in defense of the king
NBA:
The King James Version of the 2010 NBA season has come under heavy fire from alleged scholars.
Bill Simmons ripped LeBron James for not coming out sooner with a quote declaring his preference to to stay with the Cavs if that is in fact his intention. All-unknowing Geoff Ketchum proclaimed his former whipping boy Kobe the greatest while abusing James for having a Larry King interview during the finals and trying to be the center of attention during the finals instead of "growing up" and leading a team to a championship.
Well, first of all the King on King interview was only aired recently, by Larry's decision, after being taped during the playoffs. You might criticize Lebron for making a large deal of his own free agency, but then I don't know when a greater player was an available free agent. It is a big deal and I'm not one to clamor for tons of false-humility.
Last season he produced 24.78 wins with a WP48 over .400. The list of NBA players who have achieved numbers like that is short and only includes names like Olajuwon, Bird, or Jordan. His teammates accounted for another 33.08 wins and 16 of those came from Jamario Moon (4.19), Anderson Varejao (8.17, 2nd highest on the team), and Hickson (4.09). You'll notice that all three of those players were denied crucial playoff minutes by brain trust Mike Brown.
As a reminder, while Kobe has played much stronger in the playoffs (still not approaching James) he only produced 9.69 wins this season with a WP48 of .164.
This is classic winner's bias. The perceived good players on the winning team are always elevated in public opinion over the good players from the losing team. Lost in this oversimple perspective is that teams win games. While superstars make a larger difference in the NBA than perhaps any other league they still require a lot of help to secure championships.
Lebron James deserves the money he'll be paid soon, the firing of the Cavs' incompetent coach and GM, and a decent team around him to maximize the greatest player since Jordan. He doesn't deserve stupid criticisms of a performance beyond what anyone else in the league is currently capable of producing or the silly comparisons to the winning team's superstars.
As far as your game 1 analyis: I think one of the biggest difference makers in this series is Andrew Bynum. I already noted that a surge from him would be impactful and the kind of disparity between Gasol and Garnett or Bynum and Perkins we saw in game 1 will mean a short, successful series for the Lakers. The Boston perimeter is good but you usually can't count on guards to make the difference over strong production from the big men. Unless the guard is named Bird, Magic, Jordan, etc.
Football:
I prefer the Pac10, or PAC16 or whatever, to all other options.
On News8 Austin I saw an old feller from Waco decrying the "splitting of Texas teams" and arguing that Baylor deserves to be in the same league with Texas and the other Big 12 programs. His notion that Baylor is just as competitive as any other school is obviously laughable and I couldn't help but notice that his idea of what constitutes a Texas school strangely didn't apply to TCU, SMU, Houston or Rice all of which would protest inclusion on a tier below Baylor.
At any rate I wouldn't at all mind dropping the baptists exhibition game from the yearly schedule, or even the farmers for that matter. I understand that many Aggies would prefer to compete in the SEC and would happily leave Texas. I remember, as a Red Sox fan arguing that our identity was not in fact rooted to being perennial losers and that winning would just simplify baseball for poor Red Sox Nation and remove the suffering. Then Boston won 2 World Series. I celebrated a seminal sports moment and haven't been as drawn to what the sport offers since then. The time commitment necessary to routinely follow the baseball season is too intense to sign up for more abuse after already tasting the sweetness of redemption.
My point is this, the Aggies entire identity is wrapped up in beating Texas and arriving in Sports Heaven with a Big 12 title, victory over Texas, and national championship. Nothing could have more meaning or importance for their culture. They'll just be someone else's bitch in the South Eastern penitentiary anyways.
Geekdom:
Just watched the Vietcong take on the Waffen-S. As far as the actual competition it came down to this for me:
It takes a far different level of tactical skill to defend your homeland than to conquer other nations in their own environment. The Vietcong were like the Aggy basketball squad, very difficult to defeat on their own court but incapable of greatness beyond that. The Waffen-SS would be your Duke Blue-Devils, terrible in Cameron but likely to brutalize you anywhere else as well with a host of obnoxiously superior and calculating white dudes.
The gap in weapons technology was minimized by the fact that the only weapons the Vietcong made for themselves were primitive (although certainly devious) explosives and traps. The rest were Soviet or French hand-me-downs.
The tests made it seem as though the sub-machine guns were equal as killers but the German's test was clearly more difficult than the Vietcong Normandy-shoot'em up. I would have guessed that the Mauser was superior to the Tokarev, although the Soviet handgun looked a lot better than many of the sidearms U.S. troops are issued even today.
All that aside, this was one of the most hilarious episodes I've seen to date. The Germans were clearly uncomfortable with trash-talking about their Nazi predecessors while still maintaining superior facial expressions that hissed, "granted my grandfather was an ass-hole but he still would wipe the floor with yours..."
All of the acted scenes were particularly comedic as they repeatedly used words like "evil" and "despicable" while portraying SS and Vietcong fighters slaughtering idiotic Americans including one fantastic and often-repeated shot of a Vietnamese dude shooting down a helicopter with a quick spray from the hip with his machine gun.
The show's hosts clearly weren't too comfortable announcing that the deplorable Nazi's had toppled another foe although they didn't hide their excitement when the German weapons experts were shooting up mannequins that represented another race of humans to be put under foot.
If you are able to find humor in this sort of thing rather than getting your panties bunched up over the fake depiction of American combat deaths...well, the show offers a phenomenal brand of comedy you won't find elsewhere.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There’s a good (and cynical) Yahoo article today that talks about how Cavs owner Gilbert tries to run the team and make strategic decisions instead of just ponying up the money. Ostensibly, you can’t blame Brown for everything. And supposedly Ferry resigned because he was so fed up with Gilbert’s interference. Obviously, Brown was NOT a good or probably even mediocre offensive coach, but not everybody is Phil Jackson and honestly I’ve never seen players step up LESS than what Cleveland’s have done (including LeBron) over the past couple years in the playoffs.
by Blake Borron on Jun 6, 2010 3:23 PM CDT reply actions
LeBron has been fantastic in the playoffs the last few years. He’s been recording triple-doubles and 40 point games. Brown has been benching his best teammates to trot out Illgauskas and Shaq’s rotting corpses and the others have stepped up so well.
Additionally, they’ve run into good teams, defeats happen.
I don’t know much about Gilbert but if I owned a team I would be heavily involved like Cuban or Snyder.
by Nickel Rover on Jun 6, 2010 5:31 PM CDT reply actions
I’m with Nickel Rover on this. Lebron’s playoff performances over the past few years have been nothing short of stellar.
I was worried they would lose because of Mike Brown, and they did. The Cavs won 13 or 14 straight when Mo Williams and Delonte West were both injured and Lebron was running the point, and Lebron was putting up 10+ assists per game. They ran small with Hickson or Varejo at the 5, and Moon and/or Parker on the wing. No team could keep up with that group. Playing an older team like the Celtics, the Cavs needed to run them out of the gym. They played a slow paced game featuring Shaq on offense and never stood a chance. I think Moon and Hickson combined for 15 minutes over the last 3 games against the Celtics (all losses).
Ferry deserved the axe too. Larry Hughes? Mo Williams? That was the best he could do to get a complimentary scorer for Lebron? They could have had Amare Stoudamire, but were unwilling to give up JJ Hickson. I can kind of agree with that, especially when factoring chemistry. But to then turn around and not use Hickson during the playoffs invalidated any reasoning they had for keeping him.
by EggNog on Jun 6, 2010 9:48 PM CDT reply actions
Amar’e, while heavily overrated because he doesn’t play defense, rebound, and thrives specifically with Steve Nash in the Phoenix style, would be a wonderful partner for LeBron.
Who is guarding LeBron and Amar’e on a pick’n’roll? Who gets the shaft on that switch? It’s un-guardable. Pair that with Anderson Varejao’s defense and rebounding and you have the best frontcourt in the league.
Unless maybe Bynum recovers his form and health to consistently play like he did in game 2…then I don’t even know.
Blake we seem to disagree fairly often but man do I ever love that you post your thoughts here on a regular basis.
by Nickel Rover on Jun 7, 2010 2:37 AM CDT reply actions
“I don’t know much about Gilbert but if I owned a team I would be heavily involved like Cuban or Snyder.”
You just outed yourself as an insufferable asshole, and frankly I don’t see it.
I’ve always maintained that Thebron isn’t going anywhere. It’s home. I couldn’t leave a fan base in my hometown for all the money in the world, especially since I’d be paid all the money in the world to stay put.
Agreed, BronBron is the best since MJ. Save the Kobe faggotry.
If I was a producer of that show, I’d probably just stay away from anything that had the Nazi’s “winning.”
by magnusbleuveigner on Jun 7, 2010 8:45 AM CDT reply actions
Really Magnus? If you owned a team you wouldn’t heavily involve yourself in the major operations and joke about rivals and major sporting news? Why else would you own a team (besides the opportunity to make millions)?
by Nickel Rover on Jun 7, 2010 5:43 PM CDT reply actions
You understood that I meant I didn’t see you as an insufferable asshole. Hopefully you got that.
No, I can’t distance myself from some of Cuban’s other business interests, and his schtick is tiring. Snyder is just a pompous prick.
You can be heavily involved and actually be on TV less than Vanna White. Eddie Debartalo was hands on (speaking of questionable business interests) and gave the credit where it was do, though other than accepting Super Bowl trophy’s he was behind the scenes.
In the spotlight owners include: Steinbrenner (iron fisted a-hole,double entendre alert), Jerry Jones (supreme a-hole), Cuban (a-hole, though he’s made me chuckle) and Snyder (shitty owner, and an a-hole).
by magnusbleuveigner on Jun 8, 2010 9:56 AM CDT reply actions
Okay I see. Well it’s hard to know which owners are particularly involved in their teams if I haven’t heard of them. Those guys I’ve heard of because of their heavy exposure which you find so distasteful.
I wouldn’t want to be like Snyder, particularly the incompetent part, except in the regard of being heavily involved in FA signings, draft picks, etc. Cuban is hated, I know, but typically I enjoy his loud advocacy for the Mavs. You have to admit that the man enjoys his job.
by Nickel Rover on Jun 8, 2010 10:28 AM CDT reply actions

by 























