I've moved! Well at least on the internet.
Check out my new website, which has brand new blog posts, podcasts and more at HoffmanShow.com.
Thanks!
Craig
Sunday, May 1, 2016
Friday, April 29, 2016
4-29 Hoffman Show
Damon Amendolara and Anthony Gulizia join me to talk about a wild first round of the NFL Draft. Plus, why I sympathize with Dee Gordon and the legend of the words "in perpetuity."
Thursday, April 28, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 28th
Why the tape is not enough
Tonight is the NFL Draft and arguably the two best players on tape won't be taken early. One won't be taken at all, not just in tonight's first round but at any point in the next three days. Why? Injuries.
Notre Dame's Jaylon Smith had the best tape of any prospect according to multiple analysts, yet he likely won't be taken at all. The defensive standout tore his knee ligaments in the Fiesta Bowl and he's at risk to never play football again because of nerve damage in his leg. UCLA's Myles Jack will play football next year. The question is how long after that as he has a degenerative issue in his knee.
Jack made interesting comments yesterday about his knee, saying that he doesn't know how long he'll be able to play. He said that anything over three years is average anyway, so who knows what the future holds for any player. While all of what he said is technically true, he did himself no favors in being honest. Teams don't spend first round picks for average.
The larger point here though is the justification for teams putting in massive amounts of homework into drafting players. They're about to make multimillion dollar investments into these guys, so every piece of information is useful.
What's interesting is the difference between the extensive homework teams do on rookies versus the quick decisions made on free agents, who cost significantly more money. The difference in the two situations? Leverage.
A player essentially has to play where he's drafted. In free agency, especially with the best players, the player has options. Instead of convincing teams to pick him, it's the teams convincing the player that they're the right place to be and that convincing is both literal in conversational terms and financial. The more you want a player, the more money you give him.
If Jack's knee holds up for a decade and he plays at a high level, people will look back and scream about how he was the best player on tape and lament not taking him. However if he's out of the league in three years, the team that did take that risk will be mocked for selecting a player with such an obvious downside. Teams can't win unless they're the one that was right. The narrative plays the result. The reality? The projection business is hard and every situation is different. Some decision makers have the license to take risks. Some don't. Some do have that right, but probably shouldn't.
The only sure thing is that if anyone tells you they know exactly how a player is going to turn out, they're telling you they can do the impossible.
Yeah, that was a foul
The Hornets took a 3-2 lead over the Heat last night in a controversial Game 5. There were some bad calls both ways, but a blatant missed foul late has everyone's attention. Goran Dragic shot a three from the corner which was blocked by Kemba Walker. Dwyane Wade got the rebound and attacked the basket where he was rudely greeted by Cody Zeller. The Hornets forward crashed into Wade and no whistle blew. It was a foul. There is no debate.
The verticality rule is explained in this video. It's pretty simple. If you jump straight up and down, it's not a foul. If you jump horizontally and make contact, it's a foul. This was a foul.
It's frustrating and disappointing that a game's outcome can so heavily be influenced by someone not on one of the teams so blatantly not doing their jobs correctly. Refereeing is really, really hard. It's a thankless job that only comes up when something is wrong. Guess that's why we're talking about it.
Some will talk about "human error" being a part of the game, but the only errors that should exist in an ideal world would be made by those affiliated with the teams. If a player misses an open shot, that's the game. If a coach makes a poor strategy decision, that's less fun than seeing the players decide the game, but that's sports. A referee? Give me the robots!
The rules are the rules. Enforce them. And to anyone who thinks that wasn't a foul, learn the rules. There is no intelligent argument here. Just learn the rule.
Tirico
Mike Tirico is leaving ESPN for NBC, which is a monumental move in the media world. Tirico has been at ESPN for 25 years and is the signature voice for the network. You probably knew all that. What you might not know is what it's like to have experience with Mike personally. That is just as big of a treat as it is listening to him call a game.
We've spent short amounts of time together on multiple occasions thanks to our mutual love for our alma mater. Mike is as proud of a Syracuse alum as there is and still dedicates a lot of time (and likely money) to the broadcast program.
Every time I see Mike, he makes me feel like an old friend that he's known for years. He has that special ability to make anyone feel important. He's invested in how you're doing. For someone who is a titan of our industry, he's incredibly human.
That humility is also what makes him so great on the air. He's smarter than all of us. Nobody knows more about more stuff than Mike. He covers NBA basketball, college basketball, NFL football, golf and tennis and I swear he knows each rulebook better than some of the officials in those sports. It's absolutely astounding. Yet, he delivers that information in a way that doesn't scream "look at me and how smart I am." He's just brilliant.
His role at NBC could eventually evolve into calling the NFL's premier weekly game (Sunday Night Football), the Super Bowl every three years and hosting the Olympics. He'll be calling the biggest events in sports and he's more than ready. I also expect him to be a part of the Kentucky Derby broadcast.
Back in 2012, we had Mike on my college radio show and I asked him about his bucket list. He said he'd gotten to do, or at least see, pretty much every event he could have dreamed of except two. One was the Indianapolis 500. The other was the Kentucky Derby. Both happen during the NBA playoffs, something Mike's giving up in the move from ESPN to NBC as the peacock network doesn't have any NBA rights and won't for the foreseeable future. The Indy 500 is on ABC, so he won't be able to call that although he could attend. The Derby however is on NBC, so expect him to have some role in that broadcast if his bucket list hasn't changed.
Reads of the Day:
Lions LB Deandre Levy with a powerful, necessary and potent piece on sexual assault prevention: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/deandre-levy-sexual-assault-awareness/
The MMQB's Andrew Brandt takes us inside an NFL war-room on draft day: http://mmqb.si.com/2014/05/07/nfl-draft-war-rooms
ESPNLA's Arash Markazi on Doc Rivers, including some powerful quotes from his son and player Austin: http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/clippers/post/_/id/8096/doc-rivers-stays-strong-in-eye-of-clippers-storm
Tonight is the NFL Draft and arguably the two best players on tape won't be taken early. One won't be taken at all, not just in tonight's first round but at any point in the next three days. Why? Injuries.
Notre Dame's Jaylon Smith had the best tape of any prospect according to multiple analysts, yet he likely won't be taken at all. The defensive standout tore his knee ligaments in the Fiesta Bowl and he's at risk to never play football again because of nerve damage in his leg. UCLA's Myles Jack will play football next year. The question is how long after that as he has a degenerative issue in his knee.
Jack made interesting comments yesterday about his knee, saying that he doesn't know how long he'll be able to play. He said that anything over three years is average anyway, so who knows what the future holds for any player. While all of what he said is technically true, he did himself no favors in being honest. Teams don't spend first round picks for average.
The larger point here though is the justification for teams putting in massive amounts of homework into drafting players. They're about to make multimillion dollar investments into these guys, so every piece of information is useful.
What's interesting is the difference between the extensive homework teams do on rookies versus the quick decisions made on free agents, who cost significantly more money. The difference in the two situations? Leverage.
A player essentially has to play where he's drafted. In free agency, especially with the best players, the player has options. Instead of convincing teams to pick him, it's the teams convincing the player that they're the right place to be and that convincing is both literal in conversational terms and financial. The more you want a player, the more money you give him.
If Jack's knee holds up for a decade and he plays at a high level, people will look back and scream about how he was the best player on tape and lament not taking him. However if he's out of the league in three years, the team that did take that risk will be mocked for selecting a player with such an obvious downside. Teams can't win unless they're the one that was right. The narrative plays the result. The reality? The projection business is hard and every situation is different. Some decision makers have the license to take risks. Some don't. Some do have that right, but probably shouldn't.
The only sure thing is that if anyone tells you they know exactly how a player is going to turn out, they're telling you they can do the impossible.
Yeah, that was a foul
The Hornets took a 3-2 lead over the Heat last night in a controversial Game 5. There were some bad calls both ways, but a blatant missed foul late has everyone's attention. Goran Dragic shot a three from the corner which was blocked by Kemba Walker. Dwyane Wade got the rebound and attacked the basket where he was rudely greeted by Cody Zeller. The Hornets forward crashed into Wade and no whistle blew. It was a foul. There is no debate.
The verticality rule is explained in this video. It's pretty simple. If you jump straight up and down, it's not a foul. If you jump horizontally and make contact, it's a foul. This was a foul.
It's frustrating and disappointing that a game's outcome can so heavily be influenced by someone not on one of the teams so blatantly not doing their jobs correctly. Refereeing is really, really hard. It's a thankless job that only comes up when something is wrong. Guess that's why we're talking about it.
Some will talk about "human error" being a part of the game, but the only errors that should exist in an ideal world would be made by those affiliated with the teams. If a player misses an open shot, that's the game. If a coach makes a poor strategy decision, that's less fun than seeing the players decide the game, but that's sports. A referee? Give me the robots!
The rules are the rules. Enforce them. And to anyone who thinks that wasn't a foul, learn the rules. There is no intelligent argument here. Just learn the rule.
Tirico
Mike Tirico is leaving ESPN for NBC, which is a monumental move in the media world. Tirico has been at ESPN for 25 years and is the signature voice for the network. You probably knew all that. What you might not know is what it's like to have experience with Mike personally. That is just as big of a treat as it is listening to him call a game.
We've spent short amounts of time together on multiple occasions thanks to our mutual love for our alma mater. Mike is as proud of a Syracuse alum as there is and still dedicates a lot of time (and likely money) to the broadcast program.
Every time I see Mike, he makes me feel like an old friend that he's known for years. He has that special ability to make anyone feel important. He's invested in how you're doing. For someone who is a titan of our industry, he's incredibly human.
That humility is also what makes him so great on the air. He's smarter than all of us. Nobody knows more about more stuff than Mike. He covers NBA basketball, college basketball, NFL football, golf and tennis and I swear he knows each rulebook better than some of the officials in those sports. It's absolutely astounding. Yet, he delivers that information in a way that doesn't scream "look at me and how smart I am." He's just brilliant.
His role at NBC could eventually evolve into calling the NFL's premier weekly game (Sunday Night Football), the Super Bowl every three years and hosting the Olympics. He'll be calling the biggest events in sports and he's more than ready. I also expect him to be a part of the Kentucky Derby broadcast.
Back in 2012, we had Mike on my college radio show and I asked him about his bucket list. He said he'd gotten to do, or at least see, pretty much every event he could have dreamed of except two. One was the Indianapolis 500. The other was the Kentucky Derby. Both happen during the NBA playoffs, something Mike's giving up in the move from ESPN to NBC as the peacock network doesn't have any NBA rights and won't for the foreseeable future. The Indy 500 is on ABC, so he won't be able to call that although he could attend. The Derby however is on NBC, so expect him to have some role in that broadcast if his bucket list hasn't changed.
Reads of the Day:
Lions LB Deandre Levy with a powerful, necessary and potent piece on sexual assault prevention: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/deandre-levy-sexual-assault-awareness/
The MMQB's Andrew Brandt takes us inside an NFL war-room on draft day: http://mmqb.si.com/2014/05/07/nfl-draft-war-rooms
ESPNLA's Arash Markazi on Doc Rivers, including some powerful quotes from his son and player Austin: http://espn.go.com/blog/los-angeles/clippers/post/_/id/8096/doc-rivers-stays-strong-in-eye-of-clippers-storm
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
4-27 Hoffman Show: McNally, MacMahon and more
In the first edition of the new podcast format, I talk about the reaction to #MoreThanMean and Bomani Jones' thoughts on that subject. Plus, I talk with Brian McNally (106.7 The Fan, DC) on the Redskins recent moves and draft plans and Tim MacMahon (ESPN Dallas) on the end of the Mavs season. Lastly, I explain why Malachai Richardson should leave Syracuse and tell the tale of a two sport Sunday in New York.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 26th
After a weekend in New York, the blog returns for NFL Draft week and some interesting turns in the NBA Playoffs. "Reads of the day" will also be different today. No reading involved! The four hour bus ride back from NYC lead to some great podcast listening, so I'll give you those instead. To the blog:
Don't Poke The Bear
Mavs owner Mark Cuban is really, really smart. Sometimes really, really smart people do really, really dumb things. Mark Cuban did a really, really dumb thing before Game 5 of Mavs-Thunder on Monday night.
Cuban said that Kevin Durant was the only superstar on Oklahoma City's roster. Asked about Russell Westbrook, Cuban said he's just an all-star, not a superstar. Westbrook proceeded to go score 38 points as the Thunder ended the Mavericks season.
Cuban's comments didn't make any sense on a number of levels. First, they were blatantly wrong. Westbrook set an NBA record with 18 triple-doubles this year. The Thunder were 18-0 in those games, meaning he wasn't out there collecting empty stats. He's a force of nature that defies science in how hard he plays every night. His intensity and passion are palpable. He's a more than occasional pain in the ass for the media, but there is no denying his greatness as a player.
So while Cuban was wrong and may have fired up Westbrook if the comments got back to him before tipoff (the Mavs seemed to try to get under Westbrook's skin all series), there are larger implications at play as evidenced by Kevin Durant's post-game press conference.
I'll never complain about honesty from someone we cover as a collective media, but this one just doesn't make sense. There's a part of me that wonders what Cuban's motivation was and if there is some ulterior motive. Cuban's way smarter than me. He's a genius on many levels, so I'd be naive to just assume that I've got all of this figured out without at least acknowledging he might have some grand plan here. The question is if that plan exists and if it is ill-advised.
From my seat, it seems like it is. There seems to be no benefit. The Mavericks will certainly try and get in a room with Durant this summer. We'll see if they get a visit with one of the league's premier superstar after their owner diminished his friend, who is also in that class.
Don't Poke The Bear
Mavs owner Mark Cuban is really, really smart. Sometimes really, really smart people do really, really dumb things. Mark Cuban did a really, really dumb thing before Game 5 of Mavs-Thunder on Monday night.
Cuban said that Kevin Durant was the only superstar on Oklahoma City's roster. Asked about Russell Westbrook, Cuban said he's just an all-star, not a superstar. Westbrook proceeded to go score 38 points as the Thunder ended the Mavericks season.
Cuban's comments didn't make any sense on a number of levels. First, they were blatantly wrong. Westbrook set an NBA record with 18 triple-doubles this year. The Thunder were 18-0 in those games, meaning he wasn't out there collecting empty stats. He's a force of nature that defies science in how hard he plays every night. His intensity and passion are palpable. He's a more than occasional pain in the ass for the media, but there is no denying his greatness as a player.
So while Cuban was wrong and may have fired up Westbrook if the comments got back to him before tipoff (the Mavs seemed to try to get under Westbrook's skin all series), there are larger implications at play as evidenced by Kevin Durant's post-game press conference.
Durant is a free agent this summer. Westbrook is one next year. The Mavericks have consistently put themselves in a position to land big free agents, but have never reeled one in. Why would an owner, who is consistently mentioned as a major positive of the franchise (and is one of the very best in sports), put himself in a position where he could hurt his team? It seems short sighted and self-defeating. Even if the Mavericks consider Westbrook less than Durant from a scouting standpoint, there's no reason to publicly say that. Instead, you do what Rick Carlisle did after the game, which is to overly emphasize the greatness of both players.Thunder's Kevin Durant responds to Mavericks owner Mark Cuban saying Russell Westbrook isn't a "superstar" pic.twitter.com/6jPw9WktV0— Ben Golliver (@BenGolliver) April 26, 2016
I'll never complain about honesty from someone we cover as a collective media, but this one just doesn't make sense. There's a part of me that wonders what Cuban's motivation was and if there is some ulterior motive. Cuban's way smarter than me. He's a genius on many levels, so I'd be naive to just assume that I've got all of this figured out without at least acknowledging he might have some grand plan here. The question is if that plan exists and if it is ill-advised.
From my seat, it seems like it is. There seems to be no benefit. The Mavericks will certainly try and get in a room with Durant this summer. We'll see if they get a visit with one of the league's premier superstar after their owner diminished his friend, who is also in that class.
The Injury Bug Bites Twice (UPDATE: Three Times)
The NBA Playoffs were likely to play out in a rather direct fashion if everyone stayed healthy. The Cavaliers would face some challenge along the way to winning the Eastern Conference where they would lose to the Warriors, who would be pushed on some level (possibly to a decisive seven games) by the Spurs on their way to winning the west. However fast-forwarding is not allowed and the "if everyone stayed healthy part" is always a long shot. This is why they play the games.
Steph Curry hurt his ankle in Game 1 and had the entire NBA holding its collective breath after falling in Game 4 of the Warriors opening round series. The MVP has a grade 1 knee sprain and is out at least two weeks. In the regular season, that means a set amount of games. In the playoffs, that's a giant TBD.
This is where one injury affects another. The Clippers were having a hard enough time with the Blazers with Chris Paul and will likely now be without him. The star point guard broke his hand Monday night as the Blazers tied their series at 2-2. The winner of that series faces the Warriors, who will presumably close out the Rockets in Game 5 tonight at Oracle Arena. While Golden State isn't going to root for another team to suffer a key injury, they're undoubtedly rooting for that series to go as long as possible. The more time the series needs, the fewer games Curry misses while his knee heels.
While you make think the Warriors would be just fine without Curry, the numbers say otherwise. The Warriors were more than 1,000 points better than their opponents this year. They were also outscored with him on the bench for the second straight year.
It's astounding that team that won 73 games and outscored opponents by more than 10 points per game could possibly have a player it couldn't live without, but it seems the Warriors are in that position with Curry. It's worth pointing out that Dryamond Green actually had a bigger plus and lower minus in his splits than Curry, although with the two playing a high percentage of their minutes together, it's impossible to separate who is responsible at what percentage. Clearly Curry is massively important and it'll be tough for the Warriors to beat whoever is next without him. Perhaps the Paul injury will extend the Blazers-Clippers series just enough that Golden State won't have to worry about playing without Curry for more than a game or two, both of which would come at home.
Update at 5:04 PM EST on Tuesday: Clippers forward Blake Griffin will miss the rest of the playoffs with a quad injury. Paul is officially listed as out indefinitely.
The Clippers with Griffin, but no Paul were still formidable. Griffin's good enough to run a highly effective offense through, at least against the Blazers. The Warriors might've been a different story because Griffin would be guarded by Green, but the Clippers could (and have before) figured out how to score without Paul. Now, beating the Blazers is not only going to be difficult, I'm predicting it won't happen. I just don't see how they guard Damien Lillard or score enough to win. Injuries are a part of sports. The absolute worst part of sports.
Don't Read, Just Listen
As mentioned, here are the podcasts I enjoyed on the bus ride from NYC to DC.
Clippers guard J.J. Redick has done an exceptional job with his podcast. I enjoyed his chat with Late Late Show Producer Ben Winston. The two somewhat interviewed each other, providing some cool insight into both the entertainment and sports worlds: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367039936
Redick also had Packers QB Aaron Rodgers. The two comparing notes was really insightful. I especially enjoyed Rodgers comfort with his own greatness. He skipped the fake humbleness that a lot of athletes indulge in, acknowledging his high level of play comes from a place of extreme preparation: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367472055
The same can be said for ESPN analyst Louis Riddick. Listening him talk to Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch on both football and media was really interesting and entertaining: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/si-media-podcast-richard-deitsch/id997819235?mt=2&i=367080648
The NBA Playoffs were likely to play out in a rather direct fashion if everyone stayed healthy. The Cavaliers would face some challenge along the way to winning the Eastern Conference where they would lose to the Warriors, who would be pushed on some level (possibly to a decisive seven games) by the Spurs on their way to winning the west. However fast-forwarding is not allowed and the "if everyone stayed healthy part" is always a long shot. This is why they play the games.
Steph Curry hurt his ankle in Game 1 and had the entire NBA holding its collective breath after falling in Game 4 of the Warriors opening round series. The MVP has a grade 1 knee sprain and is out at least two weeks. In the regular season, that means a set amount of games. In the playoffs, that's a giant TBD.
This is where one injury affects another. The Clippers were having a hard enough time with the Blazers with Chris Paul and will likely now be without him. The star point guard broke his hand Monday night as the Blazers tied their series at 2-2. The winner of that series faces the Warriors, who will presumably close out the Rockets in Game 5 tonight at Oracle Arena. While Golden State isn't going to root for another team to suffer a key injury, they're undoubtedly rooting for that series to go as long as possible. The more time the series needs, the fewer games Curry misses while his knee heels.
While you make think the Warriors would be just fine without Curry, the numbers say otherwise. The Warriors were more than 1,000 points better than their opponents this year. They were also outscored with him on the bench for the second straight year.
| 2014-15 | 2015-16 | |
|---|---|---|
| Curry On-Court | +920 | +1022 |
| Curry Off-Court | -92 | -140 |
It's astounding that team that won 73 games and outscored opponents by more than 10 points per game could possibly have a player it couldn't live without, but it seems the Warriors are in that position with Curry. It's worth pointing out that Dryamond Green actually had a bigger plus and lower minus in his splits than Curry, although with the two playing a high percentage of their minutes together, it's impossible to separate who is responsible at what percentage. Clearly Curry is massively important and it'll be tough for the Warriors to beat whoever is next without him. Perhaps the Paul injury will extend the Blazers-Clippers series just enough that Golden State won't have to worry about playing without Curry for more than a game or two, both of which would come at home.
Update at 5:04 PM EST on Tuesday: Clippers forward Blake Griffin will miss the rest of the playoffs with a quad injury. Paul is officially listed as out indefinitely.
The Clippers with Griffin, but no Paul were still formidable. Griffin's good enough to run a highly effective offense through, at least against the Blazers. The Warriors might've been a different story because Griffin would be guarded by Green, but the Clippers could (and have before) figured out how to score without Paul. Now, beating the Blazers is not only going to be difficult, I'm predicting it won't happen. I just don't see how they guard Damien Lillard or score enough to win. Injuries are a part of sports. The absolute worst part of sports.
Don't Read, Just Listen
As mentioned, here are the podcasts I enjoyed on the bus ride from NYC to DC.
Clippers guard J.J. Redick has done an exceptional job with his podcast. I enjoyed his chat with Late Late Show Producer Ben Winston. The two somewhat interviewed each other, providing some cool insight into both the entertainment and sports worlds: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367039936
Redick also had Packers QB Aaron Rodgers. The two comparing notes was really insightful. I especially enjoyed Rodgers comfort with his own greatness. He skipped the fake humbleness that a lot of athletes indulge in, acknowledging his high level of play comes from a place of extreme preparation: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367472055
The same can be said for ESPN analyst Louis Riddick. Listening him talk to Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch on both football and media was really interesting and entertaining: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/si-media-podcast-richard-deitsch/id997819235?mt=2&i=367080648
Friday, April 22, 2016
4-22 Random Rumblings
Another Legend Gone
This is getting old. We've lost absolute titans of their respective worlds multiple times already in 2016 and yesterday's was perhaps the biggest. Musical legend (and that might not be strong enough of a word) Prince died at the age of 57.
I'm not going to pretend that I'm the world's biggest Prince fan, but you have to be a special kind of fool to not recognize his genius. I know many of the hits from "Little Red Corvette" to "Raspberry Beret" to "Purple Rain" and down on, but I've never taken a true dive into his musical catalog. As I listen to the remembrances of him, the depth of that catalogue has been a recurring theme. With some travel upcoming, and thus time to listen to music uninterrupted, I plan on diving into the deep end head first. I'm sure I'll find what so many have already, which is a full appreciation for a one of a kind artist.
Music is a big part of my life. It has been since I was 15 and started dj'ing, suddenly exposed to music of all generations. I would describe my musical knowledge as more wide than deep, although I've started to add depth in a number of genres as I've gotten older (thanks Apple Music!). Old school hip-hop is certainly where I've taken the deepest dive. I started that dive listening to the music from SVP & Russillo and discovered the brilliance of A Tribe Called Quest. When Phife died a few weeks back, it didn't hurt me like it did those older because, while I LOVE the music, it wasn't an integral part of my childhood. That's a different kind of hurt. His music was something I had discovered when I was older, deeply appreciate and appreciate more every time I listen. Phife was a genius. I understood completely the loss to the hip-hop community and anyone who grew up on his music.
Prince is that to all music. I was reading an article from Master Tesfatsion in the Washington Post about his experience with Prince. He talked about how, as he dove into Prince's catalogue, he discovered how influential he was on the music he loved and already knew. I remember going through that with Phife, and I'm 100% sure that it'll happen with me and Prince as I dive beyond the hits into his catalogue. I'm looking forward to it. I just wish I had done so sooner, and that the opportunity to see Prince perform would be there as I did.
I hate James Harden
The preceding bold and underlined header is a 100% true statement in a sporting sense. I don't know James Harden. He might be a swell guy. I have no idea. I wish him no harm. I also acknowledge he's a phenomenal basketball player. I hate watching him play basketball and actively root against his success.
Harden plays a style that is infuriating to watch. He plays consistently in isolation. He draws an inordinate amount of fouls. It's just not aesthetically pleasing. His game-winner last night was no different. He drove one-on-one, got away with a blatant push-off and hit an open jumper.
The push-off should've been called. In a late game situation, if a referee isn't 100% sure of a call (s)he should swallow the whistle. This was not one of those times. There was zero doubt that Harden committed an offensive foul. He pushed Andre Iguodala away with a fully extended arm. Iguodala had zero chance to contest the shot because of that push-off. It has to be called. I hate James Harden. I hate that no-call. I hope Steph Curry's ankle is ready for Sunday and the Rockets, who are just as unlikeable on the whole as their star, lose by 30.
This is the end of my James Harden rant.
Josh Norman's next stop
Former Panthers corner Josh Norman is visiting the Redskins today and reports say they could sign him before the weekend. Norman's asking for an absurd amount of money. He's 28 years old and wants a long term deal worth $16 million. Reports say the Redskins and 49ers are looking more in the $14 million per year range. That's still crazy, but a touch more palatable.
Just because he's asking for a lot of money (and I'm certainly not faulting him for asking) doesn't mean that he's not a really, really good football player. He's not Patrick Peterson or Darrelle Revis. He may not be Richard Sherman, but he's right there and very close based on last year's performance. He's a zone corner, which is just fine for the Redskins. He's also shown the ability to lock guys up man-to-man.
The Skins run a variety of coverages, but love to run Cover 3. They struggled at times last year on the outside in that scheme and had more success late in the year running 2-deep coverages (Cover 2 and Cover 4 aka quarters). No matter the coverage, Norman would immediately become their best cover corner and give them one of the best outside pairings in the league. Bashaud Breeland played at a Pro Bowl level and probably would've garnered that honor if he would've made a few of the interceptions he was in position for. Norman doesn't have that problem. He's got exceptional ball skills and finishes plays.
If they sign Norman, the Redskins have a decision to make on Chris Culliver. Last year's big money cornerback signing could be cut easily, saving the Redskins $8 million dollars on the cap. Essentially they'd be signing Norman for $6 million this year. They could also move the big, physical Culliver to safety. There are real concerns about Kyshoen Jarrett's injury because of the nerve damage that it included. The Skins also have the oft-injured Duke Ihenacho and 32 going on 33-year-old Deangelo Hall. They could use someone in that spot and someone who already knows the defense, albeit from a different position, wouldn't be the worst option.
Culliver's fire and competitiveness helped change the culture in DC last year. He frankly did more in that department than on the field because of his injuries. However there are definitely pockets of the organization that aren't his biggest fan, so it wouldn't surprise me if cutting him was the move.
As for Norman, my thoughts on the move will all depend on the contract structure. If Washington can get out of it after a year or two, then I have no problem with spending big on a player of his caliber. If it's a true long-term commitment to a 28 year old corner who was difficult enough to deal with that Carolina decided to set him free as opposed to keeping him around for another Super Bowl run on a one year, franchise tag deal? Not exactly in favor.
Reads of the Day:
ESPN's Wright Thompson on the secret life of Tiger Woods is jaw-dropping. So many good nuggets. So much information. Set aside 30 minutes and dive in: http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/15278522/how-tiger-woods-life-unraveled-years-father-earl-woods-death
Peter King of the MMQB goes inside the Titans-Rams trade for the #1 pick: http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/04/19/titans-rams-draft-trade-inside
There are so many good Prince pieces, but I particularly enjoyed this one because it involved Carlos Boozer, who is one of the last people I ever expected to have an amazing Prince story: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6270915
This is getting old. We've lost absolute titans of their respective worlds multiple times already in 2016 and yesterday's was perhaps the biggest. Musical legend (and that might not be strong enough of a word) Prince died at the age of 57.
I'm not going to pretend that I'm the world's biggest Prince fan, but you have to be a special kind of fool to not recognize his genius. I know many of the hits from "Little Red Corvette" to "Raspberry Beret" to "Purple Rain" and down on, but I've never taken a true dive into his musical catalog. As I listen to the remembrances of him, the depth of that catalogue has been a recurring theme. With some travel upcoming, and thus time to listen to music uninterrupted, I plan on diving into the deep end head first. I'm sure I'll find what so many have already, which is a full appreciation for a one of a kind artist.
Music is a big part of my life. It has been since I was 15 and started dj'ing, suddenly exposed to music of all generations. I would describe my musical knowledge as more wide than deep, although I've started to add depth in a number of genres as I've gotten older (thanks Apple Music!). Old school hip-hop is certainly where I've taken the deepest dive. I started that dive listening to the music from SVP & Russillo and discovered the brilliance of A Tribe Called Quest. When Phife died a few weeks back, it didn't hurt me like it did those older because, while I LOVE the music, it wasn't an integral part of my childhood. That's a different kind of hurt. His music was something I had discovered when I was older, deeply appreciate and appreciate more every time I listen. Phife was a genius. I understood completely the loss to the hip-hop community and anyone who grew up on his music.
Prince is that to all music. I was reading an article from Master Tesfatsion in the Washington Post about his experience with Prince. He talked about how, as he dove into Prince's catalogue, he discovered how influential he was on the music he loved and already knew. I remember going through that with Phife, and I'm 100% sure that it'll happen with me and Prince as I dive beyond the hits into his catalogue. I'm looking forward to it. I just wish I had done so sooner, and that the opportunity to see Prince perform would be there as I did.
I hate James Harden
The preceding bold and underlined header is a 100% true statement in a sporting sense. I don't know James Harden. He might be a swell guy. I have no idea. I wish him no harm. I also acknowledge he's a phenomenal basketball player. I hate watching him play basketball and actively root against his success.
Harden plays a style that is infuriating to watch. He plays consistently in isolation. He draws an inordinate amount of fouls. It's just not aesthetically pleasing. His game-winner last night was no different. He drove one-on-one, got away with a blatant push-off and hit an open jumper.
The push-off should've been called. In a late game situation, if a referee isn't 100% sure of a call (s)he should swallow the whistle. This was not one of those times. There was zero doubt that Harden committed an offensive foul. He pushed Andre Iguodala away with a fully extended arm. Iguodala had zero chance to contest the shot because of that push-off. It has to be called. I hate James Harden. I hate that no-call. I hope Steph Curry's ankle is ready for Sunday and the Rockets, who are just as unlikeable on the whole as their star, lose by 30.
This is the end of my James Harden rant.
Josh Norman's next stop
Former Panthers corner Josh Norman is visiting the Redskins today and reports say they could sign him before the weekend. Norman's asking for an absurd amount of money. He's 28 years old and wants a long term deal worth $16 million. Reports say the Redskins and 49ers are looking more in the $14 million per year range. That's still crazy, but a touch more palatable.
Just because he's asking for a lot of money (and I'm certainly not faulting him for asking) doesn't mean that he's not a really, really good football player. He's not Patrick Peterson or Darrelle Revis. He may not be Richard Sherman, but he's right there and very close based on last year's performance. He's a zone corner, which is just fine for the Redskins. He's also shown the ability to lock guys up man-to-man.
The Skins run a variety of coverages, but love to run Cover 3. They struggled at times last year on the outside in that scheme and had more success late in the year running 2-deep coverages (Cover 2 and Cover 4 aka quarters). No matter the coverage, Norman would immediately become their best cover corner and give them one of the best outside pairings in the league. Bashaud Breeland played at a Pro Bowl level and probably would've garnered that honor if he would've made a few of the interceptions he was in position for. Norman doesn't have that problem. He's got exceptional ball skills and finishes plays.
If they sign Norman, the Redskins have a decision to make on Chris Culliver. Last year's big money cornerback signing could be cut easily, saving the Redskins $8 million dollars on the cap. Essentially they'd be signing Norman for $6 million this year. They could also move the big, physical Culliver to safety. There are real concerns about Kyshoen Jarrett's injury because of the nerve damage that it included. The Skins also have the oft-injured Duke Ihenacho and 32 going on 33-year-old Deangelo Hall. They could use someone in that spot and someone who already knows the defense, albeit from a different position, wouldn't be the worst option.
Culliver's fire and competitiveness helped change the culture in DC last year. He frankly did more in that department than on the field because of his injuries. However there are definitely pockets of the organization that aren't his biggest fan, so it wouldn't surprise me if cutting him was the move.
As for Norman, my thoughts on the move will all depend on the contract structure. If Washington can get out of it after a year or two, then I have no problem with spending big on a player of his caliber. If it's a true long-term commitment to a 28 year old corner who was difficult enough to deal with that Carolina decided to set him free as opposed to keeping him around for another Super Bowl run on a one year, franchise tag deal? Not exactly in favor.
Reads of the Day:
ESPN's Wright Thompson on the secret life of Tiger Woods is jaw-dropping. So many good nuggets. So much information. Set aside 30 minutes and dive in: http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/15278522/how-tiger-woods-life-unraveled-years-father-earl-woods-death
Peter King of the MMQB goes inside the Titans-Rams trade for the #1 pick: http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/04/19/titans-rams-draft-trade-inside
There are so many good Prince pieces, but I particularly enjoyed this one because it involved Carlos Boozer, who is one of the last people I ever expected to have an amazing Prince story: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6270915
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Podcast: Eric Edholm on the NFL Draft
Looking for a 25 minute NFL Draft crash course? You've come to the right place! Eric Edholm of Yahoo! Sport's Shutdown Corner blog talks draft with me. We cover the evaluation process, some of the big names and touch on the Josh Norman story.
Follow Eric on Twitter here and read his work here.
Follow Eric on Twitter here and read his work here.
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 20th
RIP Pearl
We randomly rumble on a sad day as we found out this morning that Dwayne "Pearl" Washington has passed away at the age of 52. The Syracuse basketball legend might be the most important player in program history. It's either him or Carmelo Anthony. That's it. That's the list.
In the early 80's as The Big East began, Pearl was one of the stars. The league's success can be directly tied to TV (and ESPN specifically) and that success can be drawn back to the star players. The bigger than life coaches, such as Jim Boeheim, John Thompson and Rollie Massimino all had major roles, but they had to have players to make the product worth watching.
Washington was not only an outstanding player, but he was a showman. He played with uncommon flair. I was watching "With A Kiss" yesterday, the documentary on CBS analyst Bill Raftery, who coached in the early 80's in the Big East at Seton Hall. Jim Boeheim was featured in talking about the Big East, and he told a story about a trip to the west coast. He landed at LAX and was waiting at baggage claim when someone shouted at him "Hey! You're Pearl's coach!" This was in the early 1980's in Los Angeles about a player in The Big East! That was the power of Pearl. He was the first recruit in Boeheim's best stretch of coaching success until the last six years.
Will you shut up about RGIII? No.
The relationship between Robert Griffin III and Redskins fans is endlessly interesting to me. To start to understand the dynamic, you have to understand that there are numerous segments of the Redskins fanbase. There is a segment that is actually more RGIII fans than they are fans of the team. There's another group that despises Griffin. There's another group that just wishes anything about Griffin would go away. There's another group that's more rational and doesn't really care about Griffin, but understands why he's a story. Note: that is the rational group. It is likely larger than you think, but silent so we don't hear from them very often.
Secondly, just like whatever you do for a living, we are trying to make money. We make money by talking about the things that are interesting to you so that you'll listen. For a website like CSN, an article about Griffin's first mini-camp for the Browns will do well. You can call it "click-bait" but it's also good business, and it's really not that cheap. There is genuine interest in Griffin in DC because he's one of the most significant athletes to come through this market in 25 years. He's gone, but that doesn't mean the interest is. That's okay! In fact, it's completely normal.
Right now in Chicago, there's still an immense amount of talk about Tom Thibodeau. The former Bulls coach has been gone for a year. Where he goes next is one of the biggest topics on talk radio. The feud between him and the team was the number one underlying story of the Bulls' season. There's still an obsession with Phil Jackson in LA. There's still an obsession with Jeff Van Gundy in New York. LeBron is a topic of conversation in Miami constantly, although, much like Griffin, he's a topic of conversation everywhere.
The most interesting thing about Griffin and the DC market is how unique the DC market thinks it is. I've always laughed at this notion that the Redskins are a bigger mess than say the Jets or the Raiders, or that Griffin is getting some special treatment unseen before in the history of earth.
The point is these things happen. A star player, especially one with the star power of Griffin, leaves and people talk about him because he mattered to them significantly. I understand why some fans want to move on. I understand why players really want to move on. However it's the media's job to serve the largest portion of their audience, which does have some interest in that player. If you're not in that group, don't click! That's all. That's how you send your message. When the clicks/listens/views stop rolling in, we'll stop producing the content. Just don't click. Or change the channel. Whining about it actually makes it worse because you keep the name in the news. It proves that there is interest.
In our business the opposite of hate is not love and the opposite of love is not hate. The opposite of both is apathy. Voice your concerns accordingly.
Reads of the Day:
ESPN's Ramona Shelburne with a masterclass on how to use access after she spent the day after retirement (and more) with Kobe Bryant: http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/page/undefeated-kobe160419/former-lakers-star-kobe-bryant-left-nba-just-getting-started
"An Unbelievable Story of Rape" will mess up your day, leave you feeling sick and is 100% worth your time. From ProPublica: https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story
Syracuse coach Mike Hopkins tweets his tales about Pearl Washington: https://storify.com/CraigHoffman/mike-hopkins-on-pearl-washington
We randomly rumble on a sad day as we found out this morning that Dwayne "Pearl" Washington has passed away at the age of 52. The Syracuse basketball legend might be the most important player in program history. It's either him or Carmelo Anthony. That's it. That's the list.
In the early 80's as The Big East began, Pearl was one of the stars. The league's success can be directly tied to TV (and ESPN specifically) and that success can be drawn back to the star players. The bigger than life coaches, such as Jim Boeheim, John Thompson and Rollie Massimino all had major roles, but they had to have players to make the product worth watching.
Washington was not only an outstanding player, but he was a showman. He played with uncommon flair. I was watching "With A Kiss" yesterday, the documentary on CBS analyst Bill Raftery, who coached in the early 80's in the Big East at Seton Hall. Jim Boeheim was featured in talking about the Big East, and he told a story about a trip to the west coast. He landed at LAX and was waiting at baggage claim when someone shouted at him "Hey! You're Pearl's coach!" This was in the early 1980's in Los Angeles about a player in The Big East! That was the power of Pearl. He was the first recruit in Boeheim's best stretch of coaching success until the last six years.
I can't sum it up better than Boeheim. RIP Pearl, a true legend.There was no better guy and there’s nobody who has meant more to our basketball program than Dwayne Washington.#CuseFamily— Jim Boeheim (@therealboeheim) April 20, 2016
Will you shut up about RGIII? No.
The relationship between Robert Griffin III and Redskins fans is endlessly interesting to me. To start to understand the dynamic, you have to understand that there are numerous segments of the Redskins fanbase. There is a segment that is actually more RGIII fans than they are fans of the team. There's another group that despises Griffin. There's another group that just wishes anything about Griffin would go away. There's another group that's more rational and doesn't really care about Griffin, but understands why he's a story. Note: that is the rational group. It is likely larger than you think, but silent so we don't hear from them very often.
To Ricky, the rest of the fanbase and anyone else interested in the story, I'd like to explain media to you as succinctly as I can. First, our job isn't to help the team. It's STUNNING to me how many players and fans think that's our job. "Why aren't you more supportive?" Because that's not my job? I'm not paid (when I'm being paid...#HireMe) to bash the team either. I'm paid to say what I see and talk about what's interesting, without taking into consideration how it may effect the team. It's simply not a concern.Smh, why are we talking about a Browns QB in DC ? I am missing something here. https://t.co/FgXXvvcAqq— Ricky Jean Francois (@Freakyjean99) April 19, 2016
Secondly, just like whatever you do for a living, we are trying to make money. We make money by talking about the things that are interesting to you so that you'll listen. For a website like CSN, an article about Griffin's first mini-camp for the Browns will do well. You can call it "click-bait" but it's also good business, and it's really not that cheap. There is genuine interest in Griffin in DC because he's one of the most significant athletes to come through this market in 25 years. He's gone, but that doesn't mean the interest is. That's okay! In fact, it's completely normal.
Right now in Chicago, there's still an immense amount of talk about Tom Thibodeau. The former Bulls coach has been gone for a year. Where he goes next is one of the biggest topics on talk radio. The feud between him and the team was the number one underlying story of the Bulls' season. There's still an obsession with Phil Jackson in LA. There's still an obsession with Jeff Van Gundy in New York. LeBron is a topic of conversation in Miami constantly, although, much like Griffin, he's a topic of conversation everywhere.
The most interesting thing about Griffin and the DC market is how unique the DC market thinks it is. I've always laughed at this notion that the Redskins are a bigger mess than say the Jets or the Raiders, or that Griffin is getting some special treatment unseen before in the history of earth.
The point is these things happen. A star player, especially one with the star power of Griffin, leaves and people talk about him because he mattered to them significantly. I understand why some fans want to move on. I understand why players really want to move on. However it's the media's job to serve the largest portion of their audience, which does have some interest in that player. If you're not in that group, don't click! That's all. That's how you send your message. When the clicks/listens/views stop rolling in, we'll stop producing the content. Just don't click. Or change the channel. Whining about it actually makes it worse because you keep the name in the news. It proves that there is interest.
In our business the opposite of hate is not love and the opposite of love is not hate. The opposite of both is apathy. Voice your concerns accordingly.
Reads of the Day:
ESPN's Ramona Shelburne with a masterclass on how to use access after she spent the day after retirement (and more) with Kobe Bryant: http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/page/undefeated-kobe160419/former-lakers-star-kobe-bryant-left-nba-just-getting-started
"An Unbelievable Story of Rape" will mess up your day, leave you feeling sick and is 100% worth your time. From ProPublica: https://www.propublica.org/article/false-rape-accusations-an-unbelievable-story
Syracuse coach Mike Hopkins tweets his tales about Pearl Washington: https://storify.com/CraigHoffman/mike-hopkins-on-pearl-washington
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 19th
After some travel time, I've returned to rumble randomly. The travel was to my alma mater, Syracuse University, for the chance to work with the next generation of media superstars. Joe Lee, GM of WAER, invited me to work with his sports talk department and it turned into an incredible 48 hours on the hill.
It's hard to accurately describe what the student media, both WAER and Z89, mean to and have meant to my career. The shortest version of an attempt is merely saying that I would've gotten nowhere without them. The reason those places are so special is because the alums are so generous in giving back. Not only have some of the best and brightest in our industry established and passed down a standard of excellence when they were students, but they've also made sure to continue to go back and ensure that standard is upheld.
The fact that Joe reached out and specifically targeted me to come back and work with his staff is an honor. I was more than happy to make the trip. What I found, not shockingly, is an incredibly talented and driven group that craved the feedback and want to get better and continue the tradition. There's a reason there are so many Syracuse alums in this industry and there's a reason we're obnoxious about where we went to school. It's worth being proud of and it was abundantly clear to me after last week that the next generation understands that and will continue to live up to the expectations of being "one of those Syracuse guys" (or gals!) in every corner of media.
Kobe
I left for Syracuse at 6 am on Thursday morning, making it an unwise decision to stay up and watch Kobe's final game Wednesday night. So I didn't. I watched the first six minutes, in which he didn't hit a shot, and went to bed knowing it was on DVR for me to consume later.
I woke up Thursday morning bleary eyed and looked at my phone AND KOBE DID WHAT?! No amount of coffee or IV dripped caffeine could've had me come to attention faster than seeing that Bryant scored 60 on his final night. I immediately went to the box score and saw he shot fifty times, but he still scored sixty points!!! However as I started to read some of the reaction from Twitter the night before, then listen as I hit the road, I understood that this wasn't some chuck-fest. This was an all-time moment.
I finally got to watch this morning and it was pure magic. Were there some bad shots? Sure. He shot fifty times. You think they were all awesome? However there were also glimpses of a Bryant we all, including Kobe himself, thought was long gone. Snakes to the rim, ending in crafty finishes accounted for a solid percentage of his points. The pull-up jumper that made him the NBA's best player for a solid stretch of the early 00's looked as sure as it ever had. I'd use another word, but magic is the proper description.
For a player whose reputation as a closer was typically overstated (his percentages in clutch situation were terrible), this close was literally perfect. While he often forced shots and missed, there was no denying that Bryant always wanted to take the final shot. He thought it was his duty, and he had no fear of failure. That's admirable for an athlete, even if at times he should've played the percentages better. Wednesday night wasn't a time to play the percentages. Wednesday night was time to put on a show. He did, in the most unimaginable way possible.
He's inarguably one of the best fifteen players ever. He's almost inarguably one of the best twelve. He's arguably one of the best ten. He's done things few others have done in the modern era and some (his 81 point game) that none have done. From a pure sporting context, it doesn't get much better than his performance on Wednesday. Also, Mike Tirico said "fo shizzle" late in the game going to break as the telecast showed Snoop dancing which is as all-time of a moment as anything Kobe did.
However in an age where we know more about our athletes than ever before, I'd feel like a total hypocrite if I didn't at least mention that Bryant was charged with rape in 2004. It was largely not mentioned during the Kobe farewell tour until the final few days as I saw it appear a few times on social media. I was pretty young during the trial, so I went back and looked at some of the reporting from the time and it's certainly damning of Bryant. At absolute best, Bryant committed rape amidst confusion about consent. This is directly from Bryant's statement after the charges were dismissed:
"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter."
It takes two to have consent. The woman not believing she had consented constitutes rape, even if Bryant was under some other impression. Other accounts paint a much darker picture in which there's no confusion at all, and that there may have been other similar instances with other women that went unreported. We have a legal system that often fails victims of domestic and sexual violence. There are no winners in any of this. The charges against Bryant were dropped after his legal team engaged in horrifying victim blaming.
There's no good way to make all this into some grand conclusion. It feels like there's grey area here. Bryant rehabbed his image in part by doing an extremely high amount of charity work. He saw hundreds of Make-a-Wish kids, never denying one of their requests. His work with the homeless of LA is awe-inspiring. Does any of that make what he was alleged to do okay? Of course not. I don't know what the "right" response to all of this is. Watching his final game gave me great joy as a sports fan. Writing the last two paragraphs about a horrifying thing he is alleged to have done makes me feel really guilty about that joy. That's really all I've got.
Trade That Pick!
Making as hard of a left turn as we can, the Browns should trade the number two overall pick in the upcoming NFL draft and they shouldn't think twice about it. It's pretty clear the Rams are taking one of the top two quarterbacks in the draft, either Jared Goff or Carson Wentz at number one after trading with the Titans last week. That leaves any other team who wants one of those quarterbacks needing to trade with Cleveland to ensure they get their man.
The Browns don't need either if they're committed to Robert Griffin III at quarterback. Even if they're not, they should trade the pick anyway unless they believe one of them is truly special. The reality is the Browns stink. They're not winning this year with anyone they can possibly acquire at quarterback. They need a lot of players. The only way to get a lot of good players is to draft a lot of players. The way to draft a lot of players is to have a lot of picks, which you can acquire in a trade for the number two overall pick pretty easily.
NFL Draft picks, no matter where they are, are like lottery tickets. The higher the draft pick, the better chance that ticket is a winner, but the real goal is to get as many tickets as you can. If you go 50% on your picks, but only have six picks, you've only developed three players. If you have 12 picks? Now you've got six NFL caliber players and are making headway towards becoming good again.
Since multiple teams are likely to want in on whichever QB is left (multiple reports say it will be Wentz stating that the Rams like Goff), the Browns can probably get a great return for their pick. Making a deal is all about leverage. The Browns have it. They should use it, and then be patient as their stable of players develops and maybe, just maybe, they'll have a winner in Cleveland a few years down the road.
Reads of the day:
This Seth Wickersham piece for ESPN The Mag on Robert Nkemdiche is great. It shines a light on one of the draft's bigger question marks and how questionable the draft process is: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/15159447/should-teams-worry-robert-nkemdic-nfl-future
NBA Player Wayne Ellington writes about his father's impact on his life and his cold-blooded murder for The Player's Tribune: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/wayne-ellington-nets-father/
If you want some great Kobe stories, Baxter Holmes has written some remarkable stuff for ESPN LA the past few weeks. This, on his shooting routine, is one of my favorites: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15179469/kobe-bryant-famous-pregame-shooting-routine
It's hard to accurately describe what the student media, both WAER and Z89, mean to and have meant to my career. The shortest version of an attempt is merely saying that I would've gotten nowhere without them. The reason those places are so special is because the alums are so generous in giving back. Not only have some of the best and brightest in our industry established and passed down a standard of excellence when they were students, but they've also made sure to continue to go back and ensure that standard is upheld.
The fact that Joe reached out and specifically targeted me to come back and work with his staff is an honor. I was more than happy to make the trip. What I found, not shockingly, is an incredibly talented and driven group that craved the feedback and want to get better and continue the tradition. There's a reason there are so many Syracuse alums in this industry and there's a reason we're obnoxious about where we went to school. It's worth being proud of and it was abundantly clear to me after last week that the next generation understands that and will continue to live up to the expectations of being "one of those Syracuse guys" (or gals!) in every corner of media.
Kobe
I left for Syracuse at 6 am on Thursday morning, making it an unwise decision to stay up and watch Kobe's final game Wednesday night. So I didn't. I watched the first six minutes, in which he didn't hit a shot, and went to bed knowing it was on DVR for me to consume later.
I woke up Thursday morning bleary eyed and looked at my phone AND KOBE DID WHAT?! No amount of coffee or IV dripped caffeine could've had me come to attention faster than seeing that Bryant scored 60 on his final night. I immediately went to the box score and saw he shot fifty times, but he still scored sixty points!!! However as I started to read some of the reaction from Twitter the night before, then listen as I hit the road, I understood that this wasn't some chuck-fest. This was an all-time moment.
I finally got to watch this morning and it was pure magic. Were there some bad shots? Sure. He shot fifty times. You think they were all awesome? However there were also glimpses of a Bryant we all, including Kobe himself, thought was long gone. Snakes to the rim, ending in crafty finishes accounted for a solid percentage of his points. The pull-up jumper that made him the NBA's best player for a solid stretch of the early 00's looked as sure as it ever had. I'd use another word, but magic is the proper description.
For a player whose reputation as a closer was typically overstated (his percentages in clutch situation were terrible), this close was literally perfect. While he often forced shots and missed, there was no denying that Bryant always wanted to take the final shot. He thought it was his duty, and he had no fear of failure. That's admirable for an athlete, even if at times he should've played the percentages better. Wednesday night wasn't a time to play the percentages. Wednesday night was time to put on a show. He did, in the most unimaginable way possible.
He's inarguably one of the best fifteen players ever. He's almost inarguably one of the best twelve. He's arguably one of the best ten. He's done things few others have done in the modern era and some (his 81 point game) that none have done. From a pure sporting context, it doesn't get much better than his performance on Wednesday. Also, Mike Tirico said "fo shizzle" late in the game going to break as the telecast showed Snoop dancing which is as all-time of a moment as anything Kobe did.
However in an age where we know more about our athletes than ever before, I'd feel like a total hypocrite if I didn't at least mention that Bryant was charged with rape in 2004. It was largely not mentioned during the Kobe farewell tour until the final few days as I saw it appear a few times on social media. I was pretty young during the trial, so I went back and looked at some of the reporting from the time and it's certainly damning of Bryant. At absolute best, Bryant committed rape amidst confusion about consent. This is directly from Bryant's statement after the charges were dismissed:
"Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter."
It takes two to have consent. The woman not believing she had consented constitutes rape, even if Bryant was under some other impression. Other accounts paint a much darker picture in which there's no confusion at all, and that there may have been other similar instances with other women that went unreported. We have a legal system that often fails victims of domestic and sexual violence. There are no winners in any of this. The charges against Bryant were dropped after his legal team engaged in horrifying victim blaming.
There's no good way to make all this into some grand conclusion. It feels like there's grey area here. Bryant rehabbed his image in part by doing an extremely high amount of charity work. He saw hundreds of Make-a-Wish kids, never denying one of their requests. His work with the homeless of LA is awe-inspiring. Does any of that make what he was alleged to do okay? Of course not. I don't know what the "right" response to all of this is. Watching his final game gave me great joy as a sports fan. Writing the last two paragraphs about a horrifying thing he is alleged to have done makes me feel really guilty about that joy. That's really all I've got.
Trade That Pick!
Making as hard of a left turn as we can, the Browns should trade the number two overall pick in the upcoming NFL draft and they shouldn't think twice about it. It's pretty clear the Rams are taking one of the top two quarterbacks in the draft, either Jared Goff or Carson Wentz at number one after trading with the Titans last week. That leaves any other team who wants one of those quarterbacks needing to trade with Cleveland to ensure they get their man.
The Browns don't need either if they're committed to Robert Griffin III at quarterback. Even if they're not, they should trade the pick anyway unless they believe one of them is truly special. The reality is the Browns stink. They're not winning this year with anyone they can possibly acquire at quarterback. They need a lot of players. The only way to get a lot of good players is to draft a lot of players. The way to draft a lot of players is to have a lot of picks, which you can acquire in a trade for the number two overall pick pretty easily.
NFL Draft picks, no matter where they are, are like lottery tickets. The higher the draft pick, the better chance that ticket is a winner, but the real goal is to get as many tickets as you can. If you go 50% on your picks, but only have six picks, you've only developed three players. If you have 12 picks? Now you've got six NFL caliber players and are making headway towards becoming good again.
Since multiple teams are likely to want in on whichever QB is left (multiple reports say it will be Wentz stating that the Rams like Goff), the Browns can probably get a great return for their pick. Making a deal is all about leverage. The Browns have it. They should use it, and then be patient as their stable of players develops and maybe, just maybe, they'll have a winner in Cleveland a few years down the road.
Reads of the day:
This Seth Wickersham piece for ESPN The Mag on Robert Nkemdiche is great. It shines a light on one of the draft's bigger question marks and how questionable the draft process is: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/15159447/should-teams-worry-robert-nkemdic-nfl-future
NBA Player Wayne Ellington writes about his father's impact on his life and his cold-blooded murder for The Player's Tribune: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/wayne-ellington-nets-father/
If you want some great Kobe stories, Baxter Holmes has written some remarkable stuff for ESPN LA the past few weeks. This, on his shooting routine, is one of my favorites: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15179469/kobe-bryant-famous-pregame-shooting-routine
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Evaluating Evaluation
It's draft season, both in the NBA and the NFL meaning evaluations of players are flying. Everyone, from general managers of the actual teams to amateur scouts on the internet are putting out their reports. Some of those amateur scouts will somehow have better results than those professionals whose very jobs it is to nail those evaluations.
How is that possible? I have no idea and that will become increasingly clear as you read the rest of this post. That is because evaluating talent is as much about who a person is as what they do on the field. Team personnel (and professional media evaluators like Mel Kiper and Todd McShay) get to talk to the draftees, their college coaches and the people around them. The amateurs on the internet? They might know a guy somewhere, but likely they're watching tape and drawing conclusions.
So how is it that the professionals can so wildly miss? Simple. It's hard to evaluate how a human being will grow from the time they are 21 or 22 (or in the NBA's case, 19) over the next ten years of their life, but knowing what to look for is half the battle.
The genesis of this post started a few weeks ago as I heard people talk about evaluating quarterbacks. Talk show hosts and the like love talking about measurables. Carson Wentz from North Dakota State has "prototypical size" and a cannon for an arm. Those are great, but when it comes to the quarterback position, the number one attribute is decision making.
I would rather have a quarterback with an average arm that is smart and decisive than one who has the physical tools and hope that the second guy can figure it out. Everything happens in the NFL at extraordinary speed. The margin for error is nearly non-existent. A quarterback must read coverage, determine where to throw the ball and deliver without hesitation. So long that he can do that, and has a baseline requisite arm to do so, he's going to succeed. The difference in arm strength between average and good isn't enough to make up for the difference in decision making between good and average.
While the decision making trait is unique to quarterbacks, there is another set of mental traits that is just as important as any other physical trait when evaluating talent. It's described perfectly by Redskins GM Scot McCloughan in a Q&A with Bleacher Report's Jason Cole.
These characteristics can continue to play out into a players career in a negative way as well. While Curry and the others mentioned (and many more) continually improve as they go, other players can't seem to be bothered too.
Josh Gordon led the NFL in receiving in 2013. He's played in five games since. Gordon has been suspended multiple times for failed drug tests, and while reading Gordon's accounts of his downfall creates sympathy and empathy, it also makes you take a step back and go "hey guy...figure it out!" For someone that seems to so clearly understand the circumstances around his peril, he's awful at avoiding it.
That continues to this week's news when it was revealed Gordon is reportedly living with Johnny Manziel, a walking embodiment of a similar theory. (Update: the report, from ESPN, is false according to another report from Pro Football Talk, so credit to back in Gordon's corner if it is. He still did something to have his re-instatement denied. He can appeal August 1st.)
Manziel is a master (well, until this week) of saying the right thing while doing nothing of what he says. Both of them have an optics problem and neither seems particularly interested, based on their actions, of fixing them. I should be perfectly clear here that the Manziel optics problem doesn't include his domestic violence which is a real problem that, if it played out as reported based on his ex-girlfriend's accounts, should land him in jail, nevertheless out of football.
Evaluators need to be able to identify players, or more accurately people, like Gordon and Manziel so they know not to invest vast resources in acquiring them. They also need to know that if they do acquire them with low resources (whether that be a late round pick or a low dollar contract) that they will need to invest a high number of resources to help the player succeed. The results when this is done right can be magical.
Dez Bryant dropped in the draft because he was "high-risk" coming out of Oklahoma State. Bryant has succeeded because he loves football above all else (which is a credit to him and him alone) and because the Cowboys set up a support system to make sure that he had the highest chance possible to succeed as he adjusted to a new life.
Of course the difference between Bryant, Gordon and Manziel is that only one of them has football as their highest priority. In a profession with such a short career span that requires an inordinate amount of physical dedication, that's something an evaluator has to identify.
It's why Kristaps Porzingis will succeed in the NBA and countless other European players haven't. The busts fail for the same reason many American born players have. They just don't love the game. Often these are big men who play because they're big. They can succeed without immense work because their physical stature gives them such an inherent advantage at the lower levels. In order to succeed in the world's highest level professional league, even the most gifted physical players need to have a work ethic to maximize their talent.
Porzingis loves the game. He's had early success and I'll be shocked if he doesn't continue to improve. The same is true for Karl-Anthony Towns. Last year's #1 overall pick has been glued to Kevin Garnett, who is as much coach as he is player at this point, trying to learn what's made the 15-time All-Star successful.
So as you read the latest mock draft to see who your favorite team is going to take, make sure to read the whole scouting report. Don't just look at 40-times and verticals. Take a look at the personality section. Do they love the sport? Do they value being a good teammate? Will they be a positive influence on your team's culture?
If you want to put on your amateur scouting hat, don't just watch a highlight tape. Watch how hard they play. Read and watch interviews with the player to see what kind of answers they give. What's their attention to detail?
If scouting was solely about finding the best physical specimens, it'd be pretty easy. Everyone would have the same lists. However sports are played by human beings which means there are human dynamics at play and the ability to find and project talent is an extremely valuable talent in its own right.
Inevitably, someone will cost themselves their job (and the jobs of those below them) because of ego. General manager X will think he's the one who's got it all figured out. He's the one who can take the physically gifted kid and mold all that "talent" into a great player. What the great talent evaluators have figured out is that "talent" is overrated. They want the guys who can think the game so effortlessly that they don't have to think at all, maximizing the physical ability they have leading to success.
As a fan, just hope that person isn't running your team. If they are, don't worry though. They won't be for long.
How is that possible? I have no idea and that will become increasingly clear as you read the rest of this post. That is because evaluating talent is as much about who a person is as what they do on the field. Team personnel (and professional media evaluators like Mel Kiper and Todd McShay) get to talk to the draftees, their college coaches and the people around them. The amateurs on the internet? They might know a guy somewhere, but likely they're watching tape and drawing conclusions.
So how is it that the professionals can so wildly miss? Simple. It's hard to evaluate how a human being will grow from the time they are 21 or 22 (or in the NBA's case, 19) over the next ten years of their life, but knowing what to look for is half the battle.
The genesis of this post started a few weeks ago as I heard people talk about evaluating quarterbacks. Talk show hosts and the like love talking about measurables. Carson Wentz from North Dakota State has "prototypical size" and a cannon for an arm. Those are great, but when it comes to the quarterback position, the number one attribute is decision making.
I would rather have a quarterback with an average arm that is smart and decisive than one who has the physical tools and hope that the second guy can figure it out. Everything happens in the NFL at extraordinary speed. The margin for error is nearly non-existent. A quarterback must read coverage, determine where to throw the ball and deliver without hesitation. So long that he can do that, and has a baseline requisite arm to do so, he's going to succeed. The difference in arm strength between average and good isn't enough to make up for the difference in decision making between good and average.
While the decision making trait is unique to quarterbacks, there is another set of mental traits that is just as important as any other physical trait when evaluating talent. It's described perfectly by Redskins GM Scot McCloughan in a Q&A with Bleacher Report's Jason Cole.
You watch five or 10 plays, you can see the physical skills. You can see it pretty quick. If it’s a receiver running a route or a pass-rusher, you can see him drop his hips, that kind of stuff. That’s the easy part. The tough part is figuring out the person. Is he a competitor? What’s his toughness? What’s his mindset? I’ve been around long enough, which is great because I’ve made a lot of mistakes, and I’ve learned from them, but what makes a guy average to good, good to great and great to exceptional? That’s the hard part because the talent is there. Every year, you see guys come out, and they are physically gifted, bigger than life, whatever. But you also see guys who are in the sixth or seventh (round), or they are college free agents, and they play 10 years while the other guy plays two. It’s the "it" factor, and it’s hard to find. It’s really hard to find.McCloughan's theory is true in other sports as well. Think of the great athletes and what you think of first with them. Whether is Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Tom Brady, Jerry Rice or any other number of legitimate all-time greats, the first thing you hear about is their work ethic. It's how Stephen Curry elevated himself to the top of the basketball world. He had a set of natural skills that he enhanced by an immense amount of work. He wanted to be great. He loves the game. He put in the work. He is great.
These characteristics can continue to play out into a players career in a negative way as well. While Curry and the others mentioned (and many more) continually improve as they go, other players can't seem to be bothered too.
Josh Gordon led the NFL in receiving in 2013. He's played in five games since. Gordon has been suspended multiple times for failed drug tests, and while reading Gordon's accounts of his downfall creates sympathy and empathy, it also makes you take a step back and go "hey guy...figure it out!" For someone that seems to so clearly understand the circumstances around his peril, he's awful at avoiding it.
That continues to this week's news when it was revealed Gordon is reportedly living with Johnny Manziel, a walking embodiment of a similar theory. (Update: the report, from ESPN, is false according to another report from Pro Football Talk, so credit to back in Gordon's corner if it is. He still did something to have his re-instatement denied. He can appeal August 1st.)
Manziel is a master (well, until this week) of saying the right thing while doing nothing of what he says. Both of them have an optics problem and neither seems particularly interested, based on their actions, of fixing them. I should be perfectly clear here that the Manziel optics problem doesn't include his domestic violence which is a real problem that, if it played out as reported based on his ex-girlfriend's accounts, should land him in jail, nevertheless out of football.
Evaluators need to be able to identify players, or more accurately people, like Gordon and Manziel so they know not to invest vast resources in acquiring them. They also need to know that if they do acquire them with low resources (whether that be a late round pick or a low dollar contract) that they will need to invest a high number of resources to help the player succeed. The results when this is done right can be magical.
Dez Bryant dropped in the draft because he was "high-risk" coming out of Oklahoma State. Bryant has succeeded because he loves football above all else (which is a credit to him and him alone) and because the Cowboys set up a support system to make sure that he had the highest chance possible to succeed as he adjusted to a new life.
Of course the difference between Bryant, Gordon and Manziel is that only one of them has football as their highest priority. In a profession with such a short career span that requires an inordinate amount of physical dedication, that's something an evaluator has to identify.
It's why Kristaps Porzingis will succeed in the NBA and countless other European players haven't. The busts fail for the same reason many American born players have. They just don't love the game. Often these are big men who play because they're big. They can succeed without immense work because their physical stature gives them such an inherent advantage at the lower levels. In order to succeed in the world's highest level professional league, even the most gifted physical players need to have a work ethic to maximize their talent.
Porzingis loves the game. He's had early success and I'll be shocked if he doesn't continue to improve. The same is true for Karl-Anthony Towns. Last year's #1 overall pick has been glued to Kevin Garnett, who is as much coach as he is player at this point, trying to learn what's made the 15-time All-Star successful.
So as you read the latest mock draft to see who your favorite team is going to take, make sure to read the whole scouting report. Don't just look at 40-times and verticals. Take a look at the personality section. Do they love the sport? Do they value being a good teammate? Will they be a positive influence on your team's culture?
If you want to put on your amateur scouting hat, don't just watch a highlight tape. Watch how hard they play. Read and watch interviews with the player to see what kind of answers they give. What's their attention to detail?
If scouting was solely about finding the best physical specimens, it'd be pretty easy. Everyone would have the same lists. However sports are played by human beings which means there are human dynamics at play and the ability to find and project talent is an extremely valuable talent in its own right.
Inevitably, someone will cost themselves their job (and the jobs of those below them) because of ego. General manager X will think he's the one who's got it all figured out. He's the one who can take the physically gifted kid and mold all that "talent" into a great player. What the great talent evaluators have figured out is that "talent" is overrated. They want the guys who can think the game so effortlessly that they don't have to think at all, maximizing the physical ability they have leading to success.
As a fan, just hope that person isn't running your team. If they are, don't worry though. They won't be for long.
Monday, April 11, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 11th
A wild weekend in sports catapults us into a surely historic week. Kobe Bryant retires after his final game Wednesday night. At the same time, the Warriors will shoot for their 73rd win, which would break the single-season record. The NBA playoff seedings will also be set, and we're getting ever closer to the NFL draft. However before all that, we look back at a heck of a sports weekend.
The NCAA announced a three year freeze on adding new bowl games Monday morning, which was surely met with applause around the country. Three losing teams played in post-season games last year, which is a bit ridiculous considering they are supposed to be a reward for a stellar season.
Largely I'm in favor of having a large number of bowl games because they do mean a lot to the players and they really aren't hurting anyone. I didn't feel that way before going to the 2009 New Orleans Bowl and seeing MTSU win it. For a small school, it was a big deal. The players had a solid season, took advantage of the opportunity and walked away with memories they'll never forget.
That's always stuck with me, but there is a limit considering it's supposed to be a reward and the NCAA is long past that limit. We don't need to go back to an era where only the best of the best get to play in the post-season, but there's certainly a happy medium before you get to losing teams participating. It's probably farther back down the path than we've traveled, but at least for the next three years we won't be traveling any further.
Read(s) of the day:
I'm going to start adding some of the enjoyable things I've read to the ends of these random rumblings columns. I read a lot of stuff. Some of it is really good. So why not share:
History (Good)
History (Bad)
No More Bowling
The Warriors have reached the thought unreachable star of 72 wins, tying the '95-'96 Bulls' record for most in an NBA season. Those Bulls also entered their 81st game with 71 wins, but they lost. The Warriors became the first team to win in San Antonio all season.
The game was rather remarkable considering the Warriors were on the second night of a back-to-back. Golden State beat Memphis in Memphis on Saturday night in game that went down to the final buzzer. The Dubs, including Stephen Curry, haven't had their shooting rhythm as of late. Their numbers are still good overall during the past few weeks, thanks to a few outbursts including a 136 point effort in Portland, but watching them hasn't quite been the same.
That continued in the first half in San Antonio as they scored a season low 35 points. In the second half, it all came back. Curry went bananas in the 3rd quarter, scored 37 points on the night and their chances at sitting alone in history are alive. The reason they were able to overcome the atrocious first half of offense? They were tied at the half, holding the Spurs to the same output.
As you could imagine with a team that is assured one of the two best regular seasons ever, they're far from a one-trick pony. They're 5th in defensive rating after finishing first a year ago. Draymond Green might win defensive player of the year (it'll be him or Kawhi Leonard). The Warriors sport two of the league's ten best defensive lineups that have played over 100 minutes together (based on defensive rating) and neither of those are its "death lineup" of Green, Curry, Harrison Barnes, Andre Iguodala and Klay Thompson which is the league's best lineup in terms of net rating.
(Fun aside: the Warriors have the league's best three lineups (min. 100 minutes played together) in net rating and two more in the top 20.)
The natural discussion as we wait for the playoffs isn't to appreciate what Golden State is doing, but to compare it to what the Bulls did. Who would win a hypothetical seven game series? Who knows. It's impossible to know, which makes for a fun discussion. There were different rules and the two teams play very different styles. I would tend to lean towards Golden State because of their propensity to hit threes, but the Bulls were absolutely loaded and had that MJ fella, so I certainly wouldn't have the confidence to bet on it.
In terms of the accomplishment though, I think it's fair to point out that Golden State has done this in one of the golden eras of NBA basketball. The league is so deep right now with star players and great teams. The Spurs are having an all-time season that is being completely overshadowed by the Warriors. The Thunder are likely going to have two players who deservingly finish top 5 in MVP voting. The Eastern Conference is finally back too, as the 8-seed there will finish with a better record than the 8-seed in the West for the first time since 1999.
I'm not old enough to intelligently remember the league in '95-'96 so I'm not going to put what the Bulls did into similar context. It wouldn't be fair. Just know what the Warriors have done is extraordinary.
Jordan Spieth did not have a Warriors-like weekend. The 22 year old had a complete and utter meltdown at the 12th hole in The Masters final round, and it cost him his second straight green jacket.
It was such an odd outcome because the 30-minute, one-hole blunder so overwhelmingly decided the outcome of a four day event. Even if Spieth bogeys the hole instead of quadruple bogeying, he's in a playoff (if the rest of the tournament plays out the same). The seven he threw up on number twelve literally decided the tournament.
It is likely why Spieth was so distraught afterwards. It's not just the great shots that make professional golfers great, it's the ability to do damage control. Hit a bad shot? Save it with the next one. Spieth followed a bad shot with a worse one and then did it again. He actually did some damage control by getting up-and-down out of the bunker to net the quad, or it could've been even worse.
What I don't get is the narrative today that "how Spieth responds will define his career." Well no kidding. If he stinks for the rest of his life, that's gonna define his career. If he bounces back, people will marvel at his ability to put failure behind him. That's all great, but let's not pretend like this hasn't happened before.
Rory McIlroy had the 54 hole lead at Augusta in 2014 before shooting a final round 80 and losing the tournament. He came back and blasted the field at the US Open to win the very next major. Jack Nicklaus's record 18 majors are made even more remarkable by the fact that he finished second 19 times. You don't think there were a few close calls and heart-breakers in there?
Spieth will be fine. He's 22. He's already won multiple majors. His game is perfect for Augusta and he'll be the favorite there next year so long that he's healthy. He'll probably win there again. Yesterday's performance will hurt and it'll probably hurt forever. No matter how many he wins, he'll know it always should've been one more, but that doesn't mean he'll crumble into a heap of emotion and forget how to play golf.
Credit also to Danny Willett, who still had to go out and win it. He made sure to make it difficult for Spieth to catch him down the stretch and, in the end, did enough to win comfortably. That capped off a pretty amazing week for him that started with the birth of his first child. The picture of the baby in the green jacket is going to be pretty epic. Also, his brother is pretty great.
No More Bowling
The NCAA announced a three year freeze on adding new bowl games Monday morning, which was surely met with applause around the country. Three losing teams played in post-season games last year, which is a bit ridiculous considering they are supposed to be a reward for a stellar season.
Largely I'm in favor of having a large number of bowl games because they do mean a lot to the players and they really aren't hurting anyone. I didn't feel that way before going to the 2009 New Orleans Bowl and seeing MTSU win it. For a small school, it was a big deal. The players had a solid season, took advantage of the opportunity and walked away with memories they'll never forget.
That's always stuck with me, but there is a limit considering it's supposed to be a reward and the NCAA is long past that limit. We don't need to go back to an era where only the best of the best get to play in the post-season, but there's certainly a happy medium before you get to losing teams participating. It's probably farther back down the path than we've traveled, but at least for the next three years we won't be traveling any further.
Read(s) of the day:
I'm going to start adding some of the enjoyable things I've read to the ends of these random rumblings columns. I read a lot of stuff. Some of it is really good. So why not share:
- ESPN's Ramona Shelburne on the literal, physical pain Steve Kerr has endured this season as his team marches towards history.
- NJ.com's Steve Politi on the one house still standing in Augusta National's neighborhood, and the people who live there.
- The MMQB's Emily Kaplan on Jon Gruden's QB Camp, which starts this week on ESPN
Sunday, April 10, 2016
What is success? (NBA edition)
I saw a tweet this week that spawned a thought. The thought is more a philosophical question that can be applied to literally any situation in life, but we'll mostly stick to sports. What is success?
The tweet came from a Mavericks fan to my former colleague Chuck Cooperstein, the Mavs play by play man. The pessimistic fan asked "what's the point of making the playoff? They're going to lose in the first round."
Allow me to answer: you make the playoffs.
On the surface, this seems like quite the logical thing than anybody with even a minute understanding of sports should be able to figure out, but defining success in sports is far from simple. For some teams success means winning a lot. For some teams it's winning some. For some teams it's not winning at all. It's complicated. It's nuanced. And at this time of the year, it's particularly in focus for the NBA.
For the Mavericks, making the playoffs is a remarkable success. Dallas thought they had made a key addition in DeAndre Jordan last summer before the Clippers center changed his mind and decided to return to Los Angeles. That left the Mavericks with newly signed Wes Matthews coming off an achilles injury, Chandler Parsons coming off knee surgery and Dirk Nowitzki somehow still being a very good player despite being 482 years old in NBA years. Instead of being a legitimate threat to get to the 2nd round of the playoffs, the Mavs were stuck being good enough to have no shot at keeping their draft pick, which had to fall in the top 7 to not be sent to Boston to complete the Rajon Rondo trade.
Since being bad didn't have any benefit, why not see how good you can be? Despite battling injuries all year, they made the playoffs again. That should be celebrated. That's an accomplishment. That's success.
For the Warriors, making the playoffs is nothing special. Their goals are different. They're only goal is a championship. That was until they got off to the best start in NBA history and all of a sudden, the record for most wins in regular season history was on the table.
Success is a moving target, in life and in sports. When someone reaches a goal, they set a new one. When circumstances change, goals change. Rarely do plans actually work out exactly as someone lays them out. For the Warriors, the goal didn't change. They just added a new one.
The NBA's regular season is long. It starts in October and ends in April. Sometime in November or December, everyone realized the Warriors had a chance at 73 regular season wins because they hadn't lost yet and the wins were starting to stack up. At that point their season became a really long family vacation. You can't wait to leave, but by the end, even if you know you'll look back fondly, it's just time to go home.
That's where the Warriors are now. They're clearly exhausted, scraping together wins against teams they literally beat by 50 earlier in the season. They've also lost twice at home, something they didn't do all year until last weekend. The goal of championship is still at the top of their list, but along the way they'd love to get to 73. They've got two more wins to go. If they don't get it, it's nearly impossible to say that the regular season hasn't been successful. They've already assured themselves one of the two winningest regular seasons in the history of the sport. Of course that's successful, even if they don't reach their goal of breaking the record.
For the Warriors, success depends on their first goal. They must win another championship. Falling short of that is a failure by anyone's standard based on what Golden State has accomplished and what they're capable of. The funny thing about success being a moving target, is it often moves back to where it started. While the focus is on the regular season record, the determination of success hasn't moved one bit for Steph Curry and co.
That concept of moving goals and moving success brings us to the other end of the NBA spectrum: the 76ers. Sam Hinkie resigned from his front office position this week as Philadelphia continued to bring in other people around him. Hinkie wrote in his resignation letter that the changing dynamic didn't leave him in a position that he felt he could make the best decisions for the team.
Hinkie's plan to rebuild the 76ers was much maligned, but it was also misunderstood. The biggest misunderstanding was his definition of success.
Winning in the NBA actually isn't that hard. Winning championships is nearly impossible. The margin between a good team like the Mavericks and a championship team like the Warriors is massive. Hinkie wanted to build a championship team.
In order to do that, he gutted the roster and maximized his means of acquiring a star player (which you need at least one of, if not two to win a title) via the draft. In the meantime, he didn't care about how his team did. He knew he needed that player.
Upon his resignation (which wasn't forced by ownership directly, although the moves they made around him were the reasons he resigned), many analysts brought up teams like Orlando and Denver to say "you don't have to be so extreme to rebuild" as the Sixers have been the last three years.
Orlando and Denver have acquired some nice pieces. None of those pieces are the championship piece that Hinkie wanted. Sure, they've got better rosters and if they can either pick a winner later in the draft, get lucky and win the lottery or acquire a superstar player via trade or free agency, the superior roster helps them be in a position to win faster. With Orlando, this is even feasible as they've been a free agent destination in the past. With Denver? They better hope for the luck option.
Meanwhile the Sixers have the highest odds ever at the number one pick and might wind up with two picks in the top 5 this season. Every plan involving a lottery and talent evaluation also involves substantial luck. Why not give yourself the maximum chances to get lucky?
That's not to say Hinkie was perfect and didn't make some mistakes. He could've potentially had better players already with better scouting. He underestimated the human side of player development in having no veteran presence in his locker room. However his long-term plan often came under attack for the wrong reasons.
People failed to understand his definition of success. He didn't want to his team to be good. He wanted them to be great. He knew that would take time. He ran out of time.
Success is a funny thing. It can be defined by a person for themselves. It can be defined by others. It can be defined by precedent and history. It can be defined by smashing precedent and making history. It can be clearly defined. It can be misunderstood. All of those things are no more easily found than in pro sports at a season's end.
For the Mavericks, making the playoffs is a remarkable success. Dallas thought they had made a key addition in DeAndre Jordan last summer before the Clippers center changed his mind and decided to return to Los Angeles. That left the Mavericks with newly signed Wes Matthews coming off an achilles injury, Chandler Parsons coming off knee surgery and Dirk Nowitzki somehow still being a very good player despite being 482 years old in NBA years. Instead of being a legitimate threat to get to the 2nd round of the playoffs, the Mavs were stuck being good enough to have no shot at keeping their draft pick, which had to fall in the top 7 to not be sent to Boston to complete the Rajon Rondo trade.
Since being bad didn't have any benefit, why not see how good you can be? Despite battling injuries all year, they made the playoffs again. That should be celebrated. That's an accomplishment. That's success.
For the Warriors, making the playoffs is nothing special. Their goals are different. They're only goal is a championship. That was until they got off to the best start in NBA history and all of a sudden, the record for most wins in regular season history was on the table.
Success is a moving target, in life and in sports. When someone reaches a goal, they set a new one. When circumstances change, goals change. Rarely do plans actually work out exactly as someone lays them out. For the Warriors, the goal didn't change. They just added a new one.
The NBA's regular season is long. It starts in October and ends in April. Sometime in November or December, everyone realized the Warriors had a chance at 73 regular season wins because they hadn't lost yet and the wins were starting to stack up. At that point their season became a really long family vacation. You can't wait to leave, but by the end, even if you know you'll look back fondly, it's just time to go home.
That's where the Warriors are now. They're clearly exhausted, scraping together wins against teams they literally beat by 50 earlier in the season. They've also lost twice at home, something they didn't do all year until last weekend. The goal of championship is still at the top of their list, but along the way they'd love to get to 73. They've got two more wins to go. If they don't get it, it's nearly impossible to say that the regular season hasn't been successful. They've already assured themselves one of the two winningest regular seasons in the history of the sport. Of course that's successful, even if they don't reach their goal of breaking the record.
For the Warriors, success depends on their first goal. They must win another championship. Falling short of that is a failure by anyone's standard based on what Golden State has accomplished and what they're capable of. The funny thing about success being a moving target, is it often moves back to where it started. While the focus is on the regular season record, the determination of success hasn't moved one bit for Steph Curry and co.
That concept of moving goals and moving success brings us to the other end of the NBA spectrum: the 76ers. Sam Hinkie resigned from his front office position this week as Philadelphia continued to bring in other people around him. Hinkie wrote in his resignation letter that the changing dynamic didn't leave him in a position that he felt he could make the best decisions for the team.
Hinkie's plan to rebuild the 76ers was much maligned, but it was also misunderstood. The biggest misunderstanding was his definition of success.
Winning in the NBA actually isn't that hard. Winning championships is nearly impossible. The margin between a good team like the Mavericks and a championship team like the Warriors is massive. Hinkie wanted to build a championship team.
In order to do that, he gutted the roster and maximized his means of acquiring a star player (which you need at least one of, if not two to win a title) via the draft. In the meantime, he didn't care about how his team did. He knew he needed that player.
Upon his resignation (which wasn't forced by ownership directly, although the moves they made around him were the reasons he resigned), many analysts brought up teams like Orlando and Denver to say "you don't have to be so extreme to rebuild" as the Sixers have been the last three years.
Orlando and Denver have acquired some nice pieces. None of those pieces are the championship piece that Hinkie wanted. Sure, they've got better rosters and if they can either pick a winner later in the draft, get lucky and win the lottery or acquire a superstar player via trade or free agency, the superior roster helps them be in a position to win faster. With Orlando, this is even feasible as they've been a free agent destination in the past. With Denver? They better hope for the luck option.
Meanwhile the Sixers have the highest odds ever at the number one pick and might wind up with two picks in the top 5 this season. Every plan involving a lottery and talent evaluation also involves substantial luck. Why not give yourself the maximum chances to get lucky?
That's not to say Hinkie was perfect and didn't make some mistakes. He could've potentially had better players already with better scouting. He underestimated the human side of player development in having no veteran presence in his locker room. However his long-term plan often came under attack for the wrong reasons.
People failed to understand his definition of success. He didn't want to his team to be good. He wanted them to be great. He knew that would take time. He ran out of time.
Success is a funny thing. It can be defined by a person for themselves. It can be defined by others. It can be defined by precedent and history. It can be defined by smashing precedent and making history. It can be clearly defined. It can be misunderstood. All of those things are no more easily found than in pro sports at a season's end.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
4/7 Hoffman Podcast: Sam Hinkie resigns (with Jeff Platt)
My former co-host and fellow NBA junkie Jeff Platt joins me to talk about Sam Hinkie's surprise resignation in Philadelphia. We also discuss the team Jeff currently covers, the Spurs, and their pursuit of perfection and home and ultimate mission of beating the Warriors.
For reference, Sam Hinkie's letter can be read here. His podcast with Zach Lowe is here. Lowe also did a podcast with Sixers coach Brett Brown recently that is very good. That can be found here.
For reference, Sam Hinkie's letter can be read here. His podcast with Zach Lowe is here. Lowe also did a podcast with Sixers coach Brett Brown recently that is very good. That can be found here.
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 6th
After yesterday's blurb on the national title game, the blog of varied topics returns today. It includes a note on the historic Warriors run, something I forgot to mention about that title game and we start with a trial that captured America all over again.
The People vs OJ Simpson
The series finale of The People vs OJ Simpson last night on FX wrapped up a brilliant series that deserves the critical acclaim it's getting. The 1995 trial of OJ Simpson captivated America, right down to me as a kindergartener. While most of my classmates didn't care, I distinctly remember watching the verdict in my classroom along with one of my teachers. At the time, I obviously had no clue what I was watching. A five year old can't process the crime or the context, but I remember watching and knowing it was a big deal.
Twenty-one years later, I understand as much as one can not having consciously lived through it. The show did a remarkable job retelling an incredibly complex story that took 16 months in a ten episode mini-series. What I enjoyed about the show is how it wasn't trying to tell the story of the murders, but instead how the jury arrived at the verdict and how that journey impacted in incredibly high number of people.
I had no idea what the prosecutors went through. I didn't know nearly as much about Johnny Cochran's background and mission. I certainly didn't know about the insane twists and turns Judge Ito and the jury went through during the case. It was a learning experience as much as a show for entertainment, which I consider a massive positive considering the subject matter. Two people died. That can't be forgotten or taken for granted.
After every episode, I read fact-checking articles and I was astonished to see how accurate the show was. From the sexual tension between Marcia Clark and Chris Darden to various bombs dropped in the court room, the series did a rather remarkable job of capturing the circus that the trial was at the very least in spirit, if not directly accurately.
There was really only one moment where a stray from reality bothered me and that was the glove scene. It's the most pivotal moment of the trial and the show presents Darden's request of Simpson to try on the gloves as a rogue move that shocks his boss and colleague in Clark. That's not how it happened, so I'm not sure why the writers of the show chose that moment for perhaps their furthest stretch from the truth.
All in all, the show was fantastic. It was captivating, and many who were there for the trial were stunned at how it took them back, which is perhaps the greatest compliment the show could receive. I don't want to say I enjoyed it, again because of the subject matter, but it became much watch and I'm certainly glad I learned about one of the more captivating events of the last 30 years of American history.
One More Wildcat Thing
I wrote yesterday on Monday's national championship game, and soon after hitting publish realized I had forgotten one thing I wanted to mention: Villanova's discipline in that game was as easily identifiable as I've ever seen in a basketball game.
Controlling pace is talked about a lot in basketball, especially when one team has a very distinct preference. Villanova did a masterful job of slowing the game down, not so much because they like to play that way, but because they know North Carolina doesn't.
I've never seen a team so deliberately slow the pace while still playing with urgency. Even when teams slow down, they'll still run to try and steal a basket on a live ball turnover (steal, block, etc.) or a long rebound. Villanova didn't. They walked the ball up the court every single time, but they didn't then stand there and waste clock like so many teams in college basketball do. They walked up, ran a set and got good shots. It was a way to keep the pace down, but the pressure on North Carolina. It worked to the tune of 77 points on 57% shooting. This wasn't Wisconsin playing a garbage game in the forties. This was an offensive display of master discipline and execution. Credit to the Villanova coaches for the plan and the players for executing it to perfection.
For The Record
I've admired how the Golden State Warriors have conducted themselves this season. They're not afraid to talk about pursuing the '96 Bulls record of 72 wins. After last night's loss to Minnesota, they now need to win their final four games to break that record. Surely some will say "if they'd quit talking about it and just focus on the task, maybe they wouldn't lose games at home to lottery teams," but I'm not sure how they're supposed to avoid it.
The media wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't ask about the record. It's an amazing achievement that teams don't often have a chance of touching. Refusing to answer questions about it would just stack pressure internally. Instead, the Warriors have spoken openly about wanting to break it and why wouldn't they? "We want to win a lot!" Oh the horror!
The tricky thing with a record like this and the season they've had is that it's been a question for most of the season. As we near the end of the season and the reality of achieving the feat, the fatigue has to be real. The constant scrutiny has to wear down on them, as is the reality of having played 78 NBA games where teams are gunning to be one of the few losses in the Warriors' history books.
Even though the Warriors haven't played their best ball over the last few weeks, they're still winning at a remarkable rate and still are the team to beat, despite San Antonio's nearly equally remarkable season. If anything, doubts of their demise might serve as a boost of motivation and reinvigorate them for the playoffs.
The Warriors can still win the final four games and get the record. Whether they do or not, this is still unquestionably one of the best regular seasons by a team in NBA history, and if they win a title they'll be on any short list for best team ever.
The People vs OJ Simpson
The series finale of The People vs OJ Simpson last night on FX wrapped up a brilliant series that deserves the critical acclaim it's getting. The 1995 trial of OJ Simpson captivated America, right down to me as a kindergartener. While most of my classmates didn't care, I distinctly remember watching the verdict in my classroom along with one of my teachers. At the time, I obviously had no clue what I was watching. A five year old can't process the crime or the context, but I remember watching and knowing it was a big deal.
Twenty-one years later, I understand as much as one can not having consciously lived through it. The show did a remarkable job retelling an incredibly complex story that took 16 months in a ten episode mini-series. What I enjoyed about the show is how it wasn't trying to tell the story of the murders, but instead how the jury arrived at the verdict and how that journey impacted in incredibly high number of people.
I had no idea what the prosecutors went through. I didn't know nearly as much about Johnny Cochran's background and mission. I certainly didn't know about the insane twists and turns Judge Ito and the jury went through during the case. It was a learning experience as much as a show for entertainment, which I consider a massive positive considering the subject matter. Two people died. That can't be forgotten or taken for granted.
After every episode, I read fact-checking articles and I was astonished to see how accurate the show was. From the sexual tension between Marcia Clark and Chris Darden to various bombs dropped in the court room, the series did a rather remarkable job of capturing the circus that the trial was at the very least in spirit, if not directly accurately.
There was really only one moment where a stray from reality bothered me and that was the glove scene. It's the most pivotal moment of the trial and the show presents Darden's request of Simpson to try on the gloves as a rogue move that shocks his boss and colleague in Clark. That's not how it happened, so I'm not sure why the writers of the show chose that moment for perhaps their furthest stretch from the truth.
All in all, the show was fantastic. It was captivating, and many who were there for the trial were stunned at how it took them back, which is perhaps the greatest compliment the show could receive. I don't want to say I enjoyed it, again because of the subject matter, but it became much watch and I'm certainly glad I learned about one of the more captivating events of the last 30 years of American history.
One More Wildcat Thing
I wrote yesterday on Monday's national championship game, and soon after hitting publish realized I had forgotten one thing I wanted to mention: Villanova's discipline in that game was as easily identifiable as I've ever seen in a basketball game.
Controlling pace is talked about a lot in basketball, especially when one team has a very distinct preference. Villanova did a masterful job of slowing the game down, not so much because they like to play that way, but because they know North Carolina doesn't.
I've never seen a team so deliberately slow the pace while still playing with urgency. Even when teams slow down, they'll still run to try and steal a basket on a live ball turnover (steal, block, etc.) or a long rebound. Villanova didn't. They walked the ball up the court every single time, but they didn't then stand there and waste clock like so many teams in college basketball do. They walked up, ran a set and got good shots. It was a way to keep the pace down, but the pressure on North Carolina. It worked to the tune of 77 points on 57% shooting. This wasn't Wisconsin playing a garbage game in the forties. This was an offensive display of master discipline and execution. Credit to the Villanova coaches for the plan and the players for executing it to perfection.
For The Record
I've admired how the Golden State Warriors have conducted themselves this season. They're not afraid to talk about pursuing the '96 Bulls record of 72 wins. After last night's loss to Minnesota, they now need to win their final four games to break that record. Surely some will say "if they'd quit talking about it and just focus on the task, maybe they wouldn't lose games at home to lottery teams," but I'm not sure how they're supposed to avoid it.
The media wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't ask about the record. It's an amazing achievement that teams don't often have a chance of touching. Refusing to answer questions about it would just stack pressure internally. Instead, the Warriors have spoken openly about wanting to break it and why wouldn't they? "We want to win a lot!" Oh the horror!
The tricky thing with a record like this and the season they've had is that it's been a question for most of the season. As we near the end of the season and the reality of achieving the feat, the fatigue has to be real. The constant scrutiny has to wear down on them, as is the reality of having played 78 NBA games where teams are gunning to be one of the few losses in the Warriors' history books.
Even though the Warriors haven't played their best ball over the last few weeks, they're still winning at a remarkable rate and still are the team to beat, despite San Antonio's nearly equally remarkable season. If anything, doubts of their demise might serve as a boost of motivation and reinvigorate them for the playoffs.
The Warriors can still win the final four games and get the record. Whether they do or not, this is still unquestionably one of the best regular seasons by a team in NBA history, and if they win a title they'll be on any short list for best team ever.
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
What A Game
The 2016 Men's Basketball Championship was one of the best sporting events I've ever seen. A great sporting event factors in a multitude of things. It simply can't be a great game. A great game can happen in my Thursday night pick-up game on a too-small court at an elementary school played mostly by men who can't jump over a phone book.
A great sporting event requires the stakes to be high, and they don't get higher in college basketball than they were Monday night in Houston. It requires greater context, in this case two groups of seniors who had largely felt heartbreak in March, trying to finish off their careers with two victories in April.
It requires high level play, which knocks out my Thursday night pickup game. This game had that. While the officiating wasn't great (it rarely is in college basketball), the game was undoubtedly decided by the players. The high-level shot making started early and didn't end, quite literally, until the buzzer sounded.
Which brings us to the final criterion for a great sporting event: the end. The end of this game started before the end. UNC guard Marcus Paige, one of those seniors, somehow turned this into a made three point basket to tie the game.
It's a moment that will live forever. We are lucky as college basketball fans to have moments in this neighborhood with an astounding level of regularity. Gordon Hayward's shot that missed in 2011, Mario Chalmers shot that didn't in 2008 and Hakim Warrick's block in 2003 are just some of the amazing moments in close games that helped decide a championship. However the true buzzer beater is rare. Hayward's would've been, but it went begging by fractions of an inch.
The last time it happened was 1983, when Lorenzo Charles put back Dereck Whittenburg's 30-foot miss at the buzzer to cap NC State's underdog run to Jim Valvano's only title. Forgetting the added context of the improbability NC State was even in that game and what we know about Valvano's life after, I'll put this shot above that one. Whittenburg missed and Charles was in the right place. This play also involved two people, but in a totally different way.
As kids, we all dream of hitting the game-winning shot to win a championship. Ryan Arcidiacono's dream undoubtedly had him in a Villanova jersey. The Wildcats senior is the son of two Nova grads and grew up living and dying with the squad he would eventually play for. The ball was in his hands as the clock wound down. While he wouldn't have had a great look, he could've taken the shot and lived with the result. If he made it, he's a hero. If he doesn't, the game goes to overtime.
He did neither. He passed. Kris Jenkins deserves credit too for more than hitting the shot. It would've been easy to trot down the floor and watch Arcidiacono take a shot at greatness. Instead, he trailed the play, ready to shoot and when he saw his teammate doubled, made sure to call for the ball. That still doesn't mean Arcidiacono had to pass it. If he had forced a shot, no one today would have said "he should've passed to Jenkins," but he did. Jenkins was able to step into the shot and he nailed it. He's a legend. Forever, he'll be the guy who hit the shot to win the title. Arcidiacono made that so, and he deserves immense credit for it.
That said, let's not pretend Arcidiacono isn't a legend in his own right. It seems like he's been at Villanova since their last title in 1985. Of course he wasn't born then, but he's now cemented his place along side Ed Pinckney in Villanova lore. He was the best player on a championship team, the unquestioned leader and his play last night was exemplary. He had a confidence about him usually reserved for Steph Curry. It seemed he knew what was going to happen and played with no doubt. That was a lot of fun to watch, unless you were wearing Carolina blue.
This game had everything. It had legendary performances. It had legendary moments. It had a legendary ending. What more could you ask for? Unless you had a rooting interesting in an alternate ending, the answer is simply nothing.
A great sporting event requires the stakes to be high, and they don't get higher in college basketball than they were Monday night in Houston. It requires greater context, in this case two groups of seniors who had largely felt heartbreak in March, trying to finish off their careers with two victories in April.
It requires high level play, which knocks out my Thursday night pickup game. This game had that. While the officiating wasn't great (it rarely is in college basketball), the game was undoubtedly decided by the players. The high-level shot making started early and didn't end, quite literally, until the buzzer sounded.
Which brings us to the final criterion for a great sporting event: the end. The end of this game started before the end. UNC guard Marcus Paige, one of those seniors, somehow turned this into a made three point basket to tie the game.
My favorite part of this brilliant image by Lance King of Getty is Villanova's Mikal Bridges (#25) looking like "psh, okay" as Brice Johnson (#11, UNC) behind him has the look of "oh dear, okay Marcus?" as Paige uncoils and fires the ball towards the rim. He made this shot!!
Paige, who had a miserable year shooting the ball, seemed to make up for it all at once in the tournament. He hit multiple threes in every game of the tournament, including four Monday night. However instead of being able to look back and celebrate one of the most remarkable shots in NCAA Tournament history, Paige is haunted by the 4.7 seconds that followed.
It's a moment that will live forever. We are lucky as college basketball fans to have moments in this neighborhood with an astounding level of regularity. Gordon Hayward's shot that missed in 2011, Mario Chalmers shot that didn't in 2008 and Hakim Warrick's block in 2003 are just some of the amazing moments in close games that helped decide a championship. However the true buzzer beater is rare. Hayward's would've been, but it went begging by fractions of an inch.
The last time it happened was 1983, when Lorenzo Charles put back Dereck Whittenburg's 30-foot miss at the buzzer to cap NC State's underdog run to Jim Valvano's only title. Forgetting the added context of the improbability NC State was even in that game and what we know about Valvano's life after, I'll put this shot above that one. Whittenburg missed and Charles was in the right place. This play also involved two people, but in a totally different way.
As kids, we all dream of hitting the game-winning shot to win a championship. Ryan Arcidiacono's dream undoubtedly had him in a Villanova jersey. The Wildcats senior is the son of two Nova grads and grew up living and dying with the squad he would eventually play for. The ball was in his hands as the clock wound down. While he wouldn't have had a great look, he could've taken the shot and lived with the result. If he made it, he's a hero. If he doesn't, the game goes to overtime.
He did neither. He passed. Kris Jenkins deserves credit too for more than hitting the shot. It would've been easy to trot down the floor and watch Arcidiacono take a shot at greatness. Instead, he trailed the play, ready to shoot and when he saw his teammate doubled, made sure to call for the ball. That still doesn't mean Arcidiacono had to pass it. If he had forced a shot, no one today would have said "he should've passed to Jenkins," but he did. Jenkins was able to step into the shot and he nailed it. He's a legend. Forever, he'll be the guy who hit the shot to win the title. Arcidiacono made that so, and he deserves immense credit for it.
That said, let's not pretend Arcidiacono isn't a legend in his own right. It seems like he's been at Villanova since their last title in 1985. Of course he wasn't born then, but he's now cemented his place along side Ed Pinckney in Villanova lore. He was the best player on a championship team, the unquestioned leader and his play last night was exemplary. He had a confidence about him usually reserved for Steph Curry. It seemed he knew what was going to happen and played with no doubt. That was a lot of fun to watch, unless you were wearing Carolina blue.
This game had everything. It had legendary performances. It had legendary moments. It had a legendary ending. What more could you ask for? Unless you had a rooting interesting in an alternate ending, the answer is simply nothing.
Monday, April 4, 2016
Random Rumblings: April 4th
I had breakfast with a good friend yesterday and he asked me how I was doing. The answer, as has been typical as of late, is "the job hunt's going slowly, but I'm really good." Those are both true. The job hunt in a super competitive industry that hasn't had a lot of movement is going slowly, but despite that I'm largely enjoying life and making the most of the free time.
As the conversation continued and he asked what I've been doing, I told him about what I've done to stay busy, including writing and podcasting. I followed that up with my usual "I really should be doing that more." My friend, who is also in the business, agreed. So I am. Starting today, there will be a post here of some type five days per week. Sometimes it'll be a short blurb. Sometimes it'll be a podcast. Sometimes it'll be a longer piece.
Unless there is one topic that deserves its own, stand-alone column, I'm going to return to the form I used when I was job-less in 2013. I'm going to just "empty the notebook." Whatever topics are on my mind, I'll comment on. Some will be the ones everyone is talking about. Some will be a little more off the beaten path. Off we go, with today's topics being on the hardwood.
The Cuse is No Longer Loose
Syracuse's miracle run through the NCAA tournament ended Saturday night when they were soundly beaten by an unquestionably better North Carolina squad. UNC is the perfect tournament team. They've got an incredible mix of talent and experience with seniors Marcus Paige and Brice Johnson leading the way. They're both incredibly talented, know how to play and are tremendous competitors.
Syracuse isn't quite there yet. They have some talent, but the best of it is young outside of senior Michael Gbinije, who carried the Orange offensively through much of the year. Malachi Richardson and Tyler Lydon weren't quite ready for the moment as freshmen. Trevor Cooney actually played one of his best games in a Syracuse uniform in the season finale, but never quite lived up to what many thought he was capable of offensively in his time at SU. The talent was too young. The experience wasn't quite at the level of UNC's talent.
That said, this run was so enjoyable because of just that. It was an imperfect team who was completely maxing out what they were capable of. While the average fan may not understand the x's and o's of execution, everyone can appreciate effort. Even the most clueless of sports observers can go "that guy is playing really hard." While yes, Cooney didn't pan out as an offensive force like many of us thought he might, he played extraordinarily hard every minute and clearly put in a lot of work based on his growth over five years on campus into a well-rounded player. The same can be said for DaJuan Coleman. The five-star prospect arrived on campus as a hometown hero from nearby Jamesville-Dewitt, but has fought injury and never been the impact player he was slated to be. He's still busted his ass to become the best he can be, and hopefully with a fifth year next year after finishing this season healthy, can be a big time producer.
Jim Boeheim says Gbinije grew more as a player in his time than any player he's ever coached. Watching that growth has been a joy as a fan. I think he's got potential, because of his size, to be a pro. He's shown he can improve and will have to extend his range to the NBA three, but he's worth a second round pick in June.
Malachi Richardson's NBA path is a different story. He's not ready yet, but likely will be after next year. He was wildly inconsistent all year and that includes his signature game of the NCAA Tournament. He started 0-7 against Virginia before erupting in the second half to lead SU to the Final Four. Richardson should follow the Dion Waiters model and wait one more year. He'll be the featured option next season and should average between 15-20 ppg. With Syracuse poised to be a very good team again next year, Richardson could wind up in the lottery.
It won't surprise me if he tests the draft waters. The NCAA changed their rules in January to allow prospects to attend the NBA combine, feel out where they'll be drafted and still return to school so long that they don't hire an agent. Richardson could, and probably should, go but he'll find he's at best a borderline first round pick. One more year should do the trick.
Is UConn's good, good?
Boston columnist Dan Shaughnessy has spouted many questionable opinions over the years, and his most recent is being called that and worse by many. Shaughnessy said that the UConn women's continued dominance is bad for women's basketball. While his initial method, a tweet that seemed to wreak of sexism, wasn't a great look, his column after expounded and brought up legitimate questions that are worth exploring.
I think the answer to the question, "Is UConn's dominance good for women's basketball?" is "yes and no." In the short-term, Shaughnessy is right for a lot of fans. As he says, competition is the essence of sports and UConn has no current competition. After beating Oregon State on Sunday night, they've won 121 of 122 games, all of them by double figures. They're the three-time defending champions and only mighty Syracuse (go Orange!) stands in their way of number four. I love Coach Q and company, but my school will be finishing in second place.
Because of that dominance, there are fans who won't watch. However there are also fans that will. I enjoy greatness immensely and watching UConn pick a part an opponent is actually enjoyable. They play basketball at an extraordinarily high level. At that point you're not watching for the competition. You're watching for the excellence.
So while the short-term concerns Shaughnessy has are at least worth considering, there's no question this is good for the game long-term. There's a generation of girls watching this team, striving to be like Breanna Stewart and Moriah Jefferson. The level of skill and creativity is on the rise in the women's game and a lot of this can be credited back to what Geno Auriemma and UConn have done. Auriemma runs NBA sets with his players and let's those players, like Stewart, Dianna Taurasi and Maya Moore showcase their skills. That will lead to more talent in the women's game and the sport will be better for it.
The bar UConn is setting will raise the sport as a whole. It already has in many ways. While UConn sits alone at the top, the other three teams in the Final Four were there for the first time. That's a great sign of the growing talent, and as more elite talent becomes available, the gap on UConn will close. Frankly, it'll close next year anyway when Stewart (who is in the discussion for best player UConn's ever had, which means she's one of the best ever anywhere) and Jefferson graduate.
Shaughnessy's initial tweet may have been very hot-takey, but his concerns were at least worth asking a few questions. Hopefully that helps answer them.
Coming Up Tomorrow
If there's a logical thing that I know I'll be writing about tomorrow, I'll preview it at the end of the blog. I'm headed to Opening Day in Baltimore, which should be a blast. Unless it rains. Baseball does pomp and circumstance better than any other sport, so I'm looking forward to the festivities.
Of course the national championship game will also be discussed. Villanova is playing outstanding basketball, but I'm taking North Carolina. That and more tomorrow!
As the conversation continued and he asked what I've been doing, I told him about what I've done to stay busy, including writing and podcasting. I followed that up with my usual "I really should be doing that more." My friend, who is also in the business, agreed. So I am. Starting today, there will be a post here of some type five days per week. Sometimes it'll be a short blurb. Sometimes it'll be a podcast. Sometimes it'll be a longer piece.
Unless there is one topic that deserves its own, stand-alone column, I'm going to return to the form I used when I was job-less in 2013. I'm going to just "empty the notebook." Whatever topics are on my mind, I'll comment on. Some will be the ones everyone is talking about. Some will be a little more off the beaten path. Off we go, with today's topics being on the hardwood.
The Cuse is No Longer Loose
Syracuse's miracle run through the NCAA tournament ended Saturday night when they were soundly beaten by an unquestionably better North Carolina squad. UNC is the perfect tournament team. They've got an incredible mix of talent and experience with seniors Marcus Paige and Brice Johnson leading the way. They're both incredibly talented, know how to play and are tremendous competitors.
Syracuse isn't quite there yet. They have some talent, but the best of it is young outside of senior Michael Gbinije, who carried the Orange offensively through much of the year. Malachi Richardson and Tyler Lydon weren't quite ready for the moment as freshmen. Trevor Cooney actually played one of his best games in a Syracuse uniform in the season finale, but never quite lived up to what many thought he was capable of offensively in his time at SU. The talent was too young. The experience wasn't quite at the level of UNC's talent.
That said, this run was so enjoyable because of just that. It was an imperfect team who was completely maxing out what they were capable of. While the average fan may not understand the x's and o's of execution, everyone can appreciate effort. Even the most clueless of sports observers can go "that guy is playing really hard." While yes, Cooney didn't pan out as an offensive force like many of us thought he might, he played extraordinarily hard every minute and clearly put in a lot of work based on his growth over five years on campus into a well-rounded player. The same can be said for DaJuan Coleman. The five-star prospect arrived on campus as a hometown hero from nearby Jamesville-Dewitt, but has fought injury and never been the impact player he was slated to be. He's still busted his ass to become the best he can be, and hopefully with a fifth year next year after finishing this season healthy, can be a big time producer.
Jim Boeheim says Gbinije grew more as a player in his time than any player he's ever coached. Watching that growth has been a joy as a fan. I think he's got potential, because of his size, to be a pro. He's shown he can improve and will have to extend his range to the NBA three, but he's worth a second round pick in June.
Malachi Richardson's NBA path is a different story. He's not ready yet, but likely will be after next year. He was wildly inconsistent all year and that includes his signature game of the NCAA Tournament. He started 0-7 against Virginia before erupting in the second half to lead SU to the Final Four. Richardson should follow the Dion Waiters model and wait one more year. He'll be the featured option next season and should average between 15-20 ppg. With Syracuse poised to be a very good team again next year, Richardson could wind up in the lottery.
It won't surprise me if he tests the draft waters. The NCAA changed their rules in January to allow prospects to attend the NBA combine, feel out where they'll be drafted and still return to school so long that they don't hire an agent. Richardson could, and probably should, go but he'll find he's at best a borderline first round pick. One more year should do the trick.
Is UConn's good, good?
Boston columnist Dan Shaughnessy has spouted many questionable opinions over the years, and his most recent is being called that and worse by many. Shaughnessy said that the UConn women's continued dominance is bad for women's basketball. While his initial method, a tweet that seemed to wreak of sexism, wasn't a great look, his column after expounded and brought up legitimate questions that are worth exploring.
I think the answer to the question, "Is UConn's dominance good for women's basketball?" is "yes and no." In the short-term, Shaughnessy is right for a lot of fans. As he says, competition is the essence of sports and UConn has no current competition. After beating Oregon State on Sunday night, they've won 121 of 122 games, all of them by double figures. They're the three-time defending champions and only mighty Syracuse (go Orange!) stands in their way of number four. I love Coach Q and company, but my school will be finishing in second place.
Because of that dominance, there are fans who won't watch. However there are also fans that will. I enjoy greatness immensely and watching UConn pick a part an opponent is actually enjoyable. They play basketball at an extraordinarily high level. At that point you're not watching for the competition. You're watching for the excellence.
So while the short-term concerns Shaughnessy has are at least worth considering, there's no question this is good for the game long-term. There's a generation of girls watching this team, striving to be like Breanna Stewart and Moriah Jefferson. The level of skill and creativity is on the rise in the women's game and a lot of this can be credited back to what Geno Auriemma and UConn have done. Auriemma runs NBA sets with his players and let's those players, like Stewart, Dianna Taurasi and Maya Moore showcase their skills. That will lead to more talent in the women's game and the sport will be better for it.
The bar UConn is setting will raise the sport as a whole. It already has in many ways. While UConn sits alone at the top, the other three teams in the Final Four were there for the first time. That's a great sign of the growing talent, and as more elite talent becomes available, the gap on UConn will close. Frankly, it'll close next year anyway when Stewart (who is in the discussion for best player UConn's ever had, which means she's one of the best ever anywhere) and Jefferson graduate.
Shaughnessy's initial tweet may have been very hot-takey, but his concerns were at least worth asking a few questions. Hopefully that helps answer them.
Coming Up Tomorrow
If there's a logical thing that I know I'll be writing about tomorrow, I'll preview it at the end of the blog. I'm headed to Opening Day in Baltimore, which should be a blast. Unless it rains. Baseball does pomp and circumstance better than any other sport, so I'm looking forward to the festivities.
Of course the national championship game will also be discussed. Villanova is playing outstanding basketball, but I'm taking North Carolina. That and more tomorrow!
Friday, March 18, 2016
The Battle of the Alma Maters
I left Riverside High School in 2008 bound for Middle Tennessee State University and a career in music production. That lasted about six weeks before I changed my major. Two years later I was a broadcast journalism major leaving Murfreesboro for Syracuse. The details of that aren't particularly relevant at the moment, but it was the best decision I ever made. Being an SU alum has opened more doors than I could ever imagine, but my time at MTSU was just as important, and basketball was an enormous reason why.
Syracuse is as big time as a program can get, which means that it's a little harder to get on the inside. Being a student reporter makes it near impossible. Jim Boeheim has a historical disdain for them and routinely humiliates them in press conferences seemingly for sport. Again, that's a different column for a different day, but I was never more than an educated observer as a member of the media at SU.
That was far from the case at MTSU.
While many of you reading know me as a football guy from my job at ESPN980, basketball is my first love. It's my passion. I love to watch. I love to play. I love everything about it.
That love was cultivated in many ways at Middle. I was incredibly lucky to have two coaches that not only were accessible, but let me into the inner sanctums of their programs. They trusted me. They allowed me to learn.
Rick Insell was an extraordinarily accomplished high school coach before taking over the MTSU women's program. Kermit Davis was one of college basketball's rising stars before he was hit with major violations at Texas A&M and had to rebuild his career, starting in junior college. He made his way back to the D1 ranks and took over MTSU in 2002.
While I watched from press row for much of my freshman year, I started early my sophomore year as both Insell and Davis allowed me to watch practices long before the season started and kept their doors open for the entire year.
It was inside the Murphy Center, where both teams held practice, that I learned more about the game of basketball than at any other point of my life. I learned how much goes into game preparation. I learned the detail with which a team had to execute to be successful. I learned how a coach instills an attitude in a team and a program.
While Coach Insell and the woman's program had more success when I was there, I learned much of that from Coach Davis. The intensity and tempo of their practices showed me what it took to win on the Division 1 level. I knew that if he was given the time, he would be able to build a team that could consistently compete, in large part because of how much Davis taught them to compete.
Not only is Kermit a great coach with an incredible depth of knowledge, but he was also incredibly open and approachable. He, and his staff, would happily answer questions I had about their team and about the game.
Simply put, my career would've played out differently if I didn't spend that time at MTSU, not only from a media standpoint where I was able to get invaluable reps in a less competitive student media program, but from a basketball standpoint where I learned more than I could bargain for.
I took that knowledge with me and was known as a basketball guy until I arrived in DC. I still am. I just have a football education now too.
A lot has changed since I left both schools. None of the players are still at either school, unless you count Trevor Cooney who redshirted during my senior year at SU. Both teams are in different conferences as well. However the coaches are still the same and Sunday they'll play each other for a spot in the Sweet 16.
I've always felt more loyalty to Syracuse because I'm so personally attached to the university. I feel no such attachment to MTSU, and in many ways felt spurned by some of the academic types and administration there. However when it comes to the basketball programs, I certainly could justify rooting for either side.
I have a feeling I'll find myself rooting for the Orange, but if Kermit and company pull out another one, I'll certainly be proud of them. Just like I am now, despite them blowing my bracket to smithereens.
Syracuse is as big time as a program can get, which means that it's a little harder to get on the inside. Being a student reporter makes it near impossible. Jim Boeheim has a historical disdain for them and routinely humiliates them in press conferences seemingly for sport. Again, that's a different column for a different day, but I was never more than an educated observer as a member of the media at SU.
That was far from the case at MTSU.
While many of you reading know me as a football guy from my job at ESPN980, basketball is my first love. It's my passion. I love to watch. I love to play. I love everything about it.
That love was cultivated in many ways at Middle. I was incredibly lucky to have two coaches that not only were accessible, but let me into the inner sanctums of their programs. They trusted me. They allowed me to learn.
Rick Insell was an extraordinarily accomplished high school coach before taking over the MTSU women's program. Kermit Davis was one of college basketball's rising stars before he was hit with major violations at Texas A&M and had to rebuild his career, starting in junior college. He made his way back to the D1 ranks and took over MTSU in 2002.
While I watched from press row for much of my freshman year, I started early my sophomore year as both Insell and Davis allowed me to watch practices long before the season started and kept their doors open for the entire year.
It was inside the Murphy Center, where both teams held practice, that I learned more about the game of basketball than at any other point of my life. I learned how much goes into game preparation. I learned the detail with which a team had to execute to be successful. I learned how a coach instills an attitude in a team and a program.
While Coach Insell and the woman's program had more success when I was there, I learned much of that from Coach Davis. The intensity and tempo of their practices showed me what it took to win on the Division 1 level. I knew that if he was given the time, he would be able to build a team that could consistently compete, in large part because of how much Davis taught them to compete.
Not only is Kermit a great coach with an incredible depth of knowledge, but he was also incredibly open and approachable. He, and his staff, would happily answer questions I had about their team and about the game.
Simply put, my career would've played out differently if I didn't spend that time at MTSU, not only from a media standpoint where I was able to get invaluable reps in a less competitive student media program, but from a basketball standpoint where I learned more than I could bargain for.
I took that knowledge with me and was known as a basketball guy until I arrived in DC. I still am. I just have a football education now too.
A lot has changed since I left both schools. None of the players are still at either school, unless you count Trevor Cooney who redshirted during my senior year at SU. Both teams are in different conferences as well. However the coaches are still the same and Sunday they'll play each other for a spot in the Sweet 16.
I've always felt more loyalty to Syracuse because I'm so personally attached to the university. I feel no such attachment to MTSU, and in many ways felt spurned by some of the academic types and administration there. However when it comes to the basketball programs, I certainly could justify rooting for either side.
I have a feeling I'll find myself rooting for the Orange, but if Kermit and company pull out another one, I'll certainly be proud of them. Just like I am now, despite them blowing my bracket to smithereens.
Monday, March 7, 2016
Thanks For The Stability
When Scot McCloughan took over as general manager of the Washington Redskins, he was charged with changing the culture of the franchise. The culture when he arrived screamed circus. Just a year later, players being told they're not welcome back are taking to social media to say that the Redskins are a first class organization.
So why just a year later is the need for those players gone? In fact, it's probably fair to ask if it's gone.
No player embodied this more than DaShon Goldson. He was a solid player, but an amazing leader. Skins assistant Aubrey Pleasant described Goldson's leadership style to me as "leadership by democracy." The veteran safety made sure every player felt invested in the team's success. That helped lead to accountability because everyone felt responsible for themselves and others.
Knighton was the same kind of player. His production wasn't what the Redskins were looking for, and his role diminished as the season went on. Through that time though, he was a consistent voice in the locker room who had gravitas. He'd played in a Super Bowl. He'd been on winning teams.
For so many young teams in any sport, learning how to win is a process, and it requires people who know how to teach the younger generation. Despite veterans like Jason Hatcher, Knighton and Goldson, the Redskins are a very young roster, but they have emerging talent. Bashaud Breeland proved he could become a Pro Bowler, but also showed previously unseen leadership qualities. Will Compton emerged as a solid middle linebacker, along with Mason Foster. Homegrown talents Ryan Kerrigan and Trent Williams continue to play at high levels and grow as leaders.
With all the younger leaders emerging, McCloughan and the coaching staff clearly have determined that they don't need the guidance of the older players anymore, or at least as much of it. They learned, in one short year, what it takes to win in the NFL. Combine that with the expensive price tags and underwhelming performance and the team decided to move on not only from imports like Goldson and Knighton, but in-house good guys such as Darrel Young and Alfred Morris.
Put a different, and perhaps cruel, way - these guys are getting let go because they did their jobs. The franchise is now stable. A year ago, Jay Gruden was the Vegas favorite to be the first coach fired in the '15-16 season. Robert Griffin III was the starting quarterback, but inside the organization, no one felt good about it. The locker room was fractured after a miserable season.
Bringing in players from the outside helped stabilize everything, because they weren't a part of the previous chaos. The professional sports world moves fast. It doesn't look back. So as the new players came in, they got to work. The younger players followed. Griffin was replaced with Kirk Cousins. The chaos subsided. Cousins played well. The team won. It all works in concert. The result is the franchise is in an extraordinarily different place now than a year ago.
McCloughan can afford to let these players walk because he doesn't need them to stabilize anything. Now he can move on to the next phase of the rebuild, which is finding players who can play at a value he sees fit.
How did this happen? That part is easy. McCloughan brought in a number of veteran players to help establish a culture of accountability. Those veterans set the tone every day of workouts, training camp and the season to lead the Redskins to the playoffs.World class organization! Scott McCloughan called me and i have nothing but respect. Didn't have to call me. Nothin but respect!— Terrance Knighton (@MisterRoast98) March 7, 2016
So why just a year later is the need for those players gone? In fact, it's probably fair to ask if it's gone.
No player embodied this more than DaShon Goldson. He was a solid player, but an amazing leader. Skins assistant Aubrey Pleasant described Goldson's leadership style to me as "leadership by democracy." The veteran safety made sure every player felt invested in the team's success. That helped lead to accountability because everyone felt responsible for themselves and others.
Knighton was the same kind of player. His production wasn't what the Redskins were looking for, and his role diminished as the season went on. Through that time though, he was a consistent voice in the locker room who had gravitas. He'd played in a Super Bowl. He'd been on winning teams.
For so many young teams in any sport, learning how to win is a process, and it requires people who know how to teach the younger generation. Despite veterans like Jason Hatcher, Knighton and Goldson, the Redskins are a very young roster, but they have emerging talent. Bashaud Breeland proved he could become a Pro Bowler, but also showed previously unseen leadership qualities. Will Compton emerged as a solid middle linebacker, along with Mason Foster. Homegrown talents Ryan Kerrigan and Trent Williams continue to play at high levels and grow as leaders.
With all the younger leaders emerging, McCloughan and the coaching staff clearly have determined that they don't need the guidance of the older players anymore, or at least as much of it. They learned, in one short year, what it takes to win in the NFL. Combine that with the expensive price tags and underwhelming performance and the team decided to move on not only from imports like Goldson and Knighton, but in-house good guys such as Darrel Young and Alfred Morris.
Put a different, and perhaps cruel, way - these guys are getting let go because they did their jobs. The franchise is now stable. A year ago, Jay Gruden was the Vegas favorite to be the first coach fired in the '15-16 season. Robert Griffin III was the starting quarterback, but inside the organization, no one felt good about it. The locker room was fractured after a miserable season.
Bringing in players from the outside helped stabilize everything, because they weren't a part of the previous chaos. The professional sports world moves fast. It doesn't look back. So as the new players came in, they got to work. The younger players followed. Griffin was replaced with Kirk Cousins. The chaos subsided. Cousins played well. The team won. It all works in concert. The result is the franchise is in an extraordinarily different place now than a year ago.
McCloughan can afford to let these players walk because he doesn't need them to stabilize anything. Now he can move on to the next phase of the rebuild, which is finding players who can play at a value he sees fit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)