, the day after being selected for the all-star team?
The answer:
He fought his way past a bad shooting night, a surprisingly scrappy Knicks team, Nate McMillan being outcoached by Isiah Thomas, and absolutely atrocious referees to notch the first triple double of his short career.
It was a relatively quiet triple double, as far as triple doubles go. I went to the game last night and didn't realize he was close until two minutes into overtime. That's one thing that seperates him from guys like Baron Davis and Deron Williams - guys who can't sneak their way up the boxscores without making a racket and waking everybody up. Roy's numbers are so entwined with the overall flow and pace of the game that it makes it difficult - and pointless - to compare him with players like Davis and Williams. While those two players are probably the two toughest omissions from the all-star lineup, it is obvious that the coaches made the right decision in choosing Roy over them. Last night made it crystal clear.
Other observations from the game:
- While Zach Randolph was warming up before the game, he was hitting at least 80% of his shots. 90% is more like it. It was genuinely amazing, and it led to a pretty typical game for him. Typical Randolph games, of course, we are all unfortunately used to at this point. He got his 20 and 10, but looking at a close-up of his face on the JumboTron during the fourth quarter revealed not a drop of sweat on his face.
- He was soundly booed during pre-game introductions, and half-heartedly jeered every time he touched the ball in the first half. I would have joined in, save for the fact that he never spoke badly of Portland, and was genuinely disappointed when the Blazers traded him for, what it seemed to be at the time, fifty cents on the dollar. Look, on the court Randolph was selfish, lazy, and dumb. He's the only player to lead the club in scoring and rebounding four seasons in a row, but those seasons just happen to be the worst stretch in franchise history. He will never be a winner, will never be anything more than a cog in an inefficient, unsuccessful machine. But he didn't deserve to be booed.
- Yesterday was Pet Appreciation Day at the Rose Garden, and the highlight was some lady singing the national anthem holding the microphone in one hand and a scared little dog in the other. She even put the microphone up to the dog's mouth at one point during the song. I can't think of any joke or putdown that would even give this lady her just due.
- I have never seen more evidence of corrupt referees than last night. Ever. The fact that those three - Mike Callahan, Kevin Fehr, and Bill Kennedy - are at the top of their profession sickens me. I would call them incompetent, blind, and a general menace to society if it weren't for the plain and simple fact that the league pressures referees to determine outcomes of games. Calls favor the large market teams over small market teams 85% of the time. That is no coincidence. Also, you have to understand that Portland having a successful team, whether or not they have good citizens on their team or whatever their level of chemistry is, would be an outright disaster for the league. Plain and simple. Nobody outside of Portland cares about the Blazers, just like nobody outside of San Antonio cares about the Spurs.
- LaMarcus Aldridge already has more of a complete than Zach Randolph, and LMA is only 21. Randolph's a slightly better shooter, and he has a keen sense of angles and proper positioning for grabbing defensive rebounds. That's it. Aldridge was on pace to outplay Zach until he picked up a second stupid foul in the first.
- Jarrett Jack had his best game since early December, which leads me to believe that now would be the perfect time to trade him. Now, as in this second. Don't let him on the floor again. We have fifteen players under contract this season and next. This is the same team that has three European prospects waiting in the wings, plus two draft picks coming up this summer. The recent trade talk involving Portland has been ludicrous at best, but it's obvious why Portland would be engaged with teams in trade talks to begin with. Outlaw is not expendable, and absolutely should not be traded now or next summer. But Jack, Frye, and even Martell Webster might not be Blazers in a couple weeks. Who knows what will happen.
TJH
01 February 2008
Roy and More
It's been a while since we had an all-star on the team, remember when everyone used to try and vote Randolph in? Not so much because we really thought he was good enough, but that we were just so desperate to have anyone represented in the All-Star game? Thank god those days are over.
Brandon Roy deserves to be an all-star, but I think it's a shame they don't allow more than 12 people on the rosters. I think Marcus Camby is truly deserving of being an All-Star. He leads the league is rebounding and blocks and is by far the most important player on that team. But George Karl said it himself, they just don't have enough wins to warrant three players from their team on the all-star team. But it'll be fun to see Roy play this year. Even he does play only 8 minutes.
I read a trade-rumor about the Blazers being involved in a 3-way trade with the Nets and Mavs. We would give up Outlaw and Frye to the Nets and get Devin Harris from the Mavs. They're saying Kevin Pritchard is high on Harris, and for good reason I suppose, but should we really give up two of our key role players for a starter that will just put another quality PG, in Blake, on the bench?
The Lakers just made a huge trade for Gasol, so they will definitely be making the playoffs this year, so we have to either continue our winning ways or make a trade to get a little better to assure us of a spot in the playoffs. I don't think I like giving up Frye and Outlaw though. Who would we bring in off the bench in their place? McRoberts? We would first have to bring him back from the D-League. Raef? I don't like that one bit. And what about for Outlaw? Give Jack more playing time? Or James Jones? Either wouldn't be able to do the things Outlaw can do. I could see him winning a 6th man of the year award in the future if he keeps improving the way he is.
Anyway, some food for thought on the possible trade. I hope we stand pat right now, unless something more enticing than Devin Harris comes up. There is talk of throwing in Brandon Bass, who is a beast, and us also giving up Jack. THAT I could be interested in...
Oh, and how excited is everyone to see Z-bo come back to the Rose Garden? I'm sure they'll roll out the red carpet for him.
Brandon Roy deserves to be an all-star, but I think it's a shame they don't allow more than 12 people on the rosters. I think Marcus Camby is truly deserving of being an All-Star. He leads the league is rebounding and blocks and is by far the most important player on that team. But George Karl said it himself, they just don't have enough wins to warrant three players from their team on the all-star team. But it'll be fun to see Roy play this year. Even he does play only 8 minutes.
I read a trade-rumor about the Blazers being involved in a 3-way trade with the Nets and Mavs. We would give up Outlaw and Frye to the Nets and get Devin Harris from the Mavs. They're saying Kevin Pritchard is high on Harris, and for good reason I suppose, but should we really give up two of our key role players for a starter that will just put another quality PG, in Blake, on the bench?
The Lakers just made a huge trade for Gasol, so they will definitely be making the playoffs this year, so we have to either continue our winning ways or make a trade to get a little better to assure us of a spot in the playoffs. I don't think I like giving up Frye and Outlaw though. Who would we bring in off the bench in their place? McRoberts? We would first have to bring him back from the D-League. Raef? I don't like that one bit. And what about for Outlaw? Give Jack more playing time? Or James Jones? Either wouldn't be able to do the things Outlaw can do. I could see him winning a 6th man of the year award in the future if he keeps improving the way he is.
Anyway, some food for thought on the possible trade. I hope we stand pat right now, unless something more enticing than Devin Harris comes up. There is talk of throwing in Brandon Bass, who is a beast, and us also giving up Jack. THAT I could be interested in...
Oh, and how excited is everyone to see Z-bo come back to the Rose Garden? I'm sure they'll roll out the red carpet for him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
