Just when I thought Mike Shanahan couldn't get any dumber, he goes and does something like this.
And totally redeems himself!
Mad props to the Broncos' head man for fleecing the Cleveland Browns out of big-name defensive lineman Ebenezer Ekuban. Sure, last year was his first even close to productive campaign, but he’s only been in the league for a half-dozen seasons. Sometimes it just takes longer for it to click for some guys. No doubt he'll work out from now on.
Not only that, we picked up defensive tackle Michael Myers, who will provide depth. I know saying a guy will provide depth makes it sound like he's just training camp meat, but sometimes Coach Shanahan sees things in players before anyone else does, and I’m confident this is one of those times.
All we had to give up was tailback/fullback/kick returner Reuben Droughns. Sure, he might be the best player on the roster at all three of those positions, but we all know the Broncos can just plug anyone in their system and he’ll pick up 1,000 yards. And who cares about role-playing positions-who are we, the Patriots?
In fact, the next superstar runner is probably already on the roster. Can we forget Quentin Griffin and Tatum Bell? Yes, they have worse hands than Saudi Arabian thieves, but if they falter, don’t forget about former Offensive Rookie of the Year Mike Anderson. It seems like he’s been around forever, but he’ll be just 31 when next season starts.
Ekuban and Myers join former teammates Gerard Warren and Courtney Brown on Denver’s reloaded defensive front. I know what you're asking yourself right now: if these guys are so good, why were the Browns so bad last year?
You have to dig a little deeper. Despite Cleveland’s 4-12 record last year, the Browns defense and D-line in particular actually put together a fantastic season. The team held opponents to just 144.6 rushing yards per game.
And these guys will pressure the quarterback more than recent busts like Reggie Hayward and Trevor Pryce-again, despite their sorry record, the Browns finished with more sacks than the Raiders, 49ers, Texans, and Chargers. And the Chargers went to the playoffs.
Apparently new Cleveland head man Romeo Crennel knows nothing about defense, so we might as well take advantage of it and get his best players while we still can.
Once we finally get the dead weight of Pryce off the roster, the transformation to a championship-caliber defense will be complete and the Broncos will be Super Bowl-bound.
All hail the Mastermind!
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Don't You Hate Canada? (Or, How George Karl Saved the Nuggets)
Hopefully nobody remembers this, but a couple of weeks ago I wrote some predictions for the NCAA tourney.
On the plus side, I correctly called that North Carolina, Illinois, Michigan State and Louisville would all make the Final Four.
On the down side, that’s all a lie, except for North Carolina, and I think even a Canadian could’ve picked that one. I actually predicted Syracuse (which had a thrilling run all the way to the Somewhat Sixty-Four), Wake Forest (totally lost by the end of its Thanks-for-Coming Thirty-Two defeat), and Arizona to come out of their regionals.
Arizona deserves its own paragraph for the way they handled the end of that Illinois game. Wow. I don’t think anyone on that team had ever seen a full-court press before. You’d think head coach Bill Walsh would’ve run that one by ’em in practice a few times. The only Wildcat with any poise was Hassan Adams, who doesn’t let little things like the clock or scoreboard get to him. What mental toughness!
I filled out a bracket based on these, uh, “educated” guesses, entered it in ESPN.com’s Tourney Challenge, and currently reside safely in 1,671,698th place (I wish that was a joke).
Like Mark McGwire, I’m not here to talk about the past, but the point is, I’m not right all the time.
Yet I can’t remember being more wrong about a sports move than I’ve been about the Nuggets’ hiring of George Karl.
A year ago I was sitting in the newsroom of The World’s Greatest Newspaper when the topic of Jeff Bzdelik’s then-future but clearly inevitable firing came up. I asked one of the editors who exactly we’d get that would be better for the team, and he suggested Karl’s name.
I made a face. George Karl? Are you serious?
Hey, that’s just what they’re saying, he told me.
I always agreed with Charley Rosen, now with FOXSports.com, who calls Karl an “I won but they lost” type of coach who makes scapegoats out of his players. And he’s definitely butted heads with stars in the past.
Fortunately, I haven’t seen any of that in Denver (except when he publicly challenged Carmelo to play a little defense. All I can say to that is: Hallelujah!).
Instead, it’s been Karl’s willingness to set high standards that has saved the Nuggets’ playoff hopes.
An early-season skid finally gave Kiki Vandeweghe the excuse he craved to fire Bzdelik. So the Nuggets hired their resident coach-in-waiting, assistant Michael Cooper, who did nothing for the won-loss record but immediately improved our post-game interviews with his rambling stream-of-consciousness answers and a jawline straight out of Wallace & Gromit.
Vandeweghe finally got to hire the man he wanted (even if it was a year later than he wanted), and Karl has definitely turned things around. Even after last night’s loss to the Suns, the Nugs have won 14 of 16 since the All-Star break (with both losses coming against Phoenix).
How have the Nuggets done it?
Running: Just like the Broncos talk up their overpriced defensive acquisitions each year (and anything more than $5.50 an hour qualifies guys like Gerard Warren and Courtney Brown as overpaid), so the Nuggets annually talk a big game about pushing the pace at altitude.
But with the pickup of Karl, the Nuggets are actually doing it. The boys in baby blue have averaged 110.7 points in the eleven home games since the break. Credit Karl and assistant Doug Moe, who have finally brought movement back to Denver’s attack.
Defense: Just as notable has been the improvement in the Nuggets’ defensive energy. Part of that’s been the coaching staff’s emphasis on defense, but it’s also been the players-or, rather, who’s playing, as Karl has been giving big minutes to defensive-minded role players like DerMarr Johnson, Greg Buckner, and Eduardo Najera.
To be honest, Najera annoys the crap out of me. I really hate watching him play-he’s got to be in the starting five of players I can’t stand. While we’re on it, I think that lineup would look something like this:
Eduardo Najera, Denver-His game is completely devoid of anything resembling grace or skill, and his ability to draw cheap charges is umatched. And there’s nothing worse in basketball than a cheap charge, when a no-talent hack can jump in front of a real baller and somehow draw a foul.
Raja Bell, Utah-Bell’s long been one of those obnoxious guys who hustles just a little too much, but he really pushed it into overdrive last year, when he a) joined the Jazz (and Jazz fans are about as bad as Yankees fans) and b) called out Carmelo Anthony for thinking he (Melo) deserved to make the All-Star team over Andrei Kirilenko. Bell delivered a delightful mini-sermon to the press praising Kirilenko’s all-around game as more valuable than Melo’s one-dimensional scoring contribution. Of course, that’s still one more dimension than Bell brings to the table. And that’s not even mentioning that he’s named after the lion from Aladdin.
Kobe Bryant, Lakers-No explanation necessary.
Jason Kidd, New Jersey-When he’s not getting his coaches fired, Kidd pulls the same jump-in-front-of-people routine that Najera does. He just grates on me. I’d rather watch The Ring 2 again than this guy. (By the way, if you haven’t seen it, please don’t.)
Sam Cassell, Minnesota-There’s nothing better than hearing Charles Barkley compare him to Gollum from Lord of the Rings. Cassell’s so cocky out on the floor, you’d think he made a career out of something other than riding the coattails of players like Kevin Garnett and Hakeem Olajuwon. And yes, Sam, I get it, you disagree with the refs, quit beating me over the head with it.
(There’s a good chance chest-thumping Kenyon Martin would have made this list last year, though now all I got against him is the “I hate the world” glare he stole from Vince Carter and gives every time he dunks.)
Anyway, as far as Najera goes, it’s easy to get carried away and overstate the contributions of role players. But he’s chipped in with his defense and been a more productive rebounder than I thought he’d be. I’d still rather sit through a Rockies-Devil Rays tripleheader than root for the guy, though.
And finally, as cheesy as it sounds, teamwork. Karl has done a fantastic job challenging his players and getting them to focus on winning. He’s such a miracle worker, even Carmelo’s buying in.
The offense runs much smoother than it has in years, now that it has plays other than isolating Anthony and making sure no one else touches the ball. Carmelo’s minutes and shot attempts are down under the new regime (I love that coaching changes are always referred to as new regimes, as though the old guys were violating U.N. sanctions or something), but opponents can’t square in on him as much and he’s been much more efficient. In March, Anthony is averaging 20.5 points in just 29.8 minutes per game.
And the Nuggets are making this playoff run despite some obvious roster holes. Unless you think it’s 1998 and that Wesley Person or Bryon Russell is some kind of long-term solution, we still need a shooter, though Voshon Lenard ought to be back next year. (What a coincidence, his best days are behind him, too.) As it stands, Carmelo is our only real post-up threat, and squandering our precious cap room on Andre Miller and Martin probably ended any chance of fixing that anytime soon.
Yet the Nuggets keep on winning.
New coaches always get too much credit when things go right (anyone remember when Lawrence Frank was a cross between Red Auerbach and John Wooden?), and it’s ludicrous to expect the Nuggets to keep winning at quite this rate.
But George Karl has worked out so far, and he’s a definite answer for years to come.
I think.
But I’ve been wrong before.
On the plus side, I correctly called that North Carolina, Illinois, Michigan State and Louisville would all make the Final Four.
On the down side, that’s all a lie, except for North Carolina, and I think even a Canadian could’ve picked that one. I actually predicted Syracuse (which had a thrilling run all the way to the Somewhat Sixty-Four), Wake Forest (totally lost by the end of its Thanks-for-Coming Thirty-Two defeat), and Arizona to come out of their regionals.
Arizona deserves its own paragraph for the way they handled the end of that Illinois game. Wow. I don’t think anyone on that team had ever seen a full-court press before. You’d think head coach Bill Walsh would’ve run that one by ’em in practice a few times. The only Wildcat with any poise was Hassan Adams, who doesn’t let little things like the clock or scoreboard get to him. What mental toughness!
I filled out a bracket based on these, uh, “educated” guesses, entered it in ESPN.com’s Tourney Challenge, and currently reside safely in 1,671,698th place (I wish that was a joke).
Like Mark McGwire, I’m not here to talk about the past, but the point is, I’m not right all the time.
Yet I can’t remember being more wrong about a sports move than I’ve been about the Nuggets’ hiring of George Karl.
A year ago I was sitting in the newsroom of The World’s Greatest Newspaper when the topic of Jeff Bzdelik’s then-future but clearly inevitable firing came up. I asked one of the editors who exactly we’d get that would be better for the team, and he suggested Karl’s name.
I made a face. George Karl? Are you serious?
Hey, that’s just what they’re saying, he told me.
I always agreed with Charley Rosen, now with FOXSports.com, who calls Karl an “I won but they lost” type of coach who makes scapegoats out of his players. And he’s definitely butted heads with stars in the past.
Fortunately, I haven’t seen any of that in Denver (except when he publicly challenged Carmelo to play a little defense. All I can say to that is: Hallelujah!).
Instead, it’s been Karl’s willingness to set high standards that has saved the Nuggets’ playoff hopes.
An early-season skid finally gave Kiki Vandeweghe the excuse he craved to fire Bzdelik. So the Nuggets hired their resident coach-in-waiting, assistant Michael Cooper, who did nothing for the won-loss record but immediately improved our post-game interviews with his rambling stream-of-consciousness answers and a jawline straight out of Wallace & Gromit.
Vandeweghe finally got to hire the man he wanted (even if it was a year later than he wanted), and Karl has definitely turned things around. Even after last night’s loss to the Suns, the Nugs have won 14 of 16 since the All-Star break (with both losses coming against Phoenix).
How have the Nuggets done it?
Running: Just like the Broncos talk up their overpriced defensive acquisitions each year (and anything more than $5.50 an hour qualifies guys like Gerard Warren and Courtney Brown as overpaid), so the Nuggets annually talk a big game about pushing the pace at altitude.
But with the pickup of Karl, the Nuggets are actually doing it. The boys in baby blue have averaged 110.7 points in the eleven home games since the break. Credit Karl and assistant Doug Moe, who have finally brought movement back to Denver’s attack.
Defense: Just as notable has been the improvement in the Nuggets’ defensive energy. Part of that’s been the coaching staff’s emphasis on defense, but it’s also been the players-or, rather, who’s playing, as Karl has been giving big minutes to defensive-minded role players like DerMarr Johnson, Greg Buckner, and Eduardo Najera.
To be honest, Najera annoys the crap out of me. I really hate watching him play-he’s got to be in the starting five of players I can’t stand. While we’re on it, I think that lineup would look something like this:
Eduardo Najera, Denver-His game is completely devoid of anything resembling grace or skill, and his ability to draw cheap charges is umatched. And there’s nothing worse in basketball than a cheap charge, when a no-talent hack can jump in front of a real baller and somehow draw a foul.
Raja Bell, Utah-Bell’s long been one of those obnoxious guys who hustles just a little too much, but he really pushed it into overdrive last year, when he a) joined the Jazz (and Jazz fans are about as bad as Yankees fans) and b) called out Carmelo Anthony for thinking he (Melo) deserved to make the All-Star team over Andrei Kirilenko. Bell delivered a delightful mini-sermon to the press praising Kirilenko’s all-around game as more valuable than Melo’s one-dimensional scoring contribution. Of course, that’s still one more dimension than Bell brings to the table. And that’s not even mentioning that he’s named after the lion from Aladdin.
Kobe Bryant, Lakers-No explanation necessary.
Jason Kidd, New Jersey-When he’s not getting his coaches fired, Kidd pulls the same jump-in-front-of-people routine that Najera does. He just grates on me. I’d rather watch The Ring 2 again than this guy. (By the way, if you haven’t seen it, please don’t.)
Sam Cassell, Minnesota-There’s nothing better than hearing Charles Barkley compare him to Gollum from Lord of the Rings. Cassell’s so cocky out on the floor, you’d think he made a career out of something other than riding the coattails of players like Kevin Garnett and Hakeem Olajuwon. And yes, Sam, I get it, you disagree with the refs, quit beating me over the head with it.
(There’s a good chance chest-thumping Kenyon Martin would have made this list last year, though now all I got against him is the “I hate the world” glare he stole from Vince Carter and gives every time he dunks.)
Anyway, as far as Najera goes, it’s easy to get carried away and overstate the contributions of role players. But he’s chipped in with his defense and been a more productive rebounder than I thought he’d be. I’d still rather sit through a Rockies-Devil Rays tripleheader than root for the guy, though.
And finally, as cheesy as it sounds, teamwork. Karl has done a fantastic job challenging his players and getting them to focus on winning. He’s such a miracle worker, even Carmelo’s buying in.
The offense runs much smoother than it has in years, now that it has plays other than isolating Anthony and making sure no one else touches the ball. Carmelo’s minutes and shot attempts are down under the new regime (I love that coaching changes are always referred to as new regimes, as though the old guys were violating U.N. sanctions or something), but opponents can’t square in on him as much and he’s been much more efficient. In March, Anthony is averaging 20.5 points in just 29.8 minutes per game.
And the Nuggets are making this playoff run despite some obvious roster holes. Unless you think it’s 1998 and that Wesley Person or Bryon Russell is some kind of long-term solution, we still need a shooter, though Voshon Lenard ought to be back next year. (What a coincidence, his best days are behind him, too.) As it stands, Carmelo is our only real post-up threat, and squandering our precious cap room on Andre Miller and Martin probably ended any chance of fixing that anytime soon.
Yet the Nuggets keep on winning.
New coaches always get too much credit when things go right (anyone remember when Lawrence Frank was a cross between Red Auerbach and John Wooden?), and it’s ludicrous to expect the Nuggets to keep winning at quite this rate.
But George Karl has worked out so far, and he’s a definite answer for years to come.
I think.
But I’ve been wrong before.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Steve Nash for MVP?
Look, we all feel bad for Canada right now.
Without hockey, there’s a lot less to be happy about up north. Those 12-month winters just last longer when there’s no Stanley Cup up for grabs. It’s not all doom and gloom, of course-Canadians supposedly have some ridiculous prescription drug hook-up, which has got to be great news for the 75-and-over crowd, and some citizens can avoid polar bear maulings for days at a time.
But no hockey leaves a huge sporting void.
I mean, imagine if our national pastime went away for a year. Oh, wait, that’s right, nobody would care. Aside from which I don’t think Congress would let it happen. But if the NFL, our real national sport, cancelled the season, it would take the meaning out of the lives of millions of Americans, most notably myself.
There’s a good way to help Canada, and there’s a bad way.
The obvious solution is for NHL owners to stop investing tens of millions of dollars in guys with mullets and for said players to accept the fistfuls of cash billionaires are trying to hand them.
The bad solution is suggested by those Americans who are the bane of my existence. That would be sports announcers. Their idea for cheering up our neighbors is to hand the NBA’s Most Valuable Player trophy to a Canadian, an idea which, as nearly as I can tell, has no rational basis.
Seriously, you can’t watch any pro hoops this year without some idiot on a mic extolling the virtues of the Phoenix Suns’ crafty point guard, Steve Nash. At first glance, it’s not so crazy-the addition of Nash has helped propel said Suns into the rarified air of the league’s elite clubs, in a three-way race for the league’s top record with the Miami Heat and San Antonio Spurs. He’s got shooting range from all over the court and tops the league’s assist leaders.
But there are a few problems with that simplistic kind of analysis.
First, I’m not seeing any difference between Nash this year and Nash in the past. His shooting numbers are up slightly and he’s got those assists, but performance-wise, he’s pretty much the same guy he was in Dallas. In other words, he’s still not exactly Scottie Pippen on defense.
Second, I’m not even sure Nash is the best player on his team. Give me Shawn Marion, the athletic jack-of-all-trades who scores, rebounds, blocks shots and forces turnovers.
Of course, I’d rather watch Nash go about his business than Marion, whose shooting form is about as easy on the eyes as a BYU coed. But you can’t argue with the Matrix’s across-the-board production.
Basically, the main difference in watching Nash this year instead of in the past is that he’s on a new team. The uniform change is a good way to get noticed-I mean, that was pretty much the crux of Jason Kidd’s argument for the award three years ago, wasn’t it? Yet if Nash was so great, Dallas wouldn’t have let him go.
So what is an MVP anyway?
First, an MVP is obviously going to be a great player on at least a pretty good team. While I don’t think statistics tell the whole story, I do think they tell a lot of it, so an MVP will almost necessarily have impressive numbers. More importantly, the league’s MVP needs to be a good team player who lifts those around him, at least in terms of team success.
This doesn’t get mentioned much, but I think a serious MVP candidate also needs to play in pretty much every game. Say a player misses 20 games. Even if his team goes 0-20 in those contests, I think the fact that he didn’t play should count against him. Above all, versatility is huge-an MVP should score, pass, defend, and rebound well.
I don’t buy that an MVP is always the best player on the best team-that’s a little uninspired, though it’s also a good start. I also reject the argument that an MVP is the player who would be missed most if he wasn’t on his team, which inspires some sportswriters to start comparing the relative quality of two superstars’ backups. That’s ridiculous-I don’t think a player should be rewarded or penalized because his GM is a blithering idiot, or, on rare occasion, actually competent.
Last but not least, an MVP has to be, if not the best player in the league, at least the best player on his team, which is why Kobe Bryant never had a chance with Shaq on his team.
So if Nash hasn’t done enough to warrant serious MVP consideration, who has?
A lot of players more deserving than Nash will get little or no consideration because of their teams’ seasons compared to preseason expectations. This includes LeBron James, whose Cavaliers are desperately clinging to the East’s No. 5 seed. Allen Iverson might be having the best season of his career, but he still can’t overcome the presence of Chris Webber and will probably miss the postseason. Ditto last year’s MVP, Kevin Garnett, who got sent up the river by selfish teammates before the season was even really underway.
In addition, Dirk Nowitzki (too soft) and Jermaine O’Neal (second-tier star) won’t be able to overcome their respective reputations, and O’Neal missed too many games anyway (though I forget why).
That leaves the league with three legitimate contenders for MVP honors. The first is Tim Duncan, who is clearly the league’s greatest player. Duncan has had his usual fantastic season and, like Jordan in his prime, is a threat to win this award each season.
Although he’s down from his career numbers, Duncan’s performance has been MVP-caliber. Unfortunately, he’s got the major hurdle of his severely sprained ankle. If he’s really out for the rest of the season, as early reports suggest, he shouldn’t win the award. Even if he comes back in a few weeks, he’ll have missed a lot of games.
If he does make a quick comeback, he should probably win the award. But even if he doesn't, he'll just have to console himself with the championship the Spurs are probably headed towards.
The other main championship contender this far out has to be the Heat, which has not one but two players in the race.
The first is Dwyane Wade, and my first posting of this article recommended him for the award before I came to my senses. (In fact, editing it was so much fun, I'm going to have to go back and fix the confusing wording that suggested I thought Wake Forest and Syracuse would make the Final Four.) He's had a fantastic and very consistent campaign, posting big numbers and performing down the stretch of nearly every Heat game I've seen. Outside of his turnovers, he's been nearly perfect.
But the favorite for the award has to be Shaquille O’Neal, who is benefiting from the same change-of-address bias that’s helped Nash get so much ink. Like Duncan, his numbers are lower than his career averages, but that’s not really relevant-he should be competing with everyone else this year for the award, not with the ghost of his past dominance.
Besides, he’s still averaging 22.7 points per game, putting opposing big men in foul trouble and finding the open man regularly. And his presence on the court is unmatched; he allows teammates like Udonis Haslem and Damon Jones to focus only on those things they do best.
Shaq's clearly motivated this year to show that he's still the league's best player (even if he's not). It's shown in his rejuvenated defense and aggressive rebounding. And he's been a great team player in his new digs.
Kind of makes you wonder why he's on a new team in the first place.
Can you believe L.A. thought they were better off with that shoot-first egomaniac Bryant than with Shaq? Really, the Lakers were going to flounder with Kobe jacking it up every time he touched the ball? And O'Neal was going to win the battle on the court and the PR war off it? Wow. The outcome of that trade was about as predictable as a Colts-Patriots playoff game.
And the Lakers' nosedive just further demonstrates his value.
Shaq's all-around impact makes him the top candidate for this year's MVP award.
Maybe the Lakers should have kept him around instead of Kobe, eh?
Without hockey, there’s a lot less to be happy about up north. Those 12-month winters just last longer when there’s no Stanley Cup up for grabs. It’s not all doom and gloom, of course-Canadians supposedly have some ridiculous prescription drug hook-up, which has got to be great news for the 75-and-over crowd, and some citizens can avoid polar bear maulings for days at a time.
But no hockey leaves a huge sporting void.
I mean, imagine if our national pastime went away for a year. Oh, wait, that’s right, nobody would care. Aside from which I don’t think Congress would let it happen. But if the NFL, our real national sport, cancelled the season, it would take the meaning out of the lives of millions of Americans, most notably myself.
There’s a good way to help Canada, and there’s a bad way.
The obvious solution is for NHL owners to stop investing tens of millions of dollars in guys with mullets and for said players to accept the fistfuls of cash billionaires are trying to hand them.
The bad solution is suggested by those Americans who are the bane of my existence. That would be sports announcers. Their idea for cheering up our neighbors is to hand the NBA’s Most Valuable Player trophy to a Canadian, an idea which, as nearly as I can tell, has no rational basis.
Seriously, you can’t watch any pro hoops this year without some idiot on a mic extolling the virtues of the Phoenix Suns’ crafty point guard, Steve Nash. At first glance, it’s not so crazy-the addition of Nash has helped propel said Suns into the rarified air of the league’s elite clubs, in a three-way race for the league’s top record with the Miami Heat and San Antonio Spurs. He’s got shooting range from all over the court and tops the league’s assist leaders.
But there are a few problems with that simplistic kind of analysis.
First, I’m not seeing any difference between Nash this year and Nash in the past. His shooting numbers are up slightly and he’s got those assists, but performance-wise, he’s pretty much the same guy he was in Dallas. In other words, he’s still not exactly Scottie Pippen on defense.
Second, I’m not even sure Nash is the best player on his team. Give me Shawn Marion, the athletic jack-of-all-trades who scores, rebounds, blocks shots and forces turnovers.
Of course, I’d rather watch Nash go about his business than Marion, whose shooting form is about as easy on the eyes as a BYU coed. But you can’t argue with the Matrix’s across-the-board production.
Basically, the main difference in watching Nash this year instead of in the past is that he’s on a new team. The uniform change is a good way to get noticed-I mean, that was pretty much the crux of Jason Kidd’s argument for the award three years ago, wasn’t it? Yet if Nash was so great, Dallas wouldn’t have let him go.
So what is an MVP anyway?
First, an MVP is obviously going to be a great player on at least a pretty good team. While I don’t think statistics tell the whole story, I do think they tell a lot of it, so an MVP will almost necessarily have impressive numbers. More importantly, the league’s MVP needs to be a good team player who lifts those around him, at least in terms of team success.
This doesn’t get mentioned much, but I think a serious MVP candidate also needs to play in pretty much every game. Say a player misses 20 games. Even if his team goes 0-20 in those contests, I think the fact that he didn’t play should count against him. Above all, versatility is huge-an MVP should score, pass, defend, and rebound well.
I don’t buy that an MVP is always the best player on the best team-that’s a little uninspired, though it’s also a good start. I also reject the argument that an MVP is the player who would be missed most if he wasn’t on his team, which inspires some sportswriters to start comparing the relative quality of two superstars’ backups. That’s ridiculous-I don’t think a player should be rewarded or penalized because his GM is a blithering idiot, or, on rare occasion, actually competent.
Last but not least, an MVP has to be, if not the best player in the league, at least the best player on his team, which is why Kobe Bryant never had a chance with Shaq on his team.
So if Nash hasn’t done enough to warrant serious MVP consideration, who has?
A lot of players more deserving than Nash will get little or no consideration because of their teams’ seasons compared to preseason expectations. This includes LeBron James, whose Cavaliers are desperately clinging to the East’s No. 5 seed. Allen Iverson might be having the best season of his career, but he still can’t overcome the presence of Chris Webber and will probably miss the postseason. Ditto last year’s MVP, Kevin Garnett, who got sent up the river by selfish teammates before the season was even really underway.
In addition, Dirk Nowitzki (too soft) and Jermaine O’Neal (second-tier star) won’t be able to overcome their respective reputations, and O’Neal missed too many games anyway (though I forget why).
That leaves the league with three legitimate contenders for MVP honors. The first is Tim Duncan, who is clearly the league’s greatest player. Duncan has had his usual fantastic season and, like Jordan in his prime, is a threat to win this award each season.
Although he’s down from his career numbers, Duncan’s performance has been MVP-caliber. Unfortunately, he’s got the major hurdle of his severely sprained ankle. If he’s really out for the rest of the season, as early reports suggest, he shouldn’t win the award. Even if he comes back in a few weeks, he’ll have missed a lot of games.
If he does make a quick comeback, he should probably win the award. But even if he doesn't, he'll just have to console himself with the championship the Spurs are probably headed towards.
The other main championship contender this far out has to be the Heat, which has not one but two players in the race.
The first is Dwyane Wade, and my first posting of this article recommended him for the award before I came to my senses. (In fact, editing it was so much fun, I'm going to have to go back and fix the confusing wording that suggested I thought Wake Forest and Syracuse would make the Final Four.) He's had a fantastic and very consistent campaign, posting big numbers and performing down the stretch of nearly every Heat game I've seen. Outside of his turnovers, he's been nearly perfect.
But the favorite for the award has to be Shaquille O’Neal, who is benefiting from the same change-of-address bias that’s helped Nash get so much ink. Like Duncan, his numbers are lower than his career averages, but that’s not really relevant-he should be competing with everyone else this year for the award, not with the ghost of his past dominance.
Besides, he’s still averaging 22.7 points per game, putting opposing big men in foul trouble and finding the open man regularly. And his presence on the court is unmatched; he allows teammates like Udonis Haslem and Damon Jones to focus only on those things they do best.
Shaq's clearly motivated this year to show that he's still the league's best player (even if he's not). It's shown in his rejuvenated defense and aggressive rebounding. And he's been a great team player in his new digs.
Kind of makes you wonder why he's on a new team in the first place.
Can you believe L.A. thought they were better off with that shoot-first egomaniac Bryant than with Shaq? Really, the Lakers were going to flounder with Kobe jacking it up every time he touched the ball? And O'Neal was going to win the battle on the court and the PR war off it? Wow. The outcome of that trade was about as predictable as a Colts-Patriots playoff game.
And the Lakers' nosedive just further demonstrates his value.
Shaq's all-around impact makes him the top candidate for this year's MVP award.
Maybe the Lakers should have kept him around instead of Kobe, eh?
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Wiping the Floor With Cinderella
All anybody wants to talk about in sports this week are the potential Cinderella teams in the tournament.
Count me out.
First, it's time to find a new analogy (glass slippers, evil step-sisters, nothing to do with hoops, we get it) but, more to the point, those teams rarely win after the opening weekend anyway.
As fun as it is to watch inferior and sometimes unqualified teams get a chance on the big stage (step right up, Oakland!), by the time the Final Four rolls around, the real contenders will have taken care of business.
Who will those real contenders be? Let's go counter-clockwise across the country’s four regionals:
Chicago: Illinois earned the top seed in this region after eking out a respectable 32-1 record. Give the Fighting Illini the edge on big-moment experience, considering their point guard won the 1991 NBA Slam Dunk contest. But if you're questioning their strength-of-schedule and their Arena Football-like 54-43 conference championship victory, you're not alone. The team out of Chicago will be tournament-primed Arizona, led by the inside-outside attack of Salim Stoudamire, the nation's best perimeter shooter, and Channing Frye, an underrated big man.
Albuquerque: Washington swooped in for the unexpected No. 1 seed here. I love how everyone rightfully hates the BCS, but when the writers' No. 8 team gets a top seed because of a high RPI, nobody cares. Anyway, this region will come down to either the Huskies or Wake Forest, what with the Demon Deacons' Chris Paul recently adding his own twist to the whole "team-nobody-wants-to-face" angle.
This regional is home to two of my favorite teams to hate, Gonzaga and Georgia Tech. Gonzaga needs no introduction as the lower-tier school everyone mistakenly lumps with the big boys. At least the Yellow Jackets are fun to watch. Not because of their style of play, I just love watching Luke Schenscher drop passes, blow lay-ups, and basically just stand around looking like that kid from kindergarten who ate paste while some over-caffeinated announcer tries to convince me I'm watching one of the top big men in the nation. That never gets old.
I hope Washington goes far so we can read something about them other than, "They have a short guy who can dunk", but I also hope they lose, so we don't have to hear any more lame Rick Neuheisel jokes. Wake Forest is the pick.
Austin: It wouldn’t officially be March Madness without an overrated Duke team taking a top seed. As always, Duke is led by a one-dimensional two guard who gets so much unfounded hype, it would make Eli Manning blush. This year the Blue Devils are led into battle by the incomparable J.J. Redick, a fearless gunner who can light up the scoreboard from outside the solar system. Puzzlingly, his three-point percentage fell behind conference-mates and fellow legends like Taron Downey and Zabian Dowdell. Chalk that up to anti-Duke bias on the part of scorekeepers: we all know Redick is one of the finest players in the land. For example, he almost never misses a foul shot. Too bad the Dukies aren't on TV more or you'd know that already.
Kentucky and Syracuse are the other teams to watch in Texas. Kentucky might have a deep rotation, but outside of versatile senior Chuck Hayes, no one can rebound, and that will cost them. Syracuse, on the other hand, features the well-known duo of super-athlete Hakim Warrick and Gerry McNamara, who would have a little bit of a Redick thing going on himself, except that a) he can play the point and b) he's actually won something in his career. Make the Orange the next team in on experience. And yes, I picked against the Blue Devils only because I hate them, is that all right?
Syracuse: The suspense is over: so this is where Kansas will fold this year (unless you count their late-season fade as evidence that they already have). Interestingly, this region includes both last year's champions (Connecticut, which has done an outstanding job in the face of tremendous adversity) and this year's eventual kings, North Carolina. Although this schizophrenic band of McDonald's All-Americans is capable of shooting itself in the foot at any time, the nation's highest-scoring squad also peaks as its best, as seen in that clutch-as-James Bond comeback against Duke last week. With Sean May, Jawad Williams, and Raymond Felton, the Tar Heels have the goods to win it all. If Rashad McCants can come back and play at anywhere near the level he's capable of, they'll cruise to the title.
And if not, take comfort in watching fluke upsets and hearing about those plucky youngsters who showed up for the ball in a pumpkin.
Count me out.
First, it's time to find a new analogy (glass slippers, evil step-sisters, nothing to do with hoops, we get it) but, more to the point, those teams rarely win after the opening weekend anyway.
As fun as it is to watch inferior and sometimes unqualified teams get a chance on the big stage (step right up, Oakland!), by the time the Final Four rolls around, the real contenders will have taken care of business.
Who will those real contenders be? Let's go counter-clockwise across the country’s four regionals:
Chicago: Illinois earned the top seed in this region after eking out a respectable 32-1 record. Give the Fighting Illini the edge on big-moment experience, considering their point guard won the 1991 NBA Slam Dunk contest. But if you're questioning their strength-of-schedule and their Arena Football-like 54-43 conference championship victory, you're not alone. The team out of Chicago will be tournament-primed Arizona, led by the inside-outside attack of Salim Stoudamire, the nation's best perimeter shooter, and Channing Frye, an underrated big man.
Albuquerque: Washington swooped in for the unexpected No. 1 seed here. I love how everyone rightfully hates the BCS, but when the writers' No. 8 team gets a top seed because of a high RPI, nobody cares. Anyway, this region will come down to either the Huskies or Wake Forest, what with the Demon Deacons' Chris Paul recently adding his own twist to the whole "team-nobody-wants-to-face" angle.
This regional is home to two of my favorite teams to hate, Gonzaga and Georgia Tech. Gonzaga needs no introduction as the lower-tier school everyone mistakenly lumps with the big boys. At least the Yellow Jackets are fun to watch. Not because of their style of play, I just love watching Luke Schenscher drop passes, blow lay-ups, and basically just stand around looking like that kid from kindergarten who ate paste while some over-caffeinated announcer tries to convince me I'm watching one of the top big men in the nation. That never gets old.
I hope Washington goes far so we can read something about them other than, "They have a short guy who can dunk", but I also hope they lose, so we don't have to hear any more lame Rick Neuheisel jokes. Wake Forest is the pick.
Austin: It wouldn’t officially be March Madness without an overrated Duke team taking a top seed. As always, Duke is led by a one-dimensional two guard who gets so much unfounded hype, it would make Eli Manning blush. This year the Blue Devils are led into battle by the incomparable J.J. Redick, a fearless gunner who can light up the scoreboard from outside the solar system. Puzzlingly, his three-point percentage fell behind conference-mates and fellow legends like Taron Downey and Zabian Dowdell. Chalk that up to anti-Duke bias on the part of scorekeepers: we all know Redick is one of the finest players in the land. For example, he almost never misses a foul shot. Too bad the Dukies aren't on TV more or you'd know that already.
Kentucky and Syracuse are the other teams to watch in Texas. Kentucky might have a deep rotation, but outside of versatile senior Chuck Hayes, no one can rebound, and that will cost them. Syracuse, on the other hand, features the well-known duo of super-athlete Hakim Warrick and Gerry McNamara, who would have a little bit of a Redick thing going on himself, except that a) he can play the point and b) he's actually won something in his career. Make the Orange the next team in on experience. And yes, I picked against the Blue Devils only because I hate them, is that all right?
Syracuse: The suspense is over: so this is where Kansas will fold this year (unless you count their late-season fade as evidence that they already have). Interestingly, this region includes both last year's champions (Connecticut, which has done an outstanding job in the face of tremendous adversity) and this year's eventual kings, North Carolina. Although this schizophrenic band of McDonald's All-Americans is capable of shooting itself in the foot at any time, the nation's highest-scoring squad also peaks as its best, as seen in that clutch-as-James Bond comeback against Duke last week. With Sean May, Jawad Williams, and Raymond Felton, the Tar Heels have the goods to win it all. If Rashad McCants can come back and play at anywhere near the level he's capable of, they'll cruise to the title.
And if not, take comfort in watching fluke upsets and hearing about those plucky youngsters who showed up for the ball in a pumpkin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)