Ever since high school I often found myself debating what exactly constituted a sport. I would argue with participants of the less popular activities over why basketball and football were superior. In order to validate my feelings toward the lesser activities, I developed criteria that an activity must meet in order to be considered a sport, and not just a leisure activity. Below I will list my criteria and discuss.
1.) There has to be defense.
When I say defense, I am not talking about simple physical constraints such as water or the lack of oxygen. I am referring to opponents whose objective is to beat you. Defense is a key to any popular sport. It brings the best out in everyone by injecting competitiveness. Without defense, you often here, “He really is battling inner demons,” or “It’s about self-discipline and concentration.” That is fantastic, but when you have defense not only do you have to battle yourself, you also have to battle someone who will do anything they can to prevent you from succeeding.
So with our first requirement, we have defined swimming, track, car racing or any of its derivatives, and golf as leisure activities. While we are on swimming, how can a guy who only swims win 6 different gold medals? I know this has been brought up before, but it upsets me every four years. Shouldn’t swimming get a single gold medal? Since a great swimmer can win so many gold medals, I think that next year there should be a medal awarded to the best freethrow shooter, the best three point shooter, the best rebounder, the best dunker, the best team, the MVP of the league, and the best defender. That way the best basketball athlete could also win 6 gold medals. When a guy as goofy as Michael Phelps can be the greatest Olympic champion of all time, it’s time to reevaluate the system. Clearly, something is not right.
2.) The sport requires top physical condition and its players peak in their 20’s, and decline in their 30’s.
At first look, this rule would seem to invalidate baseball. We’ve all seen fat pitchers on the mound who clearly are not in top condition. However, the other positions require conditioning so I will not let the pitchers destroy the entire sport, although they do not help baseball’s case. In addition, recently players have been peaking in their 30’s, but it has become obvious that this was due to steroids, so baseball gets a pass here also.
Top physical condition is important because it implies that the sport is extremely challenging and players must be in their prime as human beings to compete at the highest level. So, we can define bowling, darts, and golf as leisure activities. You should notice that many of the leisure activities violate more than one of the requirements. This only further condemns them.
3.) The sport must draw paying spectators.
If people do not want to watch the sport, it is not a sport. So, this pretty much encompasses all sports played by women with the sole exception of tennis. This requirement is also interesting because you can apply it at the national and international level. This requirement can be used to rank sports in your local area.
For example, in Texas the hierarchy would consist of football and basketball on top, then baseball, soccer, lacrosse, hockey, and finally rugby. Another way to look at this is that the best athletes will play football and basketball first, then baseball, then soccer, etc. So, if you are playing lacrosse in Texas, you probably got cut by the football team. However, in the Northeast, lacrosse and hockey may be on the same plateau as basketball and football. At the international level, football may be last and soccer or rugby would come in first.
Regardless, this requirement identifies leisure activities such as water polo, dodge ball, and other activities of that nature that no one cares about. One could argue that activities can switch from ‘sport’ to ‘leisure activity’ depending on the location. For example, in Texas nobody wants to watch lacrosse or rugby, so these could be considered leisure activities. In Mexico, no one wants to watch football.
So swimming, golf, track, water polo, cheerleading, dancing, dodge ball, car racing, gymnastics, cycling, and every sport played by women aside from tennis are all leisure activities. Okay? Glad we got that cleared up.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Fantasy Baseball
As we approach the end of our NBA fantasy basketball season, my friend asked me if I wanted to organize a fantasy baseball league. Fantasy baseball is apparently the best fantasy experience because this is where fantasy began and the statistics are much more developed than those of basketball.
However, I have many issues with baseball and shot his thought down without hesitation. First, I’m not in the best shape of my life. I do not work out religiously and do not watch what I eat. I’m not fat, but I’m not cut either. And here resides my first issue. Why am I going to watch a sport that pays “athletes” who are in worse shape than I am? So, you are a professional athlete being paid millions of dollars and cannot keep yourself in shape? I don’t get it. And do not kid yourself. These guys have bellies. They are definitely not in their best physical condition. And the other thing I cannot make sense of is that apparently, all these guys were using steroids. Roger Clemens, I’m looking at you. How can you use steroids and still be fat? It’s ridiculous. This is how un-athletic baseball is, it has players on steroids that still cannot keep themselves in shape. Hey Roger, when is the last time you ran a mile? College? High School? It was a long time ago, I can promise you this much.
Have you ever thought about heaven and hell? My heaven would consist of an infinite number of HD TV’s, half constantly playing March Madness games and half playing NBA playoff games. Hell would consist of TV’s playing WNBA games. Seriously, it’s time to put the WNBA to sleep. When I think of women’s basketball, I think turnovers, missed layups, and an inability to jump. It’s basically like watching 20 Jacque Vaughn’s square off. And this is on TV? It’s dumbfounding. But I digress, purgatory would definitely have baseball on the TV’s. Think about it. If you arrived to purgatory and all that was on was baseball, would it even surprise you? I would think, ‘Yup, that’s about right.’
If someone told you the score to a baseball game, would you still watch it? Unless you are completely obsessed with baseball, the answer is 'no.' If someone told me that the final score of a baseball game was 3-2, I can guarantee you that there is no way I would watch this game. However, if someone told me the Celtics beat the Lakers 99-98, the likelihood of me watching the game just increased. If I found out the Cardinals beat the Steelers 35-33, I would want to see this game. This is because basketball and football are just more exciting than baseball. There is more action, more points scored, and better athletes. I know I could not play basketball or football professionally, but whenever I see a baseball pitcher I think I have a chance at the MLB. If I injected the steroids directly into my throwing arm, could I get my fastball into the 90’s? If so, I’d get a contract.
Baseball homers like to tell themselves that people who do not like baseball just don’t understand the intricacies of the game. They say, “Well, you never played so you just cannot appreciate it.” This is absurd. Baseball is not as complicated as baseball homers like to believe. It’s similar to how counting cards was portrayed in the movie 21. Counting cards does not require a gifted mind from MIT. All you do is add 1 and -1 over and over again. Similarly, just because people like to say baseball is overly complicated does not make it true.
My final thought on baseball is, how will it survive the recession? I’ve seen the stands while watching Sports Center. Does anyone go to the games? Whenever a homerun is hit, they zoom into the stands to show a fat guy leaping over 3 empty rows of seats to secure the ball. How are they going to pay CC Sabathia millions this year and survive? By the way, CC gets a $161 million contract and McDonald’s sales increase by 5% during the worst recession in decades…. Coincidence? I think not.
However, I have many issues with baseball and shot his thought down without hesitation. First, I’m not in the best shape of my life. I do not work out religiously and do not watch what I eat. I’m not fat, but I’m not cut either. And here resides my first issue. Why am I going to watch a sport that pays “athletes” who are in worse shape than I am? So, you are a professional athlete being paid millions of dollars and cannot keep yourself in shape? I don’t get it. And do not kid yourself. These guys have bellies. They are definitely not in their best physical condition. And the other thing I cannot make sense of is that apparently, all these guys were using steroids. Roger Clemens, I’m looking at you. How can you use steroids and still be fat? It’s ridiculous. This is how un-athletic baseball is, it has players on steroids that still cannot keep themselves in shape. Hey Roger, when is the last time you ran a mile? College? High School? It was a long time ago, I can promise you this much.
Have you ever thought about heaven and hell? My heaven would consist of an infinite number of HD TV’s, half constantly playing March Madness games and half playing NBA playoff games. Hell would consist of TV’s playing WNBA games. Seriously, it’s time to put the WNBA to sleep. When I think of women’s basketball, I think turnovers, missed layups, and an inability to jump. It’s basically like watching 20 Jacque Vaughn’s square off. And this is on TV? It’s dumbfounding. But I digress, purgatory would definitely have baseball on the TV’s. Think about it. If you arrived to purgatory and all that was on was baseball, would it even surprise you? I would think, ‘Yup, that’s about right.’
If someone told you the score to a baseball game, would you still watch it? Unless you are completely obsessed with baseball, the answer is 'no.' If someone told me that the final score of a baseball game was 3-2, I can guarantee you that there is no way I would watch this game. However, if someone told me the Celtics beat the Lakers 99-98, the likelihood of me watching the game just increased. If I found out the Cardinals beat the Steelers 35-33, I would want to see this game. This is because basketball and football are just more exciting than baseball. There is more action, more points scored, and better athletes. I know I could not play basketball or football professionally, but whenever I see a baseball pitcher I think I have a chance at the MLB. If I injected the steroids directly into my throwing arm, could I get my fastball into the 90’s? If so, I’d get a contract.
Baseball homers like to tell themselves that people who do not like baseball just don’t understand the intricacies of the game. They say, “Well, you never played so you just cannot appreciate it.” This is absurd. Baseball is not as complicated as baseball homers like to believe. It’s similar to how counting cards was portrayed in the movie 21. Counting cards does not require a gifted mind from MIT. All you do is add 1 and -1 over and over again. Similarly, just because people like to say baseball is overly complicated does not make it true.
My final thought on baseball is, how will it survive the recession? I’ve seen the stands while watching Sports Center. Does anyone go to the games? Whenever a homerun is hit, they zoom into the stands to show a fat guy leaping over 3 empty rows of seats to secure the ball. How are they going to pay CC Sabathia millions this year and survive? By the way, CC gets a $161 million contract and McDonald’s sales increase by 5% during the worst recession in decades…. Coincidence? I think not.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Spurs, Lakers Preview
As we get closer and closer to the playoffs, games against possible playoff opponents carry more meaning. In these games it’s important to ask, “Who needs this game more?”
In this case, the answer is clearly the Lakers. Before beating the Rockets in Houston yesterday, the Lakers lost to three Western Conference teams on the road in a row: Denver, Phoenix and Portland. If the Lakers want to feel confident on the road come playoff time, they will need to start playing much better away from LA.
In addition, the Spurs team that the Lakers will face in the playoffs will be much improved from the team they face tonight. In the playoffs, (crossing my fingers,) we will have a healthy Manu Ginobili and Drew Gooden. These players allow the Spurs to give opponents different looks on both ends of the floor. Basically, this means that the Spurs will play tonight’s game with half their playoff playbook. If the Lakers cannot beat this shorthanded Spurs team, they surely will have doubts about beating a much improved Spurs team in the playoffs, regardless of what the national media has to say. And on the other side, the Spurs will beam with confidence if they can secure the win. In fact, I would argue that if the Spurs keep this game close, they will have the mental edge if they meet the Lakers in the playoffs.
Some may point out that the Lakers are also shorthanded, as Andrew Bynum is out. However, it is much more likely that the Spurs will have a healthy Ginobili and Gooden than the Lakers will have a healthy Bynum. Remember, this same scenario played itself out at this time last year. Bynum was playing great and suffered a knee injury. It required surgery and the Lakers continuously said he would be ready by the playoffs. But this did not happen and he missed the entire season. He had knee surgery again, the Lakers claim he will be healthy again, so do not be surprised if he misses the playoffs, again.
As for my pre-game prediction, this one is a tough call. This game means more to the Lakers so expect them to come out with something to prove. Lamar Odom will play with a chip on his shoulder because he was suspended for leaving the Lakers’ bench during an altercation in Portland, and this is the game after the suspension. The Lakers lost a great game to the Spurs last time they were in San Antonio, even though Kobe Bryant did everything humanly possible to win the game, so will be motivated by the memory. As for the Spurs, they have won three in a row in impressive fashion. Tony Parker has been playing fantastic, averaging 26 ppg since Manu went down with the injury. Roger Mason has averaged 16 over the last several games as he too has stepped up in the absence of Manu. And most importantly, the Lakers played Houston last night and it was close. If the Spurs can keep the game close, keep an eye on the fatigue factor. It could have a big influence in the final 3 minutes. Bottom line, Spurs by 6. I could see the Spurs with the ball up by 4 points with 30 seconds left. The Lakers foul, Spurs make both pushing the lead to 6. Lakers make an uncontested layup to cut it back to 4. Lakers foul again, Spurs make both and are up by 6 as time expires. It feels like that kind of game.
In this case, the answer is clearly the Lakers. Before beating the Rockets in Houston yesterday, the Lakers lost to three Western Conference teams on the road in a row: Denver, Phoenix and Portland. If the Lakers want to feel confident on the road come playoff time, they will need to start playing much better away from LA.
In addition, the Spurs team that the Lakers will face in the playoffs will be much improved from the team they face tonight. In the playoffs, (crossing my fingers,) we will have a healthy Manu Ginobili and Drew Gooden. These players allow the Spurs to give opponents different looks on both ends of the floor. Basically, this means that the Spurs will play tonight’s game with half their playoff playbook. If the Lakers cannot beat this shorthanded Spurs team, they surely will have doubts about beating a much improved Spurs team in the playoffs, regardless of what the national media has to say. And on the other side, the Spurs will beam with confidence if they can secure the win. In fact, I would argue that if the Spurs keep this game close, they will have the mental edge if they meet the Lakers in the playoffs.
Some may point out that the Lakers are also shorthanded, as Andrew Bynum is out. However, it is much more likely that the Spurs will have a healthy Ginobili and Gooden than the Lakers will have a healthy Bynum. Remember, this same scenario played itself out at this time last year. Bynum was playing great and suffered a knee injury. It required surgery and the Lakers continuously said he would be ready by the playoffs. But this did not happen and he missed the entire season. He had knee surgery again, the Lakers claim he will be healthy again, so do not be surprised if he misses the playoffs, again.
As for my pre-game prediction, this one is a tough call. This game means more to the Lakers so expect them to come out with something to prove. Lamar Odom will play with a chip on his shoulder because he was suspended for leaving the Lakers’ bench during an altercation in Portland, and this is the game after the suspension. The Lakers lost a great game to the Spurs last time they were in San Antonio, even though Kobe Bryant did everything humanly possible to win the game, so will be motivated by the memory. As for the Spurs, they have won three in a row in impressive fashion. Tony Parker has been playing fantastic, averaging 26 ppg since Manu went down with the injury. Roger Mason has averaged 16 over the last several games as he too has stepped up in the absence of Manu. And most importantly, the Lakers played Houston last night and it was close. If the Spurs can keep the game close, keep an eye on the fatigue factor. It could have a big influence in the final 3 minutes. Bottom line, Spurs by 6. I could see the Spurs with the ball up by 4 points with 30 seconds left. The Lakers foul, Spurs make both pushing the lead to 6. Lakers make an uncontested layup to cut it back to 4. Lakers foul again, Spurs make both and are up by 6 as time expires. It feels like that kind of game.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Manu Ginobili Impact
I realize this is scary to read. It was at least equally unfortunate for me as I uncovered the numbers I am about to share with you. We all know that Manu is important to the Spurs. He is our third leading scorer. He is our spark off the bench. He always seems to make a momentum changing play when we most need it. He can score off the drive just as well as he can score from distance. In his article about Shane Battier, Michael Lewis referred to Manu Ginobili as a “Statistical Anomaly” because his game is so consistent that he has no statistcal weaknesses. He’s athletic, a great defender, and one of a kind.
The Spurs are 14-11 in games that Manu has missed and 29-9 when Manu plays. In other words, the Spurs win 76% of the time when Manu is on the court and only 56% of the time when he sits out. Overall, the Spurs’ record is 43-20, 68%. Extended to a full 82 games, the Spurs are 62-20 with Manu and 46-36 without him. Basically, we are on the Dallas Mavericks’ level when Manu is out and one of the best in the NBA when he is healthy.
Statistically, it becomes a little more depressing. Without Manu, we score fewer points, attempt and make fewer field goals, attempt and convert fewer free throws, assist less, force fewer steals, block fewer shots, and commit more fouls. Most telling, the Spurs score 4.6 fewer ppg and attempt 4.2 fewer free throws.
As horrible as that just felt to type, these statistics do not even do Manu justice. His impact is felt far beyond what is captured on the stat sheet. His hustle, competiveness, and leadership cannot be measured. I need not remind you, but last year we lost to the Lakers in five games greatly because Manu was hobbled and could not perform. Without Manu, we lack that extra punch to beat the elite teams in the NBA. Sure, we can still get by Phoenix and hammer a team like the Clippers, (but seriously, who doesn’t?) but we struggle against the elite teams, most recently the Cavaliers.
The Spurs have 19 games remaining in the regular season. Manu needs to get on the court soon so he can find his rhythm before the playoffs begin. Of course, this is assuming that he comes back healthy. If he comes back and plays on one leg again, unfortunately, we know how that story ends.
The Spurs are 14-11 in games that Manu has missed and 29-9 when Manu plays. In other words, the Spurs win 76% of the time when Manu is on the court and only 56% of the time when he sits out. Overall, the Spurs’ record is 43-20, 68%. Extended to a full 82 games, the Spurs are 62-20 with Manu and 46-36 without him. Basically, we are on the Dallas Mavericks’ level when Manu is out and one of the best in the NBA when he is healthy.
Statistically, it becomes a little more depressing. Without Manu, we score fewer points, attempt and make fewer field goals, attempt and convert fewer free throws, assist less, force fewer steals, block fewer shots, and commit more fouls. Most telling, the Spurs score 4.6 fewer ppg and attempt 4.2 fewer free throws.
As horrible as that just felt to type, these statistics do not even do Manu justice. His impact is felt far beyond what is captured on the stat sheet. His hustle, competiveness, and leadership cannot be measured. I need not remind you, but last year we lost to the Lakers in five games greatly because Manu was hobbled and could not perform. Without Manu, we lack that extra punch to beat the elite teams in the NBA. Sure, we can still get by Phoenix and hammer a team like the Clippers, (but seriously, who doesn’t?) but we struggle against the elite teams, most recently the Cavaliers.
The Spurs have 19 games remaining in the regular season. Manu needs to get on the court soon so he can find his rhythm before the playoffs begin. Of course, this is assuming that he comes back healthy. If he comes back and plays on one leg again, unfortunately, we know how that story ends.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Thoughts on the Ariza, Odom Foul and Scrum
I was waiting for an email and got a little too involved while commenting on ESPN's article about Lamar Odom's possible suspension. The following is what I wrote in the comments. Realize that a lot of this was in response to inane things that Lakers fans were posting, but I stand by my arguments.
If you've ever played organized basketball, it would be obvious to you that Ariza deserved a suspension. His team was down by 30 and he was playing awful, he went for a hard frustration foul. Did he mean to hurt Fernandez? Maybe not. But he did mean to deliver a hard foul. These hard fouls in blow out games should be punished so that it stops happening. If players continue to make these intentional statement fouls, players will get hurt and fights will occur. People argue that he 'clearly went for the ball,' but what is also clear is that Ariza was going to knock the hell out of Fernandez regardless of whether he got the ball or not, and this should be punished.
Hold on, you are arguing that it was not a hard foul? As soon as Fernandez caught the ball with Ariza chasing him, did anyone not see that foul coming? Ariza wound up and swung at the ball. If you hit a player with that amount of force from behind when he is in the air, it's not going to end well. Ariza swung with full force at a defenseless player at his most vulnerable point. Ariza knew that Fernandez was going to hit the ground hard. He also knew exactly what he was doing. People seem to assume that since the game is so fast, players have no control over their bodies. If you've ever played the game, you know this is not true. Ariza should be punished because his team was being run off the court and he took it out on Fernandez. Just because he made an attempt at the ball does not mean he wasn't trying to make an obvious statement foul. It's completely an unsafe play and the NBA should not look the other way.
And this going off of one leg versus two is a ridiculous argument. When you are in the open court on a fast break and being chased, you always go off of one foot. If you go off of two it slows you down and gives the defensive player a chance to get back into the play. As the offensive player, you just assume that the guy chasing you is not going to take a cheap shot, which unfortunately is exactly what took place.
I think Odom will get the 1 day mandatory suspension, but would not be surprised if it was more severe. Not only did he leave the bench, but he got involved with Brandon Roy. This is very different from the Spurs/Suns debacle in that Stoudemire and Diaw never got close to the action. Odom stuck himself right in the middle of it and had to be pulled back by his coaches. I bet this is what the NBA is discussing right now, not whether or not he left the bench, but if his punishment should be more severe since he put himself in the middle of the scrum.
Exactly, I guess most of these commenters have never played. I've been in that situation before. Getting blown out, things not going my way, so I lay a guy out. I would almost always get a piece of the ball, but that does not mean I wasn't trying to knock the hell out of the guy and send a message. It's a good way to instigate a fight or injure a player. He should be punished.
On paper, the Laker's path to the championship did look difficult. But what everyone seems to forget is that the Spurs had Manu playing on one leg. The team the Spurs had on the court against the Lakers was not their full team, and were not the team that earned a great record. Look at the Spurs record this year without Manu, 12 and 12. They are a .500 team without Manu, and exceptional with him.
If you've ever played organized basketball, it would be obvious to you that Ariza deserved a suspension. His team was down by 30 and he was playing awful, he went for a hard frustration foul. Did he mean to hurt Fernandez? Maybe not. But he did mean to deliver a hard foul. These hard fouls in blow out games should be punished so that it stops happening. If players continue to make these intentional statement fouls, players will get hurt and fights will occur. People argue that he 'clearly went for the ball,' but what is also clear is that Ariza was going to knock the hell out of Fernandez regardless of whether he got the ball or not, and this should be punished.
Hold on, you are arguing that it was not a hard foul? As soon as Fernandez caught the ball with Ariza chasing him, did anyone not see that foul coming? Ariza wound up and swung at the ball. If you hit a player with that amount of force from behind when he is in the air, it's not going to end well. Ariza swung with full force at a defenseless player at his most vulnerable point. Ariza knew that Fernandez was going to hit the ground hard. He also knew exactly what he was doing. People seem to assume that since the game is so fast, players have no control over their bodies. If you've ever played the game, you know this is not true. Ariza should be punished because his team was being run off the court and he took it out on Fernandez. Just because he made an attempt at the ball does not mean he wasn't trying to make an obvious statement foul. It's completely an unsafe play and the NBA should not look the other way.
And this going off of one leg versus two is a ridiculous argument. When you are in the open court on a fast break and being chased, you always go off of one foot. If you go off of two it slows you down and gives the defensive player a chance to get back into the play. As the offensive player, you just assume that the guy chasing you is not going to take a cheap shot, which unfortunately is exactly what took place.
I think Odom will get the 1 day mandatory suspension, but would not be surprised if it was more severe. Not only did he leave the bench, but he got involved with Brandon Roy. This is very different from the Spurs/Suns debacle in that Stoudemire and Diaw never got close to the action. Odom stuck himself right in the middle of it and had to be pulled back by his coaches. I bet this is what the NBA is discussing right now, not whether or not he left the bench, but if his punishment should be more severe since he put himself in the middle of the scrum.
Exactly, I guess most of these commenters have never played. I've been in that situation before. Getting blown out, things not going my way, so I lay a guy out. I would almost always get a piece of the ball, but that does not mean I wasn't trying to knock the hell out of the guy and send a message. It's a good way to instigate a fight or injure a player. He should be punished.
On paper, the Laker's path to the championship did look difficult. But what everyone seems to forget is that the Spurs had Manu playing on one leg. The team the Spurs had on the court against the Lakers was not their full team, and were not the team that earned a great record. Look at the Spurs record this year without Manu, 12 and 12. They are a .500 team without Manu, and exceptional with him.
Flopping Proposal
Recently there has been some talk about flopping and what to do about it. Most would agree that it degrades the game, but it is difficult to come up with a fair solution to the problem. The argument against enacting a rule that penalizes flopping is that differentiating between a flop and an offensive foul is very difficult. The call would be too subjective and the last thing the NBA needs is another subjective call for the referees to mess up.
The officiating is really awful this year. I do not know what the deal is but the refs are incredibly inconsistent, which is really bad when you consider that the only thing you want from referees is consistency. If the referees are going to call a game tight, then players can adjust accordingly. If the referees are going to allow a lot of physical play, the players can also adjust. The problem exists when the referees call it both ways during a game. Players do not know what they can and cannot do, and then they get frustrated. The players begin to argue every call and this really brings the game down as much as the flop. The two things that I cannot stand are flops and players whining to the referees.
But I digress, I have a solution to the flopping problem. I have not heard my idea articulated, but it someone came up with this first I apologize. While it is extremely difficult to distinguish between most flops and legitimate charges, it is extremely easy to identify the egregious flop. We all know it when we see it. Shaq acting like he was shot by a sniper in the rafters comes to mind, since it’s been on ESPN nonstop. But there are many instances where you sit back and say, “Wow, that was an obvious flop.”
These flops are often called as either blocks or they are non-calls. I propose that these egregious flops should be penalized with a technical foul. And not a defensive technical, a personal technical foul. As in, if a player commits two egregious flops in a game, they will be ejected. Tell me this would not stop the flopping culture in the NBA. Can you imagine the shame of the first player to get ejected because he flopped? Wouldn’t that send a shockwave felt throughout the NBA? Imagine, “Tonight on Sports Center. Shane Battier does all the little things, but sometimes does partakes in the big things, like being the first player ever to be ejected for committing two Egregious Flops in a single game. Tune in tonight to watch Battier and his walk of shame into the locker room.”
Will a player ever be able to live that down? I guarantee this would be a great stride towards eliminating flopping from the game. And this would not be as subjective as let’s say traveling. Egregious flops are more than obvious and should be easy for referees to identify. So, if you want to eliminate the flop from the great game of basketball, let’s start handing technicals out.
The officiating is really awful this year. I do not know what the deal is but the refs are incredibly inconsistent, which is really bad when you consider that the only thing you want from referees is consistency. If the referees are going to call a game tight, then players can adjust accordingly. If the referees are going to allow a lot of physical play, the players can also adjust. The problem exists when the referees call it both ways during a game. Players do not know what they can and cannot do, and then they get frustrated. The players begin to argue every call and this really brings the game down as much as the flop. The two things that I cannot stand are flops and players whining to the referees.
But I digress, I have a solution to the flopping problem. I have not heard my idea articulated, but it someone came up with this first I apologize. While it is extremely difficult to distinguish between most flops and legitimate charges, it is extremely easy to identify the egregious flop. We all know it when we see it. Shaq acting like he was shot by a sniper in the rafters comes to mind, since it’s been on ESPN nonstop. But there are many instances where you sit back and say, “Wow, that was an obvious flop.”
These flops are often called as either blocks or they are non-calls. I propose that these egregious flops should be penalized with a technical foul. And not a defensive technical, a personal technical foul. As in, if a player commits two egregious flops in a game, they will be ejected. Tell me this would not stop the flopping culture in the NBA. Can you imagine the shame of the first player to get ejected because he flopped? Wouldn’t that send a shockwave felt throughout the NBA? Imagine, “Tonight on Sports Center. Shane Battier does all the little things, but sometimes does partakes in the big things, like being the first player ever to be ejected for committing two Egregious Flops in a single game. Tune in tonight to watch Battier and his walk of shame into the locker room.”
Will a player ever be able to live that down? I guarantee this would be a great stride towards eliminating flopping from the game. And this would not be as subjective as let’s say traveling. Egregious flops are more than obvious and should be easy for referees to identify. So, if you want to eliminate the flop from the great game of basketball, let’s start handing technicals out.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Drew Gooden Acquisition
Gooden is clearly a player that can have an impact on the Spurs’ playoff run, if he can get healthy. And let me first warn you, this is a big ‘if.’ Groin injuries are treacherous because it is very difficult to know when the injury has healed. You can rest it, it can feel great, but the true test is playing basketball at game speed. While playing, one moves and contorts their body in ways that are difficult to replicate off the court. The problem with groin injuries is that if you come back too soon, you will re-injure it and be out another 2 to 3 weeks. This is why Gooden has not played since January 19th. The Spurs’ problem is that they need to get Gooden on the court so he has time to mesh with the team before the playoffs arrive. So this time crunch might result in a re-injury. I’m sure the Spurs will rest him till the last possible moment, but will it be enough time for him to heal? And if he is healthy, will the Spurs have enough games left to get him acclimated to their offense and defense?
That being said, Drew Gooden will allow the Spurs to give the opposition different looks than they are capable of with the present roster. Drew Gooden is a consistent shooter from 20 feet out and has a knack for rebounding. His defense is questionable, and it is said that he forgets plays and defensive rotations. He will probably cost the Spurs a good amount of 20 second timeouts where Pop screams at him about his lack of focus. But historically, players that have been questionable defenders always play better defense for the Spurs. Look no further than Matt Bonner and Roger Mason Jr. Matt Bonner was a notoriously bad defender and now is somewhat respectable. Roger Mason Jr. had been very weak on the defensive end, and now is competent. Drew Gooden can basically bring to the Spurs what Robert Horry brought back in the day. His range is slightly less, but his outside shot will command the respect of the defense and the opposition will not be able to double Tim off of him, as they do when we play Fabricio Oberto.
So, we hope he can get healthy, we hope he can stay healthy, we hope he quickly understands our offense, and we hope he can learn our defensive schemes. It’s a lot of hoping, but if it works out he could be a difference maker when we play the Lakers in the conference finals. Regardless, let us not overlook the most critical injury suffered by the Spurs. We hope Manu can come back healthy, else this is all moot.
That being said, Drew Gooden will allow the Spurs to give the opposition different looks than they are capable of with the present roster. Drew Gooden is a consistent shooter from 20 feet out and has a knack for rebounding. His defense is questionable, and it is said that he forgets plays and defensive rotations. He will probably cost the Spurs a good amount of 20 second timeouts where Pop screams at him about his lack of focus. But historically, players that have been questionable defenders always play better defense for the Spurs. Look no further than Matt Bonner and Roger Mason Jr. Matt Bonner was a notoriously bad defender and now is somewhat respectable. Roger Mason Jr. had been very weak on the defensive end, and now is competent. Drew Gooden can basically bring to the Spurs what Robert Horry brought back in the day. His range is slightly less, but his outside shot will command the respect of the defense and the opposition will not be able to double Tim off of him, as they do when we play Fabricio Oberto.
So, we hope he can get healthy, we hope he can stay healthy, we hope he quickly understands our offense, and we hope he can learn our defensive schemes. It’s a lot of hoping, but if it works out he could be a difference maker when we play the Lakers in the conference finals. Regardless, let us not overlook the most critical injury suffered by the Spurs. We hope Manu can come back healthy, else this is all moot.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
