I like players who spend their entire careers with one organization . Joe Sakic. Larry Bird. Magic Johnson. Now, this seems to be increasingly rare. Sports have become about the money, and some athletes would play anywhere for the right amount of money. To a certain extent, I can't blame them, but I also think there is something to be said for an athlete wanting to play for the organization that gave them their start, and perhaps take a paycut while doing so. Now, that brings me to the issue at hand. The rental player.
Ilya Kovalchuk is just the latest in a long list of players who, in the last year of their contracts, were traded to a contender. Peter Forsberg. Doug Weight. And, of course, my ultimate favourite, Marian Hossa. It's precisely the Doug Weight situation that I'd like to talk about.
In 2005, Doug Weight was a member of the St. Louis Blues. They then traded him to the Carolina Hurricanes at the deadline, who then proceeded to win the Stanley Cup. This is about as good as a rental can be. But then, after the season, Doug Weight went back to St. Louis. So, in theory, St. Louis could have kept all of the pieces they traded for, plus got back the guy they traded away. It's a smart move, but it almost seems to cheapen the game a bit in my eyes. Maybe there were no pre-arranged agreements in place, but it seems pretty likely that someone, at some point, said "Look, Doug. We love you, and we want you here, but let's send you to a contender now, give you a chance to win the Cup, then you can come back next season." They could have even negotiated contract terms. Maybe that didn't happen, but it doesn't seem too absurd that it did.
I'm not convinced that a rule should actually be put in place that prohibits the unrestricted free agent from returning to the team that traded him, because, he may not have had any control over the fact he was shipped out of town. Maybe he genuinely wants to go back where he came from and is willing to sign a new deal for less money in order to go back. That doesn't seem wrong to me, and it doesn't seem like the league should prohibit this. But, on the other side of the coin, any pre-arranged agreement almost feels like cheating to me, it just doesn't seem right. I can't quite explain why I think it's wrong, it just is.
This is one of those issues that I'm not 100% sure where I stand. What about you?
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
The most Super of all the Bowls
The Colts will win. Make no mistake about it. How much they will win by is what is up for debate.
I am going to be cheering for the Saints, for the simple fact that I am not a Colts fan. I believe anyone who isn't a die-hard Colt fan will find themselves cheering for the Saints. Their story is simply too good to pass up.
We have two of the marquee QBs in the league going up against one another, and by all accounts, both seem to be pretty stand-up guys (other than a certain pants-dropping incident in college by Manning, but hey, we forget these things). I wouldn't mind seeing either guy declare they are going to Disney Land (and in Brees' case, he has made a deal with Ellen to declare he is going to her show if he wins). But since Peyton has done it before, I'd like to see Brees get his chance. Being the experienced team or the new team can be both a blessing and a curse, depending on how you look at it. Peyton and the Colts are aware of the pressure and what it's like to be in the Super Bowl. Brees and the Saints have no idea what this is like, but sometimes ignorance is bliss. They aren't really supposed to win, so they will be going out with all guns firing. The pressure is usually on the team who is supposed to win, and this year, that is the Colts. I think back to last year, how the Cards almost upset the Steelers, even though it wasn't supposed to happen that way. If it weren't for a TD that undoubtedly shaved at least 10 years off of James Harrison's life, we may well be enjoying the last days of the Cardinals reign rather than that of the Steelers (and as a result, I would have had to live with a very cranky husband for the last year). Having said that, Brees has to shoulder the dreams of the entire city of New Orleans, and is well aware what a Super Bowl victory would mean to the city. Talk about pressure.
I am going to predict 35-27 for the Colts for a few reasons:
Peyton Manning. Enough said. Drew Brees is awesome, but Peyton is in a league of his own. He will be pressured by NO's defense and maybe even throw a pick, but he will find a way to get it done just as he did during the season. This guy is an offensive genius. He can read a defense as easily as Shaun can read a gluten-free menu. How many times did he fall behind and come back in the 4th this season anyway? To revise a famous quote by Larry Bird said about Michael Jordan "I think it's just God disguised as Peyton Manning". I'm actually going to predict that NO scores first and gets the crowd squarely on their side, but that Peyton will be cool and calculating as always, and bring the Colts to victory.
Dwight Freeney. I think the "will he or won't he" debate is genius. They are making NO prepare for three scenarios: 1) If Freeney plays, and plays well, 2) If he doesn't play, 3) He plays and doesn't play well. The Saints have to be prepared for all three scenarios, and making them do the extra thinking and preparations is genius. I think he will play and that he won't be that much of a factor, but his mere presence cannot be ignored and must be prepared for.
Indy's defense also can't be ignored. According to SI.com, before they decided they wanted to lose, the Colts defense ranked second in points allowed.
The one thing I hope more than anything is that it doesn't go into overtime. I would hate to see a Super Bowl decided on a coin toss, because whatever QB gets the rock on the first possession, they are going to score.
I am going to be cheering for the Saints, for the simple fact that I am not a Colts fan. I believe anyone who isn't a die-hard Colt fan will find themselves cheering for the Saints. Their story is simply too good to pass up.
We have two of the marquee QBs in the league going up against one another, and by all accounts, both seem to be pretty stand-up guys (other than a certain pants-dropping incident in college by Manning, but hey, we forget these things). I wouldn't mind seeing either guy declare they are going to Disney Land (and in Brees' case, he has made a deal with Ellen to declare he is going to her show if he wins). But since Peyton has done it before, I'd like to see Brees get his chance. Being the experienced team or the new team can be both a blessing and a curse, depending on how you look at it. Peyton and the Colts are aware of the pressure and what it's like to be in the Super Bowl. Brees and the Saints have no idea what this is like, but sometimes ignorance is bliss. They aren't really supposed to win, so they will be going out with all guns firing. The pressure is usually on the team who is supposed to win, and this year, that is the Colts. I think back to last year, how the Cards almost upset the Steelers, even though it wasn't supposed to happen that way. If it weren't for a TD that undoubtedly shaved at least 10 years off of James Harrison's life, we may well be enjoying the last days of the Cardinals reign rather than that of the Steelers (and as a result, I would have had to live with a very cranky husband for the last year). Having said that, Brees has to shoulder the dreams of the entire city of New Orleans, and is well aware what a Super Bowl victory would mean to the city. Talk about pressure.
I am going to predict 35-27 for the Colts for a few reasons:
Peyton Manning. Enough said. Drew Brees is awesome, but Peyton is in a league of his own. He will be pressured by NO's defense and maybe even throw a pick, but he will find a way to get it done just as he did during the season. This guy is an offensive genius. He can read a defense as easily as Shaun can read a gluten-free menu. How many times did he fall behind and come back in the 4th this season anyway? To revise a famous quote by Larry Bird said about Michael Jordan "I think it's just God disguised as Peyton Manning". I'm actually going to predict that NO scores first and gets the crowd squarely on their side, but that Peyton will be cool and calculating as always, and bring the Colts to victory.
Dwight Freeney. I think the "will he or won't he" debate is genius. They are making NO prepare for three scenarios: 1) If Freeney plays, and plays well, 2) If he doesn't play, 3) He plays and doesn't play well. The Saints have to be prepared for all three scenarios, and making them do the extra thinking and preparations is genius. I think he will play and that he won't be that much of a factor, but his mere presence cannot be ignored and must be prepared for.
Indy's defense also can't be ignored. According to SI.com, before they decided they wanted to lose, the Colts defense ranked second in points allowed.
The one thing I hope more than anything is that it doesn't go into overtime. I would hate to see a Super Bowl decided on a coin toss, because whatever QB gets the rock on the first possession, they are going to score.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Have we already seen the best of Rafa?
Rafael Nadal is already an eight-time Grand Slam champion and Olympic Gold Medal holder. When Roger Federer was Nadal's age, he had won only three Grand Slam trophies. We all know how well Federer has done since, and I have long attributed this to the fact that Federer's style of play is built for longevity, while Nadal's, sadly, is not. I am beginning to think we have seen the best of Nadal at the young age of 23.
Years ago I said that Nadal would have to change his style of play if he wanted to continue into his late 20s as an elite player. He is talented, sure, but he relies so heavily on his speed and his ability to track down seemingly impossible shots, eventually he was bound to break down. Not only that, but people slow down as they get older. His main weapon is his speed, so once that leaves, he will no longer have an advantage over many of this opponents. His serve is, by standards, quite weak, and he hits with a lot of spin but not a lot of overwhelming power. His bruising and punishing style of tennis is the exact opposite of Federer's, whose style of play is so beautiful and technically correct. Federer does not rely as heavily on his speed, but on his finesse and pure talent. Federer has been able to win 16 Grand Slam titles (!) because of his talent, but also because of his longevity. Since 2000, Federer has played in every single Grand Slam tournament. That is an unbelievable run, considering the long season in tennis (January-November), to never miss a Grand Slam is remarkable. He did, of course, play with mono in 2008, which is about the time that people started to write him off as over the hill.
Federer is faster than people give him credit for, but his greatness comes from his skill. He is able to dictate play without moving around much. If you watch him play some people, he is barely breaking a sweat. Nadal is able to dictate play as well, but this comes from his speed. He is also able to return shots that should be impossible. He wins a lot of points this way, and points turn into games, and games turn into matches. He is bound to get slower, and because he doesn't have the level of skill that Federer does, he will have no weapons to use once his speed leaves him.
Now we have the issue of injury. Nadal's knees are simply breaking down, and I think everyone saw this coming. The pounding that they take match after match has undoubtedly taken its toll, as we have seen over the last year. Although he won the Aussie Open in 2009, he was beaten for the first time at the French Open and then unable to go to Wimbledon to defend his title because of tendinitis in both knees. Nadal clearly was not in form at the Aussie Open this year, which should be the tournament where everyone is rested and fit. He had to retire in his QF match with Murray with knee pain. In just the first major of the season, if the pain is coming back already, we could be in for a Nadal-less year, or more commonly known as a Federer-dominated year. He has to take a few weeks off to rest the knees, but if they didn't heal over the last few months, I don't see how they will start to heal now.
It really is a shame, to see someone so good and so young break down before our eyes. I hope he is able to re-tool his game, but in the tennis world, Nadal is already getting old. You know what they say about teaching an old dog new tricks.
Years ago I said that Nadal would have to change his style of play if he wanted to continue into his late 20s as an elite player. He is talented, sure, but he relies so heavily on his speed and his ability to track down seemingly impossible shots, eventually he was bound to break down. Not only that, but people slow down as they get older. His main weapon is his speed, so once that leaves, he will no longer have an advantage over many of this opponents. His serve is, by standards, quite weak, and he hits with a lot of spin but not a lot of overwhelming power. His bruising and punishing style of tennis is the exact opposite of Federer's, whose style of play is so beautiful and technically correct. Federer does not rely as heavily on his speed, but on his finesse and pure talent. Federer has been able to win 16 Grand Slam titles (!) because of his talent, but also because of his longevity. Since 2000, Federer has played in every single Grand Slam tournament. That is an unbelievable run, considering the long season in tennis (January-November), to never miss a Grand Slam is remarkable. He did, of course, play with mono in 2008, which is about the time that people started to write him off as over the hill.
Federer is faster than people give him credit for, but his greatness comes from his skill. He is able to dictate play without moving around much. If you watch him play some people, he is barely breaking a sweat. Nadal is able to dictate play as well, but this comes from his speed. He is also able to return shots that should be impossible. He wins a lot of points this way, and points turn into games, and games turn into matches. He is bound to get slower, and because he doesn't have the level of skill that Federer does, he will have no weapons to use once his speed leaves him.
Now we have the issue of injury. Nadal's knees are simply breaking down, and I think everyone saw this coming. The pounding that they take match after match has undoubtedly taken its toll, as we have seen over the last year. Although he won the Aussie Open in 2009, he was beaten for the first time at the French Open and then unable to go to Wimbledon to defend his title because of tendinitis in both knees. Nadal clearly was not in form at the Aussie Open this year, which should be the tournament where everyone is rested and fit. He had to retire in his QF match with Murray with knee pain. In just the first major of the season, if the pain is coming back already, we could be in for a Nadal-less year, or more commonly known as a Federer-dominated year. He has to take a few weeks off to rest the knees, but if they didn't heal over the last few months, I don't see how they will start to heal now.
It really is a shame, to see someone so good and so young break down before our eyes. I hope he is able to re-tool his game, but in the tennis world, Nadal is already getting old. You know what they say about teaching an old dog new tricks.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Dissecting the Phaneuf Trade
I hate the Leafs, let me put that right out there. My hatred for them is trying to sku my opinion on the Phaneuf trade, attempting to convince myself that the Leafs got the raw end of the deal. In all honestly, I really don't know who got the better of the deal, or maybe each team got exactly what they wanted, something different.
The Leafs are second last in the league, and as a fantasy holder of Kiprusoff, Calgary was in the midst of what felt like a thousand losses in a row (1-6-3 in last 10). Each team clearly needed to make some changes to their line-ups, but I will admit that I was a bit surprised by the trade.
Phaneuf seems to be something of a wizard, able to convince people that he is better than he actually is. I have some friends who live in Calgary, and I'll bet every one of them is happy that Phaneuf is gone. Take, for instance, this quote from Jonathan Stoddart, former Clark's Harbour Foggie, current Calgary resident:
"...Unfortunately, you can also tell him that I have been in Calgary watching Phaneuf for his whole career. Usually if the Flames give up some terrible goal, you can whip your head around and see number 3 scratching his head and wondering whether perhaps he should have paying more attention to defense. Get ready for a few power play goals, and some good body checking, but a whole lot of defensive liability."
Phaneuf represents, to a certain extent, a symbol of escalation of commitment on behalf of the Calgary management. When someone is drafted really high (9th overall, in this case), management tends to stick with that person longer than they otherwise would, realizing they've gone all in. This might be a bit premature, considering that Phaneuf is still only 24. I've always thought the same thing about MA Fleury. Sure, he's turned it around, but if he hadn't of been a number one pick, he would have been working a Dunder Mifflin in Scranton. Granted, goalies take longer to develop, so I think they threw him in the deep end a bit too quickly. I'm not saying Phaneuf isn't a good player, he is. But at a cap hit of $6.5 million a year? Not quite. His offensive stats are good, but his defense is questionable at best.
Plus/Minus is a stat that I value both for myself as a player, and for any player that I hold in my fantasy leagues. Taking a look at the +/- stats for the first five seasons of some top defencemen in the game today, Phaneuf tends to be quite a bit behind.
Phaneuf +19
Pronger +29
Niedermayer +67
Lidstrom +130
And although this may be an unfair comparison, over his first five seasons, Bobby Orr was +359. I also checked into Zdeno Chara, and over his first five seasons he was -31, and he's turned out OK. I also don't suspect Dion's +/- will increase now that he is on a team that apparently doesn't care if they ever score any goals (remember when they decided to carry five goalies?) Dealing Matt Stajan and Niklas Hagman will certainly decrease their scoring, and considering they were 20th in goals scored, they should fall a few spots in that category. However, they are currently in last place with 197 goals against. If JS Giguere can return to form he might be able to help that. The jury is still out on whether or not Phaneuf can.
Calgary actually sits behind Toronto in goals scored, but having Stajan and Hagman will undoubtedly increase that. I actually wanted to get Stajan on my fantasy team, but there are no other centers I'd be willing to give up for him. It'll be interested to see if he sticks around in Calgary after he becomes a UFA after this season. He was playing in his hometown in Toronto, which can be a blessing and a curse. Perhaps he'll welcome to opportunity to play outside of a fish bowl and sign long-term with Calgary. After all, he'll pay less taxes.
As for the other pieces of the puzzle, some of them are throw-aways (Sjostrom, Meyers), but Keith Aulie, a hulking defenseman, could wind up being a big piece in this trade, although he is expected to report to the Marlies for now. Ian White is an offensive defenseman, but I'm not sure that's what Calgary needs right now. Although, he will be able to reproduce the kind of offensive numbers that Phaneuf did.
I also think that both sides should give Mark Giordano a bit pat on the back. If it wasn't for his emergence this season, the Flames probably wouldn't have given up Phaneuf. Giordano's numbers are almost identical to Phaneuf's, and yet he is making $850,000 this year and next, compared to Phaneuf's $6.5 million.
I think this might be a rare win-win for both teams. But if all else fails, at least Calgary got a guy with a wicked moustache.
The Leafs are second last in the league, and as a fantasy holder of Kiprusoff, Calgary was in the midst of what felt like a thousand losses in a row (1-6-3 in last 10). Each team clearly needed to make some changes to their line-ups, but I will admit that I was a bit surprised by the trade.
Phaneuf seems to be something of a wizard, able to convince people that he is better than he actually is. I have some friends who live in Calgary, and I'll bet every one of them is happy that Phaneuf is gone. Take, for instance, this quote from Jonathan Stoddart, former Clark's Harbour Foggie, current Calgary resident:
"...Unfortunately, you can also tell him that I have been in Calgary watching Phaneuf for his whole career. Usually if the Flames give up some terrible goal, you can whip your head around and see number 3 scratching his head and wondering whether perhaps he should have paying more attention to defense. Get ready for a few power play goals, and some good body checking, but a whole lot of defensive liability."
Phaneuf represents, to a certain extent, a symbol of escalation of commitment on behalf of the Calgary management. When someone is drafted really high (9th overall, in this case), management tends to stick with that person longer than they otherwise would, realizing they've gone all in. This might be a bit premature, considering that Phaneuf is still only 24. I've always thought the same thing about MA Fleury. Sure, he's turned it around, but if he hadn't of been a number one pick, he would have been working a Dunder Mifflin in Scranton. Granted, goalies take longer to develop, so I think they threw him in the deep end a bit too quickly. I'm not saying Phaneuf isn't a good player, he is. But at a cap hit of $6.5 million a year? Not quite. His offensive stats are good, but his defense is questionable at best.
Plus/Minus is a stat that I value both for myself as a player, and for any player that I hold in my fantasy leagues. Taking a look at the +/- stats for the first five seasons of some top defencemen in the game today, Phaneuf tends to be quite a bit behind.
Phaneuf +19
Pronger +29
Niedermayer +67
Lidstrom +130
And although this may be an unfair comparison, over his first five seasons, Bobby Orr was +359. I also checked into Zdeno Chara, and over his first five seasons he was -31, and he's turned out OK. I also don't suspect Dion's +/- will increase now that he is on a team that apparently doesn't care if they ever score any goals (remember when they decided to carry five goalies?) Dealing Matt Stajan and Niklas Hagman will certainly decrease their scoring, and considering they were 20th in goals scored, they should fall a few spots in that category. However, they are currently in last place with 197 goals against. If JS Giguere can return to form he might be able to help that. The jury is still out on whether or not Phaneuf can.
Calgary actually sits behind Toronto in goals scored, but having Stajan and Hagman will undoubtedly increase that. I actually wanted to get Stajan on my fantasy team, but there are no other centers I'd be willing to give up for him. It'll be interested to see if he sticks around in Calgary after he becomes a UFA after this season. He was playing in his hometown in Toronto, which can be a blessing and a curse. Perhaps he'll welcome to opportunity to play outside of a fish bowl and sign long-term with Calgary. After all, he'll pay less taxes.
As for the other pieces of the puzzle, some of them are throw-aways (Sjostrom, Meyers), but Keith Aulie, a hulking defenseman, could wind up being a big piece in this trade, although he is expected to report to the Marlies for now. Ian White is an offensive defenseman, but I'm not sure that's what Calgary needs right now. Although, he will be able to reproduce the kind of offensive numbers that Phaneuf did.
I also think that both sides should give Mark Giordano a bit pat on the back. If it wasn't for his emergence this season, the Flames probably wouldn't have given up Phaneuf. Giordano's numbers are almost identical to Phaneuf's, and yet he is making $850,000 this year and next, compared to Phaneuf's $6.5 million.
I think this might be a rare win-win for both teams. But if all else fails, at least Calgary got a guy with a wicked moustache.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
NBA All-Stars - Snubs and the Ridiculous Voting System
So, barring injury, the NBA All-Star rosters have been set.
East Starters
LeBron James - F - Cleveland Cavaliers
Kevin Garnett - F - Boston Celtics
Dwight Howard - C - Orlando Magic
Dwyane Wade - G - Miami Heat
Allen Iverson - G - Philadelphia 76ers
East Reserves
Chris Bosh - F - Toronto Raptors
Rajon Rondo - G - Boston Celtics
Paul Pierce - G - Boston Celtics
Joe Johnson - G - Atlanta Hawks
Al Horford - C/F - Atlanta Hawks
Derrick Rose - G - Chicago Bulls
Gerald Wallace - F - Charlotte Bobcats
West Starters
Kobe Bryant - G - Los Angeles Lakers
Carmelo Anthony - F - Denver Nuggets
Tim Duncan - F - San Antonio Spurs
Steve Nash - G - Phoenix Suns
Amare Stoudemire - C - Phoenix Suns
West Reserves
Kevin Durant - F - Oklahoma City
Pau Gasol - F - Los Angeles Lakers
Dirk Nowitzki - F - Dallas Mavericks
Chris Paul - G - New Orleans Hornets
Zach Randolph - F - Memphis Grizzlies
Brandon Roy - G - Portland Trail Blazers
Deron Williams - G - Utah Jazz
I have a few problems with the roster, and one HUGE problem with the voting system.
Let me start with the absolutely laughable starter selection process. For those of you unfamiliar with the voting process, the fans vote in the starters. I'm not saying the fans shouldn't have a say in who plays. Since the game is essentially for the fans, they should have a stake in who laces up, but it shouldn't be 100%. I think maybe 50% fans, 25% players, 25% coaches. I also think there should be a minimum games played regulation as well, but we'll get to that later. Plain and simple, two deserving Eastern Conference players are not All-Stars because of the idiotic selection of Allen Iverson, and the marginally stupid selection of Kevin Garnett, neither of whom are worthy of All-Star nods. I'd also argue that the coaches chose the wrong Western Center in the 90210.
Since the beginning of the season, Allen Iverson was a Memphis Grizzly for three whopping games (who, by the way, are doing splendidly since he left), was granted a leave of absence from the team, 'retired', then returned to Philly, where he has scored a whopping 14.5 pts/game. He has said that he will not disrespect the fans who voted him in by stepping aside, but I think he's disrespecting the other deserving players and the game itself by playing. His giant ego will not allow him to sit it out, just like he would rather return to an awful team be a starter, than be a team player on a winning team. Josh Smith also seems to be pretty deserving, but my suspicion is that even though he is All-Star worthy, the coaches didn't want to put three Atlanta Hawks on the team. Smith just seemed to be the worst of the three Hawk all-stars. (Point of note: remember when four Pistons were chosen? If you're deserving, it shouldn't matter what team you play on).
Kevin Garnett. Ever since his "ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!" proclamation, the guy has really gotten on my nerves. Perhaps it is my previously-alluded-to-hatred for all teams from Boston, or perhaps he's just a big tool. A lot of people claim that Garnett's true value is found in the locker room, and that he provides teams with the over-used 'intangible' qualities, but that is not what the All-Star game is about. The fans don't care how motivating someone is in the locker room of a game that is already 79-76 at half-time. Garnett is averaging 15/7 with an efficiency rating of +19.5. Respectable? Sure. All-Star worthy? Nuh-uh. David Lee, although he is of the unfortunate circumstance of playing for the Knicks, is averaging 19/11 with an efficiency rating at a whopping +25.75. Although, if Lee is still around next year he'll have LeBron to dish him the rock, so I have a feeling he'll be alright.
Which brings me to the West. Had Tracy McGrady made the All-Star game this year I would have boycotted the rest of the season. I'm not kidding. That would have been the biggest travesty ever to hit the game. McGrady has long been suspected of receiving his lion's share of votes by being Yao Ming's teammate, who just so happens to come from the most populous country on planet Earth. But come on. The guy has played 46.2 minutes the ENTIRE SEASON, and has a.... wait for it.... 3.2 ppg average. I'm pretty sure Troy Dixon could get to the NBA and score 3.2 ppg. Steve Nash beat out this guy by a few thousand votes. Yeah, the same Steve Nash who is averaging 18.5 ppg and 11 apg.
I also think that the coaches addressed their center's All-Star invitation envelope to "White guy who plays center in Los Angeles", and everyone just assumed it was for Pau Gasol. Guess they should have been more clear in their salutation, perhaps addressing it to "Really white balding guy who plays center for the bad team in Los Angeles", so Chris Kaman would have gotten it instead. I get it. Gasol has been an All-Star before, so he automatically has to un-earn the position, whereas Kaman has to earn it. Gasol's numbers, 17/11, are certainly impressive, but so are Kaman's, 20/9. The number that tells the story for me is the number of games played. Gasol was hurt and played in 29 games, whereas Kaman has played in 41. Combine that with the supporting cast these two players have and I'd say it's pretty clear that Kaman is more valuable to his team.
I'm glad that Zach Randolph has finally gotten a nod. He's been a bit of a problematic player, which could have contributed to him not being picked by the coaches before. I'm also sad that Shaq isn't in, but purely from an entertainment standpoint. He certainly doesn't deserve to be there as a player, I just hope he's there as a spectator and provides a bit of entertainment.
Being a Bulls fan at heart, I probably should cheer for the East. But to be honest, since MJ left, even though my true allegiance still lies in the Windy City, I've been following the Lakers a bit. I've decided, since this is in Dallas, I'm going to cheer for the West so Dirk can bring it home in front of his fans.
East Starters
LeBron James - F - Cleveland Cavaliers
Kevin Garnett - F - Boston Celtics
Dwight Howard - C - Orlando Magic
Dwyane Wade - G - Miami Heat
Allen Iverson - G - Philadelphia 76ers
East Reserves
Chris Bosh - F - Toronto Raptors
Rajon Rondo - G - Boston Celtics
Paul Pierce - G - Boston Celtics
Joe Johnson - G - Atlanta Hawks
Al Horford - C/F - Atlanta Hawks
Derrick Rose - G - Chicago Bulls
Gerald Wallace - F - Charlotte Bobcats
West Starters
Kobe Bryant - G - Los Angeles Lakers
Carmelo Anthony - F - Denver Nuggets
Tim Duncan - F - San Antonio Spurs
Steve Nash - G - Phoenix Suns
Amare Stoudemire - C - Phoenix Suns
West Reserves
Kevin Durant - F - Oklahoma City
Pau Gasol - F - Los Angeles Lakers
Dirk Nowitzki - F - Dallas Mavericks
Chris Paul - G - New Orleans Hornets
Zach Randolph - F - Memphis Grizzlies
Brandon Roy - G - Portland Trail Blazers
Deron Williams - G - Utah Jazz
I have a few problems with the roster, and one HUGE problem with the voting system.
Let me start with the absolutely laughable starter selection process. For those of you unfamiliar with the voting process, the fans vote in the starters. I'm not saying the fans shouldn't have a say in who plays. Since the game is essentially for the fans, they should have a stake in who laces up, but it shouldn't be 100%. I think maybe 50% fans, 25% players, 25% coaches. I also think there should be a minimum games played regulation as well, but we'll get to that later. Plain and simple, two deserving Eastern Conference players are not All-Stars because of the idiotic selection of Allen Iverson, and the marginally stupid selection of Kevin Garnett, neither of whom are worthy of All-Star nods. I'd also argue that the coaches chose the wrong Western Center in the 90210.
Since the beginning of the season, Allen Iverson was a Memphis Grizzly for three whopping games (who, by the way, are doing splendidly since he left), was granted a leave of absence from the team, 'retired', then returned to Philly, where he has scored a whopping 14.5 pts/game. He has said that he will not disrespect the fans who voted him in by stepping aside, but I think he's disrespecting the other deserving players and the game itself by playing. His giant ego will not allow him to sit it out, just like he would rather return to an awful team be a starter, than be a team player on a winning team. Josh Smith also seems to be pretty deserving, but my suspicion is that even though he is All-Star worthy, the coaches didn't want to put three Atlanta Hawks on the team. Smith just seemed to be the worst of the three Hawk all-stars. (Point of note: remember when four Pistons were chosen? If you're deserving, it shouldn't matter what team you play on).
Kevin Garnett. Ever since his "ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!" proclamation, the guy has really gotten on my nerves. Perhaps it is my previously-alluded-to-hatred for all teams from Boston, or perhaps he's just a big tool. A lot of people claim that Garnett's true value is found in the locker room, and that he provides teams with the over-used 'intangible' qualities, but that is not what the All-Star game is about. The fans don't care how motivating someone is in the locker room of a game that is already 79-76 at half-time. Garnett is averaging 15/7 with an efficiency rating of +19.5. Respectable? Sure. All-Star worthy? Nuh-uh. David Lee, although he is of the unfortunate circumstance of playing for the Knicks, is averaging 19/11 with an efficiency rating at a whopping +25.75. Although, if Lee is still around next year he'll have LeBron to dish him the rock, so I have a feeling he'll be alright.
Which brings me to the West. Had Tracy McGrady made the All-Star game this year I would have boycotted the rest of the season. I'm not kidding. That would have been the biggest travesty ever to hit the game. McGrady has long been suspected of receiving his lion's share of votes by being Yao Ming's teammate, who just so happens to come from the most populous country on planet Earth. But come on. The guy has played 46.2 minutes the ENTIRE SEASON, and has a.... wait for it.... 3.2 ppg average. I'm pretty sure Troy Dixon could get to the NBA and score 3.2 ppg. Steve Nash beat out this guy by a few thousand votes. Yeah, the same Steve Nash who is averaging 18.5 ppg and 11 apg.
I also think that the coaches addressed their center's All-Star invitation envelope to "White guy who plays center in Los Angeles", and everyone just assumed it was for Pau Gasol. Guess they should have been more clear in their salutation, perhaps addressing it to "Really white balding guy who plays center for the bad team in Los Angeles", so Chris Kaman would have gotten it instead. I get it. Gasol has been an All-Star before, so he automatically has to un-earn the position, whereas Kaman has to earn it. Gasol's numbers, 17/11, are certainly impressive, but so are Kaman's, 20/9. The number that tells the story for me is the number of games played. Gasol was hurt and played in 29 games, whereas Kaman has played in 41. Combine that with the supporting cast these two players have and I'd say it's pretty clear that Kaman is more valuable to his team.
I'm glad that Zach Randolph has finally gotten a nod. He's been a bit of a problematic player, which could have contributed to him not being picked by the coaches before. I'm also sad that Shaq isn't in, but purely from an entertainment standpoint. He certainly doesn't deserve to be there as a player, I just hope he's there as a spectator and provides a bit of entertainment.
Being a Bulls fan at heart, I probably should cheer for the East. But to be honest, since MJ left, even though my true allegiance still lies in the Windy City, I've been following the Lakers a bit. I've decided, since this is in Dallas, I'm going to cheer for the West so Dirk can bring it home in front of his fans.
Thanks for stopping by
Why, hello. Thank you for stopping by. Welcome to my sports blog, a place where I will discuss various stories and events in the world of sports. I have decided that there is no need to try and report events before anyone else does, obviously that wouldn't work, so instead this will be a blog of opinions and observations about the sports world. I welcome opposing opinions and invitations to any fantasy league you have.
A little about me. I live in Fredericton, New Brunswick with my husband Shaun. I lived for almost three years in Mississauga, Ontario, but always wanted to return to the Maritimes. University educated with Masters degrees in Business and Sport Management finds me currently unemployed (but looking!) so I have an abundance of free time on my hands. I basically follow every major sport, and will watch (and play) just about anything.
My allegiance currently belongs to:
Toronto Blue Jays
Montreal Canadiens
Chicago Bulls
Dallas Cowboys
Manchester United
I also tend to cheer for Rafael Nadal, Andy Roddick and the Williams sisters, which I will talk about later.
I hate the Boston Red Sox almost as much as Lucifer himself and would rather cheer for Jupiter than ever utter a kind word about them.
That's all for now. Thanks for stopping by, hopefully you'll add it to your daily routine.
Leave comments!
A little about me. I live in Fredericton, New Brunswick with my husband Shaun. I lived for almost three years in Mississauga, Ontario, but always wanted to return to the Maritimes. University educated with Masters degrees in Business and Sport Management finds me currently unemployed (but looking!) so I have an abundance of free time on my hands. I basically follow every major sport, and will watch (and play) just about anything.
My allegiance currently belongs to:
Toronto Blue Jays
Montreal Canadiens
Chicago Bulls
Dallas Cowboys
Manchester United
I also tend to cheer for Rafael Nadal, Andy Roddick and the Williams sisters, which I will talk about later.
I hate the Boston Red Sox almost as much as Lucifer himself and would rather cheer for Jupiter than ever utter a kind word about them.
That's all for now. Thanks for stopping by, hopefully you'll add it to your daily routine.
Leave comments!
Australian Open - TV Scheduling
Let me start of by saying the Australian Open is my least favourite tennis tournament. It marks the beginning of another exciting, albeit predictable, tennis season, and it's a wonderful tournament in the beautiful city of Melbourne, but it's location presents a myriad of problems for someone on the other side of the world.
Those of you who know me well know that there are few things in life that I value more than sleep (forget for a moment that I am unemployed and can sleep in however long I want). Having to stay up all hours of the night to watch matches really interferes with my nightly 12-hour snooze. But that's not the worst of it. I single-handedly provide TSN with the ratings it needs to continue as a network. The first thing I do in the morning, for as long as I can remember, is turn on TSN. Every. Single. Day. Over the past 11 days I have not been able to do that. Let me tell you why.
TSN replays the Australian Open matches that actually occurred during the previous night throughout the next day, which I find fantastic. But every single morning, without fail, they report the winners of the matches they are about to replay. I started watching the hockey and basketball highlights on TSN and turning the channel before the tennis review came on, but, alas, I forgot about one very important thing. The ticker. I always seem to glance just as the tennis results are zooming by. After a few days I just stopped watching TSN in the morning, and waited until the matches were replayed, pretending they were being played live. Problem solved. Or so I thought. Often there will be one match replayed, followed by another. I cannot, for the life of me, comprehend why TSN will cut to break, and Mary Carillo will proceed to tell you who wins the NEXT match. Are they hell-bent to ruin the outcome for those of us who are in our pajamas, waiting anxiously for the next match to start? For instance, I was watching a match the other day (I can't remember who), and the next match was Roddick vs. Cilic. To many people's curiosity (Shaun, most of all), I do cheer for Roddick. I watched the first match, then TSN cut immediately to the last game of the 5-setter he played against Cilic, only to replay the entire match again about a half hour later. WHY? Don't show the last game and outcome if you're going to replay the entire thing right after. Idiots.
I have thought long and hard but have yet to come up with a strategy that works for this year, other than actually getting up at 3am to watch the match live. I have devised a fool-proof plan to avoid this in 2011: Go to Australia for two weeks and watch every match.
Those of you who know me well know that there are few things in life that I value more than sleep (forget for a moment that I am unemployed and can sleep in however long I want). Having to stay up all hours of the night to watch matches really interferes with my nightly 12-hour snooze. But that's not the worst of it. I single-handedly provide TSN with the ratings it needs to continue as a network. The first thing I do in the morning, for as long as I can remember, is turn on TSN. Every. Single. Day. Over the past 11 days I have not been able to do that. Let me tell you why.
TSN replays the Australian Open matches that actually occurred during the previous night throughout the next day, which I find fantastic. But every single morning, without fail, they report the winners of the matches they are about to replay. I started watching the hockey and basketball highlights on TSN and turning the channel before the tennis review came on, but, alas, I forgot about one very important thing. The ticker. I always seem to glance just as the tennis results are zooming by. After a few days I just stopped watching TSN in the morning, and waited until the matches were replayed, pretending they were being played live. Problem solved. Or so I thought. Often there will be one match replayed, followed by another. I cannot, for the life of me, comprehend why TSN will cut to break, and Mary Carillo will proceed to tell you who wins the NEXT match. Are they hell-bent to ruin the outcome for those of us who are in our pajamas, waiting anxiously for the next match to start? For instance, I was watching a match the other day (I can't remember who), and the next match was Roddick vs. Cilic. To many people's curiosity (Shaun, most of all), I do cheer for Roddick. I watched the first match, then TSN cut immediately to the last game of the 5-setter he played against Cilic, only to replay the entire match again about a half hour later. WHY? Don't show the last game and outcome if you're going to replay the entire thing right after. Idiots.
I have thought long and hard but have yet to come up with a strategy that works for this year, other than actually getting up at 3am to watch the match live. I have devised a fool-proof plan to avoid this in 2011: Go to Australia for two weeks and watch every match.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
