Wow. I wonder how this will play out. They take Beasley and they have a problem. They take Rose and they have a problem because of Hinrich. Who do you put on the floor? With Beasley, they already have a log jam at power forward and at small forward. No matter how you slice it, it puts someone on the bench or the trading block. Deng's shooting isn't developed enough to move him to the 2 from the 3. Though Beasley's shooting probably is... But if Beasley is your power forward, then you have Thomas and Noah to figure out what to do with. This would be made easier if Noah had a more refined true low post game. But he doesn't. I don't see him being a true center even with his size. But I do like Noah's adaptability and I think he could be a serviceable low post player. And I have to wonder if you are stunting his development by asking him to anchor your team in the paint?
With the other pick, you have issues with the Bulls guard stable. You could move Hinrich to the 2 spot but he is small and sort of slow. There will be issues on defense for sure. This scenario moves Gordon further down your bench if everything in the Bulls guard rotation stays the same. Another scenario is to put Gordon at the starting 2 and move Hinrich to the bench or trade him. If the Bulls do select Rose, my instinct is that Gordon should be the actual 2 because he is more explosive and athletic. But as you noted he has shown he can come off the bench and play well which is a coveted commodity in the NBA. But I can't help but think the best move for the Bulls as an organization is to trade the pick for some experience. The team is already loaded with talent and their problems don't necessarily stem from their lack of quality players. It seems to be more about experience, chemistry and, now, coaching.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Sometimes All You Need Is....
Young legs.
Last night I watched the Atlanta Hawks shock some people. If they didn't shock the world, at least they shocked Boston. And in the end that was enough. You know it really is cool to watch a franchise grow like this. And it also says a lot about what a slight shift in personnel can make for an organization. Especially if you can be honest about the capability of the talent your team currently has, acknowledge its strength, and then set out to address its weaknesses.
Basically what you have here is a team that has just one player on their roster who has ever been in the playoffs. That would be Mike Bibby from when he was with the Sacramento Kings playing with the likes of Peja Stojakovic. His addition to the King lineup has definitely had the desired effect by allowing Joe Johnson to play off the ball more and provide an actual starting point guard with a decent enough basketball IQ on the floor versus the slew of backup guards Atlanta was using previously.
The Hawks also have something a lot of people in the basketball "know" forget to consider, or choose to ignore. The Hawks have young legs. At 30 Mike Bibby also happens to be the oldest player on the roster. That is huge. Especially in a series that has been taken to 7 games. And it showed in game 6. The Hawks got to just about every loose ball there was on the evening. In the third and fourth quarter they got defensive stops just because they were able to beat the Celtics to spots on the floor and get position. The Hawks also didn't settle for jump shots. You see this a lot in games. When players get tired (or sometimes lazy), or "old," they settle for jumpshots instead of driving to the basket in an attempt to create more offensive options. When you take a jumpshot from outside, typically everything sort of stops. People start standing around to see if it goes in. But by driving to the basket everyone has to react. There is the potential for an assist, a better (closer) shot, or a foul. Possession after possession saw Atlanta driving to the basket and forcing the Celtics to react. This accounted for the discrepancy in freethrow attempts between the teams with the Hawks shooting 47 on the night and the Celtics shooting 25.
Honestly, given what I saw on Friday night, the only way I see the Celtics beating Atlanta is if the NBA decides to help them. I don't think this is far outside the realm of possibility. I have no problem contending the NBA decided from a marketing and "We can't stand Mark Cuban," standpoints the Miami Heat was "assisted" to their title in 2006. But barring referee intervention, it is highly possible the Celtic's Big Three whose legs have an average of 11 years on them will be sent packing by a younger, faster, talented and hungrier team who could just be coming into their own at just the right time.
Last night I watched the Atlanta Hawks shock some people. If they didn't shock the world, at least they shocked Boston. And in the end that was enough. You know it really is cool to watch a franchise grow like this. And it also says a lot about what a slight shift in personnel can make for an organization. Especially if you can be honest about the capability of the talent your team currently has, acknowledge its strength, and then set out to address its weaknesses.
Basically what you have here is a team that has just one player on their roster who has ever been in the playoffs. That would be Mike Bibby from when he was with the Sacramento Kings playing with the likes of Peja Stojakovic. His addition to the King lineup has definitely had the desired effect by allowing Joe Johnson to play off the ball more and provide an actual starting point guard with a decent enough basketball IQ on the floor versus the slew of backup guards Atlanta was using previously.
The Hawks also have something a lot of people in the basketball "know" forget to consider, or choose to ignore. The Hawks have young legs. At 30 Mike Bibby also happens to be the oldest player on the roster. That is huge. Especially in a series that has been taken to 7 games. And it showed in game 6. The Hawks got to just about every loose ball there was on the evening. In the third and fourth quarter they got defensive stops just because they were able to beat the Celtics to spots on the floor and get position. The Hawks also didn't settle for jump shots. You see this a lot in games. When players get tired (or sometimes lazy), or "old," they settle for jumpshots instead of driving to the basket in an attempt to create more offensive options. When you take a jumpshot from outside, typically everything sort of stops. People start standing around to see if it goes in. But by driving to the basket everyone has to react. There is the potential for an assist, a better (closer) shot, or a foul. Possession after possession saw Atlanta driving to the basket and forcing the Celtics to react. This accounted for the discrepancy in freethrow attempts between the teams with the Hawks shooting 47 on the night and the Celtics shooting 25.
Honestly, given what I saw on Friday night, the only way I see the Celtics beating Atlanta is if the NBA decides to help them. I don't think this is far outside the realm of possibility. I have no problem contending the NBA decided from a marketing and "We can't stand Mark Cuban," standpoints the Miami Heat was "assisted" to their title in 2006. But barring referee intervention, it is highly possible the Celtic's Big Three whose legs have an average of 11 years on them will be sent packing by a younger, faster, talented and hungrier team who could just be coming into their own at just the right time.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Say It Isn't So -- Avery Must Go
So my boy KT just sent me an email about the Dallas Mavericks firing Avery Johnson. Okay the Dallas Mavericks have lost two playoff series' in the first round in the past 2 years. So what? Is that a failure. Apparently in Dallas it is.
Over his tenure Johnson amassed a record of 194-70. Impressive by any standard. His playoff record however is debatable at 23-24. But how many coaches have teams that don't even make it to the playoffs? I suppose you could argue based on the results that Avery Johnson has loads of talent but lacks the experience to "seal the deal."
I've thought about this at some length, though and I'd like to offer another perspective. I'd say that the one thing that could have been considered during these 3 full years of Johnson's tenure is team chemistry. From this perspective, the reason for Dallas' early exit in the playoffs started long before Johnson's coaching. We could start with the failure to keep Steve Nash. Cuban's thinking at the time, which I will admit followed conventional wisdom, was that Nash wasn't worth the money needed to re-sign him. Nash's age, his durability, and his liability on the defensive end of the ball, all supported this conventional wisdom. But this move left Dallas without a legitimate point guard ever since. And because they didn't have a true point, conventional wisdom again came into play. In this instance, Cuban re-signs combo guard Jason Terry mainly under the belief that Terry will grow into the point Dallas so desperately needs.
But this doesn't happen. Terry is a scorer with a shoot first, pass later (much, much later, if ever) mentality. Because Terry doesn't become the point Dallas needs and Devin Harris is slow to develop (though he does eventually become a serviceable point) Dallas is now hampered by salary considerations and they lack a point guard with a high basketball IQ.
As a team the Maverick's basketball IQ is very low. Without this ability to make smart decisions in a pinch and down the stretch, not having a legitimate point caught up with them. In order to win championships you need a few things. You need a point guard. You need a presence in the post. You need team defence. You need good coaching. You need an adequate team basketball IQ. And you need team chemistry. I think for most of Johnson's tenure, the Mavericks had at least 3 of these things at any give time. But what they have always lacked was is a high enough basketball IQ and a point guard. It can also be argued that the Mavericks don't really have a presence in the post either. You might be able to win without one or two deficiencies, but not not with 3 or more.
So what I'm saying here is the coach can only control so much of these things. The talent that winds up in the door and on the floor is so much a function of what happens in the front office and not really in his hands. In this case I have to lay the primary reason for the Mavericks woes rest not in Johnson's hands but in Cuban and Nelson's. In my humble opinion. So wherever Johnson winds up next, probably New York might be a good fit, I wish him luck. Somehow I have a feeling Cuban's trigger finger may have the same result for Johnson that the reluctance to re-sign Nash had. If so, Johnson's in line for another Coach of the Year award. Peace.
Over his tenure Johnson amassed a record of 194-70. Impressive by any standard. His playoff record however is debatable at 23-24. But how many coaches have teams that don't even make it to the playoffs? I suppose you could argue based on the results that Avery Johnson has loads of talent but lacks the experience to "seal the deal."
I've thought about this at some length, though and I'd like to offer another perspective. I'd say that the one thing that could have been considered during these 3 full years of Johnson's tenure is team chemistry. From this perspective, the reason for Dallas' early exit in the playoffs started long before Johnson's coaching. We could start with the failure to keep Steve Nash. Cuban's thinking at the time, which I will admit followed conventional wisdom, was that Nash wasn't worth the money needed to re-sign him. Nash's age, his durability, and his liability on the defensive end of the ball, all supported this conventional wisdom. But this move left Dallas without a legitimate point guard ever since. And because they didn't have a true point, conventional wisdom again came into play. In this instance, Cuban re-signs combo guard Jason Terry mainly under the belief that Terry will grow into the point Dallas so desperately needs.
But this doesn't happen. Terry is a scorer with a shoot first, pass later (much, much later, if ever) mentality. Because Terry doesn't become the point Dallas needs and Devin Harris is slow to develop (though he does eventually become a serviceable point) Dallas is now hampered by salary considerations and they lack a point guard with a high basketball IQ.
As a team the Maverick's basketball IQ is very low. Without this ability to make smart decisions in a pinch and down the stretch, not having a legitimate point caught up with them. In order to win championships you need a few things. You need a point guard. You need a presence in the post. You need team defence. You need good coaching. You need an adequate team basketball IQ. And you need team chemistry. I think for most of Johnson's tenure, the Mavericks had at least 3 of these things at any give time. But what they have always lacked was is a high enough basketball IQ and a point guard. It can also be argued that the Mavericks don't really have a presence in the post either. You might be able to win without one or two deficiencies, but not not with 3 or more.
So what I'm saying here is the coach can only control so much of these things. The talent that winds up in the door and on the floor is so much a function of what happens in the front office and not really in his hands. In this case I have to lay the primary reason for the Mavericks woes rest not in Johnson's hands but in Cuban and Nelson's. In my humble opinion. So wherever Johnson winds up next, probably New York might be a good fit, I wish him luck. Somehow I have a feeling Cuban's trigger finger may have the same result for Johnson that the reluctance to re-sign Nash had. If so, Johnson's in line for another Coach of the Year award. Peace.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Whoa, a New Post! On Basketball No Less...
Yeah, I know. It's been a while. Miracles never cease. But to be honest I just wasn't adequately inspired to write about basketball. But since I picked my fantasy teams, I'm starting to warm up to the idea. I even watched the Bulls play New York last week. Go figure?
I have two things to say about that game. I have absolutely no idea why New York won. And I have even less of an idea how the Bulls lost. It was really telling in my book to see the Bulls offense running like a finely tuned machine, the spacing, the crisp passes and backdoor cuts to the basket. This is a team with a losing record? All I can say is some times the basketball goddess is a fickle mistress.
Then we have the Knicks. And their coach. What the hell was that? It certainly wasn't an offense. I watched the Knicks play and I thought I was watching a pickup game in a local recreation center. If there were ever five players in need of an introduction, it would be the Knicks. Now I'm being purposefully sarcastic here. Actually, on paper I believe the Knicks have one of the most talented rosters in the NBA. Yep I said it. The Knicks have one the most talented rosters in the NBA. The problem I saw as I watched them "somehow" beat the Bulls was there really wasn't an offense in place as far as I could tell. There were five guys, well actually four guys, who went one on one every time the ball was in their hands (the fifth player, Balkman, was there to run down loose balls for the other four).
But that isn't really the fault of the players. The responsibility for the semblance of an offense rests in the coach's hands. After watching that game, I was never surer of one thing: Isiah Thomas wants to get fired. No offense. A rotation that looks as though it came from a ouija board. A sex scandal. A player throwing a punch at him. And a losing record. What puzzles me is why he would have to work so hard given the results he's been creating. Curiouser and curiouser...
I have two things to say about that game. I have absolutely no idea why New York won. And I have even less of an idea how the Bulls lost. It was really telling in my book to see the Bulls offense running like a finely tuned machine, the spacing, the crisp passes and backdoor cuts to the basket. This is a team with a losing record? All I can say is some times the basketball goddess is a fickle mistress.
Then we have the Knicks. And their coach. What the hell was that? It certainly wasn't an offense. I watched the Knicks play and I thought I was watching a pickup game in a local recreation center. If there were ever five players in need of an introduction, it would be the Knicks. Now I'm being purposefully sarcastic here. Actually, on paper I believe the Knicks have one of the most talented rosters in the NBA. Yep I said it. The Knicks have one the most talented rosters in the NBA. The problem I saw as I watched them "somehow" beat the Bulls was there really wasn't an offense in place as far as I could tell. There were five guys, well actually four guys, who went one on one every time the ball was in their hands (the fifth player, Balkman, was there to run down loose balls for the other four).
But that isn't really the fault of the players. The responsibility for the semblance of an offense rests in the coach's hands. After watching that game, I was never surer of one thing: Isiah Thomas wants to get fired. No offense. A rotation that looks as though it came from a ouija board. A sex scandal. A player throwing a punch at him. And a losing record. What puzzles me is why he would have to work so hard given the results he's been creating. Curiouser and curiouser...
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Some organizations just get it...
And some don't. But we won't be talking about those today. This is a day for positive speculation about an article concerning the #2 pick in the 2007 NBA draft Kevin Durant.
The article can be found here.
The Sonics are talking about playing Durant at the 2 position. This is nothing short of shear genius. One point in its favor is it gets Durant on the floor in a starting role now. It also means instead of him getting worked over and worn down on the low block by older more physical players, he will actually have a size advantage at the position.
For the team it means their starting line up will probably present one of the most difficult defensive match ups in the league, looking more like a center, a power forward, two small forwards and a point. It will give other teams similar match up issues to the ones faced when Magic was running the show for the Lakers.
I applaud the Sonics coach for recognizing something that many people who didn't follow basketball to closely seem to forget. Carlesimo notes in the article that a lot of people forget Michael Jordan came into the NBA as a very slender 6'5" ish version of the 6'6" monster he would grow into later. In recognizing this Carlesimo is giving Durant an opportunity to play at a less physical position where he can see success instantly. As he grows into that 6'9" body physically and fills out (unless his genetics are more on the variety of a Tayshaun Prince than those of a Jordan), Durant can move comfortably from the 2 to the 3 to the 4.
There is nothing but upside here. Like I said at the outset, some coaches and front offices just get it...
The article can be found here.
The Sonics are talking about playing Durant at the 2 position. This is nothing short of shear genius. One point in its favor is it gets Durant on the floor in a starting role now. It also means instead of him getting worked over and worn down on the low block by older more physical players, he will actually have a size advantage at the position.
For the team it means their starting line up will probably present one of the most difficult defensive match ups in the league, looking more like a center, a power forward, two small forwards and a point. It will give other teams similar match up issues to the ones faced when Magic was running the show for the Lakers.
I applaud the Sonics coach for recognizing something that many people who didn't follow basketball to closely seem to forget. Carlesimo notes in the article that a lot of people forget Michael Jordan came into the NBA as a very slender 6'5" ish version of the 6'6" monster he would grow into later. In recognizing this Carlesimo is giving Durant an opportunity to play at a less physical position where he can see success instantly. As he grows into that 6'9" body physically and fills out (unless his genetics are more on the variety of a Tayshaun Prince than those of a Jordan), Durant can move comfortably from the 2 to the 3 to the 4.
There is nothing but upside here. Like I said at the outset, some coaches and front offices just get it...
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Lets set the record straight
Okay. So I'm running through some basketball articles today and I come across one from Adrian Wojnarowski titled "Keeping the peace." Here is a link.
In this article the Wojnarowski is basically saying that Phoenix Suns forward Shawn Marion is a spoiled, disgruntled trouble maker for requesting either a contract extension or a trade. While it is true that a trade is unlikely purely for financial reasons, I don't feel Marion's request is enough of a reason to label him a trouble maker. And what I really feel is way off base is this observation, "Still, Marion would be wise stay in Phoenix for as long as the Suns will have him. No matter what he has there – a great team, the best point guard in the sport to get him the ball, a perfect offensive system for him – he always wants something else. In so many ways, he reminds you of Larry Brown. You get the feeling that going elsewhere for more money and more plays would not make him happier..."
It is quotes like this one that have me seriously doubting how much this guy really knows about basketball on the player side of the equation. Strip away all the dollars and the contracts and the caps and lets just look at the player. I don't think Wojnarowski's observation is valid from this pure player standpoint for a couple of reasons.
Marion is a journeyman All Star. But a lot of people don't stop to think about what that means. Before Nash and Stoudemire, Marion was in Phoenix doing his thing. And what was his thing you might ask? His thing was 35 minutes a night, 19 points, 9 rebounds, 1.5 blocks, 2.5 assists per game. 79 games a year for 7 years. How many teams can get that type of production and durability from their stars? Marion isn't flashy, he doesn't growl when he dunks, he doesn't walk on a high wire without a net, or thread laser passes through needle stingy defenses. But what he does do is show up day in, day out and give you superior numbers on both ends of the court. That is not something you can say about any of the other Suns who start. And personally if he wants more money for that, I think you figure out ways to give it to him.
Here is why. I think the Suns owe more of their success to Marion than many are willing to acknowledge. Sure, since Nash showed up the Suns offense has been one of the leagues most prolific scoring machines. But one of the main reasons these guys don't wear rings yet is that while offense packs the house, defense wins championships. Without Marion, the Suns already sieve-like paper charade defense disappears like morning mist when the sun comes up.
Another quote I don't agree with and for the life of me have to wonder has this guy ever seen Marion play?
"And whatever his not-so-veiled resentment of Nash's MVP seasons, just wait until the Matrix is no longer playing with Nash, until he sees how the rest of the league lives without a superstar playmaker to get him the ball, and he'll long to be back where he is now..."
Marion is probably the one Sun who doesn't rely on Nash or set plays to be productive. He isn't the first, the second, or the third option in that offense. And anyone with any legitimate basketball IQ can watch game film and see it. No I think if Marion leaves the Suns will be the ones longing to have what they didn't appreciate. Anytime anyone starts talking about trading Marion vs Stoudemire, it just blows me away. Look at the numbers. Marion was productive before Nash or Stoudemire ever came to Phoenix. When Stoudemire was out, his production went up in one of the most successful Suns' campaigns ever. When Nash is out Marion's numbers do not suffer. This leads me to ask the question, "what the heck gives here, and why is it that no one wants to give this guy the respect and probably the money he deserves?"
To be honest, if Marion is disgruntled, looking at what is being said in the article, I get it. I wouldn't want to stay somewhere that I wasn't fully appreciated either, where they obviously have forgotten how coming to work and producing day in, day out, season in, season out is nothing to sneeze at even if these sports experts don't get it unless they see a highlight on Sportscenter. Lets set the record straight. Phoenix doesn't get past San Antonio, or Dallas unless Marion is wearing one of their jerseys.
In this article the Wojnarowski is basically saying that Phoenix Suns forward Shawn Marion is a spoiled, disgruntled trouble maker for requesting either a contract extension or a trade. While it is true that a trade is unlikely purely for financial reasons, I don't feel Marion's request is enough of a reason to label him a trouble maker. And what I really feel is way off base is this observation, "Still, Marion would be wise stay in Phoenix for as long as the Suns will have him. No matter what he has there – a great team, the best point guard in the sport to get him the ball, a perfect offensive system for him – he always wants something else. In so many ways, he reminds you of Larry Brown. You get the feeling that going elsewhere for more money and more plays would not make him happier..."
It is quotes like this one that have me seriously doubting how much this guy really knows about basketball on the player side of the equation. Strip away all the dollars and the contracts and the caps and lets just look at the player. I don't think Wojnarowski's observation is valid from this pure player standpoint for a couple of reasons.
Marion is a journeyman All Star. But a lot of people don't stop to think about what that means. Before Nash and Stoudemire, Marion was in Phoenix doing his thing. And what was his thing you might ask? His thing was 35 minutes a night, 19 points, 9 rebounds, 1.5 blocks, 2.5 assists per game. 79 games a year for 7 years. How many teams can get that type of production and durability from their stars? Marion isn't flashy, he doesn't growl when he dunks, he doesn't walk on a high wire without a net, or thread laser passes through needle stingy defenses. But what he does do is show up day in, day out and give you superior numbers on both ends of the court. That is not something you can say about any of the other Suns who start. And personally if he wants more money for that, I think you figure out ways to give it to him.
Here is why. I think the Suns owe more of their success to Marion than many are willing to acknowledge. Sure, since Nash showed up the Suns offense has been one of the leagues most prolific scoring machines. But one of the main reasons these guys don't wear rings yet is that while offense packs the house, defense wins championships. Without Marion, the Suns already sieve-like paper charade defense disappears like morning mist when the sun comes up.
Another quote I don't agree with and for the life of me have to wonder has this guy ever seen Marion play?
"And whatever his not-so-veiled resentment of Nash's MVP seasons, just wait until the Matrix is no longer playing with Nash, until he sees how the rest of the league lives without a superstar playmaker to get him the ball, and he'll long to be back where he is now..."
Marion is probably the one Sun who doesn't rely on Nash or set plays to be productive. He isn't the first, the second, or the third option in that offense. And anyone with any legitimate basketball IQ can watch game film and see it. No I think if Marion leaves the Suns will be the ones longing to have what they didn't appreciate. Anytime anyone starts talking about trading Marion vs Stoudemire, it just blows me away. Look at the numbers. Marion was productive before Nash or Stoudemire ever came to Phoenix. When Stoudemire was out, his production went up in one of the most successful Suns' campaigns ever. When Nash is out Marion's numbers do not suffer. This leads me to ask the question, "what the heck gives here, and why is it that no one wants to give this guy the respect and probably the money he deserves?"
To be honest, if Marion is disgruntled, looking at what is being said in the article, I get it. I wouldn't want to stay somewhere that I wasn't fully appreciated either, where they obviously have forgotten how coming to work and producing day in, day out, season in, season out is nothing to sneeze at even if these sports experts don't get it unless they see a highlight on Sportscenter. Lets set the record straight. Phoenix doesn't get past San Antonio, or Dallas unless Marion is wearing one of their jerseys.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Wow. The more I read about the Blazers and Oden...
The more I see this whole situation as a microcosm of of the human condition. Humans you see, want to believe something -- something big. We want to believe something so big that it makes our lives somehow seem -- well, seem like they are more than they are. There are all sorts of examples when you think about it. Once I was listening to a show on NPR about why people who had the least to gain from a Bush presidency were willing to vote for him even if it meant voting against their own self interests. In the story there was this young couple, the wife didn't work, they had 3 kids all under the age of five, and the husband might have had a job at a McDonald's. These people were barely making ends meet. When the reporter asked the husband why he supported Bush the kid answered, "Because he's a self made man. Just like me."
Last week reporters asked the Blazers front office some pretty penetrating questions. Not questions that were in any sense derogatory, but questions that needed answers given the Oden situation. Here is what Kevin Pritchard, Blazers GM had to say.
"We picked the right player. Greg is a world-class human being. He is going to be a great basketball player."
But lets examine these 3 sentences one at a time. Pritchard says the Blazers picked the right player. That means the right player for the Number 1 pick of this year's draft is a player with one leg noticeably longer than the other, has bad knees, wrists, and ankles, has a bulging disk in his back, is 19 and has already had a tonsillectomy and wrist surgery to repair something similar to a torn ACL in his wrist (see my earlier posts) before he has played one single NBA game.
"Greg is a world-class human being." Well Ghandi and Mother Teresa and the Dali Llama are world class human beings too and no one is wasting a lottery pick on them.
"He is going to be a great basketball player." Dude. Every time I read that quote, I want to scream. I want to scream because I look at the list of medical concerns that were known about this kid, I think of the stuff I noticed about him just by watching him play and all I can do is just shake my head in utter disbelief. How bad do you have to want something to be something it isn't to overlook this stuff, then come out of a hospital and say into a bank of microphones, "He's going to be a great basketball player." ? Sigh. Apparently, the kid can't even walk. And how do you see Oden, watch him limp around the gym, then within days watch a healthy Kevin Durant practically glide by you like he's some sort of basketball supermodel and go out with your coveted number 1 pick and use it on Oden? How?
Pritchard also maintains that a "bank" of doctors looked at Oden's physicals, including his knee and they all came back clean. Like I said you see what you want to see. Just like when some folks really wanted to find WMD's in Iraq. All those people wanting something to be the way it had to be. Probably happened in Portland. No one wanted to be the odd man/woman out saying hey, "This intelligence on Oden just isn't adding up." Well when you pay for yes men, this is what you get -- a number 1 draft pick that can't walk without a limp.
Last week reporters asked the Blazers front office some pretty penetrating questions. Not questions that were in any sense derogatory, but questions that needed answers given the Oden situation. Here is what Kevin Pritchard, Blazers GM had to say.
"We picked the right player. Greg is a world-class human being. He is going to be a great basketball player."
But lets examine these 3 sentences one at a time. Pritchard says the Blazers picked the right player. That means the right player for the Number 1 pick of this year's draft is a player with one leg noticeably longer than the other, has bad knees, wrists, and ankles, has a bulging disk in his back, is 19 and has already had a tonsillectomy and wrist surgery to repair something similar to a torn ACL in his wrist (see my earlier posts) before he has played one single NBA game.
"Greg is a world-class human being." Well Ghandi and Mother Teresa and the Dali Llama are world class human beings too and no one is wasting a lottery pick on them.
"He is going to be a great basketball player." Dude. Every time I read that quote, I want to scream. I want to scream because I look at the list of medical concerns that were known about this kid, I think of the stuff I noticed about him just by watching him play and all I can do is just shake my head in utter disbelief. How bad do you have to want something to be something it isn't to overlook this stuff, then come out of a hospital and say into a bank of microphones, "He's going to be a great basketball player." ? Sigh. Apparently, the kid can't even walk. And how do you see Oden, watch him limp around the gym, then within days watch a healthy Kevin Durant practically glide by you like he's some sort of basketball supermodel and go out with your coveted number 1 pick and use it on Oden? How?
Pritchard also maintains that a "bank" of doctors looked at Oden's physicals, including his knee and they all came back clean. Like I said you see what you want to see. Just like when some folks really wanted to find WMD's in Iraq. All those people wanting something to be the way it had to be. Probably happened in Portland. No one wanted to be the odd man/woman out saying hey, "This intelligence on Oden just isn't adding up." Well when you pay for yes men, this is what you get -- a number 1 draft pick that can't walk without a limp.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)