Showing posts with label pat forde. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pat forde. Show all posts

Friday, February 14, 2014

5 comments Marcus Smart Needs Professional Help Apparently

I'm sure everyone has seen and heard about Marcus Smart pushing a Texas Tech fan (There are Texas Tech basketball fans? They exist?) for taunting him or calling him "a piece of crap." It was uncalled for and Marcus Smart was definitely in the wrong for pushing the fan and deserved some sort of suspension. Given the fact the fan was an adult taunting a 19 year old kid I tend to think 3 games was sufficient. After all, Marcus Smart isn't a professional and college athletes shouldn't have to put up with some of the shit dished out by fans. Today I have three writers who all think Marcus Smart should have gotten a longer suspension, but do so in different ways, including one who couldn't be bothered to gets his facts straight as he condemned Smart with his computer keyboard.

I'll start first with Pat Forde who says that Marcus Smart deserved a harsher suspension, perhaps the death penalty?

The three-game suspension handed down jointly by the Big 12 Conference and Oklahoma State to the Cowboys’ star guard after shoving a fan at Texas Tech is lighter than it should have been. Not egregiously lighter – three games is not insignificant – but Smart should have missed at least half of Oklahoma State’s remaining eight regular-season games, if not more.

I'm already confused by the opening paragraph. Pat Forde states the following:

1. Marcus Smart got off easy. His suspension should have been heavier than it was.

2. Smart's suspension isn't insignificant. Three games is a lot of games.

3. Even though three games isn't insignificant, it's not significant enough. Smart should have missed at least one more game.

4. Smart should probably have missed more than four games, but the exact amount of games Smart should have missed is unstated by Forde. 

So if three game isn't significant and four games is the minimum amount of games Smart should have missed, then how many games does Pat Forde think Marcus Smart should have missed? This is never clarified and the reader is left to guess.

Smart crossed a line that athletes have known for decades not to cross – do not assault a fan. No matter what is said.

Smart pushed the fan. It's not like he punched him in the face. Smart was being taunted by a grown man and lost his cool. He shouldn't be let off easy for that, but I think there's a much larger case to be made that the fan's behavior in this situation was the very reason Smart pushed him and the fan instigated the incident. I realize Smart should not have pushed the fan, but there are a lot of fans out there who think they can say or do whatever they want to these players (unpaid, "amateur" players at that) without repercussions. It's bad enough the NCAA uses players as unpaid labor, but to expect these kids to endure taunts by non-grown up grown ups is a bit too much to ask sometimes in my opinion. This larger case won't be made and there won't be a larger conversation about why it is fine for a middle-aged man to verbally abuse a college student. So that's that.

To be sure, there is no need to “crucify” Smart, to use the loaded verbiage of Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder.

There's no need to crucify him, it's just that Smart needs to be punished more severely while the fan is left to punish himself through whatever method he sees fit. Pat Forde doesn't think Smart should be crucified, he should just miss as many of the remaining regular season games as possible.

But a more significant suspension would not ruin the young man’s career or life, and would reinforce the vital message that athletes cannot go into the stands (or even to the edge of them) and get physical with fans.

I think three games sends that message. And really, Pat Forde is overstating what Smart did. Smart didn't really go into the stands any more than he was already in the stands after the ball was whistled dead. He moved a little further into the stands to confront the man he believed was heckling him. I completely agree that players can't get physical with fans, but where is the fan's responsibility in this equation? Sure, Jeff Orr bought a ticket, but he didn't buy permission to verbally abuse college athletes while they are playing a sport. His ticket isn't an invitation to do or say whatever he wants to say.

When Smart had his chair-kicking tantrum against West Virginia on Jan. 25, there was no public institutional reaction. Not during the game, not after, and not in terms of the starting lineup two days later against Oklahoma in Norman.

Travis Ford went soft on Smart then, tacitly enabling the uncontrolled behavior that would only get worse Saturday night in Lubbock.

I completely believe that Travis Ford was not present enough in this situation. He should have taken more control after the fact then he ended up taking. I don't know if Ford enabled Smart, but I'm not sure if Smart had been taken out of the starting lineup on January 25 he would have avoided pushing Jeff Orr.

To be sure, the three games Smart will miss are important ones: at Texas on Tuesday, home against rival Oklahoma on Saturday and at Baylor on Feb. 17

If that happens, a team that began the year ranked in the top 10 would be 4-9 in the Big 12 and would seemingly need to mount a furious rally in the rest of the regular season and the conference tourney to reach the NCAA tournament.

In Travis Ford's defense, it's not easy to take a really talented team and win basketball games. It takes game planning and coaching. You can't just recruit these guys and expect to win games, so perhaps actually coaching the Oklahoma State team may be more than Ford is capable of doing.

The other unsatisfying element of Oklahoma State’s press conference Sunday was the school’s refusal to say what words Smart heard from Texas Tech fan Jeff Orr. The OSU radio broadcast team reported Saturday night that it overheard Smart tell the Cowboys coaching staff he was called the N-word. 

I think bringing up exactly what was said is difficult to prove and would only serve to prolong the incident in the minds of the public. I'm guessing Oklahoma State just wanted this to be over with.

In an apologetic statement Sunday, Orr refuted that, saying he called Smart “a piece of crap.”

Oh, well that's much better then.

Neither is acceptable communication from an adult to a college athlete, and it is welcome news that Orr said he will voluntarily attend no more Texas Tech games this season. But a racial slur would be significantly worse.

It does matter what Orr said, but then again it really doesn't matter. Either way, he said something that set Marcus Smart off and has a history of semi-unruly fan conduct. It's nice that Orr has the chance to choose his punishment. If anyone got off easy, it's probably Orr. He's lucky Texas Tech didn't ban him from any further games this year or even next year. In fact, there is precedent in the NBA for fans to be banned for life for bad behavior against athletes. Five fans who helped to ignite the Melee at the Palace in 2004 were suspended for life from attending Pistons games. Obviously the scale is smaller here, but there is a precedent for fans to be punished for inciting a player's temper. The Melee at the Palace occurred in the NBA, where I think the players have more of a duty to the fans who pay their salary, and the fans still got punished severely for their behavior.

If we want to eradicate such hateful speech from athletic venues, step up and call it out. Identify the churls who need to be tossed out of sporting arenas, and the words that fans should never be allowed to say without (non-violent) repercussion.

Again, it makes sense to know that Oklahoma State wants this to all go away so this incident will be in the past, as opposed to playing a game of "He said-He said" over the next week or so as people analyze audio tapes to find out exactly what phrase or slur (if he uttered one) that Jeff Orr said. And it's not necessarily the responsibility of Oklahoma State to point out to Texas Tech which fans should be tossed out of the arena. As the home team, along with it being their arena, that responsibility is on Texas Tech security to keep civility.

The silence from Oklahoma State on this issue doesn’t help the situation.

I love how Pat Forde claims the onus is on Oklahoma State to prove something they don't care to prove in order to prove a point the school doesn't appear to care to make.

And it doesn’t help clear Smart’s name. If he concocted the racial slur as an excuse for his actions, that’s one more reason to question his character.

At no point has Marcus Smart claimed Jeff Orr called him any kind of racial slur. So the mere idea created by Pat Forde that Smart "concocted" this racial slur as an excuse for his actions is just a pure fantasy on the part of Forde. Smart has concocted nothing and the only reason to question Smart's character is based on this incident alone, despite Forde's attempts to find other reasons to question Smart's character.

The stage is set for a made-for-TV parable about the chastened guard’s return as a wiser young man.

Hopefully he will be. But for a guy whose biggest historic impact on college basketball will probably be going after a fan, this feels like a premature return.

This is Smart's biggest historic impact as long as sportswriters continue to bring this incident up, especially with the implication that Marcus Smart lied about what Jeff Orr stated that set Smart off. Marcus Smart hasn't stated anything about what Orr did or didn't say. He has apologized and that's it. That's not a fun story to cover though, so Pat Forde wants Oklahoma State to continue the story by trying to find out exactly what Jeff Orr said, all while wondering if Smart concocted a story. Forde ignores the fact that Smart hasn't spoken publicly at all about what he heard and any "story" being concocted hasn't come from Smart. Let's blame Smart for lying now too.

Tom Keegan of KUSports.com (a clearly unbiased group of people) says in his "Double-Chin Music" blog that Marcus Smart needs professional help, which seems like a bit of an overreaction to Smart pushing a fan. 

Let's hope Marcus Smart, spiraling dangerously out of control, gets the suspension he deserves and the counseling help he clearly needs.

I'm not underplaying what happened, but Marcus Smart, who is a kid, pushed a fan. He's clearly in the wrong and this should never have happened. But this means he needs counseling? I don't know. 

Something — perhaps the decision to turn down probable guaranteed millions by returning to Oklahoma State for a sophomore season back-firing with each missed three-point shot that easily could have been an assist for a better shooter — clearly is eating at the projected lottery pick of a year ago.

Actually, it's probably the constant losing and underachieving that has Marcus Smart on edge. It also didn't help that a grown man was taunting him and calling him names. 

I also enjoy how Keegan ties this in to Smart's draft stock and how it is plummeting. Because kicking Smart while he's down and suggesting he needs counseling isn't enough, Keegan also has to seemingly criticize Marcus Smart for staying in school one more year at the expense of his lottery stock, as if Smart would have stayed in school if he really cared too much about his draft stock potentially falling. 

The saddest aspect of Smart's night came after his unbelievable shove of a man who appeared to be in his late '50s or so.

Of course Keegan leaves out that a man in his late 50's who is taunting a college athlete could probably benefit from some counseling as well. Clearly there's some rage or issues with identifying himself too closely with the Texas Tech team that Jeff Orr has. But that's right, why criticize the fan when the amateur athlete is such an easy target?

He was escorted off the court by a man from the Oklahoma State bench who clearly was concerned Smart was capable of making a horrible situation worse.

Well Smart had just shoved a fan and this man from the Oklahoma State bench was concerned about getting Smart off the court safely before anything else happened. This isn't a sad aspect, but an occurrence that often happens when a player on the visiting squad is ejected from a game. 

Smart needs professional help.

I'm not entirely sure this is true. It sounds like Smart needs to think more before acts and understand that it is not acceptable to push a fan, no matter how much of an asshole the fan is being. 

After he gets it and is allowed to return to the court at some point, his road map back to a spot in the NBA draft is not all that difficult to follow: 1. Break down the defense with drives to the hoop and pass the ball to one of three more skilled scorers on the floor with him: Brown, Le'Bryan Nash, Phil Forte; 2. Stop flopping; 3. Stay on the court.

Again, Smart was already off the court when the ball was whistled dead. He lost his temper and that's unforgivable, but many of these sportswriters who condemn Smart are the same ones who don't read the comments on columns they have written because they don't find these comments worthy of reading? Imagine if those comments were screamed at the writer as he tried to write another column, I wonder how easy it would be to remain calm and focused?

David Jones of "The Patriot News" in Central PA says that Marcus Smart got off too easily and then proceeds to getting facts incorrect in an effort to draw a parallel to the 2004 Melee at the Palace between the Pacers and Pistons.

A 3-game suspension for Marcus Smart? Not enough. Not nearly enough.

Death to Marcus Smart! We can't have angry amateur athletes coming after middle-aged white men simply because the middle-aged white man called the amateur athlete "a piece of crap." What kind of world do we live in where a grown man can't yell at and calls names in the direction of a college kid all in the name of sports? Not a world that David Jones cares to live in, that's for sure.

A lot you can excuse just before, during or just after a hotly fought major athletic contest. If you get this far, it means you’re a competitor. Add the juice of adrenaline to such a personality and you can come up with a nitroglycerine moment.

I'm not downplaying it, but Smart pushed the guy. I've pushed people before and then realized I was in the wrong (not often, but it's happened once or twice) and immediately apologized. Smart didn't immediately apologize, but he was contrite the next day. It's not like he punched Jeff Orr.

But I think there’s a line that cannot be crossed without extreme punishment. That line is the one that divides the playing surface from the seats.

But where is the line on fan behavior. Perhaps I'm too blinded by the fact this is a college athlete, but Marcus Smart is 19 years old. 19 years he has been on Earth. Jeff Orr is much older than that and he seemingly has a history of taunting and misbehaving while cheering at Texas Tech athletic events. Where's the line for him? I won't excuse Smart's behavior, but where's the line drawn between simple cheering and attempts to incite the opposing players'?

I cannot believe the Big 12 decided to levy only three games against Smart. It does not matter that the Texas Tech fan who verbally accosted him and whoever those goggle-eyed women around him were look like some fanatical hayseeds.

It does matter though. There has to be some recognition that a grown adult was calling a college athlete names and that is what set Smart off. I would again ask David Jones how he would feel if those people he sees as idiots in the comments of his articles said those things to him while he was trying to write a column? Many writers don't read their comments because they are so negative and useless, but professional (and amateur) athletes hear those comments directed at them during a sporting event. How would David Jones react if he had to hear negative comments about him and heard his readers calling him names?

It does not matter what any fan says to him in such a situation, even if he is called “a piece of crap.”

Well, it does matter what a fan says to Smart. Some comments are incredibly inflammatory, though I wouldn't consider calling Smart "a piece of crap" as incredibly inflammatory.

He can’t engage in any physical contact. If he does, it should mean dire consequences. No grace period.

Smart can't engage in physical contact and he was suspended three games for engaging in physical contact. I think that's sufficient.

In my mind, the same rules should hold for any fan. Yelling and screaming insults may be socially objectionable but that’s what has traditionally passed for license paid by the price of a ticket.

I think fans have a license to cheer for their team, but my personal opinion is if a fan decides he's going to start taunting a player and thinks the fact he has a ticket will hold him back from potentially getting his ass kicked by a player then he's dead wrong. An athlete should not accost or physically threaten a fan, but if some dumbass is calling a player names, slurs or just generally being rude in order to get under the athlete's skin, then he/she better prepare for getting under the athlete's skin.

If a fan crosses the line into any area of play or makes violent contact with a player when he or she inadvertently enters the seats during play, the club or school hosting the event should ban that fan for life. It’s just inexcusable.

Agreed, but the Melee at the Palace set a precedent for fan behavior as well. Five fans behaved terribly and will never attend another Pistons game (which probably pleases them at this point) as a result.

Smart should’ve been pined for at least the rest of the regular season – seven more games – and maybe for all of it.

I guess David Jones means the rest of the postseason as well when he says "maybe for all of it," because seven more games is all of the regular season.

But when you violently shove a fan for any reason, it shows a fundamental immaturity that can’t be abided. It’s the type of conduct for which adults must administer not just a punishment but a deterrent.

It's somewhat ironic that David Jones talks about adults administering a deterrent since it was an adult who helped to create the situation in the first place. I guess that doesn't matter to David Jones that Jeff Orr helped to instigate the situation in his own right and possibly this is the reason Smart's punishment was "only" three games.

It’s usually smarter, certainly fairer and more reasonable to base suspensions upon each individual case.

And in this individual case, Smart's push was instigated by a fan taunting him and calling him a piece of crap. But you know, let's not take each situation on a case-by-case basis and just set out ground rules. Fuck being smart and fair.

But what Smart did is different. It’s a breach of the basic laws of civic behavior in a public realm of the type that’s become more and more common.

It's become more common with fans at games too. Don't forget this.

The horrific mess in Detroit in 2006 is evidence of what can happen when fans (those spiked with alcohol) and players with adrenaline mix together.

What happened in Detroit in 2006? I think David Jones is referring to the Melee at the Palace which occurred in 2004. It's just like one of these mainstream media bloggers to work so hard on proving his opinion correct that he neglects ensuring the information he is providing is correct. I'm guessing David Jones was pounding the keyboard with such a fury he didn't have time to make sure he knew when the Melee at the Palace occurred.

In this case, unlike Detroit, the player was at greater fault.

It seems to me the Melee at the Palace was a more escalated version of this Smart-Orr incident. Artest could easily have ignored the drink thrown at him, just like Smart could have ignored the comment directed towards him. I don't think the situations are comparable, but instead of a drink being thrown there were words being directed at a player and instead of a player attacking and punching a fan, a fan got pushed. There's a difference obviously, but I find the fault of the fan and player to be proportionate in both situations...just on a much smaller scale. 

Unfortunately, the Big 12 came up small and its message was weak. We can only hope college basketball doesn’t pay for that down the line the way the NBA did eight years ago in Detroit.

10 years ago. It was 10 years ago when the Melee at the Palace occurred. But hey, good strong take on the Marcus Smart situation. Your opinion is solid even if your recitation of facts isn't.

Death to Marcus Smart! He should act like an adult while the adult acting like a child should feel free to punish himself however he sees fit. After all, he's a fan with a ticket so he can do whatever he wants with no repercussions.

Friday, February 19, 2010

10 comments Pat Forde Ranks College Basketball's Best Conferences

I am not going to write anything about Tiger Woods today because, let's be honest, he isn't going to say anything of substance at his press conference. Writers are going to accuse him of not really coming clean and just the typical stuff like that no matter what he says. I think I will let it sit for a few days before I comment on it, if I do.

I absolutely love college basketball. Because of the NFL and other professional sports, I don't pay as much attention to college basketball as I really want to on this blog. Not to mention it is really hard to follow 347 (I think) Division I teams as a hobby and not sound like a dumbass sometimes trying to talk about it. I can't watch all of those games. It's easy for me to follow the NBA, NFL, and MLB because they only have 30-something teams, but there are just a lot of college basketball teams so I don't always feel like I can speak even halfway authoritatively about each team. I would never want to be a sportswriter, but if there was one sport I would love to write about, and get paid for it, is college basketball. That's a sport I would be willing to travel all over and cover. Now that I have expressed my undying admiration for the sport, I want to talk about it today.

I also want to just throw this at you all really quickly. Remember that Duke Lacrosse rape case that many mainstream writers just jumped all over (I am talking to you Selena Roberts) and never apologized for their quickness in assumption of guilt? Look at what the accuser is up to nowadays. I like how Mike Nifong refused to initially believe she had been arrested. I am so glad that case didn't occur while I was writing on this blog. There is a good chance my head might have exploded.

Ok, back to the college basketball post for the day. This column by Pat Forde isn't terrible but he ranks each conference and there are definitely parts I disagree with.

The buzzword today is "embarrassment." Maybe UConn coach Jim Calhoun (2) should announce his embarrassment more often if it's going to prompt his Huskies to beat a top-five team on the road.

Perhaps Pat Forde should also recognize that UConn matches up incredibly well with Villanova, rather than just say Calhoun being embarrassed motivated the team. UConn has tall frontcourt players and athletic guards. That is not a good matchup for Villanova who doesn't have the low post depth they need to play well against a team like UConn. Villanova's 2nd leading rebounder is Taylor King, who is a 6'6" perimeter player who is 6th on the team in minutes per game. That can't be a good thing.

Not that any team with height can beat Villanova, just teams with athletic height like UConn has. The three big guys that play the most for UConn combined for 27 points, 17 rebounds, and 7 blocks. Of course I am completely ignoring the monster game Kemba Walker had, but those three guys only had 9 less rebounds than the entire Villanova team.

I picked Villanova to play in the NCAA Championship Game against Kansas before the season began and I am really regretting that pick right now. They have great guard play but they have very little skilled height. I don't think this is a death knell for them but Antonio Pena tends to get in foul trouble and there isn't a whole lot behind him. I am sticking with my pick of Villanova in the championship game, reluctantly, because I have to at this point.

And maybe Mississippi State (3) students who got hold of DeMarcus Cousins' cell number should feel some embarrassment after, according to Cousins, they phoned in racial epithets (and other salutations) to the Kentucky center.

The term "asshole" was invented for how the MSU fans acted at home on Tuesday night against Kentucky. The officiating was terrible but that doesn't excuse the actions of the crowd. Down the stretch there were 10 foul calls against MSU and 0 against Kentucky (see, college basketball officiating is terrible like the NBA), but that's no reason to act like jerks. There are two things that annoy me the most about college basketball fans:

1. Rushing the court. I don't want to turn into Bill Simmons but there are rules for rushing the court. I think fans can only rush the court when:

a. An unranked and unheralded team beats a team ranked in the Top 10 of the country. The more highly ranked one team and the more unheralded the other team are can be inverse from each other as to whether the crowd can rush the court.

Example #1: #2 Pittsburgh losing on the road at South Florida. This is acceptable for the USF crowd to rush the court...barely.

Example #2: #17 Texas losing on the road to Washington State. This is not acceptable for Washington State fans to rush the court.

Example #3: #17 Texas losing on the road to Alcorn State. This is absolutely acceptable for Alcorn State fans to rush the court.

b. You can NEVER rush the court when playing a team in your conference. I know it sounds harsh and very strict. This is just embarrassing and I don't care how bad your team is or has been, you are in the same conference as the team you beat...you need to learn to beat the teams in your conference. Rushing the court says, "we aren't very good and didn't expect to win this game." That attitude is for losers.

Exception to this rule: If a team has been in the conference for less than 3 years. If South Florida joined the Big East two years ago and beats #8 Georgetown at home, rushing the court is acceptable. Just that once though.

c. Extenuating circumstances.

Example #1: The recent death of a player, coach, or other member of the school and then your team as the underdog beats a far superior team at home...then rushing the court is fine.

Example #2: There is a fire in the stands and all exits in the stands are closed.

As you can tell, I hate it when teams rush the court. Have some pride in your program and act like you expect to beat good teams. I have seen a ranked team win a home game and rush the court after beating another ranked team. I have seen this happen. This is absolutely unacceptable and I think NCAA sanctions should be initiated against the school that rushed the court and perhaps the students should be expelled.

I am sure there are other examples of when it is fine to rush the court, but I just made those up and couldn't think of any others. Those are the reasons that stick out in my mind.

2. I also hate it when fans act like jerks towards players. Here are some examples of what is acceptable and unacceptable:

Acceptable: Loud noises from a non-game affecting device. Keys, etc.

Unacceptable: Whistles or anything that sounds remotely like a whistle or shot clock buzzer.

Acceptable: Chanting J.R. "Can't" Reid. Sorry, that's just amusing. There is no need to bust out with SAT scores to prove J.R. Reid did better than Danny Ferry on the SAT. I am talking to you Dean Smith.

Unacceptable: Chanting "Phil Ford's wife" when a player reportedly slept with the assistant coach's wife. Even if it is reportedly true, that is not cool.

Acceptable: Yelling things at players within their earshot. Depending on the people around you, expletives may/may not be acceptable.

Unacceptable: Throwing shit on the court. This is never acceptable, except in hostage situations.

Acceptable: Getting a player's cell phone and waking that player up and just being annoying.

Unacceptable: Calling that player and saying anything that would have that player kick your ass if you were 10 feet in front of him.

Now that I have rambled some, back to the column...

Then Pat Forde starts talking about teams/coaches/players that would make good Winter Olympics athletes.

Saint Louis coach Rick Majerus (4) as a curler. He'd be a terrific skip -- that's the guy who pushes the stone, then yells at everyone else to sweep. And as a Milwaukee native, he's from the Curling Belt of Minnesota-Wisconsin-Michigan.

I think Rick Majerus would make a better Paraolympic athlete or coach. That way he could yell at them for being cripple and have Gene Wojciechowski write another book about this experience with him.

Kansas (5) as hockey players. The Jayhawks are plenty willing to fight; just ask the Kansas football team. Center Cole Aldrich already is down a tooth, and he's shown some goon potential by leveling Texas' Damion James with an elbow to the chops and sending Texas A&M's Dash Harris to the locker room with a hard foul.

Speaking of Cole Aldrich, Bill Simmons asked one of the ESPN college basketball guys on Twitter about who will be better between Aldrich and Ed Davis in the NBA. I think it ended in a toss-up. It is not a toss-up. Ed Davis is going to be a much better NBA player than Cole Aldrich. Aldrich should be a serviceable center, but I look at Ed Davis and see Chris Bosh. At worst, I see Udonis Haslem, though obviously Davis is currently a little smaller. I look at Aldrich and see Andrew Bogut or Chris Kaman...maybe. At worst, I see every white center that has done well in college basketball because he is just tall and skilled enough to do well against people shorter than him.

Plus, he's from Minnesota -- he has to know how to skate. (That alone gives him an advantage over elbow-throwing Alabama native Cousins for the enforcer spot.)

There you go Pat, great stereotyping. African-Americans can't skate. Real funny.

Duke guard Jon Scheyer (6) is perfect for biathlon. He's a great shooter, and averaging 36.6 minutes per game shows he has the stamina to handle the cross-country skiing, too.

I don't know how Scheyer would do. In the biathlon, he can't fall down and pretend like he got fouled and get a 1 minute headstart on his competitors because of this.

Syracuse forward Wes Johnson (11) is a natural for cross-country skiing, since he's already crisscrossed much of the country, going from Corsicana, Texas, to Ames, Iowa, to Detroit to Syracuse.

I realize Forde typed "much" but I still don't think leaving out the entire west half of the United States from Texas on is really even "much" of the country. Johnson hasn't crisscrossed any of the Northwest, the Pacific, the Southwest, nor any states west of Detroit. Yes, it is ultra-specific day here at Bottom of the Barrel.

North Carolina coach Roy Williams (14) would feel right at home in the kiss-and-cry area adjacent to the figure-skating rink. College basketball's resident drama queen teared up -- again -- during a recent interview with Yahoo! about the Tar Heels' struggles this season. Get the man a sequined jump suit, please.

I haven't bashed Roy Williams in a few days, so here we go. He did an interview on Wednesday where he said he has been offered or invited to interview for "11 to 12" NBA jobs over the years including the Celtics and Lakers. Ironically those are the two NBA teams that have had the most public interest in Coach K in the past. I am sure that is just a coincidence. The Celtics wanted Coach K in 1990 and the Lakers really wanted him in 2004. I like how Roy just threw that out there to let everyone know he has had job offers from the NBA like Coach K has.

For a guy who doesn't "give a damn" about other coaching jobs when he is currently at a school, when asked a question he isn't really shy in sharing private interest by NBA teams with the general public.

Roy is a hell of a basketball coach, but he is also a bit of a drama queen. The Heels are having a tough year, they will bounce back next year. They have a great recruiting class coming in and these current players are getting great experience this year. Every great college basketball program has to deal with young teams at some point, especially after winning the National Championship the year before.

The Minutes went into this exercise believing the Big East is the best league. That belief hasn't changed -- but the Big 12 is a very close second.

There are two ways to rank a conference. A conference can be ranked top-to-bottom or a conference can be ranked based on how many NCAA Tournament bids that conference will get (basically how many good teams are in the conference). I prefer the 1st method personally, but I am still not sure which method Pat Forde likes. He just sort of ranks the conferences based on their record against the other conferences, which could be misleading depending on the matchups of the teams between conferences...or he ranks them based on projected NCAA Tournament bids. I am not 100% how he did it exactly to be honest.

1. Big East (17). We know the league is good at the top, but how about some Valentine's Day love for the bottom? Rutgers, St. John's and Seton Hall all won Sunday -- and according to Tom Luicci of the Newark Star-Ledger, that hasn't happened on the same day since Feb. 12, 2002.

The fact those three teams all won on the same day is an example of how STRONG the conference is? Who did these teams play? DePaul, Syracuse and Georgetown. That does look impressive, but it also brings up my longest running problem in figuring out if a team is good or not when playing teams in-conference.

The problem is, do these losses mean the Big East is a tough conference or supposedly "good teams" like Georgetown can't win on the road, so they may not be that good? Georgetown is currently 3-3 on the road in-conference, including a loss to unranked Marquette. The other losses have been to Syracuse and Villanova, both of which are good teams, but those weren't even really close games. Villanova was up 15 points at halftime. So it is the eternal problem of whether the Big East (or any conference) is deep or the "good teams" aren't that good in the Big East (or that conference) when playing on the road.

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-7 vs. ACC; 17-5 vs. A-10; 2-1 vs. Big 12; 2-5 vs. Big Ten; 7-1 vs. C-USA; 2-0 vs. MVC; 0-1 vs. MWC; 3-0 vs. Pac-10; 7-8 vs. SEC. Total: 45-28.

So the Big East has losing records against Pat Forde's #3, #4, #5, and #6 conferences? Against the #2 conference, the Big 12, they are 2-1. I don't have time to see which teams played against each other in these conferences, but to rank the Big East #1 in conference ranking doesn't sound very persuasive when the conference has a losing record against 4 of the 5 conferences ranked below them.

NCAA teams as of now: Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia, Georgetown, Pittsburgh, Marquette, Louisville.

7 NCAA Tournament teams as of right now. I consider the Big East the best conference just based on the fact they have the Big 4 teams at the top of the standings in Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia, and Georgetown, and the rest of the conference is pretty good as well. Still, that record against other conferences makes me wonder if the Big East is really the #1 conference or not.

2. Big 12 (18). This league has the nation's No. 1 team in Kansas, one of the nation's biggest surprises in Kansas State, and then a large pack of pretty good pursuers. There might not be as many Final Four contenders here and the bottom of the league is probably worse than the bottom of the Big East, but all seven prospective NCAA teams could be first-round winners.

I would say any team that makes the NCAA tournament could be a first-round winner. I would argue that point in regard to Texas A&M and Oklahoma State, because they are going to most likely draw a #7, #8, #9, #10 seed which could beat them, but I won't argue right now.

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 2-1 vs. ACC; 8-3 vs. A-10; 1-2 vs. Big East; 6-1 vs. Big Ten; 6-4 vs. C-USA; 3-3 vs. MVC; 5-4 vs. MWC; 13-4 vs. Pac-10; 6-4 vs. SEC. Total: 50-26.

The conference has a winning record against every conference ranked in Pat Forde's rankings except for the Big East, which are #1.

NCAA teams as of now: Kansas, Kansas State, Texas A&M, Baylor, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma State.

7 NCAA Tournament teams as of right now. I think an argument can be made the Big 12 is the best conference in college basketball.

3. ACC (19). Duke is the class of the league --

That's like saying "I date the prettiest girl in Phi Mu at Appalachian State University." Or saying, "I am the most athletic player on the Duke basketball team."

and Duke was drilled by Georgetown just a couple of weeks ago.

Saying Duke was "drilled" is being polite. They were destroyed. Georgetown is a good home team against Duke, which is a crappy road team. Not to make excuses for the loss, but I don't know if this is the best way to compare these two teams since there is such a discrepancy in how these two teams play at home and on the road.

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-4 vs. A-10; 1-2 vs. Big 12; 7-5 vs. Big East; 7-7 vs. Big Ten; 5-0 vs. C-USA; 0-1 vs. MVC; 0-0 vs. MWC; 2-2 vs. Pac-10; 7-5 vs. SEC. Total: 34-26.

The ACC has a winning record against every conference except the Big 12 (#2 in Forde's rankings) and the MVC (#10 in Forde's rankings).

NCAA teams as of now: Duke, Maryland, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech.

The ACC has 7 NCAA Tournament teams as of now. I don't think it is an especially good conference this year. I do have to say Florida State is the team I think may do well in the NCAA Tournament among this list of NCAA Tournament teams in the ACC. They are going to be a tough draw for some other NCAA Tournament team. Of course Maryland has the best player in the ACC, Greivis Vasquez, and a good team around him with great coaching so I think they are going to do well in the NCAA Tournament. I wouldn't call those two teams "sleepers" but they are two teams that could do well in March.

4. Big Ten (20). The top half is really good, with Purdue, Ohio State, Michigan State and Wisconsin all having Final Four potential. But the bottom half is miserable, thanks primarily to Penn State, Iowa and Indiana. Michigan's underachieving season offsets Wisconsin's overachieving.

That really didn't all make sense to me. Whatever, let's move on.

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 7-7 vs. ACC; 3-2 vs. A-10; 1-6 vs. Big 12; 5-2 vs. Big East; 0-1 vs. C-USA; 2-3 vs. MVC; 0-2 vs. MWC; 3-0 vs. Pac-10; 3-5 vs. SEC. Total: 24-28.

The Big 10 has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), C-USA (#9), MVC (#10), MWC (#6), and SEC (#5). This appears to be the epitome of a top heavy conference. I like top-to-bottom strength so I am not impressed by this.

NCAA teams as of now: Ohio State, Michigan State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Illinois.

The Big 10 conference has 5 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now. I like Wisconsin and am not entirely on the Purdue bandwagon at this point.

5. SEC (21). Stop The Minutes if you've heard this before: It's Kentucky and everyone else.

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-7 vs. ACC; 5-4 vs. A-10; 4-6 vs. Big 12; 8-7 vs. Big East; 5-3 vs. Big Ten; 8-3 vs. C-USA; 2-1 vs. MVC; 1-1 vs. MWC; 3-3 vs. Pac-10. Total: 41-35.

The SEC has a losing record against the ACC (#3) and that is it. For a conference that supposedly doesn't have a whole lot more than Kentucky this is fairly impressive. It's really not a good conference in reality so this comparison Pat Forde uses between conferences is misleading.

How does John Calipari always end up in a conference that sucks? First it's the A-10, then Conference USA, and now the SEC. It's like he is afraid to coach a team in a good conference. Just once I want to see him coach in the Big East, Big 10, Big 12 or the ACC.

NCAA teams as of now: Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee.

The SEC conference has 3 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now. I only think one of these teams is any good.

6. Mountain West (22).

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 0-0 vs. ACC; 1-0 vs. A-10; 4-5 vs. Big 12; 1-0 vs. Big East; 2-0 vs. Big Ten; 4-2 vs. C-USA; 4-5 vs. MVC; 5-6 vs. Pac-10; 1-1 vs. SEC. Total: 22-19.

The MWC has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), MVC (#10), Pac-10 (#8).

NCAA teams as of now: BYU, New Mexico, UNLV.

The MWC has 3 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now.

7. Atlantic 10 (23).

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 4-5 vs. ACC; 3-8 vs. Big 12; 5-17 vs. Big East; 2-3 vs. Big Ten; 4-2 vs. C-USA; 3-2 vs. MVC; 0-1 vs. MWC; 0-1 vs. Pac-10; 4-5 vs. SEC. Total: 25-44.

The A-10 has a losing record against the ACC (#3), Big 12 (#2), Big East (#1), MWC (#6), MVC (#10), Pac-10 (#8), and SEC (#5).

NCAA teams as of now: Richmond, Xavier, Temple, Dayton, Charlotte.

The A-10 has 5 NCAA Tournaments teams of right now. That's a lot of teams from a conference that only has a winning record against 2 other conferences Pat Forde compared them to. This is more evidence conference records against each other may not be a good way to judge the overall strength of a conference.

8. Pacific-10 (24).

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 2-2 vs. ACC; 1-0 vs. A-10; 4-13 vs. Big 12; 0-3 vs. Big East; 0-3 vs. Big Ten; 1-0 vs. C-USA; 0-0 vs. MVC; 6-5 vs. MWC; 3-3 vs. SEC. Total: 17-29.

The Pac-10 has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), Big East (#3), and Big 10 (#4). So basically if a conference is "Big" the Pac-10 will lose to that conference. This is the opposite of what happens in college football.

NCAA teams as of now: California.

The Pac-10 has one team on pace to make the NCAA Tournament. Pathetic.

9. Conference USA (25).

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 0-5 vs. ACC; 2-4 vs. A-10; 4-6 vs. Big 12; 1-7 vs. Big East; 1-0 vs. Big Ten; 1-2 vs. MVC; 2-4 vs. MWC; 0-1 vs. Pac-10; 3-8 vs. SEC. Total: 14-36.

Conference USA has a losing record against the ACC (#3), A-10 (#7), Big 12 (#2), Big East (#1), MVC (#10), MWC (#6), Pac-10 (#8), and SEC (#5). In other words, this conference sucks.

NCAA teams as of now: UTEP, UAB.

Conference USA has 2 teams in the NCAA Tournament as of right now. I don't like either of these teams.

10. Missouri Valley (26).

League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 1-0 vs. ACC; 2-3 vs. A-10; 3-3 vs. Big 12; 0-2 vs. Big East; 3-2 vs. Big Ten; 2-1 vs. C-USA; 5-4 vs. MWC; 0-0 vs. Pac-10; 1-2 vs. SEC. Total: 17-17.

The MVC has a losing record against the A-10 (#7), Big East (#1), and SEC (#5).

NCAA teams as of now: Whoever wins the conference tournament.

The MVC is on pace to get one NCAA Tournament bid.

This is one of the reasons I think the field should not be expanded to 96 teams, because they will probably still get one bid and some of the major conferences above them would get more bids. It wouldn't benefit the mid-majors much, but the major conferences would get most of the benefit, and I am not sure those major conference teams deserve to make the NCAA Tournament. For example, undeserving teams from a conference like the Pac-10 would probably make it over a more deserving team in the MWC, Atlantic-10 or MVC.

Here are my arbitrary rankings of the conferences:

1. Big East
2. Big 12
3. ACC
4. SEC
5. Big 10
6. A-10
7. MWC
8. Pac-10
9. MVC
10. Conference USA

Now Pat Forde takes a look at the teams that get the coveted, yet somewhat unimportant, #1 seeds (Teams that are #2 seeds really don't have that much more of a difficult road than a #1 seed in my mind).

Kentucky (28). What's to like: Stayed unbeaten longer than anyone else, and the lone loss was a six-pointer on the road in league play.

Kentucky is a strong team and they will get a #1 seed, but they have a scary combination for me when it comes to playing well in the NCAA Tournament. That combination is, they are a fairly young team that has played a fairly easy schedule so far. They aren't traditionally tested every night with some of the teams they are playing. Here's a theory I have and it is based on Calipari's teams at Memphis. My theory is that because Calipari's squad played in an easier conference they weren't as used to playing tight basketball games, so when it comes time to play a tough basketball game they aren't as well-equipped to pull the game out in the end. It's a stupid theory, but Calipari's teams have a reputation for falling apart in important games they should win (i.e. 2008 National Championship Game). College basketball teams that have played in tight games know how to manage the end of the game and pull the game out. Kentucky is more used to playing tight games, but they also rely on 3 freshman as part of their core, so they are a young team in regards to the most talented players on the roster.

I think Kentucky is going to be a #1 seed but I am going to be interested to see how they do against a more experienced team like Michigan State.

Syracuse (29).

Syracuse surprised me this year. I didn't know Wes Johnson would be this good and I didn't know they would be this good as a team. The formula I like for a good NCAA Tournament team: Strong point guard, athletic wing player, and a competent center (or two competent power forwards)...they have all of that. I didn't know Scoop Jardine would run the point like he has nor did I know Wes Johnson could be that athletic wing player this year. Throw in the zone defense that befuddles teams, and this is a good Syracuse team that is built for playing late in March.

Kansas State (33).

Every year a team looks like a great team around this time of the season and they end up taking an early loss in the NCAA Tournament. Last year it was Wake Forest. I nominate Kansas State for that team this year. They aren't a bad team, I just believe they have peaked too early in the season and the toughest road game they have played all season is either UNLV or Missouri...and they lost to Missouri. I don't hate them, I just don't think they will end up with a #1 seed.

Even their best win, Texas, doesn't look so hot right now. After that, the best win is either Texas A&M or Dayton. I reserve the ability to change my opinion on them, but for right now I am suspicious of their ability to get a #1 seed.

Of course, now that I have said this, look for them to make the Final Four.

West Virginia (34).

What's to like: Of the eight contenders, nobody has played a tougher schedule (rated fourth nationally by Lunardi's InsideRPI) than the Mountaineers, who have scads of quality wins both in and out of conference.

I really like the Mountaineers, but I don't like Bob Huggins. So it is hard for me to be high (or drunk as the case may be for Huggins) on West Virginia. They have quality wins and I think it will benefit them if they get an earlier exit in the Big East Tournament. Not that they are tired, but they have played some tough games so far. They have the formula I like in a good NCAA Tournament team, they may not have a competent center, but they do have Jones and Eubanks as the two power forwards that can rebound (in lieu of a competent center) and Butler as the athletic wingman. This is a team I really like...begrudgingly.

My #1 seeds: Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, Syracuse.

Duke doesn't deserve it, but they have an easier schedule and a good chance to run the table, so I think they will back into the #1 seed slightly over Purdue, who still has to play Michigan State.

My #2 seeds: West Virginia, Villanova, Purdue, Michigan State.

My #3 seeds: Kansas State, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Ohio State. (I was going to put Wisconsin here but then they lost on the road to Minnesota)

Final Four: Kansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Villanova

I am still sticking with my Villanova-Kansas National Championship until I see the bracket (and they end up on the same side) or I get up the courage to change my mind. Of course, most of the picks I just made will change once I get a chance to see the brackets and the season is actually completed. For now, I feel 99% comfortable saying Kansas is the National Champion though.

I would love to talk about college basketball all-day-everyday, but I just don't have the time to watch all the games I want to. March is my favorite month of the sports year simply because of the NCAA and conference tournaments and the fact baseball is right around the corner.

Friday, July 3, 2009

3 comments Random Thoughts: Basketball Edition

Before I type anything else today, I wanted to draw attention to BotB commenter AwesomeSean and his gang's blog Mike and the Mad Blog.

We all know Mike and the Mad Dog "broke up" but if you like sports talk radio and like talking about always crazy New York sports talk radio they cover it well. No, I don't get a sick pleasure as a Braves fan of hearing New York flip out over Mets and Yankees losses but it's a good site and you can actually have logical discussions about the Mike's shows, which as we all know doesn't always happen when the callers call in. It is a great blog.

There has been a lot of basketball news here of late due to free agency and various other reasons. There is not too much out there and it also doesn't help that many of my favorite targets are on vacation, not currently writing, or focusing on their new Twitter account so much they don't have much time to write. I miss football season when I can get MMQB and TMQ on consecutive days. It's like a gold mine of material for me.

-Before we get to the basketball stuff and potential discussions, I have to show everyone that Rick Reilly still gets paid millions of dollars to write columns like this. Here's a little sample for those who are smart enough to ignore his columns. I would like to remind everyone not only is this journalism trademarked, but it is also award winning:

Rick thinks offices should be run a little bit more like sports. I have come to the conclusion there is no way in hell he is trying anymore to write a decent column. He has plenty of money to live on and most of the people who enjoy his columns aren't dead yet so he doesn't have to worry about gaining a new audience. I think he is just trying to ride the wave out and then retire after ESPN finally realizes he is useless.

What if the office had chest bumps and shaving-cream pies and everybody slapping the Work Like a Champion Today sign over the door on the way in?

And office chatter!

C'monKidHeyKidOnlyTakesOneBuyerKidOnlyTakesOneYouAndHerKidRightOnThe DottedLineKid.

ESPN should be embarrassed to publish this. Bill Simmons should be embarrassed that he is supposed to be competing with this guy.

When a really great secretary hits 65 and has to go, why not retire her number?
Dolores Ginty, no one will ever use extension 3713 again. It's yours forever!


How about we turn society into the Roman Empire again? When the court jester (Reilly) no longer is capable of amusing the King's subjects, he is disposed of in a very rude and hurtful manner. Let's go back to those times.

When everybody gets their job back and unemployment in this country is once again under 5%, here's what I'll do: If you see me in a bar, I'll buy you a jigger of your favorite adult beverage. But you get only 24 seconds once I walk in.

After all, I've got a shot clock.

I am not even trying to be funny...this is pathetic. Horrible, horrible writing. It's corny and really serves no purpose outside of entertaining those people who use cassette tapes to record 60 Minutes when they miss it because the buffet line was too long at a Shoney's on Sunday night. I am embarrassed to give everyone weekly updates on his columns. In the back of a magazine, this is acceptable, on a sports web site, it sucks.

-For those that thought Isiah Thomas was the entire problem with the New York Knicks, think again. Donnie Walsh is showing Isiah-esque tendencies.

A 3 year deal for Jason Kidd? I know Dallas has prepared an offer that is worth more but you would think New York had learned their lesson.

Yet it appears that Walsh and Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni are convinced that they need the unique presence of someone like Kidd -- whom they met with face-to-face Wednesday and who remains at 36 one of the league's most respected players among his peers -- to help attract top free agents in 2010.

Do you know what else is going to help attract big name free agents? Salary cap room...and signing a 36 year old point guard is not going to help with that in any fashion. Sure Jason Kidd is a big name but the fact he is older and isn't likely to be in New York for the long haul may not attract a big name free agent like the Knicks seem to think. To me, it just ties up cap room, while contributes to the idea that D'Antoni is not overly concerned with defense.

To steal directly from AwesomeSean at Mike and the Mad Blog:

To Donnie Walsh and Mike D'Antoni...Put the name Jason Kidd out of your heads. He's a shell of his former self, a malcontent and a waste of a 3 year contract. He will get brutalized on the defensive end and is not the offensive player he once was. Live with Duhon and Nate and wait for another option.

What's wrong with living with Duhon and Robinson for another year and then making a run at a big name free agent in 2010? It's New York and you will have plenty of cap room because I believe Duhon is a free agent next year. Why tie up cap room in a 36 year old point guard?

-The next big controversy in the NBA is getting ready to be the Ricky Rubio situation with the Minnesota Timberwolves. Of course Jay Mariotti has to poison relations with Spain by commenting on the issue like only Furman Bisher could.

Not much in sports makes me cringe these days, but describing Ricky Rubio as the next Pistol Pete Maravich -- legend and cult hero forevermore -- certainly is hard on the frown lines.

It's just a comparison. It doesn't mean we are all about start voting on Ricky Rubio entering the NBA Hall of Fame. Jay is always writing columns angrily and bitterly like he hasn't had a bowel movement for days and wants to take it out on the literate public.

Rubio? He's 18. I have no idea how much he'll improve his shaky jumper and adapt to the raw physicality of NBA ball.

Yeah, nobody really knows he's 18 years old. The odds are very good that because he is 18 years old his shaky jumper will improve and he will gain muscle to play against stronger competition.

If we knew exactly how he would turn out I think that could affect his draft position dramatically and the contract negotiations also might be a bit easier on both sides. I don't know why Mariotti is looking for certainty from Rubio when there is no certainty with any other player in the draft.

"I don't see Rubio being that dynamic player now," said Danny Ainge, general manager of the Boston Celtics. "I think he's got a lot of potential. He's a flashy player. I don't see him -- just physically, and because he doesn't shoot the ball very well -- I don't see him having an impact as a rookie."

Yet they insist he's Maravich.

Jay Mariotti is an idiot. I don't see how he could think if a player doesn't produce his first year in the league at the age of 19, that player is a bust. I don't know for sure, but I am guessing Pistol Pete was not THE Pistol Pete at the age of 18...I know for sure he wasn't playing in the NBA against some of the top competition in the world at that age. Let's not get xenophobic and go easier on Rubio.

And shame on Rubio for exploiting this premature, unjustified man-love by acting like a brat.

"It's too cold," he said, a day after announcing that his mother also thinks the city is too cold. "I have to think about that ... I'm going to talk with my agent about that and we are going to see."

I have no problem with Rubio exploring his options and I have no problem with the Timberwolves refusing to trade him. Basketball is a business and I think both sides have to do what is right for them.

How dare Jay Mariotti or anyone else criticize an 18 year old kid for having options and taking the time to weigh those options. We coddle 18 year high school basketball players and encourage them to have options in choosing colleges. We bend over backwards, lower college admissions standards, and allow recruits to dictate the coaching staffs of colleges where those players will only be for a few years. I don't see why someone who is not from America should be treated any differently if that person has options. He has a right to measure his two choices carefully.

The thing about Elway and Manning was, we had an idea of their track record and assumed they could play. Who in the hell is Ricky Rubio?

Rubio has a track record and he has shown he is a good player. There are very few differences, regardless of track record, between Manning, Elway, and Rubio's situation. I don't think a player should have a right to act like more of an asshole just because he has a track record.

This is an adventure into the unknown. No one is giving David Kahn the house for a teenaged point guard who might be another Darko Milicic.

As opposed to every other player drafted last week. Those players are all locks to be stars. Only these International players are great unknowns to Jay because he hasn't seen them play in this country...as if he watches the college basketball players who are drafted and can fairly evaluate their chances in the NBA. Mariotti is consistently an idiot.

-I only bring up this Gregg Doyel article because of what he says about Jay Mariotti and the fact that I agree with the premise of his article.

So you think Ricky Rubio is a jerk. Think he's a prima donna. Another John Elway or Steve Francis, unhappy with the team that drafted him and refusing to play there.

So maybe you think, as this hysterical shriek of a story so clearly put into words, Who does Ricky Rubio think he is?

He called it a shriek of a story...I love it because it is true.

But when you're named the best player in Europe at age 18, you're damned good. The next Pete Maravich, as some have called Rubio? Probably not. So if he's overrated, he's overrated. But he could be significantly less than the next Pete Maravich and still be damned good.

Exactly and that is the point Jay Mariotti was missing. Rubio may never be Pete Maravich but even if he is a rung or two down from him, he will still be a great player. If you are Rubio, would you want to play in Minnesota? I am not sure I would. If you were the Timberwolves would you play hard ball to ensure you get adequate value for Rubio in a trade or make sure you keep his rights? Yes. Everyone is getting too excited over this, it's just a business deal. Though the Wolves are dumb for drafting two point guards back to back, until Rubio does something extremely dickish I think we should hold out on judging him.

-Due to the OJ Mayo and Derrick Rose incidents many people think the NBA should re-think the one and done rule. They believe it causes too many problems because kids aren't really interested in the long term well being of the school they play college basketball at and this can cause recruiting violations. Other than the one and done rule, I am personally for the idea that a high school player should be able to go immediately to the pros, but if they choose not to, then that player has to stay at college for two years. Absent that working, my back up plan is that I believe kids should have to stay in school for two years and not just one year. I am not sure either idea is realistic.

Pat Forde thinks we should be done with the one and done rule.

That age limit has gone from boon to bust for college basketball.
It put Greg Oden and Kevin Durant on campus and in college uniforms for one season, and that was fun. But it also pushed O.J. Mayo and Derrick Rose into situations they seemingly had no interest in, resulting in ongoing scandals at USC and Memphis.


I personally don't mind the one and done rule and if I did have my way the two suggestions I have put out there previously would be the new rule if the one and done rule was abolished. I don't think we should build any type of NBA eligibility rule around the idea that NCAA colleges and players are corrupt and will bend the rules to get what they want. Whether that be paying a player or the player having someone else take his SAT's for him and the college having knowledge of this, it doesn't matter to me, the fact people will cheat to get around the system is not a reason to get rid of the system.

It has forced non-students and pseudo-professionals to feign scholarship and amateurism for one season on campus, cheapening the college experience in general and college basketball specifically.

Let's be honest. There are many athletes at schools, regardless of potential to play professionally, who are not there as students but are there as athletes with no regard for the future. I saw it at my mid-major college and I know it happens at other schools as well. Critics of the one and done rule act like it just perpetuates players and schools breaking the law. The one and done rule doesn't force OJ Mayo or Tim Floyd to take money nor does it force Derrick Rose to have someone take the SAT for him. It forced Mayo and Rose to go to college, that is true, but it did not force them to cheat or get around the system in any way. That was a personal decision that was made by them. We can't get rid of the speed limit just because people are going to speed anyway.

"All of us know which kids are only going to do a year [of college]. If they pass the first semester, they don't really have to do anything in the second semester. I think 98 percent of kids should go to college, but the ones ready to go, let 'em go. Let's just stop the fallacy."

I love college basketball and I think players really benefit from even one year of playing college basketball, but if the one and done rule is abolished and a kid wants to make a decision to go pro after high school, he has that right in my mind. If he chooses to go to college, I think he needs to stay two years.

You must believe that a kid who has been treated as a money-making commodity since seventh grade is suddenly going to resist thousands of dollars of cash and gifts for one pristine year on campus (ask USC how that allegedly worked out with Mayo). You must believe that a kid who only wants to dribble his way to a paycheck is going to take his college entrance exams seriously, or take them at all (the alleged infraction by Rose at Memphis).

The reasoning being used is fallible. The fact Derrick Rose doesn't take his college exams for himself says something about him personally as a human being and the fact Tim Floyd gave money to have OJ Mayo on campus says something about him personally as a human being. I have no problem with Mayo and Rose going pro after high school but the reasoning used here is shitty. The reasoning is that everyone will want to cheat so let's take the temptation away. It doesn't sit right with me.

Lance Stephenson does not believe he will fail. Neither does Renardo Sidney, currently on campus at Mississippi State. These guys are in the next wave of potential one-and-done players … but the path to a college uniform is growing more perilous.

You mean colleges are enforcing their admissions guidelines? How horrible! When will the de-humanizing of these athletes stop? If you are required to be in college for one year and can't get in college...tough shit. Welcome to the life of many other people in this world. Perhaps instead of playing basketball so much in high school, you should have studied more like millions of college students did, you know those who actually fucking paid their own way to college and took out student loans to do it. Just because you are required to be in college, doesn't mean you should automatically go to any college of your choice, simply because you can play basketball. The college does not have to admit you.

There are legal concerns: Stephenson has a June 29 court date for allegedly fondling a 17-year-old girl at his high school. There are academic concerns: Sources said his transcript has been kept from most, if not all, college recruiters. And there are attitude concerns: Stephenson is combustible on the court and was surprisingly cut from the USA Basketball Under-19 team last summer, at least in part because of his demeanor toward teammates and coaches.

Clearly this is an individual who needs to go to the NBA and be handed more money than he has ever seen. Brilliant logic to get rid of the one and done system and send him straight to the pros. What could go wrong?

If Lance Stephenson can't get into a college or a college doesn't want him, tough shit, but this shouldn't be a reason the one and done rule should be abolished...the one and done rule is meant for players exactly like Stephenson who aren't even close to being ready for the pros from an emotional standpoint. Being emotionally ready is as big of a deal as being physically. Most of the players who came straight from HS to the NBA and suceeded were emotionally ready for the jump as well.

-Marc Stein talks about my back up plan if the one and done rule is abolished, and that is the two and done rule. I don't like this rule that much, even though it does favor my love of college basketball more than the Go Pro or Go Two rule I made up earlier.

Orlando's Dwight Howard is the only one in that foursome who negotiated the long jump from the preps to the pros with relative smoothness. Rashard Lewis wasn't ready. Andrew Bynum wasn't ready. Not even newly minted NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant can make the claim that he was physically and mentally prepared to walk into the Lakers' locker room as a teenager in 1996

Many players even after 4 years of college are not ready for the NBA either. These players did succeed eventually though (or at least Bynum appears to being close), so we can't really argue with the end result. This is a weak argument.

Blaming the one-and-done rule for everything is a convenient excuse for college coaches, but doing so supposes that (a) players' leaving school after one season is some sort of new phenomenon and/or (b) college ball's recent scandals at USC (with O.J. Mayo) and Memphis (Derrick Rose) are the first scandals of their kind.

Wrong and wrong.

Exactly. Many are blaming the one and done rule for these scandals, which is terribly inaccurate.

It would be infinitely better for the college game to have two years of certainty with every recruit and would likewise send players to the big leagues when they're in a better place developmentally to handle it.

From a selfish college fan standpoint, absolutely. Logically though, I think the high school players should have the chance to go pro after high school. It doesn't make sense for everyone and I am sure some players are going to rebel and go to the pros after high school because they don't want to be in college for two years. I am for the one and done rule, I think it serves a purpose and I don't blame the scandals completely on the existence of the rule, but I don't think the best second best idea is to stick kids in college for two years and give them the option of going pro after high school if they want to.

In this case, no one ever talks about the kids who are saved from making a huge mistake because they're too young to declare for the draft … or the fact that no one is forcing one-and-dones to go to college. They can go overseas for a year as Brandon Jennings did if they don't want to add classwork to their basketball education.

That is exactly why I like the one and done rule. No one forces these players to go to college and certainly if they can't get in college they should look at other options. College is not a right, it is a privilege...especially for those who are having their way paid for them.

I think the reasoning for getting rid of the one and done rule are not very strong and I think making a player stay in college for two years is a bit overkill. I would personally absolutely love it, there's no doubt I feel that way, but it is never going to happen. If players like Lance Stephenson want to play in the NBA and be out of the NBA and into the NBDL by the time his peers are leaving college after two years of college basketball with a greater knowledge of basketball and how to play the game, that is his right...but don't abolish the one and done rule under the misguided idea it causes corruption. The corruption is there no matter what.

-The Pistons signed the first two "big" free agents of the offseason.

I am not really sure what to think about the Pistons signing Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva. I actually like the Villanueva signing more because he was cheaper and fills an actual need the Pistons have better than Gordon does.

Gordon agreed to a five-year, $55 million deal, according to a source familiar with the negotiations.

I am not a huge Rip Hamilton fan but Ben Gordon is essentially an undersized two guard who can't really play defense all that well. If the Pistons signed Gordon as a Vinnie Johnson type off the bench then I would really like this deal but it seems they are going to try and trade Hamilton now.

Some league executives have speculated that once Dumars landed Gordon, a prolific scorer who doesn't do much else, he would begin exploring trade possibilities for Hamilton.

I personally am not sure exactly how a Stuckey-Gordon backcourt would be an upgrade defensively over a Hamilton-Stuckey backcourt. Gordon doesn't do a whole lot more than score and Stuckey really isn't a true point guard. I am not sure I like this backcourt very much.

1) There isn't enough room in the same backcourt for Gordon, Richard Hamilton, and Rodney Stuckey; and 2) The Pistons will no longer be major players in the much better free-agent summer of 2010.

I would personally love the Gordon-Hamilton-Stuckey backcourt, but we know Gordon did not sign in Detroit to come off the bench, even though I think that may be where his true strength lies in helping his team out.

I am down with the Villenueva signing and I think it was a fairly smart one. He's big, he can shoot and he is still very young...plus the Pistons get to save money on razors for him and that is very important in this economy, especially in Detroit.

The Pistons have pretty much taken themselves out of the potential 2010 free agent class, which I am not sure was a smart decision. I am not down on these signings, I just don't exactly know how this makes them a better team.

Of course Bill Simmons chimed in on his Twitter.

Statement from Pistons to fans: "Look, any time you can tank a season for the chance to spend $95 mill on 2 non-AllStars, you gotta do it."

I would have to add that Ben Gordon, the non-All Star, absolutely lit up the 2008 "we are defending our title with so much grit and hustle David Eckstein is jealous" NBA Champion Boston Celtics in the playoffs. So while he is not an All Star, he is good enough to light up Bill's favorite team. I think he is just a little bitter.

-I wasn't exactly for the Celtics signing Stephon Marbury and I am very much not in favor of the Celtics pursuing Rasheed Wallace.

I don't think Wallace is going to want to come off the bench for any team and I am also not sure I would have him start over Kendrick Perkins in the middle. I think the Celtics made a big mistake in not wanting re-sign Leon Powe. I am biased though, because I liked him ever since he was at Cal and want to see him succeed.

I know there have been a variety of reasons behind these moves, but the Celtics haven't really impressed me over the past year with their personnel decisions. Not re-signing James Posey, signing Stephon Marbury, thinking Mikki Moore could contribute in any desirable fashion for the team, not making a trade for a more proven PG before the deadline this year, not re-signing Leon Powe, and now pursuing Rasheed Wallace in free agency. I know he is talented but I just don't see how he fits in on the team.

-I know both of these guys are "professionals" and all of that semi-nonsense, but I can't help but wonder how Artest is going to fit in with the Lakers.

I do like the essential trade of Ariza for Artest for the Lakers, despite the fact they won an NBA Championship with Ariza starting. I just wonder how Artest is going to like playing with Kobe, who we all know is uber-competitive, come practice time when Kobe is talking shit and telling Artest what to do. This could be a great move for the Lakers in picking up Artest but I also can't help but wonder if having a role player like Ariza may not be a better fit for the team. I know it sounds crazy and Artest was a model citizen last year in Houston. Sometimes I think it is better for teams to sign role players who are willing to do what they can to help the team win to build around star players and not necessarily sign guys who could be stars or close to being stars on their own.

That being said, Ariza played well this year in a contract year, so we don't really know exactly what he will do next year. Money has a way of demotivating players and 3 years at $18 million is not a bad price for Artest. It sucks for Rockets fans though. Losing Yao and now losing Artest. I just have no idea how this will work out for the Lakers. It won't shock me if Artest sucker punches Kobe in practice one day.

-Even Bill Simmons liked this trade.

Dunleavy turns Z-Bo into Q's expiring deal for 8 mill less + copious 2010 cap space? All is forgiven! Red Auerbach lives!

I guess Memphis got jealous that people were considering Minnesota to be the worst run team in the NBA so they just had to make this deal. So now a Gasol-Thabeet-Randolph frontline is going to be seen in Memphis. Randolph may be a better player than Richardson but this was still a great trade for the Clippers. I would have suggested that Memphis get someone at the PF position a little bigger and tougher than Randolph to help out Thabeet, who I think will struggle without a tough rebounder beside him, but I guess Memphis went in the other direction.

Checkmate, Minnesota. Your move.

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

3 comments The Most Controversial Topic Ever: Duke Basketball

It is Fall/Winter and college basketball has started, so you know what that means! Time to start talking about Duke being a National Championship contender and then when it is Winter/Spring everyone can talk about how Duke is overrated and they never perform well come ACC and NCAA Tournament time. You will hear how they are 4-6 over their last 10 games as well and they will be eliminated in the second round of the NCAA Tournament. There are three articles posted in the past 12 hours that talk about how great Duke is going to be this year. They are all fawning over Duke and these accolades are premature.

So, with it being National Championship Contender time of year, let's let Pat Forde go first reassuring us why this year, Duke is different.

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. -- The popular game in college basketball right now is guessing who, if anyone, will arise to legitimately challenge the 800-pound, powder-blue gorilla named North Carolina.

The popular answer for anyone who reads this blog at all...no one. Congratulations 2009 National Champions UNC Tar Heels! I am not trying to jinx them, this is really, really going to happen and I have prepared myself for it.

The answer is Duke.

The answer is wrong.

Overlooked, off-radar Duke. Really. For the first time since Jeff Capel was a player, not a coach, the Blue Devils are not swimming in overexposure.

Oh yeah, no overexposure here. The head coach was the head coach for the Olympic Gold Medal team, there have been 240 articles written about Greg Paulus not starting this year, and every single writer has picked them to be in the top 10 teams in the country.

haven't had their ears filled with premature hype.

I have to admit, for Duke, there has been just the right amount of hype. There has been hype, but nothing really over the top.

This week Duke rose to No. 4 in the rankings -- but on the buzz meter, Duke might as well have been Davidson. Except no Blue Devil was getting anywhere near the pub accorded to Stephen Curry.

This is only because the entire sportswriter nation is in love with Stephen Curry. They all go to games and hold up huge cardboards signs asking him to marry them followed by loud screaming in the camera. The reason Stephen Curry is getting publicity is because his team actually made it to the Elite Eight last year, something Duke has failed to do the past two years, which is unacceptable for them.

In the words of Tony Soprano to Richie Aprile, "those who want respect, get respect."

So don't get too cocky, Carolina. Duke is back.

You stay cocky Carolina. You have future NBA players on your bench, Duke has Lance Thomas and David McClure.

Duke is back without a powerhouse player in the middle, but with so many players who can do so many things that it can make up for that deficiency.

This article can now have officially been written every year about Duke for the past 15 years.

Singler was one of the few stars of the tremendous prep Class of 2007 who came back for a second season of college ball, and he'll be Duke's bell cow.

The reason Singler came back is because he weighed 150 pounds at the end of last year and could not have bench pressed a basketball at the end of the year he was so worn down. Due to Lance Thomas and Brian Zoubek being "the little foul machines that could," in constant competition to see who can commit the most fouls in the smallest amount of time, Singler was forced to play center.

What has changed this year? Zoubek and Thomas are one year older, that is pretty much it. I will believe Singler won't wear down again when I see it come March.

Krzyzewski is banking on Paulus to take his reduction to roughly 20 minutes per game and handle it well. Just as he sold NBA superstars on supporting actor roles in the Olympics, he's selling Paulus and fellow upperclassmen David McClure and Lance Thomas on coming off the pine.

I am still in the acceptance stage of Paulus coming off the bench because I don't think a captain who has started three years should come off the bench, but Paulus has shown himself to have the athleticism of a wheelchair athlete, so it has looked like a good move so far.

There is also not a Top 10 team in the country David McClure and Lance Thomas would not be coming off the bench for. They would not even play significant minutes for UNC.

There have been hot starts before in recent years -- plenty of them, as the Blue Devils seemingly played over their heads and then wore down or were exposed come tournament time.

Exactly, let's quit writing articles about how great Duke is going to be until we see something has changed. It grows tiresome.

Jeff Goodman your turn.

This was un-chartered waters for Duke early in the season. A hostile territory.

"This was new for us," Duke junior Jon Scheyer said. "Most of our games are in Durham."

I have to admit, this did provide a solid test for Duke, but they also played a Purdue team that was very similar to them. Strong perimeter game, very little presence on the inside. That had to help a little bit.

The Blue Devils are hardly physically intimidating. They don't possess a sure-fire first-round NBA draft pick.

I am going to just go ahead and say this is very wrong. I googled "NBA 2009 mock draft" and got this, this, this, and this.

But this team is different than its predecessors.

It can hang its hat on defense.

Duke has always hung its hat on defense, this team is no different from its predecessors in that respect. You can't give the same reasons that were used last year and the year before why Duke is going to be better and actually make it to the Sweet Sixteen this year. I think everyone is overreacting to this win a little bit. It was a big win for Duke but not something that will mean anything in March if they stumble yet again.

This edition of the Blue Devils is far more athletic and experienced. Lance Thomas and David McClure are upperclassmen who bring energy and defensive tenacity to the table

McClure also brings the complete inability or want to shoot the ball, basically making it 4-on-5 on offense and Lance Thomas is, and will always be, a fouling machine. Granted a fouling machine who has finally learned to shoot a layup, but a foul machine nonetheless.

while Paulus is a senior who brings leadership and is arguably the team's top perimeter shooter.

Great how perceptions change. Last year Paulus was the underachieving, non athletic point guard for Duke who can't guard anyone. This year, by not starting, he is the college basketball version of David Eckstein.

He and Tyler Hansbrough have scheduled January 13, 2009 for the "Hustle Off" where each competitor will compete in a series of 10 events to show how much they hustle and can lead a team consisting of underprivileged kids. Look for it and you know Dick Vitale will be calling that event, so turn down your television.

"We know we can play with any team in the country," Singler said.

That's confidence, but it's still a little early for that.

Wh...wh...what? You spent the entire column saying how great and prepared Duke was to not repeat the same mistakes the prior two teams have endured and now you backtrack on the last sentence? I am confused.

Gregg "the guy with the picture that makes him look like a sexual predator" Doyel, your turn.

This is a good year to be just about anybody in college basketball, because just about anybody could win the national championship.

No, no, no. What indication has UNC given, playing without Tyler Hansbrough at times, that they are not the best team in the country? Was it beating UNC-A by 60 points or obliterating Notre Dame at a neutral site?

But that's one team. That's Tiger Woods. You can take Tiger Woods and give me the rest of the field for the 2009 NCAA title, and I'll like my chances. And if you give me the field -- you're giving me the field.

I will take UNC because they are the best team in the country. And if I choose UNC--I am choosing the best team.

I reserve the right to change my mind if UNC starts stumbling but this is not going to happen. They are pissed off about last year and more talented than even the 2005 National Championship team.

Duke's Kyle Singler will sit on somebody's bench because he has an NBA skill set if borderline NBA size and athleticism. Duke's Gerald Henderson might also sit on somebody's bench, because he has NBA athleticism though not even an NBDL skill set. For Purdue, Robbie Hummel could get an NBA contract some day, but I'm guessing it will be of the 10-day variety.

Why does Doyel put shit like this in his columns? Just to get a reaction I guess. Maybe this is true but Gregg seems to randomly throw things like this comment in a column so he can be the "shoot from the hip, I tell you things you don't want to know" type columnist. He just comes off as an asshole.

Duke doesn't have a point guard

Apparently Gregg Doyel is the only one who missed the "Nolan Smith vs. Greg Paulus" debate all summer. They don't have an All American point guard but they have two above average point guards.

Without a lot of NBA pretty boys, Duke is a junkyard dog of a team, and it gnawed on Purdue for 40 minutes. That's why Duke could go a long way, maybe even all the way.

Based on what? They are tough now? Toughness does not translate to success necessarily.

Because it plays hard -- and because it won't have to play anybody great, not in the NCAA tournament anyway,

Gregg Doyel is a moron. Duke will have to play someone great in the NCAA Tournament, unless he is suggesting Duke and Carolina are easily the top 2 teams in the country. Which is wrong. Even if he thinks there are no great teams in the country, other than UNC, the rest of the teams have similar skill levels to Duke, thereby giving Duke a challenge. If UNC is the only great team there should be a lot of competition in the NCAA Tournament.

not unless it finally runs into the Tar Heels in the Final Four collision to end all collisions.

Gregg Doyel is still a moron. Duke won't have to wait until the Final Four for the "collision to end all collisions" they play twice in the regular season and possibly even a third time in the ACC Tournament. How Gregg can miss this, I have no idea. This is horrible.

The gap between North Carolina and the rest of the country is so large, even a known UNC nemesis like Krzyzewski admits as much.

"North Carolina is on a little bit different level," he said

I am glad we can all agree on this. What else do you expect Coach K to say though? "They suck and I think they are overrated?"

Because there are no teams in the void that comes after the Tar Heels. After UNC, it could be Duke. It could be Purdue. It could be your team -- whoever that team is.

It won't be Duke, unless something has changed this year from last year, and I won't believe that change has happened until I see it in the NCAA Tournament or Duke goes above .500 during the last three weeks of the year.

It is time to quit writing positive articles about Duke being a National Championship contender until they prove something in March.