There’s an old ‘Peanuts,’ strip in which Peppermint Patty is being asked by her teacher why she doesn’t have her homework. She talks at length about TV shows she had to watch; something that caught her attention on the radio and a comic strip—or something like it—that she spent time reading. Finally she stands up, finger in the air and says: “I blame the media!”
Peppermint Patty meet Eric Spoelstra.
Look, I don’t come here this morning to bury Spoelstra but I certainly don’t come here to praise him either. I think the argument can be made he has the toughest coaching or managing job in professional sports right now. Not only is he going to be judged a failure as the coach of The Miami Heat if the team doesn’t win the NBA title, he has to share a locker room with LeBron James.
I’m not adding the names Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh. If Spoelstra was just coaching the two of them he’d be living the good life in South Beach. Bosh is a very good player who never should have been in the same sentence or hype-fest with James and Wade. He’s a perfect third option on a very good team—which is what The Heat happen to be. Wade—unlike James—has proven he can lead a team to a championship and has also proven during this season that his ego, unlike one of his teammates, isn’t slightly larger than Gaul—no, I wasn’t around when it was divided into three parts, but I did read about it.
The problem for Spoelstra is James—and the fact that he’s about 14-years-old and clearly in over his head right now. The minute James made, “The Decision,” to take his talents to South Beach, Spoelstra’s job became impossible. He’d be better off right now applying for the open jobs at Texas Tech or at Towson. If The Heat had broken the Bulls NBA record of 72 wins—as many so-called experts predicted last summer; go back and check the tapes—and had swept to the title, Spoelstra would have been the guy in the suit who was along for the ride. The minute the team started 9-8 he became the coach who couldn’t tell an X from an O.
The Heat is 43-20. If you listen to people talk about them you would think they were 20-43. They’re not winning close games against good teams. That may change but at the moment they are offensively dysfunctional in the end game because they haven’t got a point guard and because James HAS to have the ball even when the defense KNOWS he has to have the ball.
Okay, fine. So they’ve lost a bunch of games they could have won but the fact remains it won’t matter until and unless they lose in May or June. Then Spoelstra will get fired and James won’t take responsibility for anything. Maybe he’ll start talking about his next Decision and remind people he can opt out of South Beach in another two years. (Remember his speech about all he’s done for Cleveland?)
Where Spoelstra got into trouble the last couple days wasn’t so much with his comment about players crying in the locker room after Sunday’s loss to the Bulls but with his ridiculous blame-the-media crack on Monday even though one can’t help but wonder why in the world anyone would be crying—or even glassy-eyed--after a loss in March. Maybe LeBron told Mike Bibby this was all his fault and he burst into tears, but I doubt it.
Spoelstra was trying to make the point that the close losses aren’t fueled by a lack of desire—which is fine, although lacking desire at this point in an NBA season is pretty commonplace. Have you watched a Washington Wizards road game anytime recently? So, he used a phrase he shouldn’t have used because, “guys crying in there,” gets your attention. It isn’t as if the Heat’s season ended on Sunday. There were kids playing college basketball on Sunday who saw their CAREERS end. That’s when you cry and no one begrudges you your tears. Pros crying after a regular season loss makes you want to put out a call for Tom Hanks.
Of course everything the Heat does is news. So, when Spoelstra blurted out that there was crying in his locker room, people wondered who was crying and why. Yes, it sounds like a soap opera because it is: “Days of LeBron’s Life.” He would insist that be the title as would the four-letter folks in Bristol who promote EVERY Heat game as, “LeBron James and The Miami Heat…” Maybe that was in the contract for ‘The Decision,’ (don’t you love the part where the ESPN dork says he’d do it again? That’s a little bit like the people who gave Magic Johnson a talk show saying THEY’D do it again). Wade, the guy with, you know, the actual championship ring, is just supporting cast when LeBron is in the room.
What Spoelstra should have done on Monday was laugh and say, ‘hey fellas, I was trying to make a point yesterday about how hard I think my guys are playing. I probably meant to say, ‘a lot of guys in there FEEL like crying.’ We took the loss hard but not THAT hard.’”
Instead he went Peppermint Patty and blamed the media. “A classic case of media sensationalism,” he called it. No Eric, ‘The Decision,’ was a classic case of media sensationalism and so is sticking Charlie Sheen on every single TV show that exists and promoting his appearances as if President Obama was about to announce a peace treaty had been signed in Afghanistan.
Reporting what you said in a press conference and finding it amusing, bemusing and kind of funny that you said your players were crying after losing in the 63d game of an 82-game regular season is hardly sensationalism.
Of course now those that apologize for anyone and everyone in sports are scrambling to say, ‘yeah, see, it’s those bad guys in the media.’ This morning on the way to the pool, I heard Dick Vitale doing his weekly bit with the morning pitchmen. (I couldn’t help but notice that they threw him overboard after six minutes. Was that because they HAD to get in a commercial or a sponsor-mention or was Dicky V. just out of breath?). Anyway, my position on Vitale has been made clear in the past: Love him, heart of gold. There’s nothing phony about his passion.
That said, Dicky V. somehow turned Spoelstra saying his players cried into a rant about how HE cried when he recently went to visit kids in a cancer ward at a hospital. “What’s wrong with crying! What’s wrong with a little emotion! Sometimes the media is just vicious—vicious!”
Okay Dick, calm yourself. Crying when you spend time with kids who have cancer isn’t just understandable, it’s to be expected. Honestly, I’ve done it myself and I don’t just cry, I get physically ill. Even writing it now conjures up visions that give me the shakes. You simply can’t—CAN NOT—compare that to basketball players crying after losing a game—even the justifiable tears of a career-ending loss. So please, let’s not ever go there or anywhere close to there again.
Meantime, “LeBron James and The Miami Heat,” have another game tonight. And then another and another and another. In about seven weeks they’ll play game that means something. Until then, Eric Spoelstra can cry all he wants about media sensationalism. My advice would be to get over it.
Showing posts with label LeBron James. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LeBron James. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
As the world goes ‘round – Favre, LeBron back for headlines
So Brett Favre and LeBron James are back in the news today. Sort of.
I mean let’s be honest, Favre deciding to play football this season ranks up there with the sun rising in the east and ESPN trying to claim that tomorrow being Thursday is an exclusive story when it comes to being newsworthy.
The funny thing is I never really pictured this guy as the world’s biggest diva until the past few years. He was always the rugged quarterback who took every hit, got up and kept playing. Now he’s still rugged and takes hit, he just likes to have people fawn over him and plead with him not to retire each offseason. He craves attention the way I crave John’s Pizza. (New York City, the best there is. Okay, now I’ve made myself hungry).
This time three teammates actually had to fly to Mississippi to go to Favre’s farm on bended knee and beg him to come back. Are you kidding me? Look, I don’t blame the Vikings. Favre was a major reason—Adrian Peterson might have been a factor too although that’s often overlooked—they were about two plays from reaching the Super Bowl last year. The other quarterbacks they have on the roster might get them to the playoffs because Peterson’s still there and the rest of the team is very solid, but they aren’t going anywhere in the postseason without a quality quarterback—which Favre probably still is even at 41.
But the diva act really rankles. As with Tiger Woods, Favre clearly isn’t getting very good advice. He’s gone from being one of the most respected figures in football to a punch line (for reasons, obviously, entirely different than Woods). The whole Hamlet thing wore thin a couple of years ago and yet he’s continued it with no sign of any real self-awareness about it. Yes, he did do that commercial where he pokes fun at himself for indecision, I give him credit for that. But, not surprisingly, what did that involve: getting attention and making money. Clearly, that’s what Favre is all about.
Of course as long as he performs few people are going to care. That’s how divas get to be divas. They’re so good at what they do that they’re allowed their foibles because the price paid for putting up with them is worth it. Certainly all the garbage Favre put the Vikings through last summer proved worth it once he got on the field. Clearly they are counting on the same thing happening this fall.
Favre better be aware of one thing though: If he doesn’t perform, whether because of an injury or age finally catching up with him, he’s going to get jumped on. Years ago Bob Knight said this to me: “I know as long as I win, people around here will say I’m eccentric. If I ever stop winning, they’ll say I’m an embarrassment.”
Knight stopped making Final Fours at Indiana in 1992. By 1999, he was vulnerable enough that Myles Brand could get away with firing him. If he’d been to a Final Four in, say, 1998, Brand wouldn’t have dared.
So Favre better crank up the arm and win a bunch of games or he might find himself booed off the stage.
The same is going to be true of James. If by some chance the Miami Heat aren’t dominant, if he gags in the playoffs the way he did the last two years in Cleveland, he will be a laughing stock around the country—except of course on ESPN where Stuart Scott will no doubt still pay homage to The King at every turn—and he won’t be The God of South Beach.
Whether he wins or not, it was certainly amusing to read one quote from the interviewed release by, I think, Gentleman’s Quarterly yesterday. In it, James shoots back at Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert, who ripped him after he left for Miami. Look, James is entitled to shoot back, Gilbert got after him in a way I have never seen an owner go after a player. While I sympathized with Gilbert and everyone in Cleveland, James is certainly entitled to tell his side.
But when James says, “I don’t think he ever cared about LeBron,” how can you not crack up?
There it is folks, the prototype 21st century athlete, talking about himself in the third person and criticizing an owner for not CARING about him? If you want to say, “I didn’t think Gilbert’s comments were fair to ME because of ------“ (you fill in the blank) that’s fine. But owners don’t care about athletes, they pay them to win. I’m always amused when I hear players and owners talk about how close they are to one another. They should talk to Knight because he’ll straighten them out. As long as the player performs the owner will ‘care,’ about them. As soon as he stops, the owner will talk about how much he cares about him while he’s cutting him or trading him. And if another owner wants to show a player how much he ‘cares,’ about him by giving him a better deal, the player will be gone the next day. He may or may not stage an infomercial to announce it. (One question: Has anyone figured out why James put on his act in Greenwich yet? Did he feel safe in a community that has lots of people in his tax bracket? Haven’t figured it out yet).
I wonder how much the Wilpon family ‘cared,’ about Francisco Rodriguez before he tore up his thumb punching out his girlfriend’s father last week? Right now they care so much they’re trying not to have to pay him ever again. They aren’t wrong to be as angry as they clearly are but I don’t think K-Rod should tell someone, “I don’t think the Wilpons ever cared about K-Rod.”
Actually maybe he should—because he’d be right.
I mean let’s be honest, Favre deciding to play football this season ranks up there with the sun rising in the east and ESPN trying to claim that tomorrow being Thursday is an exclusive story when it comes to being newsworthy.
The funny thing is I never really pictured this guy as the world’s biggest diva until the past few years. He was always the rugged quarterback who took every hit, got up and kept playing. Now he’s still rugged and takes hit, he just likes to have people fawn over him and plead with him not to retire each offseason. He craves attention the way I crave John’s Pizza. (New York City, the best there is. Okay, now I’ve made myself hungry).
This time three teammates actually had to fly to Mississippi to go to Favre’s farm on bended knee and beg him to come back. Are you kidding me? Look, I don’t blame the Vikings. Favre was a major reason—Adrian Peterson might have been a factor too although that’s often overlooked—they were about two plays from reaching the Super Bowl last year. The other quarterbacks they have on the roster might get them to the playoffs because Peterson’s still there and the rest of the team is very solid, but they aren’t going anywhere in the postseason without a quality quarterback—which Favre probably still is even at 41.
But the diva act really rankles. As with Tiger Woods, Favre clearly isn’t getting very good advice. He’s gone from being one of the most respected figures in football to a punch line (for reasons, obviously, entirely different than Woods). The whole Hamlet thing wore thin a couple of years ago and yet he’s continued it with no sign of any real self-awareness about it. Yes, he did do that commercial where he pokes fun at himself for indecision, I give him credit for that. But, not surprisingly, what did that involve: getting attention and making money. Clearly, that’s what Favre is all about.
Of course as long as he performs few people are going to care. That’s how divas get to be divas. They’re so good at what they do that they’re allowed their foibles because the price paid for putting up with them is worth it. Certainly all the garbage Favre put the Vikings through last summer proved worth it once he got on the field. Clearly they are counting on the same thing happening this fall.
Favre better be aware of one thing though: If he doesn’t perform, whether because of an injury or age finally catching up with him, he’s going to get jumped on. Years ago Bob Knight said this to me: “I know as long as I win, people around here will say I’m eccentric. If I ever stop winning, they’ll say I’m an embarrassment.”
Knight stopped making Final Fours at Indiana in 1992. By 1999, he was vulnerable enough that Myles Brand could get away with firing him. If he’d been to a Final Four in, say, 1998, Brand wouldn’t have dared.
So Favre better crank up the arm and win a bunch of games or he might find himself booed off the stage.
The same is going to be true of James. If by some chance the Miami Heat aren’t dominant, if he gags in the playoffs the way he did the last two years in Cleveland, he will be a laughing stock around the country—except of course on ESPN where Stuart Scott will no doubt still pay homage to The King at every turn—and he won’t be The God of South Beach.
Whether he wins or not, it was certainly amusing to read one quote from the interviewed release by, I think, Gentleman’s Quarterly yesterday. In it, James shoots back at Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert, who ripped him after he left for Miami. Look, James is entitled to shoot back, Gilbert got after him in a way I have never seen an owner go after a player. While I sympathized with Gilbert and everyone in Cleveland, James is certainly entitled to tell his side.
But when James says, “I don’t think he ever cared about LeBron,” how can you not crack up?
There it is folks, the prototype 21st century athlete, talking about himself in the third person and criticizing an owner for not CARING about him? If you want to say, “I didn’t think Gilbert’s comments were fair to ME because of ------“ (you fill in the blank) that’s fine. But owners don’t care about athletes, they pay them to win. I’m always amused when I hear players and owners talk about how close they are to one another. They should talk to Knight because he’ll straighten them out. As long as the player performs the owner will ‘care,’ about them. As soon as he stops, the owner will talk about how much he cares about him while he’s cutting him or trading him. And if another owner wants to show a player how much he ‘cares,’ about him by giving him a better deal, the player will be gone the next day. He may or may not stage an infomercial to announce it. (One question: Has anyone figured out why James put on his act in Greenwich yet? Did he feel safe in a community that has lots of people in his tax bracket? Haven’t figured it out yet).
I wonder how much the Wilpon family ‘cared,’ about Francisco Rodriguez before he tore up his thumb punching out his girlfriend’s father last week? Right now they care so much they’re trying not to have to pay him ever again. They aren’t wrong to be as angry as they clearly are but I don’t think K-Rod should tell someone, “I don’t think the Wilpons ever cared about K-Rod.”
Actually maybe he should—because he’d be right.
Friday, July 9, 2010
A day of the sublime and the ridiculous
Today is a day to write about both the sublime and the ridiculous.
The sublime came early yesterday when my good friend Paul Goydos shot 59—FIFTY-NINE!—in the first round of The John Deere Classic. For those of you who don’t follow golf, Paul was the fourth player in the history of The PGA Tour to shoot 59 in an official tour event. In all likelihood, he won’t even win this weekend—although he’s off to a pretty decent start—but he is now a part of golf history.
The ridiculous, of course, was ESPN’s LeBron James infomercial/love-athon. Let me just say two things quickly now: 1. ESPN flat out lied about when James would actually announce where he was playing. It insisted the public would know, “in the first ten minutes,” of the show. Jim Gray FINALLY stopped asking questions about the ‘process,’ at 9:27. I’m not good at math but 27 is considerably more than 10 last time I checked. 2. Some ESPN suit named Norby Williamson proudly declared yesterday that ESPN was in complete control of the show, “other than what comes out of his (James’s) mouth.” If so, everyone involved should submit their resignations this morning. ESPN at its best is very good; at its worst completely awful. This went beyond anything it has ever done for horrific.
Okay, let’s get back to Goydos because it is a far more pleasant topic. I make absolutely no secret of the fact that I’m in the tank for Paul and have been almost since the day I met him at The Buick Open in 1993 when I was researching “A Good Walk Spoiled.”
On that day, his opening line at a press conference was, “Most of you have never heard of me. There’s a reason for that. I’ve never done anything.”
My kind of guy. He ended up being the cult hero of the book and we’ve been friends ever since through a lot of ups and downs in both our lives. If you follow golf, you know that Paul’s wife Wendy got hooked on methamphetamines years ago trying to find some relief from constant migraine headaches. She ended up in and out of rehab but never was able to get completely clean. Paul ended up a single dad, dropping off the tour for a year to be with his teen-age girls. Then, a year ago in January, Wendy died of an apparent overdose.
I still vividly remember Paul’s phone call that day. I was driving home from a basketball game at Bucknell. I knew he had missed the cut at Hawaii but as soon as I heard his voice I knew he wasn’t calling to complain about his golf. Wendy was 44.
What makes Goydos a unique character is his sense of humor, which is about as dry and self-deprecating as I’ve ever seen—his opening comment that first day I met him being a good example. Later he was explaining how he plays his best golf when he gets his slice going. “I know when you’re on The PGA Tour you’re supposed to call it a fade,” he said. “But when you hit a seven iron and it goes 20 yards to the right that’s not a fade, that’s a slice.”
Paul has always described himself as “the worst player in the history of The PGA Tour.” Given that he’s been out there 18 years, has won twice and lost a memorable playoff to Sergio Garcia at the 2008 Players Championship even before yesterday, he’d have trouble making that case.
But he’s certainly not your typical golfer. He’s got a homemade swing and kind of slumps around the course, looking like a guy you might run into at the local muni on Saturday morning. He grew up on a muni in Long Beach and went to Long Beach State. When a problem with one of his hands—he couldn’t grip a club—seemed to end his golf career he did some teaching in the Long Beach school system, often working at inner city schools. That background has certainly given him a different view of life than most of his fellow pros.
Rarely does Paul get openly excited about a round of golf. I remember years ago when he played a U.S. Open qualifier at Woodmont and shot 63 the first 18 holes.
“Great playing,” I said.
“I didn’t make a single putt,” he answered.
“And shot 63?”
“Well, I guess I hit it pretty well.”
Yesterday was different. When I talked to him on the phone yesterday afternoon, he’d done hours of media because he’ll never say no when people want to talk to him. “Actually it caught me by surprise,” he said. “I mean, I know 59 is an iconic number, I was fully aware of what was going on the last few holes. I wasn’t going to sit there and pretend it wasn’t a big deal. I remember thinking on the 16th tee, ‘okay, lots of guys have the chance to shoot 59 but only THREE have actually done it. Let’s do everything possible to be number four.’”
He made three birdies to do it, holing a seven-footer on 18. “That’s the most nervous I think I’ve ever been over a putt in my life,” he said. “I KNOW winning is a bigger deal than shooting 59 but I also know people will remember me for this more than for the two wins or even The Players—which was a pretty big deal when it happened.”
Of course he had a memorable line which he had been repeating all day: “Most people dream of shooting their age. I shot my height.” He is 5-9 so shooting his height isn’t easy.
The irony is that a week ago when I’d seen him in Philadelphia he’d been legitimately down about his game—not just Goydos, worst-player-in-history down, truly down. He’d had a chance to win at Pebble Beach in February before making a nine at the 14th hole on Sunday. Since then, he hadn’t played well.
“I probably let that get to me more than I realized,” he said. “On the other hand, a four month slump for me isn’t exactly big news. I have one just about every year.”
I hope he’s out of it now. The day after a great round is the toughest one there is for a golfer. The good news is he starts out five shots clear of the field except for defending champion Steve Stricker, who went out in the afternoon and shot 60. “To start your round 12 shots behind the leader and finish it one shot back is pretty impressive,” Goydos said.
To shoot 59 is more impressive. And trust me, it couldn’t happen to a better guy. I hope he can keep it going through the weekend.
Okay, back to the ridiculous. We all knew the so-called, “Decision,” would be bad TV but did anyone imagine how bad? The painful stalling with more mindless chatter and a Stu Scott narrated paean to The King—in which he called him the greatest player in the game—was brutal. I can’t wait for Stu’s next conversation with Kobe Bryant. Even Chris Broussard, who had the story, hedged. “I hear Miami but it could be Cleveland, New York or Chicago,” he said.
I wonder: Was he ORDERED by ESPN to hedge to stretch out the “suspense.”
There were commercials galore; reminders who was sponsoring the show and then the five minutes of torturous questions from Gray—again, no doubt under orders from the suits. No one—NO ONE—cared about the damn process at that point.
Michael Wilbon, after the opening silly, “how tough was this,” question tried to get James to say something but he was strictly on message. Everyone in Cleveland was a great guy. He just wanted to win, blah-blah-blah. It was funny how he kept talking about, “everything I’ve done for the city.” Yeah, there are all those championship banners he helped hang. Oh wait, that’s not The King, he’s hung ZERO banners. Look, he has a perfect right to go wherever he wants but please don’t sit there and tell people in Cleveland how much you’ve done for them. The last thing they saw you do was wimp out against the Celtics.
Worst of all though was after the announcement finally was over and Wilbon’s attempts to get James to answer questions had failed, was Scott saying, “And the King has ANOTHER big announcement to make.” The big announcement was that someone ELSE was giving a bunch of money to The Boys and Girls Clubs. The only thing missing at that point was Jerry Lewis. Then again, Scott posing as any kind of journalist is funnier than Lewis and Martin at their peak.
I’m a little embarrassed that I watched but it was a little bit like trying to drive past an accident without rubber-necking. My new favorite owner is Dan Gilbert.
By the way, the NCAA announced—AGAIN—yesterday that it is ALMOST ready to announce what it is going to do with the 68-team NCAA Tournament format. (They called it the “enhanced,” 68 team field). I think they’re negotiating with ESPN for a special called, “The Decision."
------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
The sublime came early yesterday when my good friend Paul Goydos shot 59—FIFTY-NINE!—in the first round of The John Deere Classic. For those of you who don’t follow golf, Paul was the fourth player in the history of The PGA Tour to shoot 59 in an official tour event. In all likelihood, he won’t even win this weekend—although he’s off to a pretty decent start—but he is now a part of golf history.
The ridiculous, of course, was ESPN’s LeBron James infomercial/love-athon. Let me just say two things quickly now: 1. ESPN flat out lied about when James would actually announce where he was playing. It insisted the public would know, “in the first ten minutes,” of the show. Jim Gray FINALLY stopped asking questions about the ‘process,’ at 9:27. I’m not good at math but 27 is considerably more than 10 last time I checked. 2. Some ESPN suit named Norby Williamson proudly declared yesterday that ESPN was in complete control of the show, “other than what comes out of his (James’s) mouth.” If so, everyone involved should submit their resignations this morning. ESPN at its best is very good; at its worst completely awful. This went beyond anything it has ever done for horrific.
Okay, let’s get back to Goydos because it is a far more pleasant topic. I make absolutely no secret of the fact that I’m in the tank for Paul and have been almost since the day I met him at The Buick Open in 1993 when I was researching “A Good Walk Spoiled.”
On that day, his opening line at a press conference was, “Most of you have never heard of me. There’s a reason for that. I’ve never done anything.”
My kind of guy. He ended up being the cult hero of the book and we’ve been friends ever since through a lot of ups and downs in both our lives. If you follow golf, you know that Paul’s wife Wendy got hooked on methamphetamines years ago trying to find some relief from constant migraine headaches. She ended up in and out of rehab but never was able to get completely clean. Paul ended up a single dad, dropping off the tour for a year to be with his teen-age girls. Then, a year ago in January, Wendy died of an apparent overdose.
I still vividly remember Paul’s phone call that day. I was driving home from a basketball game at Bucknell. I knew he had missed the cut at Hawaii but as soon as I heard his voice I knew he wasn’t calling to complain about his golf. Wendy was 44.
What makes Goydos a unique character is his sense of humor, which is about as dry and self-deprecating as I’ve ever seen—his opening comment that first day I met him being a good example. Later he was explaining how he plays his best golf when he gets his slice going. “I know when you’re on The PGA Tour you’re supposed to call it a fade,” he said. “But when you hit a seven iron and it goes 20 yards to the right that’s not a fade, that’s a slice.”
Paul has always described himself as “the worst player in the history of The PGA Tour.” Given that he’s been out there 18 years, has won twice and lost a memorable playoff to Sergio Garcia at the 2008 Players Championship even before yesterday, he’d have trouble making that case.
But he’s certainly not your typical golfer. He’s got a homemade swing and kind of slumps around the course, looking like a guy you might run into at the local muni on Saturday morning. He grew up on a muni in Long Beach and went to Long Beach State. When a problem with one of his hands—he couldn’t grip a club—seemed to end his golf career he did some teaching in the Long Beach school system, often working at inner city schools. That background has certainly given him a different view of life than most of his fellow pros.
Rarely does Paul get openly excited about a round of golf. I remember years ago when he played a U.S. Open qualifier at Woodmont and shot 63 the first 18 holes.
“Great playing,” I said.
“I didn’t make a single putt,” he answered.
“And shot 63?”
“Well, I guess I hit it pretty well.”
Yesterday was different. When I talked to him on the phone yesterday afternoon, he’d done hours of media because he’ll never say no when people want to talk to him. “Actually it caught me by surprise,” he said. “I mean, I know 59 is an iconic number, I was fully aware of what was going on the last few holes. I wasn’t going to sit there and pretend it wasn’t a big deal. I remember thinking on the 16th tee, ‘okay, lots of guys have the chance to shoot 59 but only THREE have actually done it. Let’s do everything possible to be number four.’”
He made three birdies to do it, holing a seven-footer on 18. “That’s the most nervous I think I’ve ever been over a putt in my life,” he said. “I KNOW winning is a bigger deal than shooting 59 but I also know people will remember me for this more than for the two wins or even The Players—which was a pretty big deal when it happened.”
Of course he had a memorable line which he had been repeating all day: “Most people dream of shooting their age. I shot my height.” He is 5-9 so shooting his height isn’t easy.
The irony is that a week ago when I’d seen him in Philadelphia he’d been legitimately down about his game—not just Goydos, worst-player-in-history down, truly down. He’d had a chance to win at Pebble Beach in February before making a nine at the 14th hole on Sunday. Since then, he hadn’t played well.
“I probably let that get to me more than I realized,” he said. “On the other hand, a four month slump for me isn’t exactly big news. I have one just about every year.”
I hope he’s out of it now. The day after a great round is the toughest one there is for a golfer. The good news is he starts out five shots clear of the field except for defending champion Steve Stricker, who went out in the afternoon and shot 60. “To start your round 12 shots behind the leader and finish it one shot back is pretty impressive,” Goydos said.
To shoot 59 is more impressive. And trust me, it couldn’t happen to a better guy. I hope he can keep it going through the weekend.
Okay, back to the ridiculous. We all knew the so-called, “Decision,” would be bad TV but did anyone imagine how bad? The painful stalling with more mindless chatter and a Stu Scott narrated paean to The King—in which he called him the greatest player in the game—was brutal. I can’t wait for Stu’s next conversation with Kobe Bryant. Even Chris Broussard, who had the story, hedged. “I hear Miami but it could be Cleveland, New York or Chicago,” he said.
I wonder: Was he ORDERED by ESPN to hedge to stretch out the “suspense.”
There were commercials galore; reminders who was sponsoring the show and then the five minutes of torturous questions from Gray—again, no doubt under orders from the suits. No one—NO ONE—cared about the damn process at that point.
Michael Wilbon, after the opening silly, “how tough was this,” question tried to get James to say something but he was strictly on message. Everyone in Cleveland was a great guy. He just wanted to win, blah-blah-blah. It was funny how he kept talking about, “everything I’ve done for the city.” Yeah, there are all those championship banners he helped hang. Oh wait, that’s not The King, he’s hung ZERO banners. Look, he has a perfect right to go wherever he wants but please don’t sit there and tell people in Cleveland how much you’ve done for them. The last thing they saw you do was wimp out against the Celtics.
Worst of all though was after the announcement finally was over and Wilbon’s attempts to get James to answer questions had failed, was Scott saying, “And the King has ANOTHER big announcement to make.” The big announcement was that someone ELSE was giving a bunch of money to The Boys and Girls Clubs. The only thing missing at that point was Jerry Lewis. Then again, Scott posing as any kind of journalist is funnier than Lewis and Martin at their peak.
I’m a little embarrassed that I watched but it was a little bit like trying to drive past an accident without rubber-necking. My new favorite owner is Dan Gilbert.
By the way, the NCAA announced—AGAIN—yesterday that it is ALMOST ready to announce what it is going to do with the 68-team NCAA Tournament format. (They called it the “enhanced,” 68 team field). I think they’re negotiating with ESPN for a special called, “The Decision."
------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Thursday, July 8, 2010
‘The Decision” of LeBron -- breaking through new barriers of narcissism, aided by his sycophants
I really didn’t want to touch LeBron James or the NBA free agency circus again until it was over and it was possible to write about where the players had landed and how that might change the landscape of the league.
But the whole thing is so comically out of control at this point it can’t be ignored. The last week has been an embarrassment to just about everyone involved and it will reach a crescendo of Saturday Night Live parody tonight during the one hour “special,” which is apparently being called, “The Decision.”
When President Obama makes a decision on what to do next in Afghanistan that will be worthy of capital letters and an hour of TV time. This is a basketball player, one who has won zero championships up until this moment, finally getting around to telling people where he’s going to play basketball the next few years.
Please-PLEASE—do not tell me for one second that any of this is excusable because James and company are going to throw a few dollars at Boys and Girls Clubs. He can write that check any day he wants to and ask Nike to match it and not put everyone through this ridiculous sideshow tonight. One funny note: Apparently ESPN, embarrassed by the notion that the first half of the show would be some kind of tribute to LeBron, has insisted the announcement come in the first 10 minutes. I would love to see what happens to the ratings during those last 50 minutes. Do you think anyone other than people in the city James decides to anoint are going to want to stick around to hear Stuart Scott lob softballs at him?
“LeBron, my man, just how tough has the last month been for you and your family?”
Of course ESPN isn’t the only guilty party in all this by a long shot. James has always had the classic star athlete’s massive ego, that’s hardly a scoop or a surprise, especially given the way he’s been treated since high school. I still remember the first time I saw him in person. It was at one of those high school all-star camps in New Jersey and even then he had an entourage worthy of Andre Agassi at his best/worst. Even then ESPN was already trying to make him into a marketable, larger-than-life star, putting his high school games on TV to cash in a little bit on his teen-age mystique but also to align itself with him since he was probably going to be a big star in the NBA.
Which he has been. At his best, the guy is absolutely brilliant. But because of the over-marketing and hype of the 21st century he has been built into more than he is. Yesterday, Mike Gastineau, one of the smart guys in sportstalk radio started a question by saying to me, “If the city of Cleveland loses the greatest player of all time…”
“STOP!” I screamed. “STOP!”
“Okay,” Mike said, “maybe he’ll BECOME the greatest player of all-time.”
“STOP!” I screamed again.
You see I’m not prepared to declare James the greatest player in the game NOW. Until James starts winning championships, Kobe Bryant has that title. I’m not 100 percent sure that, when healthy, Dwyane Wade isn’t at least in the conversation for number two. That’s an argument for another day as is the fact that James isn’t close to Michael Jordan, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain Oscar Robertson, Larry Bird or Magic Johnson right now. Don’t talk to me about skills or dunks, talk to me about making plays that win big games. Big games, for the record, don’t take place in February. Hey, when it really matters, I’d take Walt Frazier or Jerry West over James in a heartbeat. Julius Erving wasn’t bad either.
Of course that may change. He may grow into a champion. Jordan didn’t win a title until his seventh season and ended up with six.
For now though the issue is what we’ve had to watch for the past week. Forget the now ONE MILLION times we have heard the words, “From what I’m hearing James is…” Heck, before this is over he may announce he’s going to play for Cleveland STATE. He’s got eligibility left.
Honestly, I do not care where he plays. Unless he goes to Miami, I don’t think any of the teams he might play for next year will be better than the Lakers or for that matter the Celtics (if healthy) or the Magic. If I’m wrong, fine, good for James and his teammates—although my sense is if and when a James-led team does win a title it will be all about LeBron. Apparently that’s his view of the world.
We’re all guilty. Someone asked the other day if I was so sick of the LeBron hype why did I keep writing about him? Because, sadly, it’s a story, just like the whole tawdry Tiger Woods affair (the whole thing not the individual affairs) is a story. I like to go off the beaten path as much as anyone and more than most. But when people are asking you about something on a minute-to-minute basis and you can’t escape it whenever you turn on TV, radio, the internet or pick up a newspaper, you sort of have to write and/or talk about it.
But let’s understand what the story is: It’s the story of an athlete who, even by today’s standards, is breaking through new barriers of narcissism, aided by his sycophants (ESPN included); the media, the public and an NBA system that has always been about stars not about teams for as long as David Stern has run the league.
There’s an old saying that the truly great players care first about the name on the front of their uniform not the one on the back. It may well be that James will turn out to be that way next season: Part of his deal may be to put, “LeBron,” on the front of his new uniform.
But the whole thing is so comically out of control at this point it can’t be ignored. The last week has been an embarrassment to just about everyone involved and it will reach a crescendo of Saturday Night Live parody tonight during the one hour “special,” which is apparently being called, “The Decision.”
When President Obama makes a decision on what to do next in Afghanistan that will be worthy of capital letters and an hour of TV time. This is a basketball player, one who has won zero championships up until this moment, finally getting around to telling people where he’s going to play basketball the next few years.
Please-PLEASE—do not tell me for one second that any of this is excusable because James and company are going to throw a few dollars at Boys and Girls Clubs. He can write that check any day he wants to and ask Nike to match it and not put everyone through this ridiculous sideshow tonight. One funny note: Apparently ESPN, embarrassed by the notion that the first half of the show would be some kind of tribute to LeBron, has insisted the announcement come in the first 10 minutes. I would love to see what happens to the ratings during those last 50 minutes. Do you think anyone other than people in the city James decides to anoint are going to want to stick around to hear Stuart Scott lob softballs at him?
“LeBron, my man, just how tough has the last month been for you and your family?”
Of course ESPN isn’t the only guilty party in all this by a long shot. James has always had the classic star athlete’s massive ego, that’s hardly a scoop or a surprise, especially given the way he’s been treated since high school. I still remember the first time I saw him in person. It was at one of those high school all-star camps in New Jersey and even then he had an entourage worthy of Andre Agassi at his best/worst. Even then ESPN was already trying to make him into a marketable, larger-than-life star, putting his high school games on TV to cash in a little bit on his teen-age mystique but also to align itself with him since he was probably going to be a big star in the NBA.
Which he has been. At his best, the guy is absolutely brilliant. But because of the over-marketing and hype of the 21st century he has been built into more than he is. Yesterday, Mike Gastineau, one of the smart guys in sportstalk radio started a question by saying to me, “If the city of Cleveland loses the greatest player of all time…”
“STOP!” I screamed. “STOP!”
“Okay,” Mike said, “maybe he’ll BECOME the greatest player of all-time.”
“STOP!” I screamed again.
You see I’m not prepared to declare James the greatest player in the game NOW. Until James starts winning championships, Kobe Bryant has that title. I’m not 100 percent sure that, when healthy, Dwyane Wade isn’t at least in the conversation for number two. That’s an argument for another day as is the fact that James isn’t close to Michael Jordan, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain Oscar Robertson, Larry Bird or Magic Johnson right now. Don’t talk to me about skills or dunks, talk to me about making plays that win big games. Big games, for the record, don’t take place in February. Hey, when it really matters, I’d take Walt Frazier or Jerry West over James in a heartbeat. Julius Erving wasn’t bad either.
Of course that may change. He may grow into a champion. Jordan didn’t win a title until his seventh season and ended up with six.
For now though the issue is what we’ve had to watch for the past week. Forget the now ONE MILLION times we have heard the words, “From what I’m hearing James is…” Heck, before this is over he may announce he’s going to play for Cleveland STATE. He’s got eligibility left.
Honestly, I do not care where he plays. Unless he goes to Miami, I don’t think any of the teams he might play for next year will be better than the Lakers or for that matter the Celtics (if healthy) or the Magic. If I’m wrong, fine, good for James and his teammates—although my sense is if and when a James-led team does win a title it will be all about LeBron. Apparently that’s his view of the world.
We’re all guilty. Someone asked the other day if I was so sick of the LeBron hype why did I keep writing about him? Because, sadly, it’s a story, just like the whole tawdry Tiger Woods affair (the whole thing not the individual affairs) is a story. I like to go off the beaten path as much as anyone and more than most. But when people are asking you about something on a minute-to-minute basis and you can’t escape it whenever you turn on TV, radio, the internet or pick up a newspaper, you sort of have to write and/or talk about it.
But let’s understand what the story is: It’s the story of an athlete who, even by today’s standards, is breaking through new barriers of narcissism, aided by his sycophants (ESPN included); the media, the public and an NBA system that has always been about stars not about teams for as long as David Stern has run the league.
There’s an old saying that the truly great players care first about the name on the front of their uniform not the one on the back. It may well be that James will turn out to be that way next season: Part of his deal may be to put, “LeBron,” on the front of his new uniform.
This week's radio segments (The Sports Reporters, The Gas Man)
Yesterday I joined The Sports Reporters' Steve Czaban and Andy Pollin in the normal timeslot (5:25 ET on Wednesday's). Click the permalink, then the link below, to listen to the segment from this week. In it, we discussed today's upcoming LeBron show, the Athletic Director scenarios at Maryland and Tiger Woods.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Sports Reporters
--------------------
Also, I joined The Gas Man show on Wednesday evening in my normal 8:25 ET spot. This week we discussed the upcoming choice of formats for the NCAA on the new 68 team tournament, LeBron James and ESPN, the NBA in general with this summer process, and several other topics.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Gas Man
Click here to listen to the segment: The Sports Reporters
--------------------
Also, I joined The Gas Man show on Wednesday evening in my normal 8:25 ET spot. This week we discussed the upcoming choice of formats for the NCAA on the new 68 team tournament, LeBron James and ESPN, the NBA in general with this summer process, and several other topics.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Gas Man
Friday, July 2, 2010
Sportstalk radio – All LeBron All The Time – until the puffs of white smoke appear
I was driving through New York last night on my way back to Shelter Island from the AT+T National sort-of-hosted by Tiger Woods golf tournament and, as always, I was spinning around the radio dial.
The Mets and Yankees are both in excellent pennant races right now—the Yankees to no one’s surprise; the Mets to most people’s (myself included) surprise. The Mets have pitched a lot better than anyone thought they would and have actually produced some good-looking young players who have filled in well for Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes and Luis Castillo. Beltran has been out all season, Reyes and Castillo for lengthy stretches. And yet there are the Mets, hanging in there with the Braves and Phillies.
And so, as I made my way up The New Jersey Turnpike—the traffic wasn’t nearly as bad as I had expected—I looked forward to hearing talk about the Mets and Yankees.
Not so much.
Both sportstalk radio stations were All LeBron All The Time. In fact, during Michael Kay’s, “New York Baseball Hour,” the discussion was about LeBron. The names of other free agents came up but mostly within the context of who might fit best with LeBron and who LeBron might want to play with for the next five years.
The Apocalypse is seriously upon us in sports. Beginning yesterday team executives, coaches and owners flew TO Cleveland to be interviewed by King James. Basically they all came hats—and of course checkbooks—in hand. I’m pretty sure that whenever LeBron does make a decision puffs of white smoke will come out of the roof of the IMG building. What’s interesting is that they’re all going to pay James the same money; the maximum allowed by the NBA, so the decision comes down to where he believes he can accomplish what he wants to accomplish next in his life.
That’s really what this comes down to. The biggest stage is New York—not Brooklyn with the Nets—but Madison Square Garden with the Knicks. The best road to a championship is either Miami or Chicago. The right thing to do is to stay in Cleveland and finish what he started in his home state where he has iconic status rarely conferred on any athlete or any human being.
The latter clearly isn’t going to happen. Very few athletes are about doing the right thing—except in terms of what is right for THEM. LeBron and his “people,” clearly feel he’s outgrown Cleveland; that it is time for him to take the next step on the road to conquering the world and that means moving on—even without a championship ring. Remember, LeBron only played three bad games in seven years by his count, so what the heck does he owe Cleveland? When he became the invisible man during the series against Boston in game five he said he had let HIMSELF down. Forget about anyone else.
So Cleveland fans, welcome to the Byron Scott Era. Check E-Bay to see if there’s any old film of the Browns 1964 championship available because that’s as close as you are going to get to a title anytime soon. You deserve better—a LOT better—but LeBron isn’t concerned about that.
Of course everyone has a different theory about where he is going and why. Each of the four serious candidates (The Clippers, are you kidding?) has a different reason to believe it has a chance. To put it in one sentence: The Bulls have good young players; the Heat has Dwyane Wade; the Knicks have New York and The Nets have a Russian owner who is richer than most of the NBA owners combined and clearly has some serious Chutzpah.
We’ve all heard all the various reports citing sources—my guess is the one constant in all this is LeBron’s walk-around guy World Wide Wes being a constant leak in all directions—who KNOW he’s going to New York; know he’s going to New Jersey; know he’s going to Chicago or know he’s going to Miami. Maybe David Stern will pass a ‘LeBron Rule,’ and let him play 20 games apiece for four different teams and then pick and choose where and when he wants to participate in playoff games. Maybe he can go to the Lakers for the playoffs and let Kobe take the big shots down the stretch.
I haven’t a clue where he’s going. I talk to World Wide Wes about as much as I talked to Tiger Woods’ people. Here’s what I believe though: I think LeBron knows where he’s going and I think he may have known where he was going at the exact moment that he turned the ball over for the ninth time in game six against Boston. He probably knew even before then. (By the same token I never thought for one second that Phil Jackson wasn’t coming back to coach the Lakers. I know he’s had health problems but all that talk about MAYBE going to Cleveland or Chicago or the Knicks or MAYBE retiring was a negotiating position. Jackson is a shrewd guy who works the media as well as it has ever been worked).
This whole LeBron Over Cleveland interview process is nothing more than an exercise in ego and a way for LeBron to remind people that Kobe may have all the rings (five) but he still controls the basketball world. Certainly the continuing panting over this whole thing is evidence of that.
Let me make a confession here: I have never completely bought into the LeBron hype. The first time I ever saw him was in a summer camp in New Jersey and, because I’m not a complete idiot, it was clear he was a special talent. That’s when he and his people—yes folks he had them in high school—were floating the notion that he might leave high school after his junior year and challenge the NBA draft rules. Clearly he—and they—knew how to play the hype game even then.
My sense was that LeBron was really, really good but life in the NBA against men as opposed to life in high school against boys would be a little different. I was wrong—the guy was a star from day one and has gotten better. That why now, when I hear people say, ‘well, he’s not a winner, he hasn’t got any rings,’ I don’t jump on that bandwagon—even though I’d kind of like to do so.
Michael Jordan won his first title in his seventh season. Kobe won his first when Shaq came to Los Angeles. Bill Russell is the only guy who came into a non-championship team as a rookie, won a title and kept on going from there. My guess is LeBron is going to win titles wherever he lands. It will happen faster in Miami or Chicago but it will probably happen in Manhattan or Brooklyn at some point in the future too if he goes there. Good players will want to play with him.
That said, it is tough to embrace the guy. He never cops to not playing well (three bad games in seven years, remember?); his ego is very tough to swallow especially since at this moment he does not yet have a ring and the people around him are, well, World Wide Wes.
So let’s hope he sticks to his word and announces his decision very soon (one that, as I said I think he’s already made). Then we can get back to baseball and ESPN can start updating us hourly on Brett Favre throwing passes to high school kids.
-------
John recently appeared on The Jim Rome Show (www.jimrome.com) to discuss 'Moment of Glory.' Click here to download, or listen in the player below:
------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
The Mets and Yankees are both in excellent pennant races right now—the Yankees to no one’s surprise; the Mets to most people’s (myself included) surprise. The Mets have pitched a lot better than anyone thought they would and have actually produced some good-looking young players who have filled in well for Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes and Luis Castillo. Beltran has been out all season, Reyes and Castillo for lengthy stretches. And yet there are the Mets, hanging in there with the Braves and Phillies.
And so, as I made my way up The New Jersey Turnpike—the traffic wasn’t nearly as bad as I had expected—I looked forward to hearing talk about the Mets and Yankees.
Not so much.
Both sportstalk radio stations were All LeBron All The Time. In fact, during Michael Kay’s, “New York Baseball Hour,” the discussion was about LeBron. The names of other free agents came up but mostly within the context of who might fit best with LeBron and who LeBron might want to play with for the next five years.
The Apocalypse is seriously upon us in sports. Beginning yesterday team executives, coaches and owners flew TO Cleveland to be interviewed by King James. Basically they all came hats—and of course checkbooks—in hand. I’m pretty sure that whenever LeBron does make a decision puffs of white smoke will come out of the roof of the IMG building. What’s interesting is that they’re all going to pay James the same money; the maximum allowed by the NBA, so the decision comes down to where he believes he can accomplish what he wants to accomplish next in his life.
That’s really what this comes down to. The biggest stage is New York—not Brooklyn with the Nets—but Madison Square Garden with the Knicks. The best road to a championship is either Miami or Chicago. The right thing to do is to stay in Cleveland and finish what he started in his home state where he has iconic status rarely conferred on any athlete or any human being.
The latter clearly isn’t going to happen. Very few athletes are about doing the right thing—except in terms of what is right for THEM. LeBron and his “people,” clearly feel he’s outgrown Cleveland; that it is time for him to take the next step on the road to conquering the world and that means moving on—even without a championship ring. Remember, LeBron only played three bad games in seven years by his count, so what the heck does he owe Cleveland? When he became the invisible man during the series against Boston in game five he said he had let HIMSELF down. Forget about anyone else.
So Cleveland fans, welcome to the Byron Scott Era. Check E-Bay to see if there’s any old film of the Browns 1964 championship available because that’s as close as you are going to get to a title anytime soon. You deserve better—a LOT better—but LeBron isn’t concerned about that.
Of course everyone has a different theory about where he is going and why. Each of the four serious candidates (The Clippers, are you kidding?) has a different reason to believe it has a chance. To put it in one sentence: The Bulls have good young players; the Heat has Dwyane Wade; the Knicks have New York and The Nets have a Russian owner who is richer than most of the NBA owners combined and clearly has some serious Chutzpah.
We’ve all heard all the various reports citing sources—my guess is the one constant in all this is LeBron’s walk-around guy World Wide Wes being a constant leak in all directions—who KNOW he’s going to New York; know he’s going to New Jersey; know he’s going to Chicago or know he’s going to Miami. Maybe David Stern will pass a ‘LeBron Rule,’ and let him play 20 games apiece for four different teams and then pick and choose where and when he wants to participate in playoff games. Maybe he can go to the Lakers for the playoffs and let Kobe take the big shots down the stretch.
I haven’t a clue where he’s going. I talk to World Wide Wes about as much as I talked to Tiger Woods’ people. Here’s what I believe though: I think LeBron knows where he’s going and I think he may have known where he was going at the exact moment that he turned the ball over for the ninth time in game six against Boston. He probably knew even before then. (By the same token I never thought for one second that Phil Jackson wasn’t coming back to coach the Lakers. I know he’s had health problems but all that talk about MAYBE going to Cleveland or Chicago or the Knicks or MAYBE retiring was a negotiating position. Jackson is a shrewd guy who works the media as well as it has ever been worked).
This whole LeBron Over Cleveland interview process is nothing more than an exercise in ego and a way for LeBron to remind people that Kobe may have all the rings (five) but he still controls the basketball world. Certainly the continuing panting over this whole thing is evidence of that.
Let me make a confession here: I have never completely bought into the LeBron hype. The first time I ever saw him was in a summer camp in New Jersey and, because I’m not a complete idiot, it was clear he was a special talent. That’s when he and his people—yes folks he had them in high school—were floating the notion that he might leave high school after his junior year and challenge the NBA draft rules. Clearly he—and they—knew how to play the hype game even then.
My sense was that LeBron was really, really good but life in the NBA against men as opposed to life in high school against boys would be a little different. I was wrong—the guy was a star from day one and has gotten better. That why now, when I hear people say, ‘well, he’s not a winner, he hasn’t got any rings,’ I don’t jump on that bandwagon—even though I’d kind of like to do so.
Michael Jordan won his first title in his seventh season. Kobe won his first when Shaq came to Los Angeles. Bill Russell is the only guy who came into a non-championship team as a rookie, won a title and kept on going from there. My guess is LeBron is going to win titles wherever he lands. It will happen faster in Miami or Chicago but it will probably happen in Manhattan or Brooklyn at some point in the future too if he goes there. Good players will want to play with him.
That said, it is tough to embrace the guy. He never cops to not playing well (three bad games in seven years, remember?); his ego is very tough to swallow especially since at this moment he does not yet have a ring and the people around him are, well, World Wide Wes.
So let’s hope he sticks to his word and announces his decision very soon (one that, as I said I think he’s already made). Then we can get back to baseball and ESPN can start updating us hourly on Brett Favre throwing passes to high school kids.
-------
John recently appeared on The Jim Rome Show (www.jimrome.com) to discuss 'Moment of Glory.' Click here to download, or listen in the player below:
------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Larry King interview accomplishes LeBron’s goal of diverted attention, what I’d ask; French Open
LeBron James has come out of hiding—sort of. He taped an interview earlier this week with Larry King on CNN in which he apparently tells King that Cleveland has, “the edge,” in terms of signing him once the free agent period begins on July 1.
If you believe that statement has any meaning at all, I would suggest you start baking Santa’s cookies right now because you can never start too early on a task like that.
Let’s start with the venue James chose for his re-coming out party after he absolutely spit the bit in the NBA playoffs against The Boston Celtics. King still has a huge audience—LeBron likes that. King reaches a non-sports audience—LeBron, man of the world, likes that too. King isn’t likely to ask too many tough questions—LeBron likes that most of all.
Now, without benefit of seeing the interview, here are some of the questions I would have asked had I been guest-hosting for King (I actually DID guest host his old radio show years ago but for some reason have never gotten the call from the TV people) on the night LeBron showed up.
1. What the hell happened in the Boston series—especially games five and six and double-especially game five when you were so bad there were people who actually suggested you were tanking?(Follow up if he starts rubbing his elbow: Then what happened in game three when you went off for 38 points? Did you re-injure it? And then: Do you understand why people would be skeptical if this is the best you’ve got as an excuse?).
2. If you’re leaning towards Cleveland, why all the theatrics? You know they will pay you max money, why not just say Cleveland is where you want to be, that you still have unfinished business there?
3. Do you understand how reviled you will be in the state of Ohio if you leave without ever having delivered anything other than boatloads of cash for yourself?
4. If a championship is really your first priority in life (as he will no doubt claim) how about taking a break from peddling products until you produce one? (fat chance but the question might get an interesting answer).
5. Do you understand why people are saying right now that Kobe is a lot better than you as he plays in The Finals for a seventh time and the third straight year without Shaq? By the way, is it sheer coincidence that you scheduled this interview in the middle of The Finals? Is there a little bit of A-Rod (see World Series, game 4, 2007) involved in the timing?
6. What did you mean after game five when you said you had played three bad games in seven years? Three, really? And, to follow up, did you really mean you only disappoint yourself when you play poorly? Those folks paying for tickets and buying all of your products, you aren’t concerned about them?
7. You do understand that no one buys into your numbers in game six? You had nine turnovers and were invisible when the game was on the line.
The one question I would not ask that people might find relevant is the one about his mom and Delonte West. That comes from the wild rumor category and I’d only go there if HE brought it up and somehow decided to confirm it—which I would think is extremely unlikely. My guess is that the tone of the King interview is somewhat different than mine—which may be one of many reasons why King is who he is. He may not be as soft a landing spot as, say, almost anyone on ESPN, but he’s pretty close.
It’s my personal opinion that James isn’t going back to Cleveland. This is not based on any inside information at all, only on my observations of him through the years. To be as great a player as he is—and he IS great even if he hasn’t been able to close the deal in the playoffs yet—you have to have a massive ego. To be surrounded by enablers every day who are no doubt telling him that Michael Jordan should sit at his right hand, probably makes keeping any sort of perspective pretty close to impossible.
Which is why I think his first concern will be the size of the stage and the size of his audience. That to me means New York or it means New Jersey/Brooklyn with the billionaire Russian telling him how he will help market him worldwide. I still don’t see Chicago because he’s going to want a bigger statue than Jordan someday and that’s not happening there. Miami is a dark horse because he might somehow think playing for Pat Riley—or even better, having Riley say he will come back one more time JUST to coach LeBron—makes him even bigger than he already is. Fitting those two egos into one locker room would be worth the price of admission.
In truth, it is all speculation, which is what LeBron wants. The more people talk about his free agency, the less they talk about his meltdown against the Celtics. The more they talk about him at all, the less they talk about Kobe.
So, the King interview does everything LeBron wants it to do. It diverts some attention from Kobe and from The Finals. It allows him to keep people in Cleveland at bay for a while longer with his coy, “Cleveland has the edge,” non-answer and it means he has come out in public without yet facing hard questions about what happened in the Boston series.
It’s too bad the interview was taped. It would have been pretty funny if King had taken questions and had started out with, “New York—you’re next!”
******
Someone pointed out yesterday that in writing about the sports I was looking forward to paying attention to in the coming week I failed to mention The French Open. Wow, talk about a Freudian slip.
It isn’t that I’m completely un-interested in what goes on at Roland Garros. I have a lot of fond memories of covering the tournament in the 80s and early 90s. I mean, just being in Paris at this time of year, can’t possibly be anything other than a great assignment.
But tennis just doesn’t do it for me the way it once did. Some of it, no doubt, is because I don’t know the players anymore. I know the announcers, not the players. Some of it is, I’m sure, the American drought on the men’s side: no American man has won a major title since Andy Roddick won the U.S. Open in 2003 and there’s no sign that may change in the near future—unless Roddick can finally somehow win Wimbledon.
I may be the one guy on earth who doesn’t enjoy watching Maria Sharapova play. Healthy, she’s a superb player and she’s drop dead gorgeous but the screams on every single shot are just too much for me. She makes Monica Seles sound like a mute. And, fairly or unfairly, even though I recognize the brilliance of the Williams sisters, I have never been able to enjoy them as much as I should. Some of it may be their need to constantly call attention to everything BUT their tennis; some of it may be that they are never gracious in defeat—it’s always, “I gave her the match,”—and some of it is the respect I lost for Serena after her behavior at the Open last fall. (Not to mention her moron agent sticking her hand in front of the CBS camera afterwards).
So, I’ll probably watch at least for a while from the semifinals on—although my pal Mary Carillo won’t be there because she’s flying home for her daughter’s high school graduation this weekend—but the truth is I just won’t be as into it as I was once upon a time. I wish that wasn’t the case, especially since Nadal and Federer appear to be good guys, but that’s the way it is.
--------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
To listen to 'The Bob and Tom Show' interview about 'Moment of Glory', please click the play button below:
If you believe that statement has any meaning at all, I would suggest you start baking Santa’s cookies right now because you can never start too early on a task like that.
Let’s start with the venue James chose for his re-coming out party after he absolutely spit the bit in the NBA playoffs against The Boston Celtics. King still has a huge audience—LeBron likes that. King reaches a non-sports audience—LeBron, man of the world, likes that too. King isn’t likely to ask too many tough questions—LeBron likes that most of all.
Now, without benefit of seeing the interview, here are some of the questions I would have asked had I been guest-hosting for King (I actually DID guest host his old radio show years ago but for some reason have never gotten the call from the TV people) on the night LeBron showed up.
1. What the hell happened in the Boston series—especially games five and six and double-especially game five when you were so bad there were people who actually suggested you were tanking?(Follow up if he starts rubbing his elbow: Then what happened in game three when you went off for 38 points? Did you re-injure it? And then: Do you understand why people would be skeptical if this is the best you’ve got as an excuse?).
2. If you’re leaning towards Cleveland, why all the theatrics? You know they will pay you max money, why not just say Cleveland is where you want to be, that you still have unfinished business there?
3. Do you understand how reviled you will be in the state of Ohio if you leave without ever having delivered anything other than boatloads of cash for yourself?
4. If a championship is really your first priority in life (as he will no doubt claim) how about taking a break from peddling products until you produce one? (fat chance but the question might get an interesting answer).
5. Do you understand why people are saying right now that Kobe is a lot better than you as he plays in The Finals for a seventh time and the third straight year without Shaq? By the way, is it sheer coincidence that you scheduled this interview in the middle of The Finals? Is there a little bit of A-Rod (see World Series, game 4, 2007) involved in the timing?
6. What did you mean after game five when you said you had played three bad games in seven years? Three, really? And, to follow up, did you really mean you only disappoint yourself when you play poorly? Those folks paying for tickets and buying all of your products, you aren’t concerned about them?
7. You do understand that no one buys into your numbers in game six? You had nine turnovers and were invisible when the game was on the line.
The one question I would not ask that people might find relevant is the one about his mom and Delonte West. That comes from the wild rumor category and I’d only go there if HE brought it up and somehow decided to confirm it—which I would think is extremely unlikely. My guess is that the tone of the King interview is somewhat different than mine—which may be one of many reasons why King is who he is. He may not be as soft a landing spot as, say, almost anyone on ESPN, but he’s pretty close.
It’s my personal opinion that James isn’t going back to Cleveland. This is not based on any inside information at all, only on my observations of him through the years. To be as great a player as he is—and he IS great even if he hasn’t been able to close the deal in the playoffs yet—you have to have a massive ego. To be surrounded by enablers every day who are no doubt telling him that Michael Jordan should sit at his right hand, probably makes keeping any sort of perspective pretty close to impossible.
Which is why I think his first concern will be the size of the stage and the size of his audience. That to me means New York or it means New Jersey/Brooklyn with the billionaire Russian telling him how he will help market him worldwide. I still don’t see Chicago because he’s going to want a bigger statue than Jordan someday and that’s not happening there. Miami is a dark horse because he might somehow think playing for Pat Riley—or even better, having Riley say he will come back one more time JUST to coach LeBron—makes him even bigger than he already is. Fitting those two egos into one locker room would be worth the price of admission.
In truth, it is all speculation, which is what LeBron wants. The more people talk about his free agency, the less they talk about his meltdown against the Celtics. The more they talk about him at all, the less they talk about Kobe.
So, the King interview does everything LeBron wants it to do. It diverts some attention from Kobe and from The Finals. It allows him to keep people in Cleveland at bay for a while longer with his coy, “Cleveland has the edge,” non-answer and it means he has come out in public without yet facing hard questions about what happened in the Boston series.
It’s too bad the interview was taped. It would have been pretty funny if King had taken questions and had started out with, “New York—you’re next!”
******
Someone pointed out yesterday that in writing about the sports I was looking forward to paying attention to in the coming week I failed to mention The French Open. Wow, talk about a Freudian slip.
It isn’t that I’m completely un-interested in what goes on at Roland Garros. I have a lot of fond memories of covering the tournament in the 80s and early 90s. I mean, just being in Paris at this time of year, can’t possibly be anything other than a great assignment.
But tennis just doesn’t do it for me the way it once did. Some of it, no doubt, is because I don’t know the players anymore. I know the announcers, not the players. Some of it is, I’m sure, the American drought on the men’s side: no American man has won a major title since Andy Roddick won the U.S. Open in 2003 and there’s no sign that may change in the near future—unless Roddick can finally somehow win Wimbledon.
I may be the one guy on earth who doesn’t enjoy watching Maria Sharapova play. Healthy, she’s a superb player and she’s drop dead gorgeous but the screams on every single shot are just too much for me. She makes Monica Seles sound like a mute. And, fairly or unfairly, even though I recognize the brilliance of the Williams sisters, I have never been able to enjoy them as much as I should. Some of it may be their need to constantly call attention to everything BUT their tennis; some of it may be that they are never gracious in defeat—it’s always, “I gave her the match,”—and some of it is the respect I lost for Serena after her behavior at the Open last fall. (Not to mention her moron agent sticking her hand in front of the CBS camera afterwards).
So, I’ll probably watch at least for a while from the semifinals on—although my pal Mary Carillo won’t be there because she’s flying home for her daughter’s high school graduation this weekend—but the truth is I just won’t be as into it as I was once upon a time. I wish that wasn’t the case, especially since Nadal and Federer appear to be good guys, but that’s the way it is.
--------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
To listen to 'The Bob and Tom Show' interview about 'Moment of Glory', please click the play button below:
Friday, May 14, 2010
If LeBron leaves Cleveland, this series will certainly be part of his legacy
At least LeBron James has learned a little bit in the last year about how to lose. After The Boston Celtics ended his season and quite possibly his career with the Cleveland Cavaliers, he stuck around to congratulate the Celtics with handshakes and a couple of hugs and then came into the interview room to talk about the NBA playoffs and—at least in broad terms—what his future may hold for him this summer.
That’s an improvement from a year ago when he bolted the building as soon as the Orlando Magic had finished off his team and then was un-apologetic about his wounded-diva act the following day. “Winners don’t congratulate people when they beat them,” he said.
Actually, that’s exactly what winners do. That’s one reason why the hockey tradition of the handshake line at the end of a playoff series is one of the great traditions in sports. Do you think it was painful for Alexander Ovechkin two weeks ago and Sidney Crosby two nights ago to line up and shake the hands of the eighth-seeded Montreal Canadiens after each had lost a seventh game at home to Les Habitants? (I love that nickname). Of course it was. But it would never occur to either star to NOT line up and shake hands.
At least James has learned that much about losing. But he still has a long, long way to go. His pre-game ramblings before game six about his performance in game five made little if no sense. At one point he claimed he had played three bad games in seven years. At another point he said that losing this series would have no affect at all on his legacy and acted as if he was a rookie playing his first postseason rather than a seven year veteran who may be getting ready to leave town for another team.
What’s clear when James talked is that, like so many athletes—especially Nike athletes—the carefully concocted marketing image is very different than the reality. James can certainly sell product. Talking off the top of his head, especially when faced with an on-court crisis, he’s not nearly as smooth.
That’s okay too. There’s no rule that says every great athlete has to be Arthur Ashe or Bill Bradley or Arnold Palmer. James is light years ahead of, say Stephen Strasburg, the Washington Nationals pitching phenom, who is so media-shy the team protects him as if he’s The President. When Strasburg gets to Washington the Nationals are going to have to bring the young reliever Drew Storen with him as both his designated closer and designated spokesman.
Back to James. The apologists will point out that he had a triple-double in game six and can’t be blamed for the lackluster play of his older teammates, notably Antawn Jamison and Shaquille O’Neal. The bashers will note the nine turnovers (a ridiculous number) and his unwillingness to try to take over the game. At 78-74, after he had FINALLY made a couple of threes, the opportunity for him to win the game for the Cavaliers was there. Instead, he literally handed it to Rajon Rondo, who outplayed him and everyone else throughout the series.
Let’s be fair about one thing: the constant comparisons to Michael Jordan—many the fault of Nike and his various marketing arms—are unfair and silly. There was ONE Jordan. There is no NEXT Jordan—not James, not Kobe Bryant, not the next eighth grader being over-publicized as we speak. Jordan wasn’t just a once-in-a-generation talent, he was a once-in-a-generation competitor.
He was never surrounded by great players and won six championships. Scottie Pippen became great because he had Jordan next to him. Everyone else was good enough to get Jordan to the fourth quarter and let Jordan win the game from there. That’s about what the Cavaliers are right now. They have a very good guard in Mo Williams and they tried to bring in experience and guys who could take some burden off James with O’Neal and Jamison. They won 65 games in the regular season, which makes them good—but apparently not good enough.
People will correctly point out that Jordan was in his seventh year when he won his first title. That’s true. James has just finished his seventh year. He also didn’t have three years in college under Dean Smith to learn the game the way Jordan did. Even so, he’s not Jordan. That doesn’t mean he isn’t going to win titles, I suspect he will. But his willingness to accept defeat and then to EXCUSE defeat makes him a lot different than Jordan.
Will he leave Cleveland? Probably. “Me and my team will make good decisions this summer,” isn’t likely to fill fans in that long-suffering city with confidence that he’s returning. He’s always been non-committal on his commitment to Cleveland. Some people are even writing and saying this morning that he needs to leave Cleveland because the burden of bringing a title there (the last championship team there was the old Browns in 1964) is just too much and he needs to get out.
Are you kidding? There’s less pressure in NEW YORK where the Knicks last won a title in 1973 and where they will start planning the parade the day he signs? There’s less pressure in Chicago where he can walk past Jordan’s statue every time he plays in The United Center? There’s less pressure in Miami where he’d have to fight Dwayne Wade for the basketball AND deal with Pat Riley’s ego?
In truth, he belongs in Cleveland. He can still be the (almost) hometown kid who brought a championship to the city. The Cavaliers would need to make changes around him: they probably need a new coach (I’d go get Jeff Van Gundy) and O’Neal is certainly done. But with James in town they can get players to surround him who can win a title. They aren’t there, but they aren’t that far away either.
This notion that he needs to go to New York to market himself is incredibly dumb. At James’s level it doesn’t matter where you play. Is Peyton Manning lacking for endorsement deals in Indianapolis?
WINNING makes you a billionaire not clever commercials. What’s more the RIGHT thing to do for James is to stay in Cleveland. It may be a quaint and outdated notion to say that an athlete owes something to a city but James owes Cleveland more than cutting-and-running the first chance he gets. It isn’t as if he’s going to suffer or be underpaid by staying there or he’s with an organization that won’t try to build a championship team around him.
James insisted on Wednesday that his legacy wasn’t at stake in this series. If he leaves Cleveland now his failures the last two years will very much be part of his legacy. And they will be HIS failures because the star gets credit so he must also take the blame. He still has a chance to change that legacy in Cleveland. But he can’t do it playing in New York.
*****
I want to take a second here to thank my friends at “The Bob and Tom Show.” They have been my first interview on every book I’ve done starting with “A Season on the Brink,” and, without fail the interview gives the book a running start. It did so again yesterday with “Moment of Glory,” and I don’t want any of the folks there to think I’m not grateful because I am. So thanks to Bob, Tom, Dean, Kristie, Chic and Joni for all their help through the years.
To listen to 'The Bob and Tom Show' interview, please click the play button below:
---------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
That’s an improvement from a year ago when he bolted the building as soon as the Orlando Magic had finished off his team and then was un-apologetic about his wounded-diva act the following day. “Winners don’t congratulate people when they beat them,” he said.
Actually, that’s exactly what winners do. That’s one reason why the hockey tradition of the handshake line at the end of a playoff series is one of the great traditions in sports. Do you think it was painful for Alexander Ovechkin two weeks ago and Sidney Crosby two nights ago to line up and shake the hands of the eighth-seeded Montreal Canadiens after each had lost a seventh game at home to Les Habitants? (I love that nickname). Of course it was. But it would never occur to either star to NOT line up and shake hands.
At least James has learned that much about losing. But he still has a long, long way to go. His pre-game ramblings before game six about his performance in game five made little if no sense. At one point he claimed he had played three bad games in seven years. At another point he said that losing this series would have no affect at all on his legacy and acted as if he was a rookie playing his first postseason rather than a seven year veteran who may be getting ready to leave town for another team.
What’s clear when James talked is that, like so many athletes—especially Nike athletes—the carefully concocted marketing image is very different than the reality. James can certainly sell product. Talking off the top of his head, especially when faced with an on-court crisis, he’s not nearly as smooth.
That’s okay too. There’s no rule that says every great athlete has to be Arthur Ashe or Bill Bradley or Arnold Palmer. James is light years ahead of, say Stephen Strasburg, the Washington Nationals pitching phenom, who is so media-shy the team protects him as if he’s The President. When Strasburg gets to Washington the Nationals are going to have to bring the young reliever Drew Storen with him as both his designated closer and designated spokesman.
Back to James. The apologists will point out that he had a triple-double in game six and can’t be blamed for the lackluster play of his older teammates, notably Antawn Jamison and Shaquille O’Neal. The bashers will note the nine turnovers (a ridiculous number) and his unwillingness to try to take over the game. At 78-74, after he had FINALLY made a couple of threes, the opportunity for him to win the game for the Cavaliers was there. Instead, he literally handed it to Rajon Rondo, who outplayed him and everyone else throughout the series.
Let’s be fair about one thing: the constant comparisons to Michael Jordan—many the fault of Nike and his various marketing arms—are unfair and silly. There was ONE Jordan. There is no NEXT Jordan—not James, not Kobe Bryant, not the next eighth grader being over-publicized as we speak. Jordan wasn’t just a once-in-a-generation talent, he was a once-in-a-generation competitor.
He was never surrounded by great players and won six championships. Scottie Pippen became great because he had Jordan next to him. Everyone else was good enough to get Jordan to the fourth quarter and let Jordan win the game from there. That’s about what the Cavaliers are right now. They have a very good guard in Mo Williams and they tried to bring in experience and guys who could take some burden off James with O’Neal and Jamison. They won 65 games in the regular season, which makes them good—but apparently not good enough.
People will correctly point out that Jordan was in his seventh year when he won his first title. That’s true. James has just finished his seventh year. He also didn’t have three years in college under Dean Smith to learn the game the way Jordan did. Even so, he’s not Jordan. That doesn’t mean he isn’t going to win titles, I suspect he will. But his willingness to accept defeat and then to EXCUSE defeat makes him a lot different than Jordan.
Will he leave Cleveland? Probably. “Me and my team will make good decisions this summer,” isn’t likely to fill fans in that long-suffering city with confidence that he’s returning. He’s always been non-committal on his commitment to Cleveland. Some people are even writing and saying this morning that he needs to leave Cleveland because the burden of bringing a title there (the last championship team there was the old Browns in 1964) is just too much and he needs to get out.
Are you kidding? There’s less pressure in NEW YORK where the Knicks last won a title in 1973 and where they will start planning the parade the day he signs? There’s less pressure in Chicago where he can walk past Jordan’s statue every time he plays in The United Center? There’s less pressure in Miami where he’d have to fight Dwayne Wade for the basketball AND deal with Pat Riley’s ego?
In truth, he belongs in Cleveland. He can still be the (almost) hometown kid who brought a championship to the city. The Cavaliers would need to make changes around him: they probably need a new coach (I’d go get Jeff Van Gundy) and O’Neal is certainly done. But with James in town they can get players to surround him who can win a title. They aren’t there, but they aren’t that far away either.
This notion that he needs to go to New York to market himself is incredibly dumb. At James’s level it doesn’t matter where you play. Is Peyton Manning lacking for endorsement deals in Indianapolis?
WINNING makes you a billionaire not clever commercials. What’s more the RIGHT thing to do for James is to stay in Cleveland. It may be a quaint and outdated notion to say that an athlete owes something to a city but James owes Cleveland more than cutting-and-running the first chance he gets. It isn’t as if he’s going to suffer or be underpaid by staying there or he’s with an organization that won’t try to build a championship team around him.
James insisted on Wednesday that his legacy wasn’t at stake in this series. If he leaves Cleveland now his failures the last two years will very much be part of his legacy. And they will be HIS failures because the star gets credit so he must also take the blame. He still has a chance to change that legacy in Cleveland. But he can’t do it playing in New York.
*****
I want to take a second here to thank my friends at “The Bob and Tom Show.” They have been my first interview on every book I’ve done starting with “A Season on the Brink,” and, without fail the interview gives the book a running start. It did so again yesterday with “Moment of Glory,” and I don’t want any of the folks there to think I’m not grateful because I am. So thanks to Bob, Tom, Dean, Kristie, Chic and Joni for all their help through the years.
To listen to 'The Bob and Tom Show' interview, please click the play button below:
---------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Monday, April 19, 2010
Stories of growing up a fanatic Knicks fan; These days the NBA playoffs aren't for me
I wish I could make myself care more about the NBA playoffs. I just can’t do it. They go on much too long—especially the first round which goes on for about a month—and they’re entirely too predictable. Oh sure, upsets happen every once in a while, but not nearly as often as in hockey and when they do—like Orlando over Cleveland last year—you don’t get a handshake line, you get LeBron James stomping off and then insisting he was RIGHT not to shake hands.
It’s more than that though and, to be fair, a lot of it is just personal bias.
I grew up a Knicks fan, a fanatic Knicks fan at that. I was fortunate to come to basketball just when the Willis Reed-Walt Frazier-Dave Debusschere-Bill Bradley-Dick Barnett-Cazzie Russell Knicks were about to take off. (I could name the rest of the 1970 championship roster: Dave Stallworth, Phil Jackson, Mike Riordan, Nate (the Snake) Bowman, Bill Hosket, Don May and John Warren but that would be showing off).
When I was REALLY young, the Knicks often played Tuesday night doubleheaders—seriously—with two teams playing at 6:30 and the Knicks playing at 8:30. Since it was a school night I often went to the 6:30 game and then had to go home and listen to the Knicks (Marv Albert at the mike) on radio before going to bed. In those days, game actually took under two hours. The first time I ever saw the Celtics was in the first game of a Garden doubleheader.
When the Knicks got really good in 1969, I became a blue seats denizen, sitting as often as possible in section 406, which was right at center court and, just as important, right behind what was then Marv’s broadcast position. (He was moved downstairs not long after that). That meant my buddies and I could position ourselves to actually speak to the great man when he made his way to his location. He was never anything less than friendly, often asking us what WE thought about that night’s game. We always thought the Knicks were going to win.
After games, we would wait outside the player entrance to get autographs. Needless to say I had ALL the Knicks (DeBusschere was the toughest because he would go straight into the bar next door for a couple of beers and then would sign afterwards for those who waited him out) including the trainer, the immortal Danny Whelan.
The damn Celtics beat the Knicks in the ’69 playoffs and went on to win their 11th title in 13 seasons. Bill Russell retired (Thank God) that summer and the Knicks won 60 games the next season, including an 18-game win streak that broke the Celtics all-time record of 17. They were the No. 1 seed in the playoffs but it was never easy. They needed seven games to beat The Baltimore Bullets, who had some pretty good players themselves in Wes Unseld, Earl Monroe, Gus Johnson, Jack Marin and Kevin Loughery. The Milwaukee Bucks were scary because, even as a rookie, the player then known as Lew Alcindor was almost impossible to stop, but the Knicks won that series in five.
Then came the epic final with the Lakers that included Jerry West’s halfcourt shot at the buzzer to tie game three (the Knicks won in overtime even though DeBusschere fainted when the shot went in); Reed getting hurt in game five and the Knicks somehow winning with Bowman, DeBusschere and Stallworth surrounding Wilt Chamberlain as best they could; Chamberlain going off for 45 in game six and, finally, the Willis Reed game on May 8th, 1970 when Reed hobbled onto the court long enough to hit two jump shots to start the game and never scored again.
It didn’t matter. Frazier scored 36 (and also had, I think something like 19 rebounds and 13 assists) and the Knicks won 113-99. I can still see DeBusschere holding the ball over his head as the clock went to zero and I can still hear Marv’s call (I brought my radio with me): “It is PANDEMONIUM in the Garden!”
The Knicks lost the finals in 1972 to the Lakers team that won 68 games and completely destroyed the Knicks record winning streak by winning 33 (!!!!) games in a row. But they came back a year later and beat the Lakers again, Monroe taking Barnett’s place in the backcourt and Jerry Lucas filling in admirably for Reed who was never quite 100 percent again after his MVP year in 1970.
It was 21 years before the Knicks made it back to what were known by then as The Finals. Bird and Magic and Jordan had taken the league to new heights of popularity by then but I never really jumped on their bandwagon. It wasn’t that they weren’t brilliant, I just never warmed up to Phil Jackson—yes, an ex-Knick but all the Zen-stuff never took for me—or to Pat Riley. In fact, it was Riley’s presence as coach of the Knicks in ’94 that made it impossible for me to get excited about their finally getting back to The Finals.
I’ve often told the Michael Jordan/Riley, “you media guys just don’t understand basketball,” story (Note: click here to read the story from a previous post) but it went beyond that. Riley really DID think he had invented the game and I couldn’t stand his style of play as the coach in New York and then later, after he quit the Knicks by sending a FAX (!!) announcing he was leaving, when he coached in Miami. I’m sure Stan Van Gundy loved the way he shoved him aside a few years back when he saw a chance to win another title as coach.
I was actually glad the Knicks lost game seven to the Rockets in ’94 if only because I didn’t want Riley in the same sentence with the great Red Holzman. I had no such problems with Jeff Van Gundy or the ’99 group that made The Finals but that almost didn’t count because it came in a lockout-shortened season.
Nowadays, I just can’t get into the impossibly long playoff season (yes, the NHL is almost as long but there’s more suspense in the early rounds and you aren’t constantly pounded by ESPN with one promo after another and the networks see-no-evil coverage of all things NBA. Not that this is unique to the NBA on the four letter network, it just feels smarmier on the NBA because it is so non-stop.)
That’s not to say I don’t appreciate the artistry of the league’s best players. James is amazing to watch, but I still can’t get past his behavior after the loss to Orlando last year. For the record, winning this year won’t change what he did last year. Only a genuine apology might do that. Kobe Bryant is fabulous but hard to love given his past—no, he wasn’t convicted of rape but HIS version of what happened that night in Colorado is none too flattering. Steve Nash is an absolutely freakish shooter but still hasn’t been to The Finals once. I love the potential of Kevin Durant and Stephen Curry, who are mega-talented and appear to be really good guys too.
So, I’ll keep an eye on the playoffs and hope for an upset or two—although the first weekend hasn’t been too encouraging has it? Part of me would like to see the long-suffering fans of Cleveland (in all sports) get a title, part of me would like to see if LeBron is callous enough to leave after not delivering a championship.
And the Knicks? I like Donnie Walsh and Mike D’Antoni. They have lots and lots of cap room this summer. If they use it to sign Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, I might get interested again. If it’s LeBron, well, call me when he apologizes.
It’s more than that though and, to be fair, a lot of it is just personal bias.
I grew up a Knicks fan, a fanatic Knicks fan at that. I was fortunate to come to basketball just when the Willis Reed-Walt Frazier-Dave Debusschere-Bill Bradley-Dick Barnett-Cazzie Russell Knicks were about to take off. (I could name the rest of the 1970 championship roster: Dave Stallworth, Phil Jackson, Mike Riordan, Nate (the Snake) Bowman, Bill Hosket, Don May and John Warren but that would be showing off).
When I was REALLY young, the Knicks often played Tuesday night doubleheaders—seriously—with two teams playing at 6:30 and the Knicks playing at 8:30. Since it was a school night I often went to the 6:30 game and then had to go home and listen to the Knicks (Marv Albert at the mike) on radio before going to bed. In those days, game actually took under two hours. The first time I ever saw the Celtics was in the first game of a Garden doubleheader.
When the Knicks got really good in 1969, I became a blue seats denizen, sitting as often as possible in section 406, which was right at center court and, just as important, right behind what was then Marv’s broadcast position. (He was moved downstairs not long after that). That meant my buddies and I could position ourselves to actually speak to the great man when he made his way to his location. He was never anything less than friendly, often asking us what WE thought about that night’s game. We always thought the Knicks were going to win.
After games, we would wait outside the player entrance to get autographs. Needless to say I had ALL the Knicks (DeBusschere was the toughest because he would go straight into the bar next door for a couple of beers and then would sign afterwards for those who waited him out) including the trainer, the immortal Danny Whelan.
The damn Celtics beat the Knicks in the ’69 playoffs and went on to win their 11th title in 13 seasons. Bill Russell retired (Thank God) that summer and the Knicks won 60 games the next season, including an 18-game win streak that broke the Celtics all-time record of 17. They were the No. 1 seed in the playoffs but it was never easy. They needed seven games to beat The Baltimore Bullets, who had some pretty good players themselves in Wes Unseld, Earl Monroe, Gus Johnson, Jack Marin and Kevin Loughery. The Milwaukee Bucks were scary because, even as a rookie, the player then known as Lew Alcindor was almost impossible to stop, but the Knicks won that series in five.
Then came the epic final with the Lakers that included Jerry West’s halfcourt shot at the buzzer to tie game three (the Knicks won in overtime even though DeBusschere fainted when the shot went in); Reed getting hurt in game five and the Knicks somehow winning with Bowman, DeBusschere and Stallworth surrounding Wilt Chamberlain as best they could; Chamberlain going off for 45 in game six and, finally, the Willis Reed game on May 8th, 1970 when Reed hobbled onto the court long enough to hit two jump shots to start the game and never scored again.
It didn’t matter. Frazier scored 36 (and also had, I think something like 19 rebounds and 13 assists) and the Knicks won 113-99. I can still see DeBusschere holding the ball over his head as the clock went to zero and I can still hear Marv’s call (I brought my radio with me): “It is PANDEMONIUM in the Garden!”
The Knicks lost the finals in 1972 to the Lakers team that won 68 games and completely destroyed the Knicks record winning streak by winning 33 (!!!!) games in a row. But they came back a year later and beat the Lakers again, Monroe taking Barnett’s place in the backcourt and Jerry Lucas filling in admirably for Reed who was never quite 100 percent again after his MVP year in 1970.
It was 21 years before the Knicks made it back to what were known by then as The Finals. Bird and Magic and Jordan had taken the league to new heights of popularity by then but I never really jumped on their bandwagon. It wasn’t that they weren’t brilliant, I just never warmed up to Phil Jackson—yes, an ex-Knick but all the Zen-stuff never took for me—or to Pat Riley. In fact, it was Riley’s presence as coach of the Knicks in ’94 that made it impossible for me to get excited about their finally getting back to The Finals.
I’ve often told the Michael Jordan/Riley, “you media guys just don’t understand basketball,” story (Note: click here to read the story from a previous post) but it went beyond that. Riley really DID think he had invented the game and I couldn’t stand his style of play as the coach in New York and then later, after he quit the Knicks by sending a FAX (!!) announcing he was leaving, when he coached in Miami. I’m sure Stan Van Gundy loved the way he shoved him aside a few years back when he saw a chance to win another title as coach.
I was actually glad the Knicks lost game seven to the Rockets in ’94 if only because I didn’t want Riley in the same sentence with the great Red Holzman. I had no such problems with Jeff Van Gundy or the ’99 group that made The Finals but that almost didn’t count because it came in a lockout-shortened season.
Nowadays, I just can’t get into the impossibly long playoff season (yes, the NHL is almost as long but there’s more suspense in the early rounds and you aren’t constantly pounded by ESPN with one promo after another and the networks see-no-evil coverage of all things NBA. Not that this is unique to the NBA on the four letter network, it just feels smarmier on the NBA because it is so non-stop.)
That’s not to say I don’t appreciate the artistry of the league’s best players. James is amazing to watch, but I still can’t get past his behavior after the loss to Orlando last year. For the record, winning this year won’t change what he did last year. Only a genuine apology might do that. Kobe Bryant is fabulous but hard to love given his past—no, he wasn’t convicted of rape but HIS version of what happened that night in Colorado is none too flattering. Steve Nash is an absolutely freakish shooter but still hasn’t been to The Finals once. I love the potential of Kevin Durant and Stephen Curry, who are mega-talented and appear to be really good guys too.
So, I’ll keep an eye on the playoffs and hope for an upset or two—although the first weekend hasn’t been too encouraging has it? Part of me would like to see the long-suffering fans of Cleveland (in all sports) get a title, part of me would like to see if LeBron is callous enough to leave after not delivering a championship.
And the Knicks? I like Donnie Walsh and Mike D’Antoni. They have lots and lots of cap room this summer. If they use it to sign Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, I might get interested again. If it’s LeBron, well, call me when he apologizes.
Monday, November 16, 2009
LeBron, Jordan is No Jackie Robinson; Comments on Comments
Friends of mine who cover the NBA on a regular basis tell me that LeBron James is a pretty good guy, that, for someone who has been in the spotlight since his sophomore year in high school he is relatively approachable and is also a bright guy.
Maybe.
But he’s a done a couple of things in recent months that make me wonder if he isn’t yet another in the long line of athletes who live in The Land of Never Wrong.
He could not possibly have handled his team’s season-ending loss in the Eastern Conference finals any worse that he did. After the Orlando Magic had knocked his Cleveland Cavaliers out of the playoffs in six games, James left the court without shaking anyone’s hand—including that of his friend and Olympic teammate Dwight Howard—and then left the building without speaking to the media.
Okay, it happens. He didn’t expect to lose and threw a little tantrum when he did. No big deal. But the next day when he did talk to reporters he was completely un-apologetic about his behavior, saying something stupid about winners not congratulating people who beat them. Actually that’s EXACTLY what winners do: part of being a real winner is dealing with defeat because it happens to everyone including Tiger Woods, Roger Federer, Tom Brady, Derek Jeter, Kobe Bryant and, yes, King James—who still hasn’t won an NBA title.
On top of that bit of foolishness, James showed up for his little press conference wearing a Yankees cap. I’ve heard all about what a big Yankees fan he is and has been. That’s all fine. But when you are from Akron and you’ve played your entire pro career in Cleveland and the town is sitting on pins and needles wondering what you’re going to do when you hit free agency in the summer of 2010 you do NOT show up wearing the cap of a team that plays in the same town as one of the teams that is going to throw huge dollars in your direction.
Harmless fun? Maybe. But it’s like waving red at a bull—especially the day after you and your teammates have failed to reach The Finals in a year when it was expected of you, especially when you may only have one more season left in Cleveland. Go without cap. Show a little respect for your hometown fans.
The latest Lebronism is to suggest/demand that the NBA retire number 23—Michael Jordan’s number—the same way Major League Baseball retired Jackie Robinson’s number 42. James even generously suggested he would be willing to change his number—to number 6.
This goes beyond foolish. To begin with, Michael Jordan doesn’t belong in the same sentence with Jackie Robinson, especially when it comes to breaking down barriers or being politically involved. Jordan, in fact, has made a point of NOT being politically involved. As we saw so vividly during his Hall of Fame induction speech, Michael Jordan has one cause: Michael Jordan.
No one is disputing Jordan’s greatness as a player. Many believe he’s the best player of all time. I think cases can be made for Oscar Robertson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell. But if you want to tell me that Jordan was the best, I can live with that.
Robinson wasn’t close to being the best baseball player of all time. But he may very well be the most important. The only player who comes close is Babe Ruth, who probably saved the game after The Black Sox scandal. Russell, whose Celtics won five more championships than Jordan, certainly would deserve consideration for having his number retired if Jordan’s is going to be retired. Memo to LeBron: You know what number Russell wore? Six. So how about at least scratching that from your list of new numbers.
Jordan certainly played a major part in the NBA’s renaissance in the 1980s but Magic Johnson and Larry Bird got to the league five years before he did and already had turned it in the right direction before Jordan’s arrival. Jordan didn’t win an NBA title until 1991 when the NBA---thanks in very large part to the Magic vs. Larry duels of the 80s—had re-taken its spot in the American consciousness. Jordan certainly deserves a lot of credit for all he did but he was no more important Magic or Bird. A better player? Yes. More important? No.
There is also the issue of the way he’s lived his life off the court. He isn’t a terrible guy and he hasn’t done anything truly awful. But he’s had gambling problems, he walked away from the game in mid-career for reasons that have remained murky and he hasn’t exactly handled retirement with a good deal of grace. That doesn’t mean we should all line up and say bad things about him but if a number is going to be retired by an entire league the person needs to be as special as the player. Jackie Robinson was special in every possible way. Michael Jordan was an extraordinary player. Period.
One can only hope that Commissioner David Stern and the NBA are smart enough to suggest that James focus on winning games and making commercials, not setting league policy. If James wants to change his number no one is stopping him. I would politely suggest though that he find one other than number six. Because one thing I can guarantee you is that he’ll never come close to winning as many championships as Russell whether he plays in Cleveland, New York, Miami, Los Angeles or anyplace else in the future.
-------------------------
A couple of comments on some of the recent posts and e-mails: As I’ve said before, I really enjoy them, even those from people who disagree with me since those are often very smart and well worth paying attention to.
First, since this has something to do with today’s blog, someone wrote a while back that I should stop, “trying to make a living off of Michael Jordan.” I think this was after the Hall of Fame speech when everyone in the world was commenting on it and I was in fact ASKED by many people what I thought. I would also suggest—politely of course—that I first wrote about Jordan when he was in HIGH SCHOOL and to comment on him is, in fact, my job…
Last week on Tony Kornheiser’s radio show I was asked if it was true that I had in the past opposed Navy playing Notre Dame. I noticed where one poster wrote that I had “privately,” been opposed to the rivalry for years before Navy’s win in 2007. Let’s get this straight: I don’t oppose anything privately. I opposed the rivalry very PUBLICLY for years, dating back to when I wrote “A Civil War,” in 1995. I never said the teams should NEVER play, I said I didn’t think they should play every year because it was unfair to the Navy kids: not only did Notre Dame have every possible advantage in recruiting and in exposure but Navy never got to play a home game! (Still doesn’t). One year the game’s at Notre Dame, the next at a so-called neutral site overrun with Notre Dame fans.
I changed my stance several years BEFORE Navy won for one reason: generation after generation of Navy players told me I was wrong, that they WANTED to play the game every year, relished it in fact. Even during the 43 straight losses they always thought they could win. So, because they want to play the game, I’m fine with it. I’m not the one who has to go out there and try to do the impossible—which they have now done two years out of three.
As for the couple of guys who called me a “bandwagon,” jumper, that one I think is unfair. I wrote the book in 1995 when both Army and Navy were struggling for any recognition at all. I’ve done Navy games on radio since 1997 including one three year stretch when the Mids were 3-30, including an 0-10 (none of the games close) in 2001. I really don’t think you can call me a bandwagon jumper. It’s not as if I started singing the praises of service academy kids just because Navy beat Notre Dame, although I was pretty damn happy about it.
By the way, did anyone notice that Notre Dame got called for a chop block on Saturday night? Sometimes, there is justice in the world.
Maybe.
But he’s a done a couple of things in recent months that make me wonder if he isn’t yet another in the long line of athletes who live in The Land of Never Wrong.
He could not possibly have handled his team’s season-ending loss in the Eastern Conference finals any worse that he did. After the Orlando Magic had knocked his Cleveland Cavaliers out of the playoffs in six games, James left the court without shaking anyone’s hand—including that of his friend and Olympic teammate Dwight Howard—and then left the building without speaking to the media.
Okay, it happens. He didn’t expect to lose and threw a little tantrum when he did. No big deal. But the next day when he did talk to reporters he was completely un-apologetic about his behavior, saying something stupid about winners not congratulating people who beat them. Actually that’s EXACTLY what winners do: part of being a real winner is dealing with defeat because it happens to everyone including Tiger Woods, Roger Federer, Tom Brady, Derek Jeter, Kobe Bryant and, yes, King James—who still hasn’t won an NBA title.
On top of that bit of foolishness, James showed up for his little press conference wearing a Yankees cap. I’ve heard all about what a big Yankees fan he is and has been. That’s all fine. But when you are from Akron and you’ve played your entire pro career in Cleveland and the town is sitting on pins and needles wondering what you’re going to do when you hit free agency in the summer of 2010 you do NOT show up wearing the cap of a team that plays in the same town as one of the teams that is going to throw huge dollars in your direction.
Harmless fun? Maybe. But it’s like waving red at a bull—especially the day after you and your teammates have failed to reach The Finals in a year when it was expected of you, especially when you may only have one more season left in Cleveland. Go without cap. Show a little respect for your hometown fans.
The latest Lebronism is to suggest/demand that the NBA retire number 23—Michael Jordan’s number—the same way Major League Baseball retired Jackie Robinson’s number 42. James even generously suggested he would be willing to change his number—to number 6.
This goes beyond foolish. To begin with, Michael Jordan doesn’t belong in the same sentence with Jackie Robinson, especially when it comes to breaking down barriers or being politically involved. Jordan, in fact, has made a point of NOT being politically involved. As we saw so vividly during his Hall of Fame induction speech, Michael Jordan has one cause: Michael Jordan.
No one is disputing Jordan’s greatness as a player. Many believe he’s the best player of all time. I think cases can be made for Oscar Robertson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell. But if you want to tell me that Jordan was the best, I can live with that.
Robinson wasn’t close to being the best baseball player of all time. But he may very well be the most important. The only player who comes close is Babe Ruth, who probably saved the game after The Black Sox scandal. Russell, whose Celtics won five more championships than Jordan, certainly would deserve consideration for having his number retired if Jordan’s is going to be retired. Memo to LeBron: You know what number Russell wore? Six. So how about at least scratching that from your list of new numbers.
Jordan certainly played a major part in the NBA’s renaissance in the 1980s but Magic Johnson and Larry Bird got to the league five years before he did and already had turned it in the right direction before Jordan’s arrival. Jordan didn’t win an NBA title until 1991 when the NBA---thanks in very large part to the Magic vs. Larry duels of the 80s—had re-taken its spot in the American consciousness. Jordan certainly deserves a lot of credit for all he did but he was no more important Magic or Bird. A better player? Yes. More important? No.
There is also the issue of the way he’s lived his life off the court. He isn’t a terrible guy and he hasn’t done anything truly awful. But he’s had gambling problems, he walked away from the game in mid-career for reasons that have remained murky and he hasn’t exactly handled retirement with a good deal of grace. That doesn’t mean we should all line up and say bad things about him but if a number is going to be retired by an entire league the person needs to be as special as the player. Jackie Robinson was special in every possible way. Michael Jordan was an extraordinary player. Period.
One can only hope that Commissioner David Stern and the NBA are smart enough to suggest that James focus on winning games and making commercials, not setting league policy. If James wants to change his number no one is stopping him. I would politely suggest though that he find one other than number six. Because one thing I can guarantee you is that he’ll never come close to winning as many championships as Russell whether he plays in Cleveland, New York, Miami, Los Angeles or anyplace else in the future.
-------------------------
A couple of comments on some of the recent posts and e-mails: As I’ve said before, I really enjoy them, even those from people who disagree with me since those are often very smart and well worth paying attention to.
First, since this has something to do with today’s blog, someone wrote a while back that I should stop, “trying to make a living off of Michael Jordan.” I think this was after the Hall of Fame speech when everyone in the world was commenting on it and I was in fact ASKED by many people what I thought. I would also suggest—politely of course—that I first wrote about Jordan when he was in HIGH SCHOOL and to comment on him is, in fact, my job…
Last week on Tony Kornheiser’s radio show I was asked if it was true that I had in the past opposed Navy playing Notre Dame. I noticed where one poster wrote that I had “privately,” been opposed to the rivalry for years before Navy’s win in 2007. Let’s get this straight: I don’t oppose anything privately. I opposed the rivalry very PUBLICLY for years, dating back to when I wrote “A Civil War,” in 1995. I never said the teams should NEVER play, I said I didn’t think they should play every year because it was unfair to the Navy kids: not only did Notre Dame have every possible advantage in recruiting and in exposure but Navy never got to play a home game! (Still doesn’t). One year the game’s at Notre Dame, the next at a so-called neutral site overrun with Notre Dame fans.
I changed my stance several years BEFORE Navy won for one reason: generation after generation of Navy players told me I was wrong, that they WANTED to play the game every year, relished it in fact. Even during the 43 straight losses they always thought they could win. So, because they want to play the game, I’m fine with it. I’m not the one who has to go out there and try to do the impossible—which they have now done two years out of three.
As for the couple of guys who called me a “bandwagon,” jumper, that one I think is unfair. I wrote the book in 1995 when both Army and Navy were struggling for any recognition at all. I’ve done Navy games on radio since 1997 including one three year stretch when the Mids were 3-30, including an 0-10 (none of the games close) in 2001. I really don’t think you can call me a bandwagon jumper. It’s not as if I started singing the praises of service academy kids just because Navy beat Notre Dame, although I was pretty damn happy about it.
By the way, did anyone notice that Notre Dame got called for a chop block on Saturday night? Sometimes, there is justice in the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)