The Best LeBron Destination Debate… LeBron Should Blow Into The Windy City

May 24, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Bleacher Fan.

It is a topic that will dominate sports headlines until July 1. It will be everywhere you turn, on every sports program, and in every sports section of nearly every newspaper. No, I am not referring to Bleacher Fan’s beloved World Cup, I’m talking about the ‘Where Will LeBron Play?” discussion.

It will be interesting to see if he stays in Cleveland, goes to New York, or maybe even the Clippers. Perhaps the news that coach Mike Brown won’t be retained by the Cavs will have some bearing on LeBron’s decision. All in all though, I believe the best fit for James would be to sign with the Chicago Bulls.

The city of Chicago has been yearning for its basketball team to return to the glory days of the 1990’s, and going after James and quite possibly Chris Bosh would most definitely put them back in position to return to those glory days.

James has repeatedly said he wants to win, which may limit the chances the New York Knicks or the Los Angeles Clippers have. The Bulls have a talented team as it is now, though, which is something James saw during the first round of the playoffs this year. Can you just imagine what the Bulls lineup with the look like if James joined the fray? Depending on other factors such as possible sign-and-trade deals, James could take the court next to the likes of Derrick Rose, Joakim Noah, and Luol Deng. That doesn’t even count the possibility of Bosh, who listed Chicago as one of his preferred destinations, coming to town with James.

There’s something else to consider that I really hadn’t thought about until the other day. Remember late last year when LeBron said that he was going to give up his number 23 and switch to number 6. At the time, he said he was doing it as a tribute to Michael Jordan. In fact, he asked that all players refrain from wearing the number, as it should be synonymous with “His Airness”. But perhaps that day last November, he was opening the door for possibly playing for the Bulls in the 2010-2011 season, because obviously no one is going to wear Jordan’s jersey in Chicago. Whatever his motive was for the number change, you have to admit it is rather interesting.

You can also say what you want about Barack Obama’s presidency, but the commander-in-chief keeps up with sports quite regularly. He’s been active about filling out a bracket for March Madness the past couple of seasons, and just last week he also chimed in on the LeBron sweepstakes, saying he would “fit in well” with Chicago. Obviously, this needs to be taken in context, as Obama is a former Senator from Illinois, but you know James has definitely paid attention.

It’s going to be a wild debate over the next month. We all may even get sick of hearing about it. But once the dust settles, I think LeBron James should go to the Windy City and try to win championships the way Number 23 did.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

1 Comment | The Best LeBron Destination Debate, TSD | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Biggest Choke Ever Debate… Hardly a Comedy of Errors

May 21, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

Bill Buckner didn’t choke. He committed an error, nothing more. His error was costly, and Red Sox Nation had to wait nearly 20 years after that error before finally seeing a World Series championship. But it was still just a single error on a single play.

The Red Sox still had a full game AFTER that error to recover and win the series, but the better team ultimately prevailed.

As unfortunate as the 1986 World Series was for fans of the Boston Red Sox, they did not lose it because Buckner missed one single ground ball.

Now, a CHOKE in sports is something entirely different than that example. A choke does not hinge on one moment, especially in a seven-game series. When the same two teams are pitted against each other until one of them can win four games, one single play does not define a series.

If you want to talk about choking in the World Series, you need to look for a situation where the losing team had MULTIPLE opportunities to win, but ultimately failed – every time. A REAL choke in the World Series is one where a team REPEATEDLY sets itself up for success, only to stumble every single time.

As evidence, I submit to you the 1997 Cleveland Indians.

Just as hard luck a team as the Boston Red Sox, the Indians carried a lead into the bottom of the ninth in game seven of the 1997 World Series, and STILL lost to the Florida Marlins. Unlike the Red Sox, though, the Indians can’t point to a single unfortunate moment in the 1997 series and bemoan that as the reason their downfall. The entire series was LOADED with downfalls.

The Fall Classic of 1997 played out as a cavalcade of blown chances for the Indians. For starters, they held the lead in EVERY SINGLE GAME of the series. That’s right, the Cleveland Indians lost four times out of seven games, even though they held the lead in each game.

In game one, it was a four-run fourth inning that did the Tribe in, eventually losing that game 7-4.

In game three the Indians led 7-3 going into the sixth inning before giving up two runs in the sixth, and two more in the seventh. Still, they stood tied with the Marlins entering the ninth inning. During their half of the ninth the Indians even managed to score four runs, but it wasn’t enough. Why? Because they gave up seven to the Marlins, thanks to not one, but THREE costly errors. They lost 14-11.

In game five it was another four-run inning, this time in the sixth, which was the Indians’ undoing. They lost 8-7.

Still, despite all those FAILURES, the Indians somehow led in game seven – only three measly outs away from a World Series championship – when the team’s trusty closer, Jose Mesa, was walking to the mound.

Florida’s Moises Alou hit a single to lead off the inning… still no big deal, right?

Then Bobby Bonilla struck out… two outs away!

That was as close as the Indians would get. After Bonilla’s strike out, Charles Johnson singled, moving Alou over to third base. Then, Craig Counsell hit a sac-fly that scored the runner and tied the game. Two innings later, thanks to (surprise) ANOTHER error, the Marlins were celebrating a championship in only their fourth year of existence, while the Indians were sent home as losers.

In all, the Indians gave up TEN runs in the ninth inning or later, eight of which came off of FIVE errors. They led in all seven games of the series, including holding a 2-1 lead in the bottom of the ninth inning in game seven. Yet, they still lost the Series.

Now THAT’S a choke!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

3 Comments | The Biggest Choke Ever Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Biggest Choke Ever Debate… A Bigger Bust than Dolly’s Cocktail Dress

May 21, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Loyal Homer.

When the heavily favored New England Patriots took the field on that fateful February night in Arizona, so much more than the title of Super Bowl Champion was riding on the line. Perfection was at stake.

The 2007 Patriots completed all 16 regular season games without a loss. Tom Brady and the Pats were staring immortality in the face as they looked to go 19-0, doing what only one other team in NFL history – the 1972 Dolphins – has done. Never has so much been expected, and so little been performed, with the epic collapse of the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLII.

Today’s debate attempts to answer the question of which team performed the biggest choke job of all time in sports history? Unquestionably, it is the New England Patriots. I am sure that my fellow TSD rivals, Bleacher Fan and Loyal Homer, will make compelling cases for their respective busts, but they certainly pale in comparison to the 2007 Patriots’ choke.

Bleacher Fan’s 1997 Cleveland Indians seem like a mere honorable mention in comparison with the 2007 Patriots because so little was expected of the Cleveland franchise. The Tribe had a history of playoff failure. Although the Indians made a respectable playoff run from 1995 to 1999, that the team had not made the postseason since the 1950s… and had not won a World Series since 1948. The expectations surrounding Cleveland’s seven game choke to the upstart Marlins really should not have been too big of a shocker for those who were familiar with Cleveland’s baseball history.

In contrast, the Patriots were amid a dynastic quality run of dominance. The Patriots were coming off of wins during the Super Bowls in 2002, 2004, and 2005 – an impressive and superior feat since football boasts more parity than baseball. It is because of these wins that expectations for New England could not have been any higher. To that end, the team also made the playoffs four straight seasons, and won the Super Bowl two times in that span. Everyone seemed to expect, and nearly demand, that the New England win Super Bowl XLII. Instead, Touchdown Tom and the Pats folded like a cheap umbrella, permanently tarnishing the legacy of the 2007 season, and erasing their chances of being remembered as the greatest football team of all time.

Loyal Homer’s pick of the 2004 New York Yankees, while a true contender for the title of greatest sports choke of all time, still does not top the 2007 Patriots because the Yanks legacy was not really at stake. Sure the “Curse of the Bambino” (which, for the record, I very much believe in) may have ended on that October night in 2004, but the Yankees already assured their franchise’s spot at immortality. The Yankees were 26 time World Series champions, a feat unduplicated in professional sports. New York’s legacy as the most dominant franchise in their sport’s history remains unquestioned. The fact that the Yankees blew a three-games-to-none lead over their arch-nemesis, the Boston Red Sox, was more about the rivalry than their legacy… or the 2004 championship. The Red Sox had an 86 year championship drought. Of course they were bound to win one sooner or later. It is just like the old adage that, “Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.” Or, more appropriately, like the t-shirt I’ve seen sported around the Bronx which states, “There was no curse… you just sucked for 86 years.”

The Patriots, on the other hand, had everything at stake. History could never have forgotten the Patriots 2007 season had they won it all, but now they will simply have a temporary legacy as the team that came really, really close. When comparing one isolated battle of a rivalry against a teams’ shot at immortality, I think the bigger choke definitely goes to the team that time will ultimately forget – the 2007 Patriots.

I admit I am biased. I do not like Tom Brady or his cleft chin. (Side note: There’s even a Facebook group called “I Hate Tom Brady and his Butt Chin,” which, although I did not create, I plan on joining very soon.)

I do however respect New England’s talent. The 2007 Patriots clearly assembled one of the better rosters in football. The Pats had a seemingly unstoppable offense led by not one, but two 1,000-plus yard receivers in Wes Welker and Randy Moss, who also set a record for most touchdown receptions in a season with 23. New England’s rushing attack was formidable in its own right, featuring an explosive Laurence Maroney and pace-changing pile movers in Sammy Morris and Kevin Faulk. But, most of the attention (and the pressure) fell on the man under center, Tom Brady.

But, these Patriots were not just one dimensional. They were a team feared on both sides of the ball. Defensive players like Teddy Bruschi, Adalius Thomas, Mike Vrabel, Asante Samuel, and Rodney Harrison were just as responsible for the near perfect record as the offense. Despite their super talented roster, however, the ‘07 Patriots realized that the “any given Sunday” scenario can be all too real. The Patriots were not really out gunned or out classed. They were beaten in a straight up contest of “Who Wants It More?” Ironically, that phrase was also the slogan for Super Bowl XLII. Losing a battle of heart for something that seemed so tangible, and meant so much, makes this the biggest choke of all time.

When David Tyree made his mind-boggling catch it turned the tide for the underdog New York Giants, and flushed the Patriots 19-0 dreams down the toilet. All the potential merchandise, endorsements, and legacy of 19-0 was erased by one fateful drive. The 2007 Patriots will continue to be talked about as a great team for a while, but one more win would have ensured they were remembered forever.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

3 Comments | The Biggest Choke Ever Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The Biggest Choke Ever Debate… The Pinstripe Choke

May 21, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan.

It always becomes a good discussion when talking about the different times various teams have choked throughout the years. For me, the conversation starts and ends with the 2004 American League Championship Series between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees. The Yankees won the first three games of the series with relative ease, including a 19-8 whipping in game three. But that is when the initial choking began!

The Bronx Bombers led 4-3 going into the bottom of the ninth in game four, a mere three outs from going back to the World Series, when arguably the greatest closer of all time, Mariano Rivera, took the mound. After a now-famous Dave Roberts stolen base, Bill Mueller singled to knock Roberts in for the game-tying run. Three innings later David Ortiz hit a walk off home run to right field to give the Sox the win. A nice win, but surely nothing historic would happen.

Game five was back in Boston where again the Yankees held a late lead. Rivera came on in the eighth inning, inheriting two runners. He allowed one of them to score, however, and that tied the game. It was Rivera’s second consecutive blown save. Big Papi once again became the hero in the 14th inning as he singled up the middle to knock in Johnny Damon. Surely, this couldn’t happen… could it?

Game six was the now infamous “Bloody Sock” game in which Curt Schilling pitched seven strong innings with a tendon torn in his right ankle. Don’t all you Yankee fans love recalling this? Game six also was the game where Alex Rodriguez attempted to slap the ball out of Bronson Arroyo’s glove while running down the first base line. I vividly remember being highly ticked when nothing was originally done about this. Ultimately, order was restored and A-Rod was called out – much to the chagrin of crazed Yankee fans who managed to decorate the field with debris. The Red Sox eventually won the game 4-2, thus bringing up a winner-take-all Game seven. Surely this couldn’t happen, could it? No team had EVER come from a 3-0 deficit to win a seven game series. I repeat… EVER!

As much as many wanted Game even to be dramatic, it wasn’t meant to be… making it even more of a choke. Boston jumped out to an early 6-0 lead, thanks to a grand slam by Damon. The Red Sox never looked back, and cruised to a drama free 10-3 victory. The Red Sox won game seven on the Yankees turf, making it even sweeter for Red Sox nation. All the pressure was on the Yankees in that game, and it showed.

The Red Sox would go on to win the World Series for their first title in 86 years. But they never would have gotten there if it were not for some help from the Yankees. To this day, it still blows my mind how a team can blow two late leads with the game’s best closer, and then come home and lose two games. That, my friends, is a major choke!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Biggest Choke Ever Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate Verdict

May 21, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.

The NBA has certainly made an effort to improve its image. I was personally glad when the NBA set a mandatory dress code for its players several years ago. Quite frankly, the NBA was beginning to earn a reputation as a league of thugs. The dress code went a long way in slowing that trend down in my opinion. There have also been other methods suggested to improve the overall image of the league, as well as the overall quality of the play. One of those ideas was the focus of yesterday’s debate.

As it stands now, players are allowed to enter the NBA at the ripe old age of 19, as set forth in 2005. The goal of this was to slow the “watering down” of the league’s talent. In other words, many high school players jumped to the league that weren’t ready. Take a look at the list of players who have gone pro straight out of high school. There are some notable names, like those mentioned by Bleacher Fan, and some other notables I had forgotten about like Amar’e Stoudemire and Jermaine O’Neal. There’s also some notable players who haven’t done so well, guys like Kwame Brown and Darius Miles. And then there’s a whole list of guys you have probably never heard of.

LeBron James averaged 20.9 points per game during his rookie season and helped engineer a quick turnaround for the Cleveland Cavaliers franchise. Dwight Howard is another positive example. He averaged a double-double during his rookie season, averaging 12 points per game and ten rebounds per game. He’s the youngest player in the NBA ever to do that. He also started all 82 games that season. To me, Howard’s accomplishment is quite telling. To average a double-double just one year removed from high school is remarkable. It’s one thing to score a lot of points, and guys like James are to be commended for doing so as rookies.

Bleacher Fan highlighted some of the accomplishments of the “high school” players in their first few seasons in the league. But to average double digit rebounds against very physical frontline players on a nightly basis like Howard did shows that talent indeed should have no age limitations.

Bleacher Fan also brought up the fact that having four years of collegiate playing experience does not necessarily improve a player’s chances of making it as an NBA player. Ed O’Bannon is the perfect example. He led his UCLA Bruins to the NCAA championship, and now… you’d be hard pressed to find anyone under the age of 25 who even recognizes that name. As both arguments stated, having playing time in college didn’t exactly help out Ron Artest, as he was in the center of the league’s most glaring disaster of the past decade.

Babe Ruthless does correctly say, however, that 19-year old kids aren’t necessarily ready for the rigors of the NBA lifestyle. That may well be the case for many of the kids. But no one is forcing the teams to draft these players. It is up to the organizations to do their due diligence and decide if drafting these kids is the right thing to do. From a player’s standpoint, if they have done their own due diligence and feel they are ready to step up to the professional ranks with a high school degree, then who are we to prevent that from happening? However, they must do so knowing the trade offs and risk. They will not have a college education to fall back on if the NBA doesn’t work out.

Bleacher Fan is awarded the victory.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate

May 20, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.

Recently, Hall of Fame, NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar reopened an old argument regarding the minimum age limit for the NBA. Athletes used to go straight to the NBA from high school (see Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, etc.) before the age minimum was set at 19, back in 2005.

Still, many players declare for the draft after even just one year in college (see John Wall, Derrick Favors, etc.). The 2010 NBA Draft is a little more than a month away, and with so many underclassmen choosing to stay in the draft this year it’s sure to be a discussion filled topic in the coming weeks.

Today’s question is simply: “Should the NBA increase the minimum age limit to 21?”

Bleacher Fan will argue that the age limit is just fine the way it is now, while Babe Ruthless will argue that the limit needs to be raised to 21.

Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless, you are now on the clock.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate… Youth in Revolt

May 20, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Babe Ruthless.

According to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who wants the NBA to up its minimum age requirement to 21, players like Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, LeBron James, and Tracy McGrady were unprepared and too immature for professional basketball when they were drafted.

Kareem refers to his college experience as helping him to develop both physically and emotionally. That fact may have been true for him, but that does not mean it is true for the entire league. You can’t blame youth, for example as being the culprit for players demanding multi-million dollar contracts. For that, you must blame the market. I can assure you that LeBron James would be demanding the highest contract in this upcoming offseason whether he played college ball or not. Why? Because he is good enough to demand it!

Playing basketball does not require a college degree. If a player does not NEED a college education to play the game, then why require it?

There is also no guarantee that a college education will bring maturity. Latrell Sprewell played college ball from 1988-1992. How did that help HIS maturity? Ron Artest played college ball from 1997-1999. Clearly, college isn’t doing THAT much to help with developing a player emotionally!

As far as physical maturity goes, Ed O’Bannon led his UCLA Bruins on to the NCAA Championship, came out of college as a top-ten draft pick, and then was out of the league in two years. Likewise, players like Adam Morrison and Michael Olowokandi had very successful college careers and entered the NBA with a great deal of expectation, only to disappoint. Meanwhile, Kobe Bryant skipped college, hit the NBA running, and is on track to be one of the greatest players of all time.

Some athletes will excel in the NBA, others will struggle. That fact is just as true for 19-year-olds as it is for 23-year-olds.

The NBA cannot dictate the terms of attitude and emotional maturity for the players that come into their league. Instead, they can only dictate the terms for whether or not a player is qualified to compete in the NBA.

Consider the shared accomplishments of Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, LeBron James, and Tracy McGrady in their seasons before they were old enough for Kareem to deem them prepared:

  • SIX All-Star selections
  • ONE NBA Championship
  • ONE Rookie of the Year Award
  • ONE All-NBA First Team selection
  • TWO All-NBA Second Team selections
  • ONE All-NBA Third Team selection

If that is Kareem’s perception of being UN-prepared, then he may need to rethink his expectations of preparedness!

Kareem’s proposed vision of the NBA is one that today would still not include Derrick Rose or Kevin Durant (both of whom have already earned All-Star selections). Likewise, it would have shaved three years off of Moses Malone’s Hall of Fame career.

The fact is that NBA success has little, if nothing at all, to do with age. Players don’t go to bed on the night before their 21st birthday and suddenly wake up the next morning NBA-ready. If Michael Jordan decided to skip college and join the professional ranks out of high school, he would have been JUST as successful.

For the NBA to up its minimum age requirement to 21, a STRONG case would have to be made that younger athletes simply are not capable of competing in the professional ranks until they have developed themselves – both physically and mentally – through several years of college or international play.

Unfortunately, that case cannot be made when guys like Garnett, Bryant, and James CONTINUE to perform as the best players in basketball. They (along with many others) have already proven that success can be achieved for players YOUNGER than 21.

You can talk about the ideals of player maturity and development. You can argue about the values of the college experience and the need for something to fall back on if the NBA doesn’t work out for you. What you can’t, do is deny the fact that the BEST players in the game today skipped college and found success IMMEDIATELY in the NBA.

The choice is simple. Either allow for the possibility of a player being drafted too early or outright deny the possibility of a superstar in the making from stepping on the court – EVEN when history has proven -that 18- and 19-year-olds are fully capable of success in the NBA.

I don’t know about you, but if the only price for getting players like LeBron, Kobe, and KG into the league as soon as they are ready is that Kosta Koufos ALSO gets to come along, then bring on Koufos!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate… Teens in the NBA

May 20, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan.

The NBA has taken huge strides to improve its image, yet it seems to intentionally undermine these efforts with its current minimum age requirement. Under the current collective bargaining agreement a player can enter the NBA at the age of 19.

Let us examine that age for a minute. The average 19-year-old American male has held a driver’s license for less than five years. They have been eligible to vote and purchase cigarettes for just one year. And they still cannot legally purchase alcohol for another two years. Does the individual I just described sound like they are responsible enough to handle a multimillion dollar job? Especially considering that their position makes them a role model to kids throughout the country? I think not.

When I was 19-years-old I was a rowdy frat boy whose only concern was going to parties, chasing women, and video games, but at least I went to college. The argument could be made that NBA players without college experience can boast even less maturity. Is that really the image that NBA commissioner Stern wants to portray? If so, we could have just stumbled across the NBA’s next marketing campaign, “The NBA. Young hoodlums playing a professional sport.” Or, better yet, “The NBA. Our players may not be old enough to shave… but, hey we have a dress code.”

A player can go prep-to-pro in the NBA and miss out on the maturation process that college basketball provides. The college experience allows players to develop athletically and personally. Now I know that playing college basketball does not immediately qualify a player as a consummate professional and an ambassador for the sport (see Ron Artest and Allen Iverson), but it certainly does nothing to hurt the development of their character. College teams emphasize team work, camaraderie, and loyalty, qualities that seem to be increasingly less prevalent in a NBA landscape dominated by monster free agent contracts and contract holdouts. It seems that if the NBA wants to sell itself as a legitimate sports franchise it should raise the minimum age requirement to 21.

Recently, basketball legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar stated that he thought “even [LeBron] James would have benefited from college.” He went on to state that he thinks college would have completed and polished LeBron’s already well-rounded game. Can you imagine the potential? Seriously, if LeBron’s skills could have been elevated by college, are there any LeBron fans out there that would oppose that? I honestly do not see the down side to taking efforts to maximizing players’ potential talent.

One of the largest arguments against a minimum age in basketball is it that it steals away valuable money making years and economic opportunities from a player. That may be true, but I do not think the NBA wants the public to perceive money as the driving force behind the league. Sure the players and agents would probably baulk at anything that reduces big paydays for players, but making the game about the game, instead of the money, may actually endear it to the fans. I have never heard a fan say, “Boy these players simply aren’t being paid to play early enough.” Increasing the minimum age of NBA players to 21 is the right move for the players, the fans, and the NBA – even if they don’t know it yet.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

1 Comment | The Raising the NBA Minimum Age Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The Most Valuable Under the Radar NBA Player Debate… Hill Has Skills Few Can Match

May 19, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan.

Every NBA team has one. That player that is steady, solid, and well-rounded. The type of guy that contributes to wins and losses in ways that statistics simply cannot capture. At this stage of the NBA playoffs, the best teams are on display. Those best teams all have an under the radar talent that contributes to the overall team’s success in myriad ways. My colleagues will introduce their favorites. I picked last in the group, but I still got the best player – Grant Hill, forward for the Phoenix Suns.

Hill is the prototype of the under the radar impact player because he doesn’t lead the team in any big time stat category, but his presence is felt in all of them. His nearly ten points per game do not lead the team. His 26 playoff assists this post-season are second only to that Steve Nash fella. He is third in rebounding on the team with 68, trailing only the much taller Amar’e Stoudemire and super-athlete Jason Richardson (by one rebound). His 83 percent shooting exhibition from the free throw line is second to Nash as well (for players with ten or more attempts).

None of those stats lead the team, yet all are impressive, and every significant statistical category is impacted.

Those are the obvious stats, but digging deeper into the world of statistics reveals Hill’s positive impact in even greater detail. I have gone on the record many times at TSD, both in published articles and in production meetings, that the addition of the plus/minus stat to professional basketball box scores is a HUGE and positive development. If you’re unfamiliar with the stat, it measures a player’s total impact while on the floor. For example, if John Doe has a -5 in the box score, then the team was five points behind the opponent while John was on the court.

It is no coincidence that the better Grant Hill does in the plus/minus category, the better the team does. In fact, at least in the playoffs, the Suns were winners as long as Grant Hill was in positive territory (with the one exception being a foul trouble related effort that limited his minutes).

The team’s first playoff game was a loss to Portland, where Hill was -5 for the game. Game two was a big win where Hill made ten of eleven field goal attempts and registered a +14. I won’t bore you with all of the game-to-game statistical goodness that is the plus/minus, but I’ll point to a couple of instances where the stat was a key indicator and best conveys Hill’s impact.

With Phoenix having lost home court advantage in the first two games to Portland, the Suns entered the Rose Garden in a must win situation. While Richardson exploded for 42 points that game, he still only mustered a +15 for his team when he was on the floor. Contrast that performance with the ever-solid Grant Hill who poured in just eight points but managed a +16 all around performance. In the series deciding game Hill’s offensive effort was even less impressive, with just three points on 1-4 shooting. But his plus/minus was off the charts at +26.

The Spurs’ series was much the same for Hill, solid performances highlighted by impressive plus/minus. He does not lead the team in scoring, rebounding, or assists. But, he does lead the team in fundamentals and hustle – the two primary necessities of any champion of under the radar skills.

Grant Hill is 37 years old. The point in his career where explosive scoring outputs are standard is long since buried. But he understands how important it is to be fundamentally sound – those are timeless abilities that not even advanced playing age can erode. For contrast, put Hill’s performances and overall approach to the game up against players from a team like the Cleveland Cavaliers. The ability to box out, to execute a half court trap, to stop the ball on a fast break… these are all skills that do not necessarily show up in the box score. But they do show up in the win column. Just ask the Cavs.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Most Valuable Under the Radar NBA Player Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Most Valuable Under the Radar NBA Player Debate… The Biggest Little Man in Boston

May 19, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

I’m officially a believer.

I refused to drink the Kool-Aid for a long time, and I criticized those in the media who had already started to recognize that which I failed to see until recently. But I am convinced now.

The Boston Celtics truly are playing championship caliber basketball.

I am surely not the only one coming to this realization, considering the fact that the Celtics dispatched LeBron James, and some other guys from Cleveland, in the last round of the playoffs. And they have already won the first two games of the Eastern Conference championship IN Orlando against the Magic.

Most impressive, though, has been the performance of Rajon Rondo.

Before the postseason began, if I asked you to name the most valuable point guard in the NBA, you would have given me names like Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Derrick Rose, or Chris Paul. Likewise, if I asked you to give me the name of the most valuable player on the Celtics, you would have most likely named one of the “Big Three” – Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, or Ray Allen.

Rajon Rondo, who has been a very impressive player throughout his career, never seemed to draw the attention of those other players. They seem to find the headlines much more easily. Whether he is compared to other point guards in the league, or to his own teammates, Rondo NEVER seems to get top billing.

All of that has changed. If I were to ask you those same questions today, Rondo would be the definitive answer to BOTH.

No player has been bigger this postseason than the little guy. At six foot one, Rondo is clearly the shortest guy on the court for Boston. But that has not stopped him from almost single-handedly beating the Cavaliers, leading them through a postseason that now appears destined for the NBA Finals.

In the series against the Cavaliers, for example, Rondo averaged a double-double with 20.6 points and 11.8 assists per game. Added to that impressive performance comes 38 rebounds, including 18 in game four alone against a Cavs team that featured not one, but TWO, seven-footers (three, depending on which heels Anderson Varejao is wearing). Not bad for a little guy!

His performance in game four of the Cavaliers series has actually been dubbed as one of the greatest in all-time Celtics’ history (which includes players like Larry Bird, Bill Russell, and Bob Cousy). Against the best team in the NBA (Editor’s Note: Says who?), Rondo notched a triple-double with 29 points, 13 assists, and the aforementioned 18 rebounds.

He has been the leading point-scorer for the Celtics this postseason, and his ability to create shots for everyone else on the court around him has caused many sleepless nights for Erik Spoelstra, Mike Brown, and now Stan Van Gundy.

This is not KG’s team, and it does not belong to the Big Three. This is Rondo’s team! He has taken charge of the Celtics, and his teammates have responded in kind by playing some of the best basketball we have seen in a very long time.


Rajon Rondo won’t be “under the radar” anymore, though. His performance this postseason has served as a declaration of the type of player that he is – MOST VALUABLE!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Most Valuable Under the Radar NBA Player Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.