Jack’s Blog

Since Michael Jordan turned 50 this past Sunday, talk show hosts (and several other media members) felt it was necessary to raise the unanswerable question of “Who’s the best player of all-time?”  Naturally, because they are the two best current players (with Kevin Durant nipping at their heels), the argument shifted to who’s better between Kobe Bryant and LeBron James.

All the comments were made - Kobe has five rings, LeBron is at his prime with many years left to play dominate.  The debate is a necessary one - if you’re ten years old.  Maybe fifteen.  Anytime past that age, if you continue to play the “who’s better/who’s the best game,” you need to at least realize that there are no winners (and plenty of losers.

Kobe is sensational - skill set, mind set, defensive ability, personal drive and (which can be a negative, depending on how strong or fragile your teammates are) ability to demand/produce the best in your teammates.  MJ shared the exact same qualities.  Which is why Kobe has them - because, from the day he entered the league, he has modeled everything he does like Jordan.  Not just his play, which is sensational, but his mannerisms, his dealing with the media, his gait … his being.

LeBron can’t match those two because his skills, body, mental aspect - nothing - is like those two.  He’s 6′8″ and willing to admit to 250, with rumors as high as 280, and negligible body fat.  For that reason, people have tried to compare him to Magic.  LeBron is no Magic either, if for no other reason than Magic was a point guard and LeBron is not.  LeBron is the epitome of what Don Nelson used to call a point guard.  Magic ran the show and, when he shot, it was a set shot.  He could drive, but it usually ended with a pass or a layup, seldom a dunk.  LeBron is the show, shoots (real) jumpers, and when he drives, the result is … louder.  It still obtains the same desired results as Magic - Ws.

Sure, you can get into “rings,” what we used to call championships but what now needs to be defined as something you can wear and show off, as opposed to a something you were part of, that only a selected few can actually claim they “be” (as opposed to “have”).  So when the trump card in the Kobe vs. LeBron debate is five rings to one, the line LeBron used (oh so obviously created by one of his publicists), that if rings are the determining factor, then Bill Russell must be the best because he has 11 and Michael has six.”  Then, others had to be brought in besides Russell, e.g. Wilt Chamberlain, Jud Bueschler, Charles Barkley, Robert Horry, Reggie Miller, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing and a cast of characters from NBA past and present.

I’m on record as saying MJ is the G.O.A.T. but as far as Kobe versus LeBron, it’s too tough a call.  They’re waaaaaay different, each with their own strengths.  Kobe couldn’t have won as many without Shaq but Shaq couldn’t win as many without Kobe (even though they each did without each other).  LeBron couldn’t win without selecting his current teammates but, c’mon, he got to the Finals with the Cavs.  Have you ever checked that roster?  Closely checked it?  Had he won the whole thing with that group, the comparisons would be with Bill Walton and the Trailblazers.  Take LeBron off the Cavs and Walton off the Blazers and pit the remaining players against each other.  That finals would probably be the least watched in television history.  Definitely the most boring, lackluster series ever.

It’s been used before but John Harbaugh’s rule should be considered prior to anyone opening their mouth in the Kobe-LBJ discussion:

“I’ve got this rule.  We make no comparisons.  Somebody is going to be devalued.”

Everybody is chiming in on which is better, the guys who took gold yesterday or the original Dream Team.  As with most comparisons with teams and players from different generations, there’s no definitive answer nor any conclusion that will be agreed upon.  But it does make for interesting conversation.  So, here’s my take.

The originals were made up of eleven future Hall-of-Famers, 100% of the squad except for Christian Laettner who was added because the “committee” thought the colleges should have a representative.  That’s a pretty strong reason to end the discussion.  While the latest Team USA certainly has some future HOFers, there’s no way that number will reach eleven.

Undoubtedly, the current team faced greater competition than the guys in ‘92.  The teams “competing” in 1992 were more like fans, posing for pictures and asking for autographs before and after games.  This year’s opponents had legitimate NBA talent, players who perform better for their own countries than they do for their NBA team because their “The Man” and can play looser, with greater confidence.  Juan Carlos Navarro’s performance (at least the first half) could be exhibit 1.

The evidence of how dominant the Dream Team was can be found in head coach Chuck Daly’s goal: not to call a time out.  He admitted that, in the gold medal game, he was tempted to call one, but decided against it.  Talent took over and there was no need for a TO.

Looking at talent comparison, each squad has sensational players.  Point guards, wings, power forwards match up well.  The main difference is at the center position.  While Tyson Chandler is a defensive stopper and erases mistakes, he’s no match for either Patrick Ewing nor David Robinson.  It’s not exactly revolutionary but I think it’s enough to give the nod to the elders.

When it comes to comparing different eras, the actual players have their own ideas.  It’s like one of the 1960 Olympic team members (at that time considered the best ever) said to Michael Jordan about the outcome if their two teams ever competed:

“We’d kick your ass.”

After last night’s disappointing (to the entire jilted city of Cleveland) blowout of the Cavs by the Miami Heat, the rumors of Pat Riley coming out of coaching retirement and replacing Eric Spoelstra will cease - until the next loss.  Even if it’s two weeks from now.

There’s always been heat, pun intended, on Coach Spo ever since that opening night loss to the Boston Celtics.  At first there were merely whispers, but then Laker coach Phil Jackson dropped the “Van Gundy thing” on the media and since then the pressure has intensified exponentially.  Personally, I always doubted Riley would replace Spoelstra, but last night confirmed my belief.

Sure, Riley won championships with two distinctly different styles - first, with the Showtime Lakers of Magic, Kareem and Co and then, with Shaq & D-Wade in South Beach.  In between, he came close with the grind-it-out, in-your face, physical defense of the Patrick Ewing Knicks.  In this case, it wouldn’t be a matter of coaching style he would have to adapt but personal philosophy.

In the early ’80s, a couple coaching friends and I would hold an annual self-improvement clinic in an effort to stay a step ahead of our colleagues.  After the clinic’s inaugural year, Larry Shyatt, currently associate head coach for the University of Florida Gators, but back then, an assistant at New Mexico, called me (I was an assistant at Tennessee at the time) and said he’d received a letter from the graduate assistant at Providence asking if he could be included in our group.  That’s how Jeff Van Gundy became an integral member of our clique and, to this day, he still attends.

One of the years he was Riley’s assistant with New York, Jeff gave us the inside scoop on Pat Riley and his philosophy of coaching.  Jeff praised Riles as the most organized coach he’d ever been around and also the most insistent in certain areas.  It was news then but has been reported many times throughout the years of how Knicks players would be fined if they helped up a fallen opponent after he fell - even if it was a New York player who knocked him down.  In addition, Jeff told us that no one, meaning players and coaches was allowed to even acknowledge the presence of an opponent on game night.  This included warm ups an hour before the game.

Therein lies the reason pat Riley would never consider coaching LeBron James.  As mature as James’ body and game is, his game day demeanor is equally immature.  Chatting it up during and even prior to games - case in point was last night during free throws when he and the Cavs’ bench were catching up on old times - is a major segment of the way LeBron plays.  It didn’t shock me that LeBron did his customary “powder cloud” before the game last night.  What shocks me is that Pat Riley allows him to ever do it.

At least Riley stopped the childish “picture-taking” prior to games or putting on the fake bowling routines that were part and parcel of his game day preparation in Cleveland.  No wonder the organization was upset he left them.  As long as he played like an MVP, the Cavs let him do whatever he wanted, independent of how unprofessional it was.  The mantra coaches use is “You need to play for the name on the front of the jersey, not the one on the back.”  During his years in Cleveland, LeBron’s name should have been on both sides. 

There’s no official word that Riley has put the hammer down on pregame antics.  Just the smoke and lights celebration the Big Three put on after their signing was out of character for a Pat Riley-run show.  What it would mean if Riley were to put on the sneakers and whistle again is that either he or LeBron would have to change.  If that time ever comes, my bet is that it would be James - until a couple of losses and then we’d be hearing - probably from the media’s favorite snitch, now referred to as “a highly placed source in the organization” that Riles was taking the fun out of the game.  Riley has always maintained that there really isn’t fun in basketball - only:

“Winning and misery.”

It’s always interesting (for those of us to do this sort of thing) thinking about who, after all the draft hype, will eventually be the Rookie of the Year.  Sometimes, it’s a certainty, e.g. Lew Alcindor (remember him?), Patrick Ewing, Shaq and LeBron.  Barring injuries, no one really knows because, although the number one pick usually goes to a bad team and, thus, gets mega-minutes, other first rounders are put into positions which showcase their abilities and allow them to have big years.

Naturally, the overwhelming favorite this season will be John Wall.  Based on his first two summer league games, the ROY award’s going to be hard for anyone to take away from him.  But there are other candidates.  One, in particular, is the number two pick, Evan Turner.  Having played in college for a greater period of time must have helped with his maturity, as did playing on the Big Ten stage and having to be a leader for the Buckeyes - which he did magnificently.  Another factor in his favor is he will be coached by Doug Collins who, aside from being a terrific motivator and possessing an extremely keen basketball mind, was the number one pick coming out of Illinois State.  He will be a calming mentor to Turner.

Picks three and four, Derrick Favors of the Nets and Wesley Johnson of the Timberwolves, respectively, each were selected by bad teams desperately in need of immediate help at their positions so opportunity will be no problem and while their teams were lousy last year, each has complementary pieces who should allow the two newcomers to flourish in their extensive roles.

DeMarcus Cousins’ maturity has come under scrutiny - for which he has only himself to blame - but if his mental makeup can catch his physical stature, he also will be given a role in which he’ll get all he needs to prove himself - and will have a great point guard and guy who understands what it takes to win the award.

Gordon Hayward and Cole Aldrich may have hit the jackpot with the teams who drafted them but, while they’ll be happy to be in the situations that present themselves, they won’t be ROY candidates - which is as good as any rookie could hope - to be drafted by a good team which needs them but, more importantly, is just what they need.  As if the guaranteed money wasn’t enough of a bonus.

So, armed with all this knowledge, who will the 2011 NBA Rookie of the Year be?  My pick is . . . the Clippers’ Blake Griffin.  For all the reasons above - opportunity, need, big minutes, will be playing for Vinny Del Negro, under whose guidance Derrick Rose, Joakim Noah and Taj Gibson became NBA fixtures (defined - by me - as guys who will have minimum 10-year careers) and, add to that list, a hunger to make up two years in one.  

Those in the Clippers’ organization claim Griffin’s work ethic is unsurpassed.  And he has several others traits that ought to insure NBA longevity and stardom, e.g. skill set, strength, quickness, intelligence and high character.  After missing his first year in the league due to injury (the reason he’s eligible for the ROY award), Griffin is finally healthy.  This is a guy who was MVP of last year’s summer league.

If ever Napoleon Hill’s quote applied to anyone, it applies to Blake Griffin:

“Effort only fully releases its reward after a person refuses to quit.”

Another year goes by and the worst team in the NBA does not get the #1 pick in the lottery.  How in the world can this occur year after year?

As a math teacher, I’ll let you in on the reason.  While the team with the worst record in the league has the greatest number of ping pong balls, it still has only a 25% chance of “winning.”  Which means that there is a 75% chance that one of the other teams’ ping pong balls comes up.

How, then, can the Washington Wizards, with only a 10% chance of hitting the jackpot, come up roses?  Listen carefully for the answer: BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS TO WIN!  Sure, the Wizards beat the odds, but whatever team that won, including the New Jersey Nets, would have beaten the odds.  If someone asked you which group had a better chance of winning, the one with 25% of the ping pong balls or the one with 75%, which would you choose?  Well, that’s who won - and will usually win.  Three out of four times, anyway.

People claimed there was hanky-panky when the Knicks, a franchise the league desperately needed at that time (and it doesn’t now?) to be successful won the lottery and got the rights to Patrick Ewing.  Then we were supposed to believe that it was a coincidence that the Cleveland Cavaliers just happened to win the lottery the year that Akron’s LeBron James was the prize? 

Was the fix on for this year’s NBA lottery?  The late Abe Pollin, the long-time Washington Bullets/Wizards owner (and one of the true gentlemen in the NBA), died earlier this season.  With all the problems that franchise has encountered - all of its own (players) making - doesn’t it make for a nice story that the Wiz caught a break and his widow could be there to celebrate winning the (apparent) John Wall sweepstakes? 

Maybe, but if you are one to subscribe to conspiracy theories, I can’t say I know you’re mistaken, but if you ask me how, over and over, the team with the greatest number of chances to win doesn’t, my answer is:

“Do the math.”�

And he’s continuing to do it.  To think, everyone thought brother Jeff was the family’s coaching whiz.  (Actually, the true coach guru in the Van Gundy family is father, Bill - and I’m sure either of the two boys would attest to that).

Let’s break down this Stan Van Gundy character.  I’ve known his brother, Jeff, a good deal longer.  While we happen to be talking about the Van Gundy’s (in reality, I was the only one who was talking about them, but let’s say it was a team effort), it’s nearly indisputable, and I readily admit to being completely biased, that Jeff is setting the standards for color commentators.  In my mind, Jeff and Hubie Brown (another prejudicial vote on my part because I have a connection with Hubie, albeit it a stretch) are on islands by themselves when it comes to analyzing a game as it happens, all the while entertaining the viewing and listening audience while doing it.  If the island took a census, though, it also might claim Doug Collins as a resident.

Back to Stan, who by no means is the poster boy of what we thought an NBA coach would look like.  It’s relatively apparent he never played in the League and I’m not sure it would register as much of a shock if we were to find out he never played in any league (of course, he played for his father @ SUNY-Brockport).  With all the movements throughout the years, we’ve heard claims from groups such as the NAACP that a black worker has to do the work twice as well as that of a non-minority in order to merely maintain his employment.  Similarly for women, so say organizations such as NOW.

That might be true, probably is.  And in some cases, “twice as good” might be a rather conservative estimate.  Yet, if someone believes those opinions to be valid (and, while no one may really know the exact numbers, I would agree in the concept), trying to crack into such as a glory type club as the NBA, without having gone through the actual wars, . . . that’s going to be some hill to climb.  The numbers are much more skewed for coaches in the NBA, who did not play in the League.

So, his basketball career wasn’t the deciding factor in having him wind up in the professional ranks.  Based on what I’ve encountered, heard (from both coaches and players) and observed, success in the NBA comes from one thing more than any other factor.  And that trait is the ability to gain the players’ trust - and you can’t be phony about it.  That might get you through a year or two, but then somethin’s gotta give.

At one of the annual self-improvement clinics we used to hold for “our mastermind group,” (see my blog on 8/7/09) I remember hearing Stan’s brother, Jeff (when he was an assistant coach with the New York Knicks), telling us, “The best way to gain the players’ trust is to have them see you sweat right along with them.”  That was why when Jeff had a individual improvement session with one of their players, say, Patrick Ewing, he never got some kid to shag the balls for them.  He told me Patrick never said anything to him about it, but Jeff, himself, felt more comfortable by doing it that way, and, wouldn’t you know it, it wound up really gaining the trust of others because that was how he treated every player on the squad.  If specific drills or such were designed for “bigs”, then he might make adjustments, not because of “prima donna-ing,” but because that person needed a modification of some sort.  And it’s the same way for Stan.

Something else you’ll notice about SVG.  Watch how often the Magic score when they have possession of the ball, out of bounds, after a time out - independent of where the ball is inbounded.  Check on the subtle defensive changes, e.g. they were doubling the post after his first dribble, but changed to an immediate trap just to throw off the ballhandler’s sense of rhythm. 

Stan Van Gundy belongs in the NBA - and not just the league.  One more win and he’ll be where he deserves.  I’ve heard that Stan Van Gundy has a lookalike - some porno star.  Not being a charter member in the porn industry, I wouldn’t know.  It’s just that when people are expecting to see someone who looks the part of an NBA coach, but is far from it, he tends to be treated much more critically. 

Although not nearly in the same category, I imagine Stan Van Gundy agrees whole-heartedly with Martin Luther King’s statement:

“It may be true that the law cannot make man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.”

Here we are at the end of another college football season and at the highest of level of the intercollegiate sport, we hear complaining from people (not just the coaches and players) that their school, i.e. not the University of Florida Gators, is the best team in the nation - and each is prepared to do (oral) battle - in the form of a debate, be it on radio talk shows, TV or anywhere any two people disagree.  Bring your stats, tradition, schedule, crap on the other teams who’ll be showing up at the championship debate and be ready to get it on.  It will be held at a bar in South Bend so the participants will be assured of a neutral field.  As bad as the locals there were this past year, I don’t think they’ll be joining the verbal sparring.  They definitely would not be on the invited guests list. 

My blog on 11/23/08 explains that a playoff in big-time college football would not give us the best team in the country.  Let’s say a four-loss Virginia Tech squad snuck in the playoff and upset Oklahoma, then went all the way through unblemished, with the benefit of a miraculous field goal as the horn sounded in their next game against Utah and then, with 0.02 left in the semi-final game, they blocked the potential game winning extra point by three touchdown favorite USC and ran the recovered ball back for two points, snatching a victory out of what was surely what the networks wanted, i.e. a USC-Florida final.  Then they beat the Gators, who on the title game’s opening possession had Percy Harvin and Tim Tebow collide, both being carted off the field and unable to continue.  You’d have your National Champions - the 12-4 VPI Gobblers, the best team in the country.

That’s ridiculous.  Not the scenario, the thought that a team who played in the ACC, a BCS conference but a poor one at that, would be crowned as the best team in the nation.  Being named National Champions and being considered the best team in the nation are two seperate entities.  I mean, how excited would it be to see a scenario like that happen?

You know, like in 1983, when NC State beat vastly superior Houston or two years later when Villanova had to be nearly perfect, but pulled it off against Georgetown, or, more recently and closer to my home, when Fresno State won the College World Series.  I’ve heard so many people call the Bulldogs the National Champs, but don’t think I’ve ever heard anybody lay claim to their being the best intercollegiate baseball team in the nation.

So that’s what we want?  Some underdog, in the powerful sport of football, beating the team ranked number one all year because of a bad call (that couldn’t be reviewed)?  Do you really want a year like ‘83 with Jimmy V running around looking for somebody to hug or ‘85 with Patrick Ewing going down to defeat (when everyone knew his Hoyas team would have beaten ‘Nova 99 times out of 100) or the Underdogs to Wonderdogs Fresno State baseballers dogpiling at the pitcher’s mound in Omaha?

Yeah, me too.  We can still hope.  Who cares who’s considered the best team, we just want the excitement of one-and-done pressure-packed playoff!

“Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.”  �

The three main reasons are: Michael Jordan’s 45, Larry Bird’s back is shot (even worse than it was in 1992) and Charles Barkley can barely beat Dick Bavetta in a race. 

Congrats to our guys for reclaiming the Gold - and doing it in a classy manner, i.e. through teamwork and relinquishing their individual egos for the good of the squad), but if you thought for a millisecond this blog was about to make the claim some of the hip-hoppers are considering, e.g. that this collection of NBA players is better than the original Dream Teamers, you’d better hope fans aren’t subjected to drug testing.

No one, including parents, wives, children or even a player’s posse (well, maybe the posse because their “livelihood” is dependent on those they cling to and deify) can say with a straight face that the current Olympic men’s basketball team would beat the original group who represented us in Barcelona.  Breaking down the rosters illustrates the superiority of the Dream Team beyond a shadow of a doubt.  This year’s squad has the better twelfth man, since there was a mandatory spot for a college player in ‘92 and Christian Laettner occupied it - a good player, but one whose career pales in comparison to each of the Redeem Teamers.

In no way am I implying that every one of the original Dream Team is a better player than any one of this year’s group.  Kobe Bryant, in my mind (and in the minds of many others) is the best player in the game today.  Not only can he score in a multitude of ways (like any way he wants), but he’s the ultimate lockdown defender who takes pride in his skill on that end of the floor and requests (demands) to guard the other team’s best perimeter offensive player (as he did with Mike Krzyzewski prior to Olympic tryouts).  I still feel, though, that Michael Jordan gets my vote as the best who ever played the game.

LeBron James’ skill set is beyond belief, especially when his age is taken into account (his chronological age, not how old he looks).  His defense could improve as could the range on his jump shot and his shot selection.  Still, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to put up their salary in a one-on-one contest against him. I’ll hold off the comparison to him and, instead, mention each player on each team, which I believe will prove my case (and not because “the dude’s fakin’ “).

I got to see Jason Kidd up close when I was coaching at USC and he was playing at Cal.  A friend of mine, who was an NBA head coach at the time, asked me to assess the players in the Pac-10 for the upcoming draft.  When Kidd’s name came up, my evaluation was, “He plays the game like coaches would play, if they had the skill.”  While he’s getting on in years, Chris Paul and Deron Williams aren’t too far behind and may surpass his accomplishments before their careers end.  Still, Magic Johnson reinvented the point guard position and probably would be selected first at that spot if someone were starting a team.  If not, John Stockton, the all-time assist leader (by an incredible margin), might be picked if a traditional point were chosen (especially if the person choosing wanted to run the pick and roll and also needed someone who could shoot). 

Certainly, Dwight Howard’s a man-child, but where he is currently in his career would have to take a back seat to either the Patrick Ewing or David Robinson of 1992.

The role of “designated shooter” was given to Michael Redd this year and Chris Mullin in ‘92.  Any debate here?

Chris Bosh was an absolute shining star in the Olympics (what a relief it must have been getting away from - and what a downer it must be, thinking about going back to - Toronto).  Still and all, at the power forward position, many consider Karl Malone to be the best ever.

Dwayne Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Carlos Boozer and Tayshaun Prince are great ones with Wade looking like he’s returning to his championship form.  Prince seems to be the anti-Melo, a guy who will always be on a winning team, yet not receive the glory the other guys do, while Anthony will lead his team in scoring and get the accolades, but comes up short in the win column (at least, on the professional level).  Boozer is a steady contributer, who annually puts up All-Star stats.

Charles Barkley was a type of player who comes along very seldom.  I was coaching at Tennessee when he was at Auburn and you’d swear he had helium inside of him when you’d see that body get that high up off the floor.  His body, mind and game all improved significantly when he got into the League.  Scottie Pippen was considered by many the second best player in the NBA (as long as he played with MJ - and in Barcelona, they were together).  Larry Bird wasn’t Larry Legend when the ‘92 Olympics were held, but nobody would ever be foolish enough to challenge him to a shooting contest.

The one factor that must be taken into consideration that this edition had to do that the ‘92 team didn’t was play against far better competition.  I remember Dream Team Head Coach Chuck Daly admitting, after it was all over, he told his staff his goal was not to ever call a time out.  Talk about grasping: the ultimate pessimist realizing the hand he was dealt, seeing the others in the game and feeling that confident - and for good reason.  By the way, he achieved his goal.

Each team won the Gold and did it with class (Barkley’s errant elbow aside).  Who better to quote, when discussing Olympic success, than Peter Ueberroth, who said prior to the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics (and after which he received Time’s Man of the Year award):

“We can accomplish anything in this world, solve any problem, if enough people care.”

After Mike D’Antoni, Larry Brown, Rick Carlisle, Terry Porter and Scott Skiles got hired as NBA head coaches, there were grumblings about about the “good ol’ boy network” and how teams continue to hire “re-treads.”  On the filp side, Eric Spoelstra, Vinny Del Negro and Michael Curry just got selected to run their first ever ball club, hitting the financial lottery in the process, prompting many (probably the same complainers above) to point out that they have no experience.

Every time jobs open, there are certain names that pop up, yet these guys never seem to get the least bit of consideration, despite being (NBA) household names.  One is Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, another is Rick Barry and a third who has recently joined the mix is Patrick Ewing.  Since NBA franchises would hire Hannibal Lechter to coach their teams if they thought he could produce a championship, it’s a wonder to many why these three icons, all of whom have expressed desire to lead a team, have been continually passed over.

In Ewing’s case, NBA insiders have told me on more than one occasion that Patrick’s off the court behavior has been as impossible to defend as he was when he got the ball three feet from the basket.  In fact, there was a time when the woman he was married to during his playing days with the Knicks was planning to write a tell-all book and, in fact, it was headed - or even was sent - to the publisher.  Although I don’t recall the book ever seeing the light of day, Ewing’s reputation has been well-known enough for teams to shy away from placing him in the uiltimate leadership position.

The other two pariahs, Jabbar and Barry, are a simple case of “people have long memories.”  Rick, as most of us remember, never committed a foul (according to him) and Kareem spurned what most people considered normal social behavior during his playing days, prefering to be more or less a reclusive - and not a particularly pleasant one at that.

When I was coaching in college, I heard Hubie Brown, who, I believe, at the time was an assistant coach for the Milwaukee Bucks give a lecture to a group of high school “all-stars.”  He spoke of a kid (by far the best player on the team), but someone who was intentionally uncoachable - and not only uncoachable, but someone who actually went out of his way to make the coach’s life miserable.  Near the end of his senior season, the college coaches weren’t coming around like the youngster was assured they would.  When he finally realized the error of his ways, his attitude turned 180 degrees, he apologized profusely to the coach and begged him for help.  However, the coach had had enough, the kid had been a pain in the butt the whole year.  Yet, now he decided, when it was convenient for him, to make up for a whole season’s (career’s) worth of misery he caused.   Right or wrong, the coach basically told him to get lost.  The title of Hubie’s speech was what Ewing, Jabbar and Barry needed to understand a long time ago:

“You need to learn how to say hello before it’s time to say goodbye.” �