RealClearSports - Articlestag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//42008-07-16T22:10:48ZMovable Type 3.33Soccer Punchtag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.121432008-07-17T22:00:41Z2008-07-16T22:10:48ZThere are, believe it or not, more hated Yanks overseas than George W. Bush: the Americans who own European football teams
When Barack Obama arrives in England in a few weeks on his celebrated European tour, he’ll probably disembark assuming that George W. Bush is the most despised American in Britain.
If so, he’ll be wrong. Currently, sitting atop the most-hated Yank chart is Tom Hicks, co-owner of the Liverpool soccer club and a Texas businessman who ran with the same crowd as the incumbent president when Bush was governor of the Lone Star state.Jeff Pyatt
Arrogant Americans
What has Hicks done wrong? To American eyes accustomed to the George Steinbrenners of the sports world, not much, as the team continues to perform relatively well on the field. But to apoplectic English and Liverpool fans, to whom tradition is vital, Hicks couldn’t be a more bumbling, stumbling embarrassment. In fact, when his son attended a game in February and went to a pub afterwards, he was spit upon, had beer thrown at him, and had to be rescued.
Hicks and his co-owner, Canadian George Gillett Jr. (owner of the NHL’s Montreal Canadiens), have publicly quarreled on more than one occasion. It was reported that Hicks had sounded out another potential manager (coach) for the team, undermining the current and highly respected skipper, Rafa Benitez. He even asked one of the club’s most solid links to the past, chief executive Rick Parry, to resign, on grounds he was disloyal (Parry refused). The always-excitable English press has occasionally taken to calling the team “Hicksville.”
But the final straw, for many fans, came two months later. While Liverpool played its key game of the year — a Champions League clash with Arsenal — Hicks stayed home in Texas to watch the Rangers on opening day. “I would never miss our home opener,” he was quoted as saying, “but I will have the Liverpool game on my TV.” That, of course, drove Liverpool fans bananas.
None of this, clearly, rises to the level of a foreign-policy crisis, of course. But it is indicative of a clash of cultures — of which Obama should be aware. Having lived in Europe recently, I can attest to the fact that most Europeans do like individual Americans (though not President Bush). But when they think about the United States, what does tend to irritate them is the arrogance of some Americans who convey the idea that everything stars-and-stripes is superior.
European soccer — especially in Liverpool — is something close to a sacred rite. What Bush buddy Hicks has done is akin to walking into a church, lighting a cigarette, and cracking open a beer. Note to Obama: the best way to reach out to our British friends and improve Anglo-American relations would be to get Hicks to sell the team.]]>
Boston Phoenix]]>
March Madness Will Be Fun Againtag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.121042008-07-17T01:52:11Z2008-07-16T07:18:14ZI can’t wait to watch the 2009 NCAA Tournament.
I won't have to listen to the humorless and joyless Billy Packer ranting endlessly. I won’t have to put up with Packer's pompous declarations. I won't have to frantically search for the mute button when Packer begins to scold the refs, the players and the crowd – but rarely the coaches – for anything that goes wrong on the court.
Samuel Chi
College basketball is going to be fun again.
Packer sucked the life out of one of the most exciting sporting events just by being his curmudgeonly self. March Madness should be a time of celebration, a time of boundless joy over impossible possibilities. Instead, with Packer behind the mike, it often felt like the Batan Death March.
It would inevitably start on Selection Sunday. It had become an annual ritual for Packer to berate the committee chairman, the poor soul who just spent 48 sleepless hours to pick 65 teams for the tournament. It predictably began with the diatribe over why so many mid-major teams, teams from conferences that Packer deigned to be beneath contempt, were picked over the bottom feeders of his beloved ACC.
There was that worthless George Mason team in 2006, or Saint Joseph’s in 2004. Or any team from the Missouri Valley Conference, in any year. If Packer were the committee chairman, he’d just make it the ACC Tournament with a few invitations to the big-name teams from other power conferences.
Packer hates Cinderellas. Most college basketball fans want to see the little guys compete, and perhaps steal a game or two. Packer wants to see them squashed like cockroaches on a buffet table. UCLA 70, Mississippi Valley State 29 – now, that’s a basketball game that would make Billy Packer almost smile.
It’d be one thing if Packer’s dour demeanor and sour words were only for the benefit of the camera, a charade to counterbalance the insufferable boosterism of, say, Dick Vitale. But that was no act. The man is really that mean and graceless.
He once called Allen Iverson a “tough little monkey” as a compliment. Whether he was a racist or not, at least he was on his best behavior when it came to commentary on black athletes in the latter part of his career. Not so with women.
Packer’s a world-class misogynist. He once mused about Jennifer Gillom, the center for the U.S. Women’s Pan-Am team: “Doesn't Gillom remind you of a lady who someday is going to have a nice large family and is going to be a great cook? Doesn't she look like that?”
Packer thinks women’s basketball is so utterly rubbish that he belittled Richmond’s Ginny Doyle, who had set an NCAA record by making 66 consecutive free throws. Doyle invited Packer to a free-throw shooting contest, with a men’s ball, not the smaller women’s ball that Packer had denigrated. Packer showed up and promptly made 12 of 20 shots. Doyle sank all 20.
Then there was the 2000 incident at Cameron Indoor Stadium, when he was stopped and asked to show his credential by a female Duke student. Beyond the usual narcissist drivel such as “do you know who I am” dripping from his pursed lips, Packer couldn’t help but add this gem: “Since when do we let women control who gets into a men's basketball game? Why don't you go find a women's game to let people into?"
OK, we get it. He hates the underdog. He thinks women should stay in the kitchen. He is not moved by all the hoopla and pageantry that is March Madness. He must know basketball, right?
Well, he knows basketball, in so far as it’s played in the conventional form, like when he starred for Wake Forest in the 1950s. He has no real grasp of the many innovations of the sport over time, which might explain his absolute abhorrence for the NBA. When a new concept emerges in the college game -- take the Dribble Drive Motion Offense most notably deployed by Memphis in recent years -- it seemed to befuddle him.
So just exactly why CBS kept this man as the voice of the Final Four for the past 27 years, when he was nearly universally despised and derided? Simple. It’s a true test for the audience. If you’re a college basketball fan and you’ve tolerated Packer through gritted teeth over all these years, you must truly love the game.
You have now passed the test. Congratulations!
Bring on Clark Kellogg. And turn up the volume.
Sir, Step Away from the Headsettag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.121052008-07-16T06:11:16Z2008-07-16T06:58:21ZThis year's Home Run Derby reinforced a couple of previously held maxims about baseball. First, second-basemen, no matter how many home runs they hit, should not be considered power hitters. Second, things get much more interesting whenever someone is described as an "ex-heroin addict." And third, columnists should no longer be shoehorned into the broadcast booth.
ESPN's failed experiment of turning writers into analysts, which began with the much-questioned addition of Tony Kornheiser to Monday Night Football, continued Tuesday night with Rick Reilly's guest spot during the derby. Thanks to a record-setting first-round run from Josh Hamilton, Reilly's performance will most likely be forgotten within the week. But after two hours of pithy one-liners, nonsensical flame-fanning, and enough awkward Karl Ravech sendbacks to last the Baseball Tonight host a lifetime, Reilly's time in the booth should serve as a lesson for TV executives for decades to come.Ryan Hudson
there's this little website you might've heard of...). But during Hamiiton's record run, both men acquitted themselves admirably, providing exactly the kind of analysis you'd expect from men who are paid to break down the game.
Phillips brought up the fact that Hamilton never made it past A-Ball. That he had essentially leapt from the bottom rung of the minors to the major leagues without the normal tiered progression common to almost every ballplayer. Morgan piggybacked on Phillips's comment, talking about how difficult it was to adjust to major league pitching, providing the perfect amount of context to explain how astounding Hamilton's return really was. Of course, this outburst of competency may have only been prompted by Reilly's droll awkwardness. But if it only takes one $17 million dollar fish-out-of-water columnist to turn two normally sub par analysts into deft commentators, maybe ESPN has found itself a bargain.
]]>
Is This Break Necessary?tag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.120512008-07-15T21:38:24Z2008-07-14T21:47:34ZThere are two and only two days on the calendar when no games are scheduled in big-league baseball, football, basketball or hockey: the day before and the day after baseball's All-Star Game.
Maybe it ought to be three.
The All-Star Game has become a tired spectacle, a corporate cash-grab, a massive irrelevance. Fewer American households watched the game last year than forty years ago, despite a 50% increase in U.S. population in that time. Jeff Pyatt
The All-Star Game has become an excuse for its peripheral events, baseball's one opportunity to schmooze its sponsors and clients in Super Bowl fashion. Unlike the World Series, it takes place in a predetermined location, allowing the corporate jet set to make plans and schedule its taxpayer-subsidized gatherings.
The fan voting – excuse me, the Monster 2008 All-Star Game Online Ballot at MLB.com – provides fodder for commentators who are shocked that a popularity contest doesn't always select the worthiest candidates. Those complaints about the starting lineups – announced on the 2008 All-Star Game Selection Show presented by Chevrolet – serve the promo machine beautifully, and fuel the Monster 2008 All-Star Final Vote to select the last player for each team. (No doubt someone is generating a profit on every click.)
The interactive off-site exhibition – the DHL All-Star Fan Fest – is apparently a must-see if you've purchased your seats as part of the home team's season-ticket offering, since you are required to buy two Fan Fest admissions for every All-Star ticket purchased. In an effort to reach out to the youth of America, children are admitted free – if they happen to be under two years of age. Otherwise, it's $25.00 for the kiddies, on top of the cost of tickets to All-Star Sunday (featuring the XM Satellite Radio All-Star Futures Game and the Taco Bell All-Star Legends and Celebrity Softball Game), the Gatorade All-Star Workout Day on Monday that includes the State Farm Home Run Derby, and of course the game on Tuesday night (Red Carpet Show presented by Chevrolet, coverage on MLB.com presented by Fruit of the Loom, and don't forget the Monster All-Star Game 2008 MVP Vote on MLB.com for the Ted Williams Most Valuable Player Award presented by Chevrolet).
Nascar's got nothing on these guys.
None of this would matter if the game were worthwhile. It isn't.
Once upon a time, the All-Star Game was our one chance to see all the game's best players in a short span of time. Today, in a world of SportsCenter and YouTube and baseball's Extra Innings Package and MLB.TV, we can see the game's best every night if we want to. There's no novelty left to wear off.
League identity has broken down as well. When I first followed baseball, there were only a few specific periods in which interleague trades could be made; today, players move freely from league to league through trades, free agency, and waiver moves. Interleague play in the regular season also reduces the significance of the AL-NL division, as does the common umpiring pool that serves all games.
(Incidentally, while I'm generally among the purest of purists, I'm not bothered by the notion of the All-Star Game deciding home-field advantage in the World Series. It's a gimmick, but it's not as though this system replaced a more sensible, merit-based method. Giving that extra home game to the All-Star winner is no worse than alternating leagues.)
The three most memorable All-Star moments in the last twenty years were, undoubtedly, Ted Williams's appearance at the 1999 game in Boston, the tie-game debacle in Milwaukee in 2002, and John Kruk's comical plate appearance against Randy Johnson in 1993. None of the three exactly reflect the game as a showcase for baseball's best.
The same can be said of the Home Run Derby on Monday night. What was fun once has become, like its close cousin the NBA Slam-Dunk Competition, an exercise in tedium through repetition and abdication. The game's best hitters want nothing to do with it: of the eight players participating this year, only three rank among the top 100 active home-run hitters.
Finally, there's the nightmare of managing the game. In general, once players advance beyond tee-ball, it's accepted that some of those who show up for a game may have to sit it out. Not so at baseball's Midsummer Classic. It was bad enough to try to get everybody into the game when there were 30-man rosters. Now, thanks to the specter of that tie in Milwaukee, there are 32 men on each team. Terry Francona and Clint Hurdle will need advanced Excel training just to maintain a lineup through the game.
I've got no illusions that anything is going to change about the bloated event the All-Star Game has become. There's still something nice about seeing all the game's best players stand along the foul lines to receive their measure of applause. Unfortunately, it's all downhill from there.
Where Have All The Heavyweights Gone?tag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.118932008-07-11T18:41:17Z2008-07-11T06:33:32ZSerious boxing fans will no doubt remember Hasim Rahman and John Ruiz.
The Baltimore-born “Rock” was a pretty good puncher who began his pro career in 1994 and struck pay dirt in 2001 when he flattened heavyweight champ Lenox Lewis with a right hand to the chin. (Lewis knocked him out in the return bout.)
Jeff Pyatt
The “Quiet Man” is a Massachusetts native who turned pro in 1992. His jab-and-grab style was death on the pay-per-view action. But Ruiz won his share of the title seven years ago by beating Evander Holyfield. (He lost it to Roy Jones Jr.)
If you’re wondering what happened to those two blasts from the past, here’s a bulletin. At the tender ages of 35 and 36 respectively, Rahman and Ruiz are the highest-ranking U.S. heavyweights fighting today, according to ESPN.com boxing guru Dan Rafael. That’s no joke. But it should be.
Meanwhile the third-highest ranked U.S. heavyweight, someone named Tony “the Tiger” Thompson, is fighting for the title on Saturday in Germany against IBF, IBO and WBO champ Wladimir Klitschko, the large Ukranian with the PhD who is sometimes more professor than puncher inside the ring.
One boxing writer has called Thompson “the best kept secret in the heavyweight division.” Given that he’s 36 years old and no one outside his immediate family has heard of him, that’s an understatement. The HBO audience for this one probably won’t match the numbers for the Discovery Channel’s recent special on albino piranhas.
Diagnosing the ills of boxing these days is like doing the autopsy on Rasputin the Mad Monk. It’s hard to know where to start. But how about with the utter lack of talented and marketable American heavyweights. Forget about Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, or Rocky Marciano. Never mind the glorious 1970s convergence of Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, and George Foreman. These days, boxing fans practically pine for the era of Michael Dokes, Pinklon Thomas, and “Terrible” Timmy Witherspoon.
If boxing needed a wakeup call, it was CBS’s decision to air mixed martial arts on Saturday nights. Mixed martial arts is pretty much the equivalent of human cockfighting. But it won’t be long—if it isn’t already the case—that Kimbo Slice will be a household name while the name of the last American heavyweight champ will be the answer to a trivia question.
For those dwindling few who still pay attention to the U.S. fight game, the draws are 43-year-old Bernard Hopkins, a natural middleweight; 39-year-old Roy Jones Jr., a light heavy; and 35-year-old Oscar De La Hoya, whose last title was as super welterweight. The best recent American fighter was the gifted Floyd Mayweather Jr., a welterweight. But a small man like Mayweather never managed to attract anywhere near the attention that would have been lavished on a U.S. heavyweight with a fraction of his skills. Mayweather knows that size counts. He recently showed up in a Wrestle Mania event to do battle against a creature called “Big Show,” who is listed at 7 feet tall and 440 pounds.
The American heavyweight scene went south around the turn of the millennium when age finally caught up with Holyfield. That ended a strong run that began in the 60’s with Ali and moved through Frazier, Foreman, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes, and of course, Mike Tyson before petering out. There have been fallow periods before—like the mid-80’s when guys like Dokes, Witherspoon, and Thomas passed various titles around. But nothing this grim
They say that good U.S. heavies are scarce because young athletes who once headed to the heavy bag are shooting for careers as tight ends and small forwards. That’s understandable. There are no multi-year guaranteed contracts and no free agency in boxing.
And that bring us to another problem. These days, you have to be big enough to be an NFL tight end or NBA forward to fight as a heavywieght. There is no room in the sport for your garden-variety large individual. In their primes, Dempsey weighed about 190 and Louis was around 200. Marciano, weighed all of about 185. Ali and Foreman were considered very large specimens in their day. They both stood about 6’3” and weighed 215 or so.
But today, Rafael’s roster of the five top-ranked heavies includes Klitschko (6’6”, 240 pounds), Sam “The Nigerian Nightmare” Peter (250 pounds), Nikolai Valuev (boxing’s “Andre the Giant” at 7’, 320 pounds) and two guys named Chagaev and Povetkin who tip the scales at a mere 225-230.
By the way, if that list reminds you of the characters in Dr. Zhivago, get used to it. The old Soviet Union may have lost the Cold War, but it rules a heavyweight division that was, for an awfully long time, the dominion of some of America’s greatest athletes. There’s not much chance that “Tony the Tiger” will change that on July 12. And sadly, there’s even less chance we’ll be watching.
Lessons of Championstag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.118032008-07-09T19:21:10Z2008-07-09T05:35:20ZWASHINGTON -- If you read Monday morning's sports headlines, you learned that Rafael Nadal "dethroned" and "shocked" tennis champion Roger Federer at Wimbledon.
He won, in other words. But barely, barely.
If, on the other hand, you actually watched the Sunday match, you know that though one player prevailed, both men won. You also awoke Monday morning physically exhausted and emotionally spent.
Jeff Pyatt
To watch this Wimbledon was to endure, to sweat, to grip the arms of your chair through a 4-hour, 48-minute white-knuckle contest between two giants of grace and beauty, and that other thing.
Ah, yes, class.
Some rare days, the performances of others inspire and uplift. Sunday was one of those days. The match also provided a welcome reprieve from the coarseness of our culture, the pile-driving pace of our perpetual politics, and offered a glimpse at what sportsmanship -- on and off the court -- ought to look like.
To those who don't care whether the little ball gets over the net, as a friend of mine once described her lack of interest in tennis, Wimbledon may not have made the radar screen. But Sunday's contest transcended a single sport and entered the realm of surpassing spectacle. It was a gripping contest of will and spirit.
Federer at 26 is the leading man of tennis. He hadn't lost Wimbledon since 2002 and was poised to tie another record -- six straight titles. Nadal, just 22 and holder of four French Open titles, was positioned to become the first Spaniard to win Wimbledon since 1966.
Otherwise, this was no ordinary encounter. Between the vagaries of weather and the clash of these titanic talents, the match is unmatched in tennis history. Twice rain forced the players to stop, while wind gusts altered shots and points. Break points bounced maddeningly between deuces and ads. Finally, on his fourth match point, Nadal was able to wrest the championship from Federer.
Throughout, both men were mesmerizingly fierce and yet imperturbably calm. At crucial points they were like gladiators playing chess. Notably missing were the tantrums, histrionics, profane outbursts and end-zone antics we so often witness in sports these days. At a time when adults bemoan the paucity of role models, Wimbledon provided a banquet of riches.
Tennis has always been a gentleman's (and lady's) game, though in recent years standards have sagged. Manners aren't as fashionable or as rigorously enforced as once upon a time. Attire has evolved from traditional whites to duds of one's choosing. Yet Wimbledon still requires players to dress in white.
Nadal wore knee-length "shorts" and a sleeveless shirt, while Federer was dressed more conservatively. We moderns like to pretend that clothes don't matter, that personal style is simply another function of freedom of expression. Yet we still judge others by how they present themselves, and Federer's presentation on the court bespoke a higher level of respect for the game.
The men's playing styles are equally different. Nadal is Sylvester Stallone to Federer's Baryshnikov. Nadal enters the court like a steeplechase stallion, jogging in place, aching to hit the track. Federer is a Zen master -- centered, calm, patient.
By the end of the first three sets, however, all such distinctions evaporated. I am probably not alone in saying that by the last set, I no longer cared who won. I wanted neither to lose. Both were victors who demonstrated how to win and how to lose.
After the finale, Federer, layered in long pants and sweater, looked as if he'd just stepped out of the shower to accept his second-place silver tray. Affectionately cuffing Nadal on the back of the neck, he posed for fans and kept his remarks brief: "I tried everything. ... But Rafa is a deserving champion. ... It's a pity I couldn't win it in the circumstances, but I'll be back next year."
For his part, Nadal -- sweat-soaked and choking back emotion -- climbed the stands to embrace his parents. It was a touching moment that needed no commentary. Afterward, Nadal raised the gold trophy and was gracious in victory.
"I'm so proud because I feel I am playing against, and now beating, the best player in the history of tennis. The fight he put up against me was unbelievable and I congratulate him for that. I also have to say that he is a credit to our sport whether he wins or he loses."
It doesn't get any better than that. Would that life imitated Sunday's Wimbledon.
(c) 2008, Washington Post Writers Group
Modern Pentathlon: A Sport For Warriors, Not Spectatorstag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.117522008-07-08T16:23:34Z2008-07-09T08:33:37ZThe 1912 Olympic Games in Stockholm are usually remembered for the remarkable accomplishments of Jim Thorpe. In those Games, Thorpe famously won gold medals in the track and field pentathlon as well as the first Olympic decathlon, an event designed to determine the perfect athlete. For his accomplishments, he earned newspaper headlines, ticker-tape parades and was anointed by the King of Sweden "the greatest athlete in the world," an honorary title that has since been bestowed upon every Olympic gold medal decathlete.Jeff PyattIn Pictures: More Stories from Patton's Pentathlon
Despite its purpose and history, the sport that was once called the "military pentathlon" and the sport Patton described as – in spite of his misfortune with it -- a test of "the fitness of the perfect man-of-arms," has never effectively reached a worldwide audience and always seems to be on the verge of elimination from the Olympics.
In fact, the modern pentathlon is so out of favor with current IOC President Jacques Rogge that he twice proposed removing it in the last six years. In both instances -- once in 2002 and again in 2005 -- it narrowly avoided becoming the first sport since polo in 1936 to be excluded from the Summer Olympics. It is thus against the odds that the modern pentathlon is set to celebrate its 100th Anniversary at the 2012 London Games.
But Rogge will likely try again. With a program already topping more than 300 events comprised of some 28 different sports, Rogge believes the Olympics can't add new events from popular growing sports like golf, rugby, and squash, without removing other less popular events like baseball, softball, and the modern pentathlon.
It is therefore an ominous future for the modern pentathlon, and one that would make Baron Pierre de Coubertin's heart -- buried within Mount Olympus -- break apart. When he founded the modern pentathlon, de Coubertin, who more famously founded the modern Olympics, created an event that encapsulated the spirit and competitiveness of the international games.
"It's clear there will never be millions of pentathletes in the world," Joel Bouzou, former modern penthatlete and current secretary general of the modern pentathlon federation told the AP. "But it is a symbolic sport and part of Pierre de Coubertin's legacy. How can you kill the only sport created by the renovator of the games? If pentathlon is taken out of the program, it will die."
Military tradition inspired the collection of diverse skills de Coubertin pooled together -- swimming, running, pistol shooting, fencing and horseback riding. More specifically, it was the story of a young French soldier who utilized all five skills to deliver a message through enemy lines. De Coubertin believed that this set of events would move beyond track and field by testing more than just strength and speed, but would "test a man's moral qualities as much as his physical resources and skills, producing thereby the ideal, complete athlete."
In 1912, de Coubertin, through Patton's example, succeeded. Even though many felt that he had earned the right to be disgruntled, Patton, in a manner that runs counter to how we remember him now, heaped praise upon the event and the camaraderie it fostered amongst his fellow competitors.
It was "an officers' competition, and certainly the high spirit of sportsmanship speaks volumes for the character of the officers of the present day," Patton said. "Each man did his best and took what fortune sent like a true soldier, and at the end we all felt more like good friends and comrades than rivals in a severe competition, yet this sport of friendship in no manner detracted from the zeal with which all strove for success."
Even after Patton's near-miss, the sport never gained a foothold beyond a few niche countries. The event was initially dominated by Swedes, who swept the podium places in the first two Olympics and won eight of the first nine gold medals – interrupted only by Gotthard Handrick, a German flying ace who became a national hero during the infamous 1936 Berlin Games. In the modern era, the winners have been primarily Russians and Eastern Europeans.
In today's Olympics, when marketability is as important as athletic ability, Olympic events need to capture more than just ideals and the spirit of sportsmanship. To this end, in recent years the modern pentathlon has undertaken major changes to its format to try to stave off Olympic extinction. The competition now takes place in one day, as opposed to five days when Patton competed. The team event was eliminated after 1992 and a women's competition added in 2000. And changes to the point system ensure that the competitor who crosses the finish line first in the 3,000 meter run -- the final event -- wins the gold.
Will these changes make a difference? Will more people now take an interest in the modern pentathlon? Probably not. In all likelihood, the IOC powerbrokers will always be able to cite the lack of widespread appeal as grounds to remove the modern pentathlon. But if they ever succeed, they will do so at the cost of removing the sport that best exemplifies the founding spirit of the Olympic Games.
In Pictures: More Stories from Patton's Pentathlon
]]>
Wimbledon Lucky to be Predictabletag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.116872008-07-05T11:48:07Z2008-07-05T12:54:02ZWhat, you were expecting a Safin-Schuettler final?
Destiny has never been so delicious. A Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal final seemed so preordained, with the other 62 matches played as mere exhibitions. Inevitability didn't work for Hillary Clinton, but it's a gift from the tennis gods to Wimbledon.
Samuel Chi
familia in Mallorca. Federer is charmingly and disarmingly arrogant (some trick to pull that off!). Nadal's arrogance lives only between the white lines -- he's as gracious and humble as they come.
Yet it is Federer whose confidence should be badly shaken after the humiliation in Paris. Oddsmakers made Roger and Rafa co-favorites prior to the start of Wimbledon -- quite disrespectful to the man who's won his last 65 matches on grass. The media bandwagon is now full of Rafa's new best friends, many of them eager to proclaim that Federer's reign is over. Even McEnroe -- OK, Patrick McEnroe -- said that Rafa owns Roger, probably for good.
If you didn't think Federer was seething after getting dusted on the Roland Garros clay, then you must’ve been fooled by that unflappable mask of his. Roger is quietly going about his business this fortnight, and he's revealed few flaws in storming to the final without dropping a set. He's not going down without a fight.
Nadal, on the other hand, has been electrifying. He's learned to adapt his game to the once-foreign surface, amping up his serve and perfecting his return game. Rafa won't say it -- but at the precocious age of 22, he's ready to take over the tennis world.
Is he good enough to dethrone the king, right here and right now? Hmmm, we're not quite so sure. Fortunately for Wimbledon, the only match that's not a foregone conclusion is the only one that matters.
]]>
O.J. Mayo Will Not Be A Startag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.115952008-07-02T17:45:38Z2008-07-02T19:49:44ZIn his column on Tuesday, posted here at RealClearSports, Gregg Doyel made a rather bold prediction:
So I'm saying it right now. The best player to come out of the 2008 NBA Draft won't be Derrick Rose. Won't be Michael Beasley, either. It'll be O.J. Mayo, and frankly, it might not be close.
Doyel makes the claim that Mayo will be an absolute star in the NBA. In fact, he's so confident that he says Mayo "will mash rest of draft class into a pulp" - in the title of his article. This is when Doyel and I differ. Greatly. Not only will Mayo not be the best of the 2008 draft class, but he will be a complete bust.Ryan Hudson
Sports Illustrated at just 14-years old.
Will Mayo flare out as quickly as Miner did? Who knows for sure. But the similarities are worthy of acknowledging. Both players entered the NBA with pressure and expectations of greatness.
Miner, who's most notable pro-accomplishment was winning the Slam-Dunk Contest twice, quickly wilted under the pressure and lasted just four years in the league. "I always felt the worst thing to happen to Harold was the 'Baby Jordan' tag," said George Raveling, Miner's head coach at USC.
If Mayo wants to avoid the same career as Miner, he needs to soon realize that to make it in the NBA, he'll have to alter his game. But perhaps more importantly, if Mayo hopes to succeed at the next level -- and prove his doubters wrong, myself included -- he needs to accept his limits and avoid buying into his own hype.]]>
In Baseball, "No" Doesn't Mean "No-No"tag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.114702008-06-30T06:32:21Z2008-06-30T15:29:52ZWho are you gonna believe – me, or your lyin' eyes?
That's the question Major League Baseball posed for the 55,000 fans who filled Dodger Stadium for Saturday night's Angels-Dodgers game. Jered Weaver allowed no hits in six innings for the Angels, then Jose Arredondo came on in relief and retired all six batters he faced. Weaver pitched beautifully but fielded imperfectly; his error on a corkscrew nubber led to the game's only run. The crowd saw something rare: just the sixth time in major-league history that a team lost despite throwing a no-hitter.
Or did they?Jeff Pyatt
Not according to Major League Baseball. Because the Angels were the road team, and the home team did not bat in the bottom of the ninth, the game will not be recognized as an official no-hitter.
In the early 1990s, baseball's official Committee on Statistical Accuracy issued the following definition of a no-hitter:
"An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher or pitchers allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings. In a no-hit game, a batter may reach base via a walk, an error, a hit by pitch, a passed ball or wild pitch on strike three, or catcher's interference."
(You can tell this was written by a committee, which must have argued long and hard over that second sentence. Most of us would have assumed that a no-hitter can include things that aren't hits.)
This definition has been interpreted to deny a no-hitter when the visiting team loses one, because its pitchers have only recorded twenty-four outs rather than the usual twenty-seven. That's what happened in four of the six lost no-hitters: Silver King of Chicago in the Players League in 1890; Andy Hawkins for the Yankees a hundred years later; Matt Young for Boston in 1992; and Weaver-Arredondo on Saturday. (Losing no-hitters pitched by Ken Johnson for Houston in 1964 and the Steve Barber-Stu Miller combination for Baltimore in 1967 were not affected, because the losing teams were at home.)
For a long time, the list of no-hitters was clouded by a few lingering questions. Should we credit someone with a no-hitter if the game is called on account of rain before the ninth inning? What if a pitcher or team gets through nine hitless innings, but allows hits in the tenth or later? In both of these cases, the Committee's ruling sensibly says no. Sorry, David Palmer, but your rain-shortened five-inning perfect game in 1984 isn't long enough to make the cut. Tough luck, Harvey Haddix, but your twelve perfect innings in 1959 are negated by the long ball you gave up in the 13th. It's not a no-hitter if the number in the final H column isn't a zero.
But applying it to games like the Angels' non-no-no defies logic. In the wording itself, the phrase "which consists of at least nine innings" modifies "a game," rather than defining the effort required of the pitchers. They could have written, "An official no-hitter occurs when a pitcher or pitchers record at least twenty-seven outs while allowing no hits in the course of a complete game," but they didn't.
Baseball's own official rules clearly state that "(t)he game ends when the visiting team completes its half of the ninth inning if the home team is ahead" (Rule 4.11(a)). Saturday night's game was played out to its proper conclusion, not shortened by the umpires because of weather or anything else. It was a nine-inning ballgame, even though the Dodgers did not bat in their half of the ninth inning.
MLB doesn't have to change a thing in order to recognize these efforts as official no-hitters. All it has to do is declare or acknowledge that the "innings" clause in the definition applies to the game as a whole. Jered Weaver and Jose Arredondo pitched a losing no-hitter Saturday night. Everybody knows it but the rules.
Why Euro Is Such a Big Dealtag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.113882008-06-27T14:16:19Z2008-06-27T14:21:28ZPARIS, FRANCE -- To spend some time in Europe during the quadrennial Euro soccer championship is to understand that it many ways, this tournament is a bigger deal on the continent than the World Cup. Sure, winning the World Cup is said to be the biggest prize in the sport. But the same teams always dominate that tourney (Brazil, Italy, etc.), and there’s a lot more prestige in Europe to beating a traditional rival you’ve competed with for centuries, than eclipsing a nation like Ivory Coast or Mexico at the World Cup. Besides, in an era when Europe is supposed to be all unified and everything, where else but in soccer and the annual Eurovision song contest can you legitimately stir up all the old tribal antipathies, which may explain why this tournament unexpectedly produced so much attacking, exciting soccer.
The championship will go to Germany or Spain, the pre-tourney favorites, but the real winners this time around have been Turkey and Russia, the losing semi-finalists. If soccer had all the political ramifications some of its adherents claim, Turkey’s gallant come-from-behind performances here against more talented foes to reach the last four would guarantee it the long-sought admission to the European Union it seeks. Alas, soccer isn’t life and while Turkey will continue to be allowed to match wits with the likes of the Germans and Portuguese on the pitch, it will be a long while yet, if ever, that it gets its place in Brussels.
Felipe Scolari goes to Chelsea. Even when England isn’t in a tournament (is that why things went so swimmingly?), it has to inject itself into the headlines. Thus, right in the middle of the tournament, the richest-of-the-rich and the most obnoxious-of-the-obnoxious, Chelsea FC, announced it was hiring Portuguese coach Scolari as its new skipper. The disrupted Portuguese squad then when on to lose the rest of its games and go out of the tournament.
Scolari is being hailed as the new savior of Stamford Bridge. Don’t count on it. He hasn’t coached a club team in well over a decade (and that was in Brazil – a different matter entirely) and all he’s really proven on the national team scene is that he can take a group of talented Portuguese speakers and get them to play mildly over their heads. As a judge of talent he is untested and he is a hothead to boot. Will he last more than a year? It would be a surprise if he did.
The return of the Germans which means the return of Bayern Munich. German club teams have underperformed on the European stage the last few seasons and last year Bayern Munich got run off the pitch by Zenit 4-0 in the later stages of the UEFA tourney. This season Germans teams should do better. Their performance at Euro shows they have a lot of maturing talent and Bayern, especially, under the stewardship of Jurgen Klinsmann, should improve. Look for Bayern to make a run in the Champion’s League.
Expect the unexpected next season. Seasons following lengthy cup competitions tend to produce more surprises. Many of the sport’s stars are tired and more than usual get injured as their bodies break down. Thus, if there’s ever going to be a year when some Spanish team shatters the Real Madrid-Barcelona domination of La Liga and when some unexpected English team cracks the traditional top 4 of Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester United, and Chelsea --and even makes a run at the title -- this should be the year.
This tournament showed the continent’s favorite pastime at its best. Let’s hope it continues.]]>
A Mid Season Report Card on Joe Girarditag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.113862008-06-27T14:03:56Z2008-06-27T14:08:22ZAs soon as Joba Chamberlain threw pitch No. 100 to the Padres on June 19, Joe Girardi marched to the mound. It made no difference that Chamberlain had struck out nine and was locked in a 1-1 game. The manager brought the hook for his ace of the future.
At that point, Yankee fans may have had a flashback to the mound visit that didn’t happen. In the biggest moment of 2007—leading 1-0 in Game 2 of the ALDS against the Indians—Joe Torre failed to intervene while Chamberlain inhaled a sudden swarm of bugs. It looked like a Hitchcock movie. Two wild pitches later, the lead—and effectively, the Yanks’ season—was gone.
Most blamed the Yankees for the ugly divorce with Torre. But some fans had grievances against “Sleepy Joe” that included everything from his laid-back style to painful post-season blunders (opting for Jeff Weaver over Mariano Rivera in Game 4 of the 2003 World Series, not bunting against Curt Schilling in the “bloody sock” game in the 2004 ALCS.)
So Torre took his bruised ego to L.A where he stars in a State Farm commercial—surfing the Pacific, shopping Rodeo, and cruising in a convertible. He looks mah-velous in Dodger Blue. And the man following him in New York looks kind of small in his Yankee uniform.
It doesn’t help that Girardi inherited a club on the dark side of a dynasty, one that sometimes stirs memories of the 1965 Yankees—the aging Mantle-led club that ushered in a long winter of losing in the Bronx known as the Horace Clarke era.
Halfway through Girardi’s rookie season, the Yankees (42-36) are four games ahead of last year’s pace—although the odds of them pulling off another 51-25 closing sprint seem remote. But even if the 13-year playoff run ends in Girardi’s first year—and one can imagine how the New York tabloids would handle that—in a subtle but important way, he’s already proven to be the right choice.
Truth is, Girardi has disappointed both his fiercest critics and most ardent backers. He did not alienate a veteran team with a hyperactive rah-rah style as some feared. But he did not infuse it with a crisp, aggressive, small-ball mentality as others hoped. Both sides would admit he’s been more low-key than expected. But what he has done so far, and it’s no small thing, is hold together a team that has seen its pre-season blueprint vaporize.
This club was supposedly transitioning to youth, the big reason why they decided not to deal for Johan Santana. But Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy, the two can’t-miss kids in the rotation, were 0-7 with a hideous 113 hits and walks in 60 innings before getting hurt.
As for the two 20-something pillars of the daily lineup, Robby Cano has been compared to a young Rod Carew. But with a.241 average and .282 OBP, Rod Kanehl may be more like it. The Yanks keep waiting for Melky Cabrera to blossom into a .285, 20 homer, 20 stolen base guy. Yet at .254 and on pace for a career high in strikeouts, he may have regressed.
Meanwhile, the long absences of A-Rod and Posada took the starch out of a lineup that can no longer slug its way past its problems. Halfway through 2008, the team that led the league last year in average, homers and runs is now third in average, seventh in homers, and sixth in runs.
So why exactly does Girardi deserve props? For proving refreshingly and surprisingly immune to the enormous pressure to win every day in New York. (He is clearly aware of it, since the #27 on his back is the number of the next Yankee championship.) And his patience has paid off in two key areas—with a fragile bullpen and some aging everyday ballplayers.
Torre’s Bronx legacy included a smoking pile of burned-out bullpen arms as he frantically searched for that elusive “Bridge to Mo.” The result was some very hairy eighth innings and a sometimes weary closer. (Rivera’s 3.15 ERA last year was his highest since 1995, when he started 10 games.)
This year, by shrewdly mixing and matching the unproven relief crew of Jose Veras, Edwar Ramirez, Ross Ohlendorf, and the eternally unreliable Kyle Farnsworth, Girardi has somehow survived Chamberlain’s transition to a starting job. The Yankees have lost one game when leading after six innings and a fresher Rivera, at 38, has a .76 ERA without a blown save.
At the same time, Girardi’s decision to rotate his lineup, giving regular time off to Bobby Abreu, Hideki Mastui, and Johnny Damon (all of them 34 and the latter two increasingly gimpy), has worked. Damon and Matsui are both hitting over .320. Abreu with 10 homers and 50 RBIs, avoided a repeat of last year’s lousy start. For an offense that sometimes struggles to score runs, and isn’t being single-handedly carried by A-Rod, that’s a life saver.
None of this makes Girardi a genius. Nor has it fundamentally changed the reality of a decaying team trying to rebuild without having the luxury of a down season or two. No manager in baseball is under more pressure to win than Girardi. The fact that he’s not acting like it not only distinguishes him from Torre. It’s his best quality.
Heat Should Keep The Pick And Draft Beasleytag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.112902008-06-26T05:28:20Z2008-06-26T14:51:33ZWhere did this debate even come from? For months the debate had been Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley with many feeling Beasley is definitely more talented. Everyone seems to think the Bulls will draft Derrick Rose number one overall, leaving the Heat a chance to pick possibly the most talented player in the Draft and they’re looking to trade? I understand listening to offers and keeping your options open, but when it comes down to it, the Heat will regret it if they don’t pick Beasley.
Are the Heat forgetting that Beasley was the most dominant player in college last season? Beasley was third in scoring (26.5 ppg) and first in rebounding (12.5 rpg). He had 28 double-doubles on the year, shot nearly 54% from the field and a shade under 40% from 3-point range. He has the complete game, but still has room to grow. Robbie Gillies
Refuting The Reasons Why The Heat Wouldn’t Pick Beasley
He’s Immature
There have been no recent signs that he can’t handle the pressure and stay out of trouble. He bounced around to six different High Schools and had a few disciplinary issues but he was never arrested and has had no problems since. When asked about his maturity level, Beasley said, “How mature do you want me to be? I’m 19 years old.” How can you not like this kid? He could’ve pulled a typical company line and said something like, “I’ve handled all the pressure’s so far and I’m ready to lead a franchise.” But he didn’t. He’s always honest and isn’t that one of the biggest signs of maturity? And about his supposed attitude problems Beasley responds, “[The Bulls] asked if I was crazy. I left that one unanswered.". And a sense of humor too.
He’s Too Small
He was listed at 6’10 in college, 6’8 in Orlando, and was recently measured at 6’7 without shoes. All I have to say to that is Charles Barkley. All Beasley has to say is, "It's a little disappointing to me that I found out I'm actually a midget."
They Need A Point Guard
This is not the NFL. You don’t draft based on need. You draft based on best available. The Heat do need a point guard, but when a team wins less than 20% of their games the previous season (15-67), a point guard is not the only thing they need.
Beasley is a dominant player that has a strong inside game and an increasingly consistent mid and deep-range game. He is the most talented player in the Draft and talent is exactly what the Heat need. This is a no-brainer. Keep the pick and draft Michael Beasley.
The Heat Must Develop Depth by Jeff Briggs
]]>
The Heat Must Develop Depthtag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.113052008-06-26T05:28:14Z2008-06-26T14:49:43ZOf all the NBA teams, the Miami Heat, holders of the second overall pick, have the most interesting options in tonight's draft. They can select Michael Beasley, whom most consider to be the clear number two pick in the draft; they can opt not to pick Beasley and take another player like OJ Mayo; or they can trade down with any number of teams and stockpile picks and players to build around their core of Dwayne Wade and Shawn Marion. Robbie Gillies
As I've already expressed, picking OJ Mayo with the second pick would be a mistake. Burdened with the NBA's worst record in '08, one draft pick will not be enough to solve the Heat's lack of depth. They should instead look to trade the pick.
Rumors have circulated that the Heat have been in trade talks with the next three teams on the board: Minnesota, Seattle, and Memphis. Of these, the best trading partner may be Memphis, which desperately wants a legitimate PF to replace Pau Gasol. The Grizzles have two young PGs in Mike Conley and Kyle Lowry, as well as sharpshooter Mike Miller and the fifth pick in the draft. A plausible trade would give the Grizzlies the opportunity to take Beasley and send Miller, Lowry, and the #5 pick to Miami -- a combination of building-block role players and a potential star.
There are also rumors that Riley has soured on Beasley because of his lack of maturity. The Heat already have to deal with Marion's behavioral problems; they don't need the additional distraction of Beasley's immaturity. Riley, who has held secret workouts with OJ Mayo and Jerryd Bayless, might even prefer either of these players to Beasley. By trading down, he could address one problem (depth), avoid another (Beasley's behavior) and still get the player he wants.
While the Heat are just two years removed from being NBA champions and have two all-stars in Wade and Marion, they are still several pieces away from being a legitimate contender again. When they won the championship the team was built around Wade, Shaq, and a group of veteran players that played strong defense. Although a great scorer, Beasley can't fill Shaq's shoes and his ineptitude on the defensive end does not fit into Riley's scheme. Ultimately, the Heat lack the depth needed to make a serious run in the playoffs. If they have the option of trading their pick to improve their depth and still get the player they desire they should -- and will -- do it. Beasley is not the answer for the Heat, but they can use his high draft value to make a trade and improve their team beyond what Beasley could possibly do for them next season.
Heat Should Keep The Pick And Draft Beasley by Robbie Gillies]]>
Tuesday Top 10: NBA Draft Picks That Shaped A Franchisetag:www.realclearsports.com,2008:/articles//4.111952008-06-24T09:52:39Z2008-06-26T06:56:50ZThe Celtics just won their first Championship in 22 years, thanks in large part to their first round pick in the 1998 Draft, Paul Pierce. Pierce has been the face of the Celtics for a decade now, and while picking up Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen took the team over the top, it was Pierce that was the Finals MVP, and their primary threat all season long. But, despite what Paul Pierce has done for the Celtics, he didn't make our list for the Top 10 Draft picks that shaped a franchise. Teams like the Bulls and Heat are hoping the players they select this Thursday in the NBA Draft might one day be able to do a fraction of what these players did (have done) for the team that drafted them.Robbie GilliesABOUT THE LIST: The players had to have been drafted by the team they had an impact on. Someone like Kobe Bryant or Bill Russell, who were involved in draft day deals, were ineligible. Shaping the franchise was defined as: a player becoming the face of the franchise and having changed the culture of basketball on that team for an extended period of time.
10
2003: Cleveland Cavaliers - LeBron James
LeBron James is by far the most recent player on this list, and it’s very debatable whether or not he should be in the top 10, having only been with the Cavs for five seasons. But, LeBron has turned the culture around for the Cleveland Cavaliers. In five seasons before LeBron, the Cavs had a regular season winning percentage of .344, and since LeBron joined, their winning percentage has soared to .541. More importantly, LeBron has led them to three straight playoff appearances, including their first Finals appearance in team history, in 2007. Whether LeBron James remains in Cleveland is the big question. James can become a free agent after the 2010 season and there’s been much speculation that he might want to move to a bigger media market.
9
1987: Indiana Pacers - Reggie Miller
Pacer fans booed when Miller was announced with the 11th pick overall in the 1987 Draft. They were hoping for Indiana-bred Steve Alford, who had just led the Hoosiers to a National Championship. Miller spent his entire 18-year career with the Pacers, and during that time, he led the Pacers to the playoffs in all but three seasons, including a trip to the Finals in 2000. Miller’s reputation was that of a clutch shooter in the playoffs, especially against the Knicks. Among his more impressive playoff performances against the New York squad was scoring 25 points in the 4th quarter of Game 5 of the Eastern Conference Finals in 1994, tallying nine points in under nine seconds in Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Semifinals the following year to win the game, 107-105, and scoring 17 points in the 4th quarter of the deciding Game 6 of the Eastern Conference Finals in 2000. Miller holds the record for most 3-pointers made in NBA history.
8
1964: New York Knicks - Willis Reed
You think the Knicks were bad this year? In the four seasons prior to drafting Reed, the Knicks had had their three worst seasons in the team's history. Reed was the beginning of the turnaround for the Knicks. In his rookie season he averaged 19.5 points per game (7th in the league) and 14.7 rebounds per game (fifth in the league). Reed really cemented his legend as one of the Knicks all-time greats during the 1969-1970 season. The Knicks won a franchise record 60 games, including an 18 game win-streak. Reed was the All-Star MVP, regular season MVP, and Playoff MVP. Before there was Paul Pierce’s recovery in Game 1 of these past Finals, there was Willis Reed in the 1970 Finals against the Lakers. In the first four games of the series, Reed had averaged almost 32 points and 15 rebounds. Then, in the fourth quarter of Game 5, he suffered a deep thigh injury and was out for Game 6. Without Reed on the court, the Lakers destroyed the Knicks, 135-113, to tie the series at three games. No one knew if Reed would be able to play Game 7, but just before tip, Reed limped onto the floor to a standing ovation at Madison Square Garden. He scored the Knicks' first two baskets of the game. These were the only two baskets he would make, but the emotional lift was enough to carry the Knicks to a 113-99 victory and their first Championship in franchise history. The Knicks made the playoffs the last eight years of Reed’s career, appearing in three Finals and winning two of them.
7
1985: New York Knicks - Patrick Ewing
The 1985 Draft was the first to use the lottery to determine the top pick. The prize for winning the lottery? Patrick Ewing. Any previous year and the Knicks would have had the third overall pick, but they won the lottery and selected Ewing first overall. Ewing made an immediate impact, averaging 20 points and 9 rebounds in his first season. The Knicks missed the playoffs in Ewing’s first two seasons, but made the playoffs in 13 straight years with Ewing after that. But, despite their success during the regular season and playoff streak, they could never win it all. Unfortunately for the Knicks and Ewing, there was a man named Michael Jordan in their Conference. But, when Jordan went to play baseball in 1993, the Knicks had their chance. They made it to the Finals, but couldn’t top Olajuwan and the Houston Rockets. The Knicks would make the Finals again in 1999, but this time it was Tim Duncan and the Spurs that kept the Knicks from a Championship.
6
1984: Houston Rockets - Hakeem Olajuwon
In Olajuwan’s first year on the Rockets, they had more wins (48) than they had in the two previous seasons combined (43). In 17 seasons in Houston, the Rockets were only once under .500, and that was in large part due to Olajuwan only playing in 50 games that season. In just his second season with the team, they made it to just their second Finals, losing to Larry Bird and the Celtics. Olajuwan would have his greatest season in 1993. Joining Olajuwan in the starting five that season was Robert Horry, Otis Thorpe, Vernon Maxwell, and Kenny Smith, none of whom were voted to the All-Star team. That year he won the MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, and Finals MVP, leading the Rockets to their first ever Title. The Rockets would repeat the following season, and Olajuwan would earn his second straight NBA Finals MVP.
5
1962: Boston Celtics - John Havlicek
Havlicek played 16 years with the Celtics, and won the Championship in half of those seasons. Havlicek is probably best known for his steal in the seventh game of the 1965 Eastern Conference Finals. The Celtics led 110-109 with just seconds remaining and the 76ers inbounding the ball, with a chance to win. Havlicek was able to tip the pass to a teammate to seal the win. Havlicek came off the bench much of his career, but his energy and stamina gave the Celtics the boost they needed to continue winning Championships. Havlicek bridged the Celtics gap when stars Bill Russell and K.C. Jones retired in 1969. The Celtics would win two more Championships with Havlicek running the fast break, the last of which occurred in 1976, against the Phoenix Suns. In Game 5 of that series, Havlicek hit a game-saving basket in double-overtime to force a third overtime. The Celtics would eventually win the game, 128-126, and the Championship in 6 games. Havlicek is the Celtics all-time leader in points and games played.
4
1997: San Antonio Spurs - Tim Duncan
During the 1996 season, David Robinson hurt his back in the preseason, and then broke his foot shortly after returning. He played in only six games, the Spurs finished just 20-62, and were awarded the first pick in the Draft. That selection, Tim Duncan, joined David Robinson, and the two were dubbed the Twin Towers. In his rookie season, Duncan averaged 21.1 points, 11.9 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks, and was named the Rookie of the Year. In just his second season, the Spurs beat the Knicks in the Finals in five games, and Duncan was named the MVP of the series. The Spurs have won four Championships, all with Duncan, who has been the Finals MVP in three of those. Duncan has done it on each side of the ball. He’s averaged 21.6 points and 11.8 rebounds for his career, and has been named to the NBA All-Defensive 1st or 2nd team every year.
3
1979: Los Angeles Lakers - Earvin "Magic" Johnson
Despite winning 47 games during the 1978 season, the Lakers had the first overall pick in 1979 due to a trade with the Jazz three years earlier. The Lakers drafted Earvin “Magic” Johnson and the Showtime era began. Magic averaged 18 points, 7.3 assists, and 7.7 rebounds his rookie year as the Lakers compiled a 62-20 regular season record. The Lakers advanced to the Finals to face the 76ers. The Lakers had won Game 5 to go up 3-2, but Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was lost to a sprained ankle. Magic had to fill in at the Center position in Game 6 and he came through with one of the greatest performances in the NBA Finals. Magic had 42 points, 15 rebounds, 7 assists, and 3 steals as the Lakers closed out the series. Johnson became the first rookie ever to win the Finals MVP. Magic would go on to lead the Lakers to the Finals in nine of his first 12 seasons, winning it five times. He was named Finals MVP and League MVP three on three separate occasions.
2
1978: Boston Celtics - Larry Bird
You can’t help but think about Larry Bird when you think of the Boston Celtics. Bird rejuvenated the Celtics who had suffered back-to-back seasons of sub .400 basketball before the Hick from French Lick arrived. In Bird’s first season, the Celtics won 32 game more than they had the previous season. Bird led the team in scoring, rebounding, steals, and minutes played as he won Rookie of the Year. Larry joined Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain as the only players to win three consecutive MVP’s (1984-1986) in his career. The Celtics made it to the Finals in each of those three seasons, and won two of them. In the 1986 Finals against the Rockets, Bird just missed averaging a triple-double (24.0 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 9.5 apg). Bird was named to the All-Star team in all 12 years of his NBA career. The accolades go on and on, but what might be the most telling of how popular Bird was in Boston, is that the Boston Garden sold out the final 541 games of his career.
1
1984: Chicago Bulls - Michael Jordan
This one’s not even close. They have a statue of the man outside the United Center in Chicago. Magic Johnson once said, “There’s Michael Jordan and then there is the rest of us.” Jordan not only shaped the Bulls franchise, he shaped the entire NBA. Though he has been out of the league now for five years, his shoes are still the number one seller. Two-thirds of all basketball shoes bought in the US are of the Jordan brand. Before Jordan, the Bulls had never made it out of the Conference Finals. With Jordan, they won six Championships, twice winning three in a row. Jordan was, of course, Finals MVP for each of their six Championships. He led the NBA in scoring in 10 different seasons, including seven in a row, made the NBA All-Defensive First Team nine times, was a 5-time MVP, and holds the record for career scoring average at 30.1 points per game. His greatness is obvious, but what really puts him at the top of this list is that he did more for the Bulls franchise, and the NBA, than anyone else, ever.
HONORABLE MENTIONS
1958: Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers – Elgin Baylor
1960: Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers – Jerry West
1968: Baltimore/Washington Bullets - Wes Unseld
1981: Detroit Pistons – Isiah Thomas
1983: Portland Trail Blazers – Clyde Drexler
1984: Utah Jazz – John Stockton
1985: Utah Jazz – Karl Malone
1987: San Antonio Spurs – David Robinson
1996: Philadelphia 76ers – Allen Iverson
1998: Boston Celtics – Paul Pierce ]]>
