Redick on Tour

Two things.

First, a couple weeks ago in the comments, one of my brilliant (that's a synonym for “two”) readers asked about the pro prospects of former Duke shooting guard J.J. Redick. I said I'd get into it more later, and now it's later, with the Orlando Magic selecting Redick in Wednesday's draft.

It's impossible to say with absolute certainty how a player can turn out. That said, I think you can guess pretty well for most players. My guess with Redick: he won't make a very good pro. I think the best situation for him is as a bench player-and not a sixth man, more like an eighth-on a good team.

I just don't think his skills-fantastic in college-translate very well to the professional level. The positives:

-His shooting. Redick is a terrific perimeter jump shooter and is valuable to any NBA team on the strength of his free throws alone. At least he could be. Even if Redick can't get an open shot his whole career, he'll still be a good free throw shooter, right? So doesn't he make more sense as the twelfth man on a contending team than some washed-up veteran or NBDL prospect? Of course, no team actually uses their twelfth man that way, but what if he was the in-on-offense, out-on-defense sub for Shaq? Wouldn't that spread the floor for Dwyane Wade and give opponents one more person they absolutely couldn't foul, or am I crazy? (Of course, Miami just won a championship-this is just an example.)

-Experience. Redick has experience in big games and he's comfortable in the spotlight, at least off the court. More to the point, he was the most-hated collegian in years; he's clearly not rattled by angry crowds.

-Conditioning. Duke's always thin, which means their starters generally play huge minutes. Thus, even if Redick's not in tip-top shape now, he at least knows how to take conditioning seriously. (That's not as much of a given for pro athletes as you'd think.)

The negatives:

-Size. Redick is 6-4, 190, which puts him somewhere between point guard and two guard in the NBA. Actually, he gives up size to big points like Jason Kidd and Andre Miller. But since he lacks essential point guard skills, he'll be a shooting guard. He's not so small that it's literally impossible for him to succeed...but I don't think he can guard NBA twos for thirty minutes a game.

-Defense. Duke traditionally plays fantastic team defense, and Redick was solid enough there. That said, I don't think he'll be well-suited to the man-to-man he'll often play in the NBA. He's used to teammates who can help cover for him. In Orlando, the backcourt...well, how can I say this nicely...they have as much room for improvement as any in the league!

-Crunch time. Yes, he has big-game experience, but Redick's play seemed to falter under pressure-just check his numbers when Duke has been eliminated from the last few March Madnesses.

-Type of player. There are a lot of very good outside shooters in the college ranks in the 6'3” to 6'4” area, and most of them don't do anything in the pros. Of course, most of them aren't Player of the Year candidates in college, either. But then again, most of them don't drive drunk or suffer back injuries, so it might just even out.

I think the negatives outweigh the positives. Redick could have a long career, I just wouldn't expect it to be very memorable.

* * *

On to the second thing, which is the doping scandal that has rocked the Tour de France.

If you haven't heard, Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, and Francisco Mancebo-the No. 2, 3, and 4 finishers in last year's Tour-have withdrawn from the race. More accurately, their teams withdrew them after each was named in a Spanish doping investigation.

Considering how often I knock baseball, I say kudos to everyone involved. (Well, not to the bikers.) I don't know for sure that any of these guys did anything wrong. But with the amount of money involved, it's interesting to see how quickly the teams distanced themselves from the riders. Take this quote from T-Mobile (Ullrich's team) spokesman Stefan Wagner:

Asked whether T-Mobile would consider cutting ties with Ullrich completely, he replied 'certainly ... we are now demanding evidence of his innocence.'
'If this evidence can be provided, then we have a completely new situation," he said. "If it cannot be provided, nothing will change about this situation.'

This strikes at the heart of why it's so hard to investigate performance-enhancing drugs. If he's innocent, what evidence could Ullrich possibly provide? I think we all agree that falsely banning one athlete who didn't use drugs is far worse than allowing ten guys on the juice to compete.

I see this and I ask myself: what other league would do something like this? Can you imagine the NFL suspending Hines Ward, Joey Porter, and Shaun Alexander before last year's Super Bowl? Then again, it is cycling, a sport where etiquette is more prominent than, say, baseball. (Or, in other words, they actually have etiquette in cycling.)

But that's the whole point: the Tour's not doing anything. It's corporate sponsors who don't want their images tarnished. We often worry about the influence of big companies on American sports-is that Spider-Man on the bases?-but maybe it's time to reconsider that. If T-Mobile was paying for a spot on, say, Baltimore Orioles jerseys, don't you think real steroid testing would have been implemented a lot sooner?