Nike Ad: Basketball Never Stops

Underrating Players Creates Top Heavy Image and Hurts NBA Financially

Kevin Love (Minnesota), right* David Lee (Golden State)

Debates about who is the best player in any given sport have gone on and will go on forever.  Few people will ever see eye to eye with one another because we as fans see different things while watching the same game.  Part of the reason is because many fans still cannot separate their personal feelings about a players’ character from the statistical facts.

World-renowned sports outlet ESPN released a list consisting of what they thought to be the best players in the NBA, ranking each one without on court positions as a dividing factor.  As expected, the debates began.

The Top 10 consisted of Lebron James at the top followed by Dwight Howard, Dwayne Wade, Chris Paul, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, Derrick Rose, Derron Williams and finally Blake Griffin. 

The list breaking down into 3 categories, 5 guards, 4 forwards and 1 center.  Out of those Top 10 players, 8 are in the Top 5 statistically, based on position. So what is there to debate you ask, quite a bit actually.

Although it is clear that the list released was based primarily on stats, you have to wonder how Dirk Nowitzki, who no doubt deserves the accolades he receives for winning his first championship against a heavily favored Miami Heat, could be ranked #5 by ESPN when statistically is ranked #9 among forwards based on points, rebound and assist averages.  Secondly, Chris Paul, often-injured and often-considered one of the best point guards in the NBA, was ranked #4 by ESPN, but sits at #6 among guards statistically. 

So why were they ranked so high by ESPN?

Dirk’s ring surely helped out, and I’m in no way questioning his talent or performance during the playoffs and finals, however Blake Griffin and Kevin Love ranked above Dirk statistically but didn’t make the playoffs.  Am I trying to say that Blake Griffin (ranked #10 by ESPN) and Kevin Love (ranked #16 by ESPN) are better than Dirk, maybe, because after all, numbers don’t lie.  On the other hand, I would be out of my mind to say that the Clippers and Timberwolves were better teams than the Mavericks, as both teams finished the ’10-’11 season in the bottom 3 spots of the Western Conference, while the Mavericks went on to win the title.

In the case of Chris Paul, take Monta Ellis (#41 according to ESPN) for example.  Ellis, who ranks #5 amongst guards statistically and one spot ahead of Paul, averaged 9 more points, 1 less rebound and 4 less assists per game last season.  The major difference has nothing to do with these players’ talent, but the teams they play for.  New Orleans won 10 more regular season games than Golden State and also made the playoffs.  Both have been in the league for 6 years and their career averages are very similar.  But only one remains in the headlines, whether it is for rumors regarding trades or big wedding plans with celebrity guests.

But does popularity alone make Paul and Nowizki better than Griffin, Love and Ellis according to ESPN?

Subconsciously to many, yes it does.  Far fewer eyes have been laid on Ellis’ Golden State games and this is a major problem.  Exposure.  Whether it is the time allotted to teams during highlights on sports center or stories written about these types of underrated players, something needs to be done.  Not only does more exposure lead to a larger fan base for smaller teams, but also possibly larger TV deals for those small markets.  Increased television exposure could bring more money into the league, a continuing issue in the current NBA lockout discussions.

No one has ever doubted LeBron James’ talent when the Cavaliers went from doing poorly only winning 35 games, to becoming title contenders with a record of 50-32 and losing in the finals a mere 4 years after joining the team.  He was and still is considered one of the best players in the NBA by many because the fans and critics have an opportunity to watch him perform at such a high level night in and night out during nationally televised games. 

Blake Griffin became one of the most followed athletes in sports once his in-game high-flying slam dunks became nightly highlights and posted all over the internet.  Him winning the slam-dunk competition at this year’s All-Star game by jumping over a car in which his teammate passed him the ball through the sunroof, all while an entire church choir sang behind him and throwing down the dunk on his first attempt, basically cemented his fame in not only sports, but the entertainment industry as well.  A summer internship at FunnyorDie.com, a popular sketch comedy website, will only ad to his celebrity working along side Hollywood funny man Will Ferrell who has strong ties to the site. 

Is ESPN’s Top 500 list based on popularity?  In Blake Griffin’s case, the answer is no. 

Blake Griffin did in fact perform at a high level during his rookie season, resulting in him winning the rookie of the year award; but his Clippers team, as mentioned earlier, were terrible and only won 32 games.

So it basically comes down to this: 

“If a tree falls in the forest, and there’s nobody there to hear it, does it make a sound?”

Whether its through TV ads, shoe deals, communicating with fans on social media, discussing their personal life or sitting down for more interviews, people need to have access to more players performances besides the top 10 that are, although deserving, singled out and solely celebrated.

With more exposure we can begin considering players on losing teams such as Andrea Bargnani (ranked #81 by ESPN) from the Toronto Raptors who ranks 3^rd statistically among centers only behind Al Jefferson (ranked #52 by ESPN) and Dwight Howard (ranked #2 by ESPN), as some of the best in the league and not an after thought.  As talked about and celebrated a player as Andrew Bynum is, if he were a part of the Los Angeles Lakers, I have a hard time believing he would be such a house hold name while averaging 11 points and 10 rebounds as a center after 6 years in the league.

With more players being recognized for their talents instead of the team they play for, the NBA can only benefit from not having to rely on a minority of well-known players to keep the sport alive and exciting.

Jordan: Love The Game Commercial

Lockout explained in 90 seconds

Lebron James - King with no Rings

Players vs Owners - Why I support the 2011 NBA lockout

My favorite comic strip growing up as a kid was Spy vs Spy.  I would skip all the movie and music parodies and get straight to the real reason I picked up the newest MAD magazine issue.  I found it fascinating and hilarious how creative the 2 spies could be when leading the other into a trap.  In some cases they would start out as partners, only to have one betray the other by the end. My obsession continued later in life when a Nintendo game was released leaving my brother and I no choice but to stay up all night figuring out which way to best trick the other into falling into our seemingly unlimited number of traps.  One always thought he was smarter than the other, and all though each won battles, neither ever won the war.  And in the case of the NBA, the possibility of losing a full season while coming of its best ratings in years, leaves both the owners and players as losers when the bomb finally goes off.

I've made it clear I support the owners during the 2011 NBA lockout and even encourage a season long work stoppage if it means a better NBA as a result.  Now I am aware of the thousands of pro basketball related jobs and small town business in certain cities that rely heavily on the NBA to stay afloat, and my heart does go out to them.  However like any pyramid of power, it's the people at the bottom that suffer the most.

For years both the players and owners have made deals with each other with their own interests at hand, unfortunately the last few seasons have left the players as the sole beneficiary of those deals, and that needs to stop.  Skip all the "people pay to see the players" talk, we are way beyond that.  The truth is that 2 items on the negotiation list need to be adjusted for the games to continue and competition to be put back in the NBA.

The BRI split, which is all monies made from the NBA, is being offered as a 50/50 split by the owners.  Simply put, stars like Kobe and Lebron are not affected by this, as their income comes from many sources beyond the league.  Shoe deals, commercials, overseas appearances, promotional tours and the list goes on.  Lesser known players don't have that advantage, so a larger player split for the players is understandable when looking at it from a bench player's point of view.  It is important to mention that the 50/50 split still guarantees players a 6 figure pay checks every year along with their current contract salaries.  I think that is more than enough and the players should accept it.

The 2nd issue is the Hard Cap and Luxury Tax.  Owners want to limit player salaries and have teams that make more money spread the wealth amongst the teams with less financial power.  To be fair, the problem was created by owners paying way too much for players, believing that paying an average player a stars salary makes him a legitimate talent.  Over the years, and even more so during last years free agency, mediocre players were over paid in order to appease fans with a star in smaller markets.  As great as Joe Johnson and Rashad Lewis may be, they are no where near worth the $100 million plus dollars they earned, in the NBA or any other pro basketball league.  Of course no player ever wants to hear there is a limit on their potential earnings, which is why players were going to the highest bidder.  Which brings us to the 3rd issue, competition.

For years wealthy owners have pretty much bought out great players from smaller franchises that could not match their bid and filled their rosters with top talent.  This created pools of players jumping ship to larger markets with wealthier owners.  This can't continue if the league wishes to remain a legitimate sport and not a sports entertainment franchise like the WWE.  What many players fail to realize is that more parity brings more financial gain through an increased popularity, support by fans, sponsors and TV deals with stars in every market. Since 2000, the Lakers have participated in 7 out of 10 NBA finals, with a pay roll way over $336 million dollars.  This makes a lot of sense when you compare that to the Milwaukke Bucks' pay roll of $209 million, a team that has only made the playoffs 5 times in 10 years, and besides an Eastern Conference Finals appearance in 2000, never made it out of the 1st round.

Some will scream, "hey it's a business!" Fine, script the games, have the outcomes predetermined and add soap opera story lines before, during and after matches and I will be the first to sign up.  However, if the NBA is still wants to be considered a professional sports association, parity must exist and reckless spending by owners and endless greed from the players needs to stop.

Blue Chips Movie Review

"The business always gets in the way of basketball" 

~ Jason Kidd, Dalls Mavericks ~

The above quote from NBA champion Jason Kidd could in no way better describe the core theme of the film "Blue Chips".   It is also the best way to summarize the current situation regarding the 2011 NBA lockout.  The reason I decided to to take on the task of watching NBA related movies during the lockout was to ignore the insignificant financial based meeting updates and instead watch movies that were all about the love of the game.  However, almost as if a sign from the NBA gods, I chose to watch a much talked about film that I had never seen and was quickly reminded that you can only stick your head in the sand for so long.  The thing that makes "Blue Chips" such a great movie is that it takes you away from the court and into the offices that put together the teams, and the sometimes ugly steps taken to reach success.

Nick Nolte (Hulk, Tropic Thunder) plays coach Pete Bell, a once successful coach now on the brink of his first losing season in years with his team, the Western University Dolphins.  Coach Bell is introduced to the audience while in a fit of rage at half-time during a game in which his team is being blown out.  There seems to be no intention to motivate the players throughout his rant as his team is clearly lacking any type of confidence that could lead to a come back victory.  This was a powerful scene that left me feeling uncomfortable at moments, knowing young men go through this several times throughout an already stressful college athletic career.  The director did a great job of showing the arena patrons, cheerleaders and bands enjoying themselves during the half-time show, oblivious to what the players were going through in the locker room.

During a post game interview a reporter asks Bell if he believes the lack luster performance is due to the fact the school has been unsuccessful in recruiting players because of an alleged scandal.  The scandal in question being that of "point shaving".  A term used when a player is paid to deliberately affect the point deficit  Las Vegas, Nevada gambling houses have created based on inside information, predictions or corruption.  

As the film progresses we learn that besides the scandal, Western University is losing out on recruiting great players to East Coast schools, which have better TV coverage and booster systems, a forbidden practice of paying players or providing gifts to their families to have them enroll in a particular schools program.  

The thing I love about this theme is that it divides the viewers into 2 groups, forcing them to ask themselves what if anything is acceptable when it comes to paying college athletes.

In 2010 it was estimated that the NCAA made $750 million dollars through ticket sales, TV deals and sponsorships.  The school with the best players get the best of all the deals previously mentioned and this is why it has become practice for some schools to have boosters sway a potential player's mind when it comes to picking which schools to join.  It is against school regulations for any player to profit from their participation in athletics, and penalties range from fines, staff firings and even bans from tournament play. 

The argument that many have is that if the NCAA can make $750 million dollars from their athletes performances and images, why can't the players be compensated.  However, in most cases the argument ends there.  Simply put, schools are for education, not sports entertainment, and there is no doubt that athletics is a great way for many students to earn an great education.  However, if schools were allowed to begin paying players, the schools with the biggest bank accounts would have the best players and competition would suffer, which is exactly what has happened in the NBA, and is a major piece of the lockout negotiations.  Just as it costs money to run an NBA franchise, it costs money to run a college basketball program, and it is also important to mention that everyone involved in NCAA athletics is paid except for the players.

I stand on both sides of the fence with the belief that if millions are made off of someone's hard work, they should be compensated.  I also believe that allowing this to happen opens up a type of Pandora's Box where other students in other sports and under varying scholarships could demand a form of compensation for their works, efforts and contributions to the school.

In many cases I sympathized with the underprivileged athletes in the film when accepting gifts, and at the same time disgusted by some of their parents greed, some of which often seemed like they were selling their children.

"Blue Chips" concludes with a what I must admit is one of the most bitter sweet sport speeches I have ever heard, but to go into further detail would spoil the film.  The movie has no concrete or cliche ending most are accustomed to seeing in sports films, which I found was very refreshing, especially considering the film was made in 1994. 

In the end, "Blue Chips" is a must see film for any sports fan who wants to see the dark side of sports that most fans turn a blind eye to, and forces them to face it.

Brian Wilson - NBA 2K12 Great Debate

The Mighty Macs Movie Review

After months of scouring the internet for news and quotes that could hint to the end of the NBA lockout and debating every NBA 2K12 video game commercial that gets posted to Youtube with "view seeking" opinions, I have finally had enough.  This lockout has brought out the ugly side of the sport and as much as it is true that every sport is a business, we are all slowly placing money before the passion and pride that created the athletes that play these sports and the fans that support them. 

So I searched and came across a list on the internet that listed the best basketball related movies out there, and while I wait for the NBA to return, I thought I might check them all out and get my basketball fix that way.  Not only am I watching movies I may have missed out on, I am at the same time distracting myself from the constant barrage of lockout information that means nothing until the first game of the season starts or is delayed.

Some of the greatest achievements in sports history have been about players, coaches, families, communities, schools and their commitment to winning; not millions, billions, agents and owners.  This is exactly why I enjoyed this movie so much. The Mighty Macs is solely about the love of the game.  While most sports films are dominated by male leads and their stories, this film takes the opportunity to shed light on a great moment in not only basketball, but sports history, and does a great job doing it.

The film wastes no time in getting its point across.  The opening scene has Cathy Rush driving down a small rural road with the car radio on.  After a quick mention of president Kennedy, it relays this message while reporting about a womens rally in Washington, D.C., "Women should learn to become a doctor, not learn to marry one." 

The Mighty Macs is the true story of 2008 Basketball Hall of Fame inductee Cathy Rush played by Carla Gugino (Entourage, Sin City, Watchmen) who took the coaching job at Immaculata College.  An all girls school run by nuns with less than adequate facilities, and despite that won the first ever Women's National Title.  The movie also stars Academy Award winner Ellen Burstyn as Mother St. John, a seemingly cold nun who runs the college and is frustrated with her futile efforts to save the school from closure.  Marley Shelton (Grindhouse, Sin City, Scream 4) plays Sister Sunday, a nun who on the brink of losing her faith, gets the sign she was looking for and aids Rush in coaching the team.  David Boreanaz (Bones, Angel, Buffy) has a smaller but very important role as Rush's supportive husband Ed Rush, an NBA referee.

The movie takes place in 1971 Pennsylvania. The Vietnam war was taking place, communist and capitalist debates were a hot topic and more women were entering the work force.  However, during this time men were still revered as the bread-winners, and the movie doesn't shy away from the topic in the scenes between Cathy and Ed Rush. Although he is supportive, Ed Rush is often frustrated by his wife's desire to pursue a career and therefore questions her happiness within their marriage.

When Rush accepts the coaching position, she immediately finds out the gym has burned down and only a rec room, now used as a storage space is all she has for holding her team's practice.  There is no shortage of girls that show up for tryouts, and while some dropout, the remaining players have very few conflicts with the coach.  While other schools practice and play in standard gym attire, the Immaculata team play in what I can only describe as short cut prairie dresses with numbers ironed on the backs.

The film also does a good job at discussing issues women were facing during that time such as findings ones worth through a good husband, poverty, insecurities about beauty and their futures. As these problems arise in the film, they are resolved by the team coming together to support each other and use basketball as an outlet for their anger.

As the movie progresses and the team begins to find success, they earn the support from it's once doubtful head master, its nuns, the entire student body and finally city of Immaculata.

My only gripe with the film would be that the scenes that focused around the actual playing of basketball were short in length. Whether that was done deliberately to focus on the characters, I don't know, but it left me feeling like the majority of the film focused on the team practice sequences. Not necessarily a bad thing, but not what most are accustomed to when watching a sport based movie.

There are a lot of great sports films out there, and there are no doubt better ones on the list I intend to review, but this is definitely a film that should the opportunity arise, should be watched.  Women in sports have come a long way with the WNBA, Canada's Womens Hockey and US Womens soccer teams being the proof of that.  

I believe that there should be more films showcasing the great accomplishments in womens sports as there are many stories worth telling.  Whether done independently or on big budgets, it can do no harm to show positive female role models in the form of athletes and not only the boundaries that society and films places on them.

Official Site: http://themightymacs.com/

Michael Jordan vs Drake

NBA Street: Lockout Edition

Fans should lockout home games

I went from sympathizing with the players, then the owners and now the fans.

No fans no NBA, simple as that.

It's almost insulting the way money is discussed in these meetings, they are not government or military employees, they are pro athletes.

The fans, whether from BRI to products marketed by players, a lot of the money the owners and players make comes from the fans.

It would never happen, but for 1 home game per team to have no tickets sold would speak volumes, but again, I doubt that would ever happen.