ballershorts.com
Archive for January, 2009
January 27, 2009 at 2:53 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves
Today I am off on a journey…
To a magical place where no one ever commits a foul…
To a mythical land where hair fosters strength…
To a wondrous realm where the largest giants only throw rocks from beyond 23 feet…
That’s right, I am off to Europe. Specifically, I am traveling to Barcelona, the native home of the Gasol brothers and a hotbed of Euro hoops.
So many questions are asked about European players: Why are they so soft? Why do they whine so much? Why don’t they have barbers?
Well, I will attempt to answer these questions in my few months abroad. I plan to attend professional contests and play pick-up in the streets, truly scrutinizing the forces, both physical and mental, that have created the typical European baller.
If anyone has any suggestions, questions, ideas, or concerns, please let me know.
January 18, 2009 at 1:33 am · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves
For better or for worse, most people have nicknames.
Let’s be honest, the names we receive from our parents are rarely exciting. How many of you had 6 Mikes in your high school class? Point made.
Apparently famous people are exempt from following the conventional wisdom that you give your children “actual” names (e.g. actress Gwyneth Paltrow’s daughter Apple and magician Penn Jillette’s daughter Moxie CrimeFighter). But we all can’t be as trendsetting as celebrities, and thus we settle for good, old-fashioned monikers. My parents played by the rules and named me Ben.
However, we normal people have refused to let celebrities hoard all the fun. Just because our birth certificates say one thing doesn’t mean we can’t be addressed by another. And while nicknames may have originated as ways to distinguish Mike A. from Mike B., they have evolved into so much more. They can praise or disparage, tell stories or describe characteristics, establish connection or foment discord. In fact, I believe nicknames are signs that life is rich and vibrant.
For example, my father’s friend was so dominant at ping pong that it seemed like he was playing with 8 arms; he will forever be called Spider.
Somehow, by the end of my freshman year at Columbia I was regularly referred to as B Dolla. (That made me far too happy; I even got the name inscribed on my next pair of basketball sneakers.)
The basketball court is the perfect place for the creation of nicknames. You hit big shots, you become known as Mr. Clutch. You always deliver, you’re The Mailman. You make passes that have spectators wondering “How did he do that?” Magic.
Some monikers, like the ones above, need no further explanation; Others, not so much.
Poking around Wikipedia – “The Cave of Wonders” – I recently discovered a list of NBA players’ nicknames. All of the obvious sobriquets were present, but I was quite surprised at the plethora of unknown, undeserved, and downright fascinating labels. Below is a list of those I found most amusing:
Dikembe Mutombo – Air Zaire. Has anyone ever really seen him jump? And how about Bows of Steel or Bowflex?
Nick Young – Bean Burrito. Don’t ask me what this means. Ask Nick himself. This might be his response: ”Only the great legends were named Burrito. They used call Michael Jordan ‘Black Bean Burrito,’ because he was dark, and his head was like a bean. Kobe was called guacamole.” Hmmm. I know that Young left school early, but seriously? (More about this can be found here.)
Jerome James – Big Snacks. I know they inked him to a deal worth $30 million over 5 years, but didn’t the Knicks have a little money left over to get James a nutritionist?
Channing Frye – Buffet of Goodness. Supposedly Frye once compared his own skill set to said buffet. If the smorgasbord only features 18 foot jumpers, then he’s right on target.
Brian Cardinal – The Custodian. How astute! He truly does resemble a custodian much more than a basketball player. I guess if his team doesn’t want him in the rotation, they could at least use him in the halls.
Manu Ginobili – The Poo God. I honestly have no idea. They say that you can find anything on the internet, but it’s not true. You cannot find the history behind this nickname.
Joel Przybilla – Vanilla Gorilla. From now on, whenever I’m in a bad mood I will just envision Przybilla’s head on the body of a gorilla. I wish I was handy with picture editing, but I’m not. You will also just have to use your imagination.
Those are just a few of the remarkable nicknames circulating around the league. If you are interested in perusing the entire list, you can find it here.
January 12, 2009 at 5:46 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Awards
Hello everyone! With conference play delightfully underway, we’ve reached roughly the halfway point of the college basketball season. At this juncture in every professional league, sportswriters congregate like flies around flames to bestow interim awards. I would like to extend this service to the ranks of amateur ballers and hand out some midseason hardware.
Most Impressive Team: Pittsburgh I know it’s kind of lame to go with the #1 ranked team here, but there’s a reason they sit at the top of the polls. The Panthers are undefeated, and they are dominating almost every game. In fact, they have won all but two of their contests by at least 13 points. Jamie Dixon has a squad that doesn’t turn the ball over, controls the glass, boasts great inside-out balance, and has two senior leaders in Sam Young and Levance Fields. That is a perfect recipe for success. Pittzburgh has come to play every single night, refusing to suffer one of those emotional letdowns so prevalent in the college game. I don’t know if they are explosive enough to win the tournament in March, but they will be in every game they play.
MVP: Jonny Flynn (Syracuse) I fully expect to catch some flak for this pick, as Steph Curry, Blake Griffin, James Harden, and Jeff Teague might be more obvious choices. I could not fault anyone for backing one of those four. ’Cuse has ascended to #8 after being unranked in the preseason, their 16 wins tying Clemson’s for the most in the country, and Flynn has been the undeniable catalyst for the surprisingly excellent Orangemen. The sophomore point guard’s statistics are modest, 16.4 points and 5.5 assists per game, but his impact is far greater than his numbers would indicate. He could average 25 if he wanted, but that’s not what his team needs. Flynn is his squad’s emotional leader and go-to guy. He knows exactly what Coach Boeheim wants his team to do and makes sure that they execute. Perhaps most importantly, he has played his best in Syracuse’s toughest games. When second leading scorer Eric Devendorf was suspended at Memphis, Flynn played all 40 minutes, contributing 24 points, 6 assists, 4 rebounds, 3 steals and willing his team to victory. In my opinion, Syracuse is evolving into a legitimate championship contender, and Jonny Flynn is the reason why. Also, check out this finish.
Best Coach: Dino Gaudio (Wake Forest) After Skip Prosser’s tragic death two summers ago, Gaudio was promoted to head coach and endured a difficult 2007-08 season. The Deamon Deacons were just 17-13 (7-10) and did not even make the NIT. This year has been a completely different story: they are now 14-0 and ranked #2 in the country. Wake definitely has talent, but I have to give Gaudio most of the credit for their success. He is coaching a very young team, starting a freshman, two sophomores, and two juniors, and getting the absolute most out of them. The Deamon Deacons keep turning in impressive performances, repeatedly displaying toughness, smarts, and resiliency. They just snapped BYU’s 53-game home winning streak and knocked off UNC.
Biggest Disappointment: Gonzaga They always play a tough nonconference schedule, but this Bulldogs team has recently been very underwhelming. After climbing to #4 in the AP poll, they proceeded to lose four of their next five, including one to Portland State at home. Their overtime loss to UConn ostensibly looks pretty good, but they blew a fantastic opportunity (and a double digit lead) by getting rattled down the stretch. Though they’ve done it twice, Tennessee is the only ranked team that they’ve beaten. Austin Daye and Jeremy Pargo, who were in many preseason All-American discussions, have been very inconsistent.
Biggest Surprise: The Bay Area Nobody outside of NorCal predicted this much success for Cal and Stanford. The Golden Bears were just 17-16 last year, while the Cardinal lost the Lopez twins. But new head coaches Mike Montgomery and Johnny Dawkins have their teams playing some great ball, as Cal is 15-2 and Stanford is 11-3. The difficult Pac-10 slate will tell us if these teams are for real; early signs are pointing to yes for Cal (4-0) and no for Stanford (1-3), but we need to stay posted.
Best Freshman: Greg Monroe (Georgetown) In a year devoid of one-and-done talent, the do-it-all center for the Hoyas has been the steadiest diaper dandy. He is a very versatile weapon, with the ability to score in multiple ways and great court vision. He has also recently picked up his rebounding numbers. On an otherwise undersized team, Monroe has ably filled the void left by Roy Hibbert. When he gets stronger and more assertive, he will become a true nightmare.
Best Player You Don’t Know: Michael Washington (Arkansas) Despite losing all five starters from last year’s tournament team, Arkansas has jumped out to a 12-2 record. Perhaps the biggest reason is the emergence of their Junior power forward. A bit player last season, Washington is now averaging 18 points on 60% shooting, to go along with 10 rebounds per game. Furthermore, he produced two of his finest performances in the Razorbacks’ huge upsets of Oklahoma and Texas, even playing Blake Griffin to a standstill. He might be the most athletic big man in the country.
Most Ridiculous Game: Texas Tech 167 – East Central 115 These aren’t your father’s Red Raiders. Bob Knight’s son Pat has instilled some Mike Leach-esque offense to Tech’s hardwood. In this absurdly uptempo game, 17 players scored in double figures (1o by Texas Tech), but none had more than 20. Some more crazy Red Raiders’ stats: they shot 59.3% from the field, forced 29 turnovers, dished out 35 assists, and snagged 24 offensive rebounds.
January 7, 2009 at 10:23 pm · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves
I noticed an interesting thing while watching Boston College’s upset of previously #1 ranked North Carolina. There has naturally been much discussion regarding this game, as UNC had been viewed as somewhat immortal, but one intriguing late-game development isn’t really being mentioned. Down by 10 points with 3 and a half minutes to go, UNC really ramped up the defensive pressure in a desperate attempt to come back. The Tar Heels pressed, trapped, scrambled, reached, bumped, and scrapped. The Eagles meanwhile looked like deer caught in headlights; they appeared deathly afraid to dribble and had no idea where to pass the ball. 2 and a half minutes (and several BC turnovers) later, it was a 3 point game. There just wasn’t quite enough time for Carolina to fully overcome the deficit; they were forced to foul and BC hit clutch free throws. But it seemed as if the Tar Heels would have won had they just initiated the pressure tactic a little sooner.
This got me thinking… Why not start out a game that way?
I’m not recommending this strategy for every team. But if you are a more athletic, heavily favored squad, wouldn’t it behoove you to play helter-skelter pressure D from the get-go? Wouldn’t it take your opponents out of their comfort zone, force them to alter their gameplan, create easy buckets, and cement your mental advantage? I believe the answer is yes.
If it was that obvious, though, then more teams would do it. (If I’m not forgetting someone, Tennessee is the only high-profile program that regularly utilizes a press.) There must be reasons why such a tactic is not widely employed. Yet I must respectfully disagree with prevailing wisdom. I have tried to anticipate the critiques to my proposal, and I think I have sufficient responses.
Critique: It tires out your guys.
Response: If you are successful, you will build an early lead. As a better team, you definitely want to play from ahead. You can then use the bench more freely, dictate tempo, and potentially put the game away quickly. And if you have properly conditioned your players, they should be able to play this style.
Critique: You can’t simulate the desperation felt at the end of tough games. Without that natural emotion, the press will not be as effective.
Response: While that desperate feeling can sometimes be a boon, it can also be detrimental to success. It can cause mental mistakes, breakdowns, and cheap fouls. A good coach should be able to get his team amped enough and then accurately direct that energy. Furthermore, players are fresher at the beginning of the game, which could compensate for the lack of desperation.
Critique: In crunch time, an underdog with a slim lead plays tight, trying to not lose rather than to win. Therefore, they don’t fully attack the press for fear of messing up, which in turn messes them us more. This stress is not felt at tipoff, so they might respond better.
Response: Other, equally strong stresses are felt at the start. The underdog is often nervous about being run out of the building, embarrassed. Why not smack them in the mouth immediately? Don’t let them feel for one second as if they belong on the same court as you. Don’t let any of their players get loose or comfortable. If the game is close down the stretch, then they know that they can hang. Don’t give them that mental edge.
Critique: A breakdown of a pressuring, trapping defense usually leads to an easier bucket than a breakdown of “regular” defense.
Response: That risk is real, but there is also much greater reward. A stop on “regular” defense rarely creates simple transition baskets the way a stop in this defense will. And if you truly trust in your players’ mental and physical abilities, you should believe that they can recover back on D when necessary.
Critique: It could lead to foul trouble for important players. Guys are more likely to make physical contact in a feisty trapping press than in other schemes.
Response: In my opinion, this is the biggest potential downside. Having to sit one of your best players due to foul trouble greatly effects your gameplan. Again, it comes down to trust and intelligence; veteran players should be able to execute. And if a foul or two gets called, you can always retreat back into a more traditional D.
Let me reiterate and clarify: I don’t think that every team should use this strategy. It isn’t easy to carry out. But I am suggesting that the best teams in the country, teams possessing a high level of talent, athleticism, and experience, should ALWAYS use it against lesser, inexperienced squads. It would decrease the risk of being upset and generally make games easier.
January 4, 2009 at 1:33 am · by bteitelbaum · Filed under Rants and Raves
Stephon Marbury has been called a lot of things - overpaid, egotistical fool has a nice ring to it – but rarely has he been termed a winner. In fact, every team he left (Minnesota, New Jersey, and Phoenix) won 50 games in their first post-Marbury season. In spite of his undeniable talent, prevailing opinion says he is a player to be avoided.
And yet the Celtics want to sign him.
The “Our Chemistry Is Amazing and We Sacrifice Individual Accomplishment for Team Achievement” Celtics want to sign the “I Have a Tattoo of My Company’s Logo on My Head” Stephon Marbury!
You know what? It might not be as crazy as it sounds. It just might work.
The public and the media have very short memories, and thus the Celtics are now widely viewed as consummate winners. But let’s not forget about their history before last season. Though no one ever disputed the individual abilities of Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen, there were definitely questions concerning their attitudes and mentalities. In actuality, none of them had really been “winners” either. Let’s take a close look at each member of the big 3.
The Truth – The only member of the big 3 that was drafted by the Celtics, Pierce has always been an effective scorer and well-rounded player. As Boston’s franchise player, he restored the team’s respectability following several seasons near the bottom of the Eastern Conference. He even led the C’s to the conference finals in 2002. After that, however, it started going downhill. There were trade rumors surrounding Pierce in the summer of 2003, and the team descended once more to the cellar of the East. There were whispers around the league, Did he believe he could ever seriously win in Boston? Did he even want to be there anymore?
The Big Ticket – During his time in Minnesota, in which he was good for 20, 10, and 5 every night, Garnett was named to 8 All-NBA teams and won an MVP award. However, his T’Wolves lost in the first round of the playoffs 7 straight times. They finally broke through and reached the Western Conference Finals in 2004, but that was the last time Garnett would sniff postseason. Though Garnett’s intensity was unmatched, he ostensibly lacked a killer instinct, seeming to defer to others when the game was on the line. There were whispers around the league, Could he carry his team when they needed him most? Was he scared of the big shot?
Ray-Ray – Jesus Shuttlesworth got game. In 11 seasons with Milwaukee and Seattle, Allen averaged 22 points/game and shot 40% from three point range. Unfortunately, his total record was under .500 (428-436) and he only made it to the playoffs 4 times. Furthermore, Allen had a well-publicized feud with Kobe which began right after Shaq was traded. The true motivations behind Allen’s criticism are yet unknown, but many surmised that there was an aspect of jealousy over the fact that Kobe was considered a better player. There were whispers around the league, Was he anything more than a talented gunslinger? Did he really want to win as badly as he wanted to score?
The questions didn’t end immediately when this trio came together. Until the group stepped on the court, uncertainties abounded, and few people outside of New England truly believed that it would only take one year to win it all. Were they willing to surrender shot attempts and isolation plays? Who would emerge as the leader? Would Allen and Pierce fully commit to defense? There was certainly a chance of failure.
The Celtics’ overwhelming success obviously made these worries moot. Everyone bought into the team concept, accepted reduced roles, tightened the screws defensively, and ratcheted up the intensity. The prior questions were answered, and the prior criticisms forgotten.
Sometimes you get lucky, falling into the right situation with the perfect people. Pierce, Garnett, and Allen were just so fortunate. I’m not intimating that this will definitely happen to Marbury should he join Boston. He has been more problematic and erratic than the other three, both on and off the court.
But I wouldn’t discount him yet. It would not be a total surprise if a Celtics’ Marbury experiment was successful. Hey, we can’t completely understand cosmic forces, can we?
And if it somehow works, if Marbury does everything right and helps Boston repeat, how do we remember him then?