Saturday, May 31, 2008

Cliffs Notes Version: Bill Plaschke on the Lakers Clinching the West

Same guy, same annoying, cutesy writing. Here is a trimmed down version of his column on the Lakers clinching the Western Conference.

From Finished to Finals.

From Loons to June.

From Shock to Awe.

No more punch lines, just punch…

No more laugh track, just tracks….

Whoever they play… the Lakers will not have home-court advantage.

But for the fourth time, they will have home-run advantage.

Nobody's season...

Nobody's season...

Last summer, remember, Bryant's prayer was that he leave everyone.

Now, his prayer is that everyone follow him.

How did this happen?

How did this happen?

If you don't think … then you haven't been watching.

If you don't think … then you haven't been listening.

So did the San Antonio Spurs. So did the rest of the NBA. So did we.

Now go read the column.


Didn’t you pretty much get the tone, style and point with 80+% of the words missing?

Friday, May 30, 2008

Jemele Hill Was One Perceptive 3 year Old

So maybe I’m just being an asshole and picking on Jemele Hill here – hey it’s what I do best. In this interview with Hoops Addict, which was linked on Deadspin - there is the following Q & A:

Mobley: One of my earliest basketball memories is Julius Erving cupping the ball, and gracefully dunking over Michael Cooper. What is your earliest basketball memory?

Hill: I’d probably say Bird v. Magic in the NCAA title game. I sensed it was very important, but it wasn’t until a couple years later that I understood why. We were looking at the future of the NBA.

I thought Jemele was about 30 – I didn’t look long but the first Google hit put her age at 30 in an interview written in July ’06. So let’s say 32. She graduated from Michigan St. in ’97, so that would hang together.

So, in March of 1979, Jemele Hill was probably 3 ½ or so. Educated guess.

Some early sports memories that I have would be watching some of the 1985 World Series – though I don’t remember watching a single play. I remember watching Mike Tyson knock out Trevor Berbeck live in 1986 at a friends house. I remember watching the baseball All-Star Game in 1984 at that same friend’s house and his older brother telling us to tell him if Rickey Henderson got on base. I remember watching the 1984 Summer Olympics – boxing - when I was on vacation visiting my grandparents. I was 6.

The first pro-sports event I ever went to was the Red Sox home-opener in 1986. I missed the day at school. The Red Sox lost to the Royals and I won a dollar because I bet the Royals would win – I figured they were like guaranteed because they were the reigning World Series champs. Marty Barrett hit a homerun into the net. I sat on the third base side.

Now – Jemele’s from Michigan so I’m sure the game was huge deal in her area. Like Flutie-mania in the Boston area in 1984 – I remember specifically getting a promotional Flutie poster at McDonalds. I of course recall Squish the Fish and Bury the Bears t-shirts in early 1986 during the Patriots march towards getting slaughtered in the Super Bowl. But I don’t remember the Celtics winning the ’81 title – because I was 3, and that’s damn near impossible.

I remember December 29, 1991 is Shawn Kemp day at an Elementary school playground in Massachusetts. I remember making predictions on who would win game 7 of the 1993 Western Conference finals and my friend predicting “Sonics by 3 in overtime” before the game and nailing it. I remember more random stuff about the NBA from 1988-1998 than I care to.

I have a pretty good memory for random sports stuff. The way it often works is you remember stupid, random items. I don’t remember shit from when I was 3. Jemele Hill? She remembers the turning point of modern basketball. I’m not trying to pick on her, maybe I’m just jealous – or impressed. I have a 3 year old nephew and he probably won’t remember the Pats blowing the Super Bowl and a chance at 19-0. Or maybe he will?

Speaking of remembering….remember this post, about Jemele changing her pick for MVP from Chris Paul to Kobe Bryant?

Mobley: Did you vote for MVP? If so, who did you vote for and why? If not, who would you have voted for?

Hill: I didn’t have a MVP vote, but if I did, I probably would have voted for Chris Paul. That’s a painful admission because I’ve been beating the Kobe for MVP drum for the last two seasons. Kobe taking Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm, etc., to the playoffs was a lot more impressive than what he did this year. Chris Paul had one of the best seasons any point guard has ever had. He turned around a franchise and they nearly finished with the top seed in the West. How he elevated the games of the players around him was remarkable.

At least that's more in line with her passionate column supporting Paul.......that she contradicted a short time later.

Friday, May 23, 2008

Jemele Hill vs. Logic, Round 8

According to Jemele Hill's latest, David Stern should want to see a Spurs-Pistons finals. No no no, ratings won't be as high as a Celtics-Lakers finals. No, the NBA won't make much money. True, we just saw a Spurs-Pistons finals a few years ago. So what's the reason? ready? They play good defense, are good guys and if the Celtics and Lakers face off, everyone will think it's because of some NBA conspiracy. Yeah....yeah that's where this column spent most of its time. I didn't read ahead before posting this, so I didn't get the warning that you just received.

Forgive me, citizens of Easily Entertained, Need-Flash-To-Appreciate Nation for this blasphemous proposal:

Soooo we’re going to start off the column by insulting our readers?

Let's root for another edition of Pistons versus Spurs in the NBA Finals!

Let’s not and say we did (I’m in 6th grade).

(Trying to block out the sound of 260 million people collectively groaning.)

I'm hoping that suggestion doesn't make NBA commissioner David Stern lose his lunch. But if Stern could overcome his nausea at the thought of another clash of these underappreciated titans, even he would have to admit that Pistons-Spurs would be the best thing for the NBA.

I’m reading this column with you, reader. I haven’t read it yet. I just saw the title and knew this shit would be blog worthy, or at least that I’d want to post about it. So here I am, in my underwear, where I’ve been sitting for 6 days playing NHL ‘94 on my Sega Genesis while scouring the internet for bad journalism. Let’s see if Jemele puts forth a good reason for Stern to “have to admit” that Pistons-Spurs would be the best thing for the NBA. I just scored another goal with Pavel Bure, nice. Remember, that’s basically her thesis here, that it’s the best thing for the NBA.

Full disclosure: As a Detroiter, I would love to see the Pistons in the Finals for the sixth time in my lifetime. But this isn't about me. This is about the league's credibility.

No, it’s about you being a Pistons fan. This column should be trusted as much as a Simmons column about why the Celtics should be in the finals, or anything written by someone from San Antonio and LA. The votes of those four fan bases don’t count here, because they are biased.

As an NBA fan, there is nothing more irritating than when the league's credibility is challenged by cockamamy conspiracy theories. (See: New York Knicks and Patrick Ewing, and Michael Jordan's impromptu first retirement.)

Can you please bring this up to Bill Simmons next time you guys do a podcast. That guy is conspiracy theory central – straight out of that Mel Gibson movie, Mad Max. In fact, The Knicks getting the first pick (and therefore Ewing) and Jordan retiring because of some secret agreement with Stern are Simmons’ conspiracies! This paragraph belongs in a fucking ESPN memo, not a column.

The biggest NBA conspiracy theory going right now is that the league is trying to make a Boston-L.A. Finals happen, because it would mean insane television ratings and a return to the time when the dominance of those two franchises overshadowed everything else in sports.

Didn’t Simmons have a joke in yesterday’s column about Jack Nicholson reffing a game 7 so that the Lakers make the finals? I mean, people don’t actually think the league is rigging games, dummy, they are joking that the NBA would prefer an LA Boston finals because of the huge fan bases and the fact that they are the two most celebrated & successful franchises in the sport. Rocket science not this is. They aren’t serious.

This has undoubtedly been the NBA's best season since MJ's heyday.

I agree, probably, but I’m biased because I live in New England.

The Western Conference was the most competitive conference in NBA history,

Eh, I think this is an over-rated point.

the Slam Dunk Contest returned to relevancy,

Magic Johnson says this every year then he laughs like Elmer Fudd for 45 seconds. It’s a pretty irrelevant point here.

trades rejuvenated the Lakers and Celtics, Chris Paul emerged as the league's next transcendent player, and the drastically improved TV ratings in the playoffs showed that sports fans were gobbling it all up.

Word up.

If this were any other NBA season, the insinuation that the league was somehow working to orchestrate the return of the Lakers-Celtics rivalry would be considered a real reach -- but not when the Tim Donaghy betting scandal is still looming.

But…Tim Donaghy wasn’t operating on the behalf of the interests of the league. He was doing the opposite. He was acting for himself – against the interest of the league (the perception of fair play). So that example is not good. Oh, but you want to beat it into the ground for no reason? Fuckin-a man!

Many fans have long believed that the relationship NBA officials have with players and coaches influences how the games are called. But now those conspiracy theories have teeth, because Donaghy's lawyer, John Lauro, filed presentencing documents in federal court that supported what those conspiracy theorists have been screaming for years.

What does this have to do with the finals and why David Stern should prefer to have Spurs vs. Pistons? So people don’t think there’s a conspiracy? That’s how we’re deciding who we want in the finals?

Also in the Lauro papers were charges that other referees besides Donaghy participated in gambling activity. Couple that with what was reported about Jordan's extensive gambling and Charles Barkley's initially "overlooking" that he owed the Wynn casino $400K, and Donaghy's issues all of a sudden look like they're a part of a problematic NBA subculture.

So the reasons that you have for preferring the Pistons vs. the Spurs, other than the fact that you are an unabashed Pistons’ fan, is because you think fans will think the conference finals were fixed, and that will hurt the credibility of the game? I’m guessing that is where this is going. Sorry Jemele, we’re just not that dumb.

Certainly, you can look at the Donaghy situation and think of Matt Walsh, another guy who seems difficult to trust. The commissioner has said Donaghy's camp is making these wild accusations only so he can gain a more lenient sentence.

What do Diane Canon, Vinnie Johnson, Connor Henry, William Bedford, a parquet floor, Vinnie Del Negro, Tony Campbell, and the Alamo have in common?

They have more to do with the subject of this column than Tim Donaghy, and way the fuck more than Matt Walsh.

That could be true, but that still doesn't do anything to change the perception that the outcomes of NBA games are somehow tampered with. If there are any controversial calls that favor Boston or Los Angeles, or if there are games in which either of those teams makes a ton of trips to the foul line, the CTs (conspiracy theorists) will ask: What would prevent the NBA from urging the officials to call games a certain way to ensure a Finals involving teams from two of the biggest media markets in the country?

Okay, but I think when people say they want to see a Celtics vs. Lakers finals, they are saying that without any emotion of “I want the NBA to fix the conference finals.” I don’t think we, the fans, and David Stern, the commissioner, should root for the a Pistons vs. Spurs finals, that we may want to see less, just so there’s no room for a conspiracy theory that may be put forth by some fucking morons. Jemele and logic don’t like each other. People who want the Celtics and Lakers in the finals don’t want them to get there via questionable calls. So, if there are no questionable calls, then what’s the problem?

This would seem to be a fundamental flaw in the entire premise of this column, no? That if they get there without questionable calls or, who knows, in spite of calls against them, then there is no room for idiots to write about conspiracy theories. Everyone wins.

Oh but wait, what if the NBA is conspiring to put the Pistons and Spurs in the finals just to avoid the appearance of a conspiracy! See how this is a waste of time?

But if it's Pistons-Spurs, the NBA Finals will be conspiracy-free.

I saw this coming and it still feels like I just got punched in the face.

I anticipate the crybabies will complain that the Spurs and Pistons are boring to watch. But most real basketball and sports fans won't think that way -- just those casual NBA viewers who want it both ways. You know, the ones who deride the NBA for promoting individuals, but whine when Kobe, LeBron or some other one-named superstar isn't in the Finals. The ones who claim they love underdogs, but won't give the Pistons or Spurs a chance.

The casual viewers may not watch the finals for lack of a compelling superstar, true. I don’t know how you’ve immediately tagged those casual viewers as being people who are mad that the NBA promotes individuals. It’s like you’re making up a class of people to support your argument. Also, that last sentence is nonsensical bullshit. I don’t think there’s many people watching these conference finals with a sense that there are underdogs. The Spurs are the defending champs and the Pistons have been in 82 straight conference finals.

If you're someone who grumbles that NBA players don't play defense, you should root for Pistons-Spurs (although Boston may play the best defense of the remaining playoff teams).

If you want defense, root for the Pistons, even though the Celtics prolly play better defense. If I’m ever on trial for murder, I want Jemele to prosecute.

If you complain you're sick of seeing NBA teams that don't play hard, root for Pistons-Spurs. If you love teams that win because of their commitment to team basketball, root for Pistons-Spurs. If you're sick of seeing basketball dominated by And-1 wannabes, root for Pistons-Spurs.

Me: Jemele, how do any of those sentences disqualify the Celtics and Lakers?
Jemele: They don’t!
Me: Okay. Cool.

Also, the Detroit PA announcer sounds more hackish than an And-1 announcer.

These are two teams loaded with unselfishness -- and they feature players who are among the NBA's best citizens.

Ugh. Soooo………… this mean….the Celtics and Lakers….don’t? Also, I know this doesn't speak to their "citizenry", but aren't Bowen and Horry a little dirty sometimes? Doesn't Rasheed Wallace get kind of a lot of technicals? Also, what's with the spot on Sheed's head? What about that?

No, of course not. Jemele loves to just argue vague, fucked up points while ignoring the obvious aspect that these positives apply to all four of the remaining teams in the playoffs.

When people call Tim Duncan milquetoast, it makes me want to break kneecaps. First, Duncan is a thoughtful quote -- as are most of the Spurs. Second, Duncan shouldn't be penalized because he'd rather frustrate his opponents with precise passing out of double-teams and unstoppable bank shots, rather than trying to make the Top 10 Plays on "SportsCenter."

Yay, Tim Duncan is great! I just found this out. It’s still 1999, right? I’ve been alphabetizing canned goods and bomb proofing my basement for 4 months getting ready for New Years.

Duncan is perhaps the best player of his generation. The Pistons, who are in their sixth straight Eastern Conference finals, are maybe the closest thing the Eastern Conference has had to a dynasty since Jordan's Bulls.

Eh? Isn’t Kobe also perhaps the best player of his generation? It’s a good argument – I could support either guy. So that first sentence could apply to both Western Conference teams. I’m supposed to want the Pistons in the finals because they are a conference dynasty? That’s fucking lame. The Celtics are the biggest Eastern Conference dynasty in the history of the world, if you want to go there. Is that compelling? The team that has won 16 championships – the team of Russell, Cousy, and Bird getting their first shot in 22 years to add to their record 16 championships. All the while holding off the team that is hot on their tails for historical NBA supremecy, the Lakers? The team they battled so many times. The ’69 finals – game 7 in Russell’s final year- the Don Nelson bounce? Magic vs. Bird. Magic's hook. A team lead by one of the most entertaining players ever, Kobe Bryant? The team of Magic, West, Baylor, Chamberlain and O’Neal?

No? Not as intriguing as the team who has the closest thing to an Eastern Conference dynasty since Jordan retired? I'm supposed to want to see Chauncy Billups in another finals instead of seeing Garnett and Pierce take the shot at a championship?

It's easy to write a column about why you should pick option a over option b if you get to ignore every positive about option b.

If it's Pistons-Spurs, it's our core sports values at work.

Unlike the Lakers and Celtics. Buncha assholes. Did you know that Leon Powe tortures slugs with magnifying glasses on sunny days? I’m pretty sure Luke Walton punches pregnant women in the stomach. Kobe Bryant is a rapist……errr…..let’s move on.

Besides, unlike the Lakers and Celtics, the Pistons and Spurs didn't get to the conference finals with the help of questionable blockbuster deals. Talk about your NBA conspiracy theories. The Lakers got Pau Gasol for 10 rubles and a John Tesh DVD. And Kevin McHale forked Kevin Garnett over to the franchise he just so happened to win three NBA titles with. Nothing suspicious about that, right?

This is a sentence from earlier on:

As an NBA fan, there is nothing more irritating than when the league's credibility is challenged by cockamamy conspiracy theories.

Since that sentence, all Jemele has done is through out potential conspiracy theories and ballwash the Spurs and Pistons a little bit.

The Pistons and the Spurs built their teams the old-school way -- through coaching, drafting and crafty pickups.

Trades are not an old-school way to build a team. Rasheed Wallace and Rip Hamilton fell from the sky. The Lakers aren't coached well. PJ Brown was not a crafty pickup. I'm with you Jemele.

The Pistons drafted Tayshaun Prince as well as key reserves Jason Maxiell and Rodney Stuckey. They signed Antonio McDyess and Chauncey Billups -- nobody wanted "Bad Knees" McDyess, and Billups had played for five NBA teams before the Pistons. And they traded for Rasheed Wallace and Rip Hamilton -- Wallace had a bad rep as a hothead but propelled them to the NBA championship in 2004 , and when they traded for Hamilton, people thought they were crazy because it meant giving up Jerry Stackhouse.

The Spurs drafted Duncan, as well as sleeper-picks Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili -- pretty good choices, no? And who would have guessed Michael Finley would win a championship before former teammates Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash? But that's what happens when you roll with the smartest organization in the NBA.

You can argue the Gasol / Garnett trades if you want, but really you can’t argue about how any other players got on either of those teams. Here’s the question, do Gasol or Garnett make the Lakers or Celtics more or less compelling to watch in the finals? If it’s more, than the whole rant about how they built there teams means nothing. Because the column is supposed to be about who we want to watch in the finals. If you’d rather watch a Celtics/Lakers finals without those two, then you have an argument.

Pistons-Spurs -- that's what we all should be dying to see.

Annnnnnd we’re done. Are you convinced, David Stern?

John Hollinger: Let Me Save You a Ton of Time


There is no fucking way.


Friday, May 16, 2008

Are You Surprised the Spurs Won Game 6?

Gregg Doyel seemed to be. I just don’t get the angle he takes in this column.

SAN ANTONIO -- The wrong team played like there was no tomorrow. The wrong team panicked. The wrong team choked.

Well, since the Spurs were going to be eliminated from the playoffs if they lost, I’d say that they needed to play like there was no tomorrow – because there was no tomorrow.

The New Orleans Hornets blew Game 6 on Thursday night -- losing 99-80 -- and part of me wonders if they blew Game 7 while they were at it.

Nope – Game 7 is at home on Monday. They may lose that game, because the Spurs are a good basketball team, but not because they lost game 6.

If anyone was going to wilt Thursday at the AT&T Center, it should have been San Antonio.

Because they are the defending NBA champions playing at home in a conference semi-finals game against a team in the playoffs in the first time. Yeah, who expected the Spurs to not wilt in that situation!

Granted, home teams haven't done a lot of wilting this NBA postseason -- entering this game, home teams were 19-1 in the conference semifinals -- but San Antonio was facing a game unlike any of those first 20: The Spurs walked onto their home floor facing elimination. And they did so as the defending NBA champions.

Sooo…they were more likely to wilt, because of the pressure? The Popovich/Duncan era Spurs have four fucking rings.

Add that up, and throw in the fact that San Antonio's last elimination game had occurred in the 2006 postseason -- and the Spurs lost that game, to Dallas, in the conference semifinals -- and this had all the makings of a potential San Antonio panic attack.

Oh, well, I hadn’t realized it was there first elimination game (are those the only big games) in two years and they lost the last one. Who didn’t see them losing 2 in a row in that scenario (separated by a mere 2 years)?

But the Spurs were just fine.


The rest of the column is a typical game summary.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Bill Plaschke doesn’t like Pau Gasol Anymore

Bill Plaschke recently wrote these lines of poetry about Pau Gasol after game 1 of the playoffs. Well, now it’s crunch time (second round) and what happens? The big Spanish baby had a bad game. This is only half his latest column because I can only deal with so many one sentence paragraphs of fruity sportswriting.

Did you see the craziness of the video-game highlight, Kobe Bryant 2008, a toss against the backboard that he caught for a dunk?

Kobe Bryant 2008 is a “video-game highlight”? Huh? Anyway, yes, I saw that play.

Did you feel the floor burns of those three steals, Grand Theft Basketball 2008, consecutive heists in the final minutes?

So we’re working a video game theme I see. Plaschke, you creative dog. I hope there’s some Ikari Warriors worked into the conclusion.

Did you hear the Lakers come back from a 10-point deficit midway through the fourth quarter Friday night to silence the head-throbbing noise and nearly trash the best home court in basketball?

"We could have won this game," Lamar Odom said, shaking his head.

But the story was what you didn't see.

The moral was what you couldn't feel.

The outcome was due, in part, to what you could barely hear.

Could this guy be any more fucking full of himself?


Faced with the most intense, physical postseason game of his career, late-season giant Pau Gasol shrank to an indiscernible size in the Lakers' 104-99 loss to the Utah Jazz at EnergySolutions Arena.

With their first loss in seven postseason games, the Lakers weren't the only ones to reveal their spring mortality.

Gasol, a novice in these deeper waters, proved he also can sink.

Handed its first real test of June-worthiness, that great basketball brain flunked.

Faced with its first playoff adversity, that gentle smile became a whine.

Jarred for the first time with playoff desperation, those beautiful passes were junked.

I left that all in there, uninterupted, so that you can see the horrendousness of the prose.

Can you all say it with me?

JUST FUCKING SPIT IT OUT. Plaschke’s biggest fault is that he feels the need to say the same thing over and over again.

Instead of getting to the point, he stinks up the joint.

Thank you, thank you. I'll be on page 3 of LA Times Sports any time now.

And so forth. "It was loud," Gasol said. "It was intense."

Unacceptable! You aren’t suppose to feel intensity, or hear the crowd. You can only relax your calm eyes on the rim and sink jumper after jumper.

In his tired eyes you could see the confirmation of one more sentence.

No you couldn’t. You couldn’t see anything in his eyes. You’re making that up and using his eyes as some sort of literary device to make another faux poignant, obvious, crappy observation.

It was awful.

I hear you brother. I saw that in his eyes too.

For the first time in this postseason, Gasol did not dress in the crowded visiting locker area afterward, instead retrieving his clothes and dressing in a quieter spot in the back.

THAT, has meaning. I mean, like, wow! Right? Crazy shit. I mean, dressed in a quieter spot? There's so much going on there. I think that should be the name of Gasol's biography.

It was precisely that way in the game.

I know right. I mean, that was the meaning that I saw from it too. This is awesome. I’m thinking like Bill Plaschke now.

Did you notice Gasol sipping his coffee this morning with his pinky in the air? I see another flop in game 4.

Suddenly, if the Lakers aren't careful with their two-games-to-one lead, it could be that way for the rest of the summer.

I’m sorry, Bill? You lost me. It could be WHAT WAY? Like they were dressing in quiet spots instead of in the dressing room. All summer?

"I can do much better," Gasol acknowledged.

On that shot, he was perfect.

In a game in which Utah's two big men combined for 49 points, he scored 12.

Fucking failure. I mean – he should have hit so many more than 6 of his 10 shots.

In a game that featured 37 Lakers free throws, he didn't get to the foul line once.

It’s because he’s a giant passive pussy. I mean – he took 5 free throws a game in the regular season. Now he takes none. That can only be because he was afraid of getting hit like a little girly girl. What’s the matter – they don’t have hard fouls back in Spain? Go back to soccer you pussy.

No, wait. Knitting! Knit me a sweater “Pau-ssy”.

In a game that featured many touches in 40 minutes, he had just one assist.

Many touches! I hadn’t even realized that. Here I was, watching the game….and not noticing all of these non-assist creating touches.

Okay this got boring a while ago.

Friday, May 9, 2008

ESPN Editors Realize They Need To Start Fact Checking Bill Simmons

Bill Simmons wrote a piece about Barry Bonds for the magazine a few weeks ago. In it, he noted the following:

For all intents and purposes, Bonds' career has vanished into thin air. His home ballpark has had three different names (Pac Bell, SBC and AT&T), but it was mostly considered the House That Barry Built. This season, though, all traces of his dirigible-size head have been erased. Forget about a statue, inside or outside the stadium; there isn't a plaque, a banner or even a picture. It's like Bonds never happened.

That's mildly interesting, right? Problem is the May 5th issue of ESPN Magazine pointed out that it's dead wrong.

On page 16:

We whiffed when we wrote that the San Francisco Giants had removed all traces of Barry Bonds from AT&T Park. Turns out, nods to the slugger pop up in 10 places, including:

- Behind Right-Centerfield, where a plaque marks the landing spot of infamous no. 756.
- Rightfield Portal, where his name appears alongside those of the three other Giants with at least 500 HRs.
- Leftfield, where there are replicas of his five MVPs adorning the Coke-bottle platform.
- Rightfield Portwalk, where seven of the 14 monuments that line the sidewalk fence commemorate his milestones.
- AT&T Park grounds, where Bonds stars in various displays that celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Giants' arrival to the Bay.

Yeah, but after those five spots, and five other spots, they've totally erased him!

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Colin Cowherd Thinks Lebron James is Boring to Watch Play Basketball

I didn’t address yesterday’s comments from Colin Cowherd when he said there’s been 70 great guards in NBA history but only a few (I think he said 8) great centers, all to (somehow) support his theory that guards are more important than big men (ignoring the fact that 8 of the last 10 championships have been won with Duncan and Shaq). It all made no sense, so I gave up on writing a post. This happens a lot with Colin. I listen to something and say “man, that’s terrible – I should post on that”…but I have a hard time describing what the fuck he was saying and I’m too lazy to transcribe it. This happened last year when he said that Kauffman Stadium was the worst baseball park to watch a game in because the Royals were terrible. I stared at my keyboard for a good 5 minutes there.

Anyway, here are some of quotes from today’s show, about Lebron James.

“I just don’t like watching him play.”

“Lebron doesn’t entertain me.”

“I don’t find him that visually stimulating, he doesn’t have much of a jumper, he scores a lot of points at the free throw line. I know he’s great, he just doesn’t move me artistically like a Kobe.”

“Lebron is not super-vertical, he’s not artistic like Kobe…. he’s not that consistent.”

So, in conclusion – Lebron James – is boring to watch play basketball. He’s not “super-vertical” – which must mean he doesn’t have great ups…not enough of a dunker for Colin. THIS GUY IS NOT ENTERTAINING, AND IS NOT “SUPER VERTICAL”.

Seriously – he played a bad game – 2 for 18 with 10 turnovers. That’s some ugly shit. No reason to make sweeping statements about the guy. Inconsistent? He had a bad game. He led the league in scoring this year. Isn’t that, like, consistently scoring a lot of points? I know you need radio fodder but c’mon. The guy did a through the leg dunk in a high school game – don’t say he’s not super-vertical.

One of his main complaints is that Lebron scores too high a percentage of his points at the line. Um, Lebron averaged more points than Kobe this year, but scored 1 less point per game than Kobe from the line. So….that….point…would apply to Kobe, right? His game is not as smooth as Kobe Bryant’s, but no one’s is. Is that where we draw the line between an entertaining player and a boring player?

Colin Cowherd’s NBA analysis is scary bad.