So, it's been a few weeks. What I've missed:
1. Jay Cutler has diabetes. Articles list several prominent athletes who've had the disease and been successful, including guys like Bobby Clarke, Jackie Robinson, and Gary Hall, Jr., who I liked a lot even though I only saw him compete in sprints once every four years.
From the USA Today article:
That sort of makes it sound like he'll be much better this year now that he's healthy. And that makes sense if the disease held him back down the stretch. The thing is his game-by-game statistics don't paint the picture of someone who was worn down at the end of the season; instead, he had some of his best (and worst) games then. No doubt it must have been hard on him, but statistically, he wasn't a trainwreck because of the illness. So who knows. Of course, I expect him to be better this year (and statistically, he was way better last year than I give him credit for), but mostly just as a natural result of experience and growth.
2. Troy Tulowitzki tore a tendon in his left quad after starting the season in a serious slump. He's out for a few more weeks but the Rockies still haven't recovered from a slow start. I feel bad that I haven't watched them this year, but not that bad.
3. Kobe Bryant won the NBA's regular-season MVP award. Many have referred to it as a lifetime achievement award, that Kobe just got the trophy because he's been the best player in the league for so long.
This is ridiculous on many levels. First, Kobe has not been the best player in the league for as long as people have said he is, and I'm not sure he ever has been. Second, there were many qualified candidates, and Kobe was definitely one of them. Did someone clearly deserve the award over him? LeBron James had better, almost beautiful numbers (30 points, 7.9 boards, 7.2 assists), but his team won only 45 games. Kevin Garnett's team won 66, but Garnett was 45th in points per game and 22nd in rebounds: not even close to typical MVP-caliber. Chris Paul's team finished just one game behind the Lakers, and he brings a ton to the table, but does any sane person really take him over Kobe in a must-win game? (I think this is important in basketball, where one player can have a bigger impact than in, say, football.) Paul scored much less than Kobe and piled up assists, which are a stat I consider kind of lame. So it's not like he was obviously better, especially when you consider Bryant's versatility. (Also, if Garnett and Paul are in the mix, I'm not sure why Tim Duncan isn't, but no one even mentions him.)
Compare this to, say, Karl Malone's MVP award after the 1996-97 season. Malone had good numbers, over 27 points and nearly 10 rebounds per game. But Michael Jordan was ridiculous that season, winning the scoring title once again with 29.6 points per game, grabbing almost half-a-dozen rebounds per game, and remaining clearly the most-feared player in the league, especially in pressure situations. Jordan's Bulls team won 69 games, which would have tied the record for most wins in a season had the Bulls not broken the old record one year before with 72. Jordan was obviously the class of the world, but Malone got his first MVP trophy. Now THAT was a lifetime achievement award.
However, the idea of a lifetime achievement award isn't anathema to me, at least not entirely. I mean, if the race was really too close to call between Kobe and Chris Paul, I don't have any problem with the tie going to Kobe since we already know he'll go down in history, and because he's already gotten it done for a few years. I like looking at lists of past winners and seeing names like Abdul-Jabber, Chamberlain and Bird as award winners. I don't feel the same way about Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash, and maybe even KG winning it the past few years.
4. Man, am I glad the Spurs have fought their way out of that 0-2 deficit. I was feeling pretty awkward there for a sec.
1. Jay Cutler has diabetes. Articles list several prominent athletes who've had the disease and been successful, including guys like Bobby Clarke, Jackie Robinson, and Gary Hall, Jr., who I liked a lot even though I only saw him compete in sprints once every four years.
From the USA Today article:
CBS4 in Denver caught up with the Denver Broncos quarterback, and was told the disease has affected him for 'at least six months.'
'I was losing weight, didn't have a lot of strength,' Cutler said. 'You could tell, just the way I played. Some of the throws that I made didn't have a lot behind them.'
That sort of makes it sound like he'll be much better this year now that he's healthy. And that makes sense if the disease held him back down the stretch. The thing is his game-by-game statistics don't paint the picture of someone who was worn down at the end of the season; instead, he had some of his best (and worst) games then. No doubt it must have been hard on him, but statistically, he wasn't a trainwreck because of the illness. So who knows. Of course, I expect him to be better this year (and statistically, he was way better last year than I give him credit for), but mostly just as a natural result of experience and growth.
2. Troy Tulowitzki tore a tendon in his left quad after starting the season in a serious slump. He's out for a few more weeks but the Rockies still haven't recovered from a slow start. I feel bad that I haven't watched them this year, but not that bad.
3. Kobe Bryant won the NBA's regular-season MVP award. Many have referred to it as a lifetime achievement award, that Kobe just got the trophy because he's been the best player in the league for so long.
This is ridiculous on many levels. First, Kobe has not been the best player in the league for as long as people have said he is, and I'm not sure he ever has been. Second, there were many qualified candidates, and Kobe was definitely one of them. Did someone clearly deserve the award over him? LeBron James had better, almost beautiful numbers (30 points, 7.9 boards, 7.2 assists), but his team won only 45 games. Kevin Garnett's team won 66, but Garnett was 45th in points per game and 22nd in rebounds: not even close to typical MVP-caliber. Chris Paul's team finished just one game behind the Lakers, and he brings a ton to the table, but does any sane person really take him over Kobe in a must-win game? (I think this is important in basketball, where one player can have a bigger impact than in, say, football.) Paul scored much less than Kobe and piled up assists, which are a stat I consider kind of lame. So it's not like he was obviously better, especially when you consider Bryant's versatility. (Also, if Garnett and Paul are in the mix, I'm not sure why Tim Duncan isn't, but no one even mentions him.)
Compare this to, say, Karl Malone's MVP award after the 1996-97 season. Malone had good numbers, over 27 points and nearly 10 rebounds per game. But Michael Jordan was ridiculous that season, winning the scoring title once again with 29.6 points per game, grabbing almost half-a-dozen rebounds per game, and remaining clearly the most-feared player in the league, especially in pressure situations. Jordan's Bulls team won 69 games, which would have tied the record for most wins in a season had the Bulls not broken the old record one year before with 72. Jordan was obviously the class of the world, but Malone got his first MVP trophy. Now THAT was a lifetime achievement award.
However, the idea of a lifetime achievement award isn't anathema to me, at least not entirely. I mean, if the race was really too close to call between Kobe and Chris Paul, I don't have any problem with the tie going to Kobe since we already know he'll go down in history, and because he's already gotten it done for a few years. I like looking at lists of past winners and seeing names like Abdul-Jabber, Chamberlain and Bird as award winners. I don't feel the same way about Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash, and maybe even KG winning it the past few years.
4. Man, am I glad the Spurs have fought their way out of that 0-2 deficit. I was feeling pretty awkward there for a sec.
Comments
A case could be made for CP3 though, after all, he did make an allstar our of David West. I would say that Kobe had a better team than Paul did, but I doubt either team would even make the playoffs if you were to remove either of the two.
Blaine, West has improved his stats a lot, but he was somebody coming out of college. I agree Paul has had an impact, but it's easy to give a star too much credit for someone else's work. Besides, did people talk about Gasol the way they do now before he was with Kobe?
For that reason, LeBron is the one player I think you could justify giving the MVP to over Kobe. Imagine how bad the Cavs would be without LeBron - they would be much worse off than the Lakers without Kobe (who would at least have some role players).
As for Cutler, I would be interested in seeing how his stats late in games, rather than late in the season, stack up. My understanding is that diabetes would wear down his stamina in a particular day but not necessarily over time, so it might explain 4th-quarter struggles (to the extent he had any) but not late-season struggles.
And how can a professional athlete go through all those physicals and not know he has diabetes?
Anyway, this set of splits on ESPN.com (scroll down a bit) does suggest he did worst in the fourth quarter last year, but also that aside from a few picks he did very well in third quarters so I'm not sure what conclusions to draw.