| NFL | |
|
NFL Mock Draft 2009 Draft of 2009 Lacks Star Power NFL Draft 2009: Getting Started Super Bowl Well Worth Tuning In For
|
| NBA | |
|
Prospects On Center Stage NBA Preview 2008/09: Final Call
|
|
NBA Draft 2007: The Bigger Picture By Ron Jumper With the lottery under raps, I can't help but be a little intrigued by how everything played out. The Portland Trailblazers caught what could turn out to be the biggest break in NBA history, as they had virtually no chance of winning the lottery at around 5%. The Supersonics caught nearly as incredible of a break by landing the 2nd pick. From NBA Commisioner David Stern's standpoint, this all worked out way too perfect. Every "T" was crossed and every "I" was dotted on the Stern wishlist. Two teams who were never on national television (Portland and Seattle) will now be on about 20 times a piece next year because of Oden and Durant. Portland was once a great NBA city and it is good for the league for them to be in the mix of things. For Seattle, it could make a world of difference for their future. Remember, the Sonics are in the midst of trying to sell the franchise and/or move to new city. Wouldn't you say the team will be much more appealing to potential buyers once Oden or Durant joins the roster? (Quick refresher, the Cavs franchise grew about $100 million in value when Lebron joined the roster.) Stern knows this, so do you think that could have been part of his master plan all along? It is bad for the league for a franchise to be in limbo and getting negative press. All that could be deemed coincidental, however... During the last few weeks of the regular season Memphis, Boston, and Milwaukee were accused of "tanking" games, which I feel almost certain they were (as I've written before, see "Tanking: Right Or Wrong?"). I think it is very possible Stern wanted to send a message because not one of them made it into the top 3 of the draft, though they had far and away the best odds. Could it be conspiracy? I think it is very possible. I don't really have a problem with this because, overall, it is better for the intergrity of the game for teams to play their best every night and make for an enjoyable product to watch. It isn't fair to season ticket holders or even NBA League Pass subcribers who pay to watch their team, only to have players faking injuries and being "rested" in order to improve the odds on getting more ping pong balls. Everything that happened was for the good of the league so if it was planned, and just made to appear as chance, it really isn't such a bad thing.  Changing gears just a little bit, I was thinking and suddenly an intriguing thought hit me. I realized something very profound. I may have found the missing link between just having talent and being able to win in the NBA. Stay with me for a second... Obviously, winning the championship is the ultimate goal for every NBA team. It is also the most common way athletes are judged as to how successful their careers are or were. With today's media, winning is also the best way for athletes to escape the scrutiny that they can come under at times. Just take this year, there were mulitple players that had the same song with a different beat. There was the usual talk about Kevin Garnett and how he couldn't win in Minnesota, he was overrated, he needed to be traded, etc. There was criticism of Lebron James when he missed critical shots (mostly free throws) at the end of games, saying he didn't have the same desire and competitive nature as D-Wade, Jordan, etc. As the Lakers faded down the stretch, the usual talk of Kobe being unable to win without Shaq and that he didn't make his teammates better resurfaced again. Once the Mavs started losing to the Warriors, Dirk being "soft" and a "choker" in the clutch was all anyone could talk about. When the Jazz won game 7 at Houston, the T-MAC critics came out again because Tracy McGrady has failed to get out of the first round once again. Why did I say all that? You ask. Take KG, Lebron, Kobe, Dirk, and T-Mac, what do all of them have in common? Not a single one of them played college basketball. Let's recap a little bit, take a look at the last decade's NBA Finals MVPs: 2006 Dwyane Wade 2005 Tim Duncan 2004 Chauncey Billups 2003 Tim Duncan 2002 Shaquille O'Neal 2001 Shaquille O'Neal 2000 Shaquille O'Neal 1999 Tim Duncan 1998 Michael Jordan 1997 Michael Jordan Every single one of them spent multiple years in college before going to the NBA. You have to go back to Moses Malone in 1983 to find a NBA Finals MVP that didn't play college basketball and came straight from high school. So what does that mean? You may be wondering. I think it makes perfect sense if you think about it. Take the typical player that jumped straight from high school to the NBA, they played AAU since they could walk and all anyone ever told them was how good they were going to be. The way AAU is set up when you are in high school is that you play 1 or 2 games everyday and it becomes relatively unimportant whether you win or not, it really only matters how good your numbers were. Before too long, these guys can lose that competitive nature to win because they are, to a point, immune to losing in a sense. Everyone around them is telling them that they need to average this or put up that. They forget the importance of winning. Then when they get to the NBA, it is almost the same thing. They are playing for a bad team, so winning isn't even a thought. Their whole workout is geared towards becoming a great 1-on-1 player and being a star. They constantly are told how good they are going to be. The player can't help but get caught up in their own career and, by doing so, put winning to the side. For example, an up-and-coming NBA player like Josh Smith (a former AAU standout for the Atlanta Celtics, a team also featured Dwight Howard) has been told since he got in the league that he would be an amazing player if he developed a jumpshot. I guarantee you Josh Smith would rather get a great jumpshot, become an All-Star, and get a max contract than take the Hawks to the playoffs. Not that he doesn't want to win, but if he had to pick between making the playoffs or being a bookend All-Star, which do you think he would choose?  This is all just food for thought, it isn't fact. I just like to speculate and come up with my own theories as to how to win and what route you should take to building a winning team. I like the idea that bringing in guys that know how to win breeds winning. Take the Bulls 4 years ago, they really didn't have much going for them. Then they started drafting proven college winners like Hinrich, Gordon, Duhon, and Deng (even Tyrus Thomas played in the Final Four) to give them a winning attitude and competitive nature. Since then, they have become a winning franchise that is a piece or two away from winning a championship. Name a team that was bad and got turned around thanks to an influx of high school talent... Yeah, I can't think of one either. Take a team like Seattle, who hasn't taken a college player in the first round since 2003 (Nick Collison). They have took project after project, trying to get that next diamond in the rough big man. All the while, they were waisting Ray Allen's prime. Imagine if they had taken the Bulls approach and brought in winners around Allen to compliment him. Instead of drafting project centers Robert Swift, Johan Petro, and Saer Sene; they could have taken Jameer Nelson, David Lee, and Ronnie Brewer. Imagine the difference, take a look at that lineup: PG Jameer Nelson SG Ray Allen SF Rashard Lewis PF Chris Wilcox C David Lee Bench: SG Ronnie Brewer PG Luke Ridnour PF Nick Collison This would be a team fighting for a playoff spot at the very least. Suddenly, you would have a young athletic team that could get up and down the floor. It would make for exciting basketball, so they would probably get on television more often. It would make Seattle a more desirable place to coach. Most importantly, they wouldn't have waisted Ray Allen's prime. Allen is one of my favorite NBA players and I think it is a travesty he has been stuck in Seattle all this time without a legitamate chance to even make the playoffs, much less make a playoff run.  Be sure to check back Friday, as Ron will be breaking down the 2007 NBA Draft pick by pick with his Mock Draft. You won't be able to find better insight, as he breaks down possible trade scenarios, team needs, and hypothetical lineups for next season. May 23, 2007 |
| NCAA Football | |
|
Be Careful What You Wish For
|
| NCAA Basketball | |
|
Jumpology: My Bracket Jumpology: Scouting The Heavyweights Jumpology: Reviewing The Bracket
|