Archive for the ‘customer service’ Category

Why the Media Asks Those Timely, Insensitive Questions

Friday, May 13th, 2016

At the NCAA Regional Finals in Anaheim, the #1 seed Oregon Ducks had just lost to #2 Oklahoma in a game that sent the Sooners to the number one goal every college player dreams of – the Final Four. There’s a brief cooling off period before the media is allowed to interview the players and coaches. Because of other media commitments for the winners, the losing team is required to speak first.

Usually the requests are for three players and the head coach to attend the post game press conference. It’s always difficult watching these pressers because the season comes to such an abrupt end. The NCAA tourney is a sudden death ordeal, unlike the NBA’s best-of-seven playoffs. Therefore, every game is like Game 7 to a college kid – meaning the loser has to face the realization that . . . it’s over.

For seniors not only is the season over, but for the guys who aren’t going to play professionally, their basketball career is over. For many of them, they’ve been playing since they could walk. So that’s a pretty big dose of reality to swallow for a 22-year-old kid. Yet, Jon Rothstein of CBS Sports Network thought it was both appropriate and necessary to ask Oregon’s seniors, 20 minutes after the game – and their dreams – ended, “How much does this loss hurt?”

Dwayne Benjamin was the first to answer. He looked up and said, “I’ve never felt like this before, never been this sad. Not because we lost but because we can never call this team a team again.” And that is why media members feel obligated to ask the probing questions at such difficult times. Naturally, Benjamin had been sadder – certainly when a loved one died but, for raw emotion, Rothstein got the powerful quote he was hoping for.

Flash forward to last night’s Game 6 elimination victory for Oklahoma City over the San Antonio Spurs. Look, we all get it. Tim Duncan turned 40 last week. While he’s been referred to as “the greatest NBA power forward ever,” there is no doubt that he has slowed down. Considerably. In this country one segment of society loves to deify athletes – until they show signs of no longer having the ability to dominate. Then, they will drop that athlete as fast as they’ll replace him with . . . someone who reminds them of him “back when.”

It was just March 23 that an article was written about “Old Man River-walk” entitled, Stats aside, Duncan may be having his best season yet” (Fran Blinebury, Sure, there has been a transition from being the leader scorer to a veteran “player-coach” but, after all, the Spurs did win 67 (out of 82) regular season games and posted a 40-1 home record during that period. Duncan’s stats have dropped significantly to 8.6 points, 7.3 rebounds and 1.3 blocks (from 19.0 pts, 10.8 reb and 2.2 blocks) but aren’t his current numbers what the Spurs could use from a back up post player? Did he hurt the team that badly during the season? During last night’s telecast, Jeff Van Gundy warned people not to pass judgment on Duncan for his play in the OKC series alone.

Duncan has been taking pay cuts so it’s not like San Antonio would be freeing up a ton of cap space. (In an article on the richest NBA players, he rated ninth with an estimated net worth of $150 million, so he’s as savvy with the financial part of his life as he is with the professional side) and what price can be put on his leadership and the fact that a living legend, a future Hall of Famer is still on the squad, acting as a role model, willing and able to discuss the Spurs’ style and NBA life to the younger guys? The main question for the Spurs is – will whichever player they get in Duncan’s place be an improvement on next year’s roster?

Possibly due to the respect the members of the media have for him – or possibly due to feeling intimidated – the question was of the hem and haw variety: “Have, uh, you taken any time, at all, to think about your future?” Duncan gave the veteran’s reply – which might be why media guys love to ask young kids questions during the tough times:

“I’ll get to that after I get out of here and figure out life. That’s it.”


Wrapping Up the Golden State-Portland Series

Thursday, May 12th, 2016

The NBA, as I’ve posted on numerous occasions, is a game played by the greatest athletes in the world. Yet, in the series between the Warriors and Blazers, what we saw often boggled our minds. There is no doubt that excitement abounded throughout every game but . . . those guys did some of the “damn-dest” things on the court. Considering there was so much at stake, it was amazing some of the foolish actions that were committed, most of which are unforced, time and again.

Whether it was careless turnovers (a lack of regard for the taking care of the ball or being more interested in looking good rather than being effective, who knows), innumerable bad shots (many that went in but, eventually, they caught up to each team), giving up offensive rebounds (although, sometimes, they were due to outstanding efforts by the offensive rebounder), missed free throws (certainly, those at crucial times),  losing big leads (maybe due to playing too cautiously), jumping without knowing where to pass (a cardinal sin back in the day) or the coach’s biggest pet peeve – fouling jump shooters (especially three-point shooters - shouldn’t professionals know better), it’s incredible that these players – with so much on the line – continued to play that way. Could the pressure of the playoffs have had anything to do with it?

Another group under pressure – even more than the players and coaches – were the referees because, independent of the score, they can never win. After all, if there’s one thing a viewer could count on, it was that on every call – and a large majority of the “no calls” – at least one player, and usually his coach, would complain whine to the referees. As, invariably, would the viewer.

One thing for sure, though, is anyone watching the Warriors play, will, at least once (and probably more), see a millionaire get humiliated. If you’re not sure who it is, here’s a hint:

“Whichever guy is guarding Steph Curry.”


Why You Need to Share Your Speech with Others You Trust

Sunday, May 8th, 2016

Villanova University won the national basketball championship. If they think that was special, wait until George Raveling, a 1960 ‘Nova graduate, delivers this year’s commencement speech. I was one of George’s graduate assistants at Washington State between 1973-75. Early in my stay there, I caught a few typos in communication we sent (back then there was no spell check or autocorrect – heck, there were no computers) so anytime we’d send out any written material (letters, camp brochures, media guides, etc.), George would have me proofread them. Without patting myself on back too excessively, I’ve shown a penchant for being able to write and speak as well as spell. For those reasons, George sent me (and a couple others whose opinions he trusted) a rough draft of his commencement speech, requesting we check it out. Without divulging any of the contents, let’s just say the class of 2016 will walk away educated, inspired and entertained – as everyone who is in the audience for a Rave production is upon leaving.

Throughout the years, George and I stayed close. For the record, no one is better at relationship building than George. We reconnected at USC in the early 1990s. He was the one who encouraged me to join the National Speakers Association which I did around the turn of the century (although I no longer am a member). George also helped me (as I did him) when, during our time at WSU he’d receive requests to speak at high school banquets throughout the state. The state of Washington consists of somewhere in the neighborhood of 70,000 square miles so, try as he might, there was no way he could fulfill all the requests.

I got the majority of these engagements for reasons beyond George not being able to accommodate everybody. First of all, I was the only single guy on the staff and when there was a chance for the other assistants to be with the families, they relished the time at home. It definitely wasn’t a matter of money because these engagements didn’t pay. Finally, I thought this would help my career – and I actually liked speaking.

One such opportunity came from Washtucna, a small town in eastern Washington. When the request came in, there was little doubt which coach was to be honored. Making $1550 for the year, a free meal and mileage money were a good supplement to my meager existence. As I drove into town, I noticed a sign that said, “Welcome to Washtucna, population 311.

When I entered the gym, which had been transformed into the banquet hall for the evening, the athletics director approached me and thanked me for coming. We made some small talk and, before too long, the room was packed. I was surprised at the turn out, as it wasn’t like the team had a championship season or anything extraordinary. Apparently, it was just a group of special people who had bonded and were proud of their youngsters. “How many people are here tonight?” I asked him.

He said there would be 250 people in attendance. I always like to begin with an observation to show people I can be extemporaneous, as well as deliver a prepared speech. I came up with what I thought was a really funny line – although, after saying it, I was in a minority – of one. “When I drove into town, I noticed your population is 311. (Your AD) advised me there will be 250 people here tonight, which leaves me with one question:

“Where are the other 61 of you?”

I can’t begin to tell you how much I wished I’d run that line by others before deciding it was a good opener.

The Dilemma of Big Time College Recruiting

Friday, May 6th, 2016

A news report out of Tuscaloosa announced that Alabama’s defensive line coach, Bo Davis submitted his resignation last week. Davis, who was the Tide’s top-ranked recruiter (named the SEC’s Recruiter of the Year by 247Sports), resigned after he committed recruiting violations. The infractions were for making multiple out-of-state contacts with recruits during a dead period, compounded by lying to the NCAA investigators when confronted with the accusations.

Davis had coached at UA for three years, beginning with the 2007 season. In 2010 he left to work at Texas, then returned to the Tide staff for the 2014 and 2015 seasons. Why would a guy jeopardize a half a million dollar a year job (actually, $475,000, but factoring in the cost of living in Tuscaloosa, it can safely be rounded up) for a few recruits? At the best football school in the nation? Was it that he didn’t think he could land the guys without an extra contact or two? Did he think he was above the archaic rules? Were his competitive juices flowing and he just didn’t want to get beat on big time recruits? Or was it that he’d developed such a close relationship with the kids that it didn’t seem like violating NCAA rules but simply showing genuine concern for future student-athletes? (For another blog on the subject, check out my 3/13/16 post).

Each year coaches must take – and pass – a recruiting rules test or else they are not allowed to recruit. Breaking the rules, though, can always be justified. In many cases, the rules appear absurd and nit picky. Often, when the smoke clears, the coach who was the perpetrator is slapped on the wrist, e.g. not being allowed to recruit off campus during the next recruiting period. However, when lying is involved, the NCAA is just like anyone who feels a trust has been violated – and the fangs come out and the punishment is severe.

If there was video surveillance on every high school campus or recruits’ homes, the public would be shocked at how many other coaches might be acting in a similar manner to Davis. It’s been said so many times that college football at the FBS level is big business that it’s become a cliche. But it’s much greater than big business. Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, IBM, GE, Apple, AT&T, Wells Fargo, Amazon – we’ve heard of all of them. Yet, other than the company’s employees and stockholders, who really roots for them? Alabama football, Kentucky basketball, Oregon track & field, Miami baseball, Iowa wrestling, USC tennis – they, and hundreds of schools like them, have fanatical bases of supporters throughout the country and the world – and score is kept, and publicized for every contest.

College football recruiting is a sport in and of itself. People make money rating scholastic players – teenagers - and fans (grown up individuals) subscribe to these publications so they can discuss, argue, call talk shows, text, email, blog, instagram, snapchat, whatever the latest means of communication is – about the successes and failures of the kids who signed a piece of paper (actually, two of them) with their favorite university. Before any of them ever put on a uniform!

Bo Davis is the latest coach (athletics department employee) to be caught by college football’s governing body. He’s not the only one and he certainly won’t be the last so don’t be surprised when another story pops up regarding a coach losing his (or her) job for violating the rules. No matter who it is, however, each situation seems to end in the exact manner Davis’ did – with a release from the head coach (or AD) that says:

“We appreciate the contributions he made to the program here and we wish him the very best in the future.”

Barkley Analysis of Cavs and Hawks Was on the Right Track

Thursday, May 5th, 2016

The Cleveland-Atlanta tussle last night, for all intents and purposes, was over shortly after the opening tip. The Cavs knocked down 18 three-pointers in the first half (an NBA record) and 25 of them (also a record) for the game which they won 123-98 – a contest that wasn’t nearly as close as the score would indicate. When the final horn sounded, what came next was, duh, the post game show.

It’s just that this post game show is different than all others. Professionalism is thrown out the window when Ernie Johnson, Kenny Smith, Charles Barkley and Shaquille O’Neal perform – and, make no mistake about it, what they do is a performance. Don’t be fooled, though, the trio of former players know the game, its strategies, the feelings of players – during the long regular season and playoffs. Both Kenny and Shaq have multiple championships on their resumes and Charles and Shaq are Hall of Famers. E.J. somehow keeps the ship afloat, although his charge is constantly challenged by his three sidekicks who seem to be auditioning for roles in Barbershop every time the red light goes on. That means the audience gets to hear analysis from superstars as well as a winning point guard who thoroughly understands the ins and outs of hoops, not only from his career as a pro but as one of the late Dean Smith’s team leaders. The theme of the show went in several directions, possibly because the game they were supposed to analyze was a 25-point blowout (I shouldn’t say “possibly” since Charles mentioned it over and over, as if the teams involved owed it to the TNT crew to provide them with an exciting contest to dissect).

One point, in particular, was Charles mentioning the Cavs’ deciding to go after the NBA record for threes in a game (even though they subbed out the starters). This move, to Chuck, was the Cavs disrespecting the Hawks. With the crowd loving every minute and encouraging the home town club to launch away (since the outcome had been determined long before and they needed to get their money’s worth), Cleveland’s bench missed one three pointer after another, until they finally knocked a few down, the fans roaring with each until the new record was achieved.

At the outset of the post game show, Charles came out swinging, insisting that Atlanta “take someone out” – translated as “touch someone up.” He went on and on, claiming the game was over early and the Hawks allowed themselves to be humiliated when the bench from Cleveland kept hoisting threes in an attempt to break the record. At first, Ernie was shocked, repeating “take someone out” as if Chuck was suggesting he would have pulled a Tony Soprano on a Cavs’ player. Kenny was also somewhat incredulous, saying it wasn’t the players’ fault they wanted the record – for their fans if not themselves. Since it dealt with knocking the hell out of somebody, Shaq agreed with Charles’ assessment. This went on for quite a while with E.J. and Kenny advocating for basketball only to be played, since it was, after all, a basketball game, not MMA. Barkley continued making his point, i.e. that a message needed to be sent for the next game, but simply repeating himself rather than attempting to use any other words or examples.

While the segment dragged on entirely too long, turning into a great deal of repetition, it was better than the inside jokes the foursome turned to at the close of the show which, undoubtedly were hilarious, just that no one in the viewing audience had a clue why or, even, what the subject matter was.

My brazen presumption is Charles could have helped his cause immensely if he’d had used the following comparison:

“The Cavaliers were playing the part of the Globetrotters, while the Hawks were, willingly, acting as the Washington Generals.”

You’re Never Too Old to Make a Fool of Yourself

Monday, May 2nd, 2016

For the past week my wife, Jane, and I have been in Colorado. I caught up with a former colleague of mine – and his family – while she got to spend time with a friend of hers from decades gone by. The main purpose of my mission was to receive treatment for my chronic pain.

However, this blog is not about the friends my wife and I reconnected with, nor is it about the technique I experienced (which, to date, has afforded some relief). Rather, it’s about how the week long trip ended. The story of what happened during the week might be told in a subsequent post but, for now, allow me to elevate each reader one spot on the intelligence ladder.

A brief history first: last December, Jane and I flew to Oregon to watch younger son, Alex, play in a basketball tournament south of Portland. Because Alex’s team, Cal State Monterey Bay, played on the coast on Wednesday prior to the tourney which was scheduled for Friday-Saturday, instead of going back to Fresno, we drove up the coast and flew out of San Jose.

We parked in Parking Lot 6, which was located next to the terminal that was for Alaska Airlines flights (short term Parking Lot 5 is in between the two). A shuttle bus picked us up at one of two designated stops and took us to the terminal. Short and sweet – and if I remember correctly, the charge was $8/day.

For our trip that began a week ago Sunday, I drove past one terminal, then proceeded past the other (there are only two) to the parking lot. I glanced at the sign for Parking Lot 5 which had an hourly rate (and a maximum rate of $30/day). Immediately beyond was the entrance to Parking Lot 6. I pulled in, went to the end and saw a spot right on the end of the row, one I’d never forget (because as we get older, our memories . . .).

We got our luggage and went to the area for the shuttle bus to pick us up but, with no bus in sight, and us having plenty of time, remarked to Jane that we should just walk. Rolling our suitcases along (where were suitcases on wheels when I was recruiting in college and had a suitcase, hanging bag, brief case, portable VCR – highlight videos were allowed but many families couldn’t afford VCRs – an overcoat, the book I was reading and the day’s newspaper), we went to the terminal. Our first problem was we were flying United and all of their flights went out of the other terminal. We trekked on to the next one (about 1/4 mile hike).

On our return, naturally, we were at the same terminal. When I asked where to catch the shuttle for Parking Lot 6, no one was quite sure but one fellow said I should take the blue shuttle. It was around 9:00 pm and no blue shuttle was in sight. “Let’s walk,” I bravely said. 1/4 of a mile or so later, we past Parking Lot 5 and rolled into Parking Lot 6. I was telling Jane that I’d remembered where the car was because of the spot on the end. Until I got near that area and . . . everything looked different. Our car was nowhere in sight.

Hmm, what’s a guy to do? I was certain I had parked there. I knew it. Yet, everything looked different. I’ve seen enough TV shows to realize that changes can be made but, come on, who did I think I was? I took out my car key and began to press the unlock button – to listen for the sound that would reveal the car’s whereabouts. Nothing. Then I realized it was an absurd move because I knew that wasn’t where I’d parked the car.

I went to the shuttle area and picked up the phone to let someone other than Jane know of our predicament. The phone was dead. Maybe the TV idea wasn’t so farfetched. Nah. I began to call AAA but thought of what I’d say – “Hi, I’m a AAA member. I’m having car trouble. I’m at the San Jose airport parking lot – and – can’t find my car!”

Then, I remembered being in a similar situation about 10 years ago, coincidentally at the San Jose airport. As was the case on this trip, the plane tickets were about half the price from San Jose as they would have been from Fresno, so we flew out of San Jose. Alex was in a basketball tournament in 7th or 8th grade and we ran into traffic. We were hustling to catch the shuttle bus, get to the terminal, check in, go through security, get to the gate and make the flight – that I had completely forgotten where we’d parked. Since then, I have never left a parking lot without knowing where the car was.

What bailed us out back then was after the attendant at the parking lot heard my story, she said that if I could tell her my license plate number, they could locate my car through video surveillance and computer (something or other). I was so frazzled I have no idea exactly what she said except a guy came around in an airport vehicle and drove me to car. Jane found such a gentleman. First I reported the dead phone. He explained that since the beginning of the month, they no longer shuttled people to the terminal since it was so close. Huh.

He drove me around the lot. He felt that, since I was sure I was in Lot 6, the spot at the end of the row might have been my mind playing tricks on me. Finally, I requested he call into wherever and check my license plate. After a few minutes – it must have been a busy night for people needing such information – a woman said she’d located my car. It was in Lot 5. Since I had looked there as well, I was suspicious until he said he’d drive me to it. In fact, I had checked Lot 5 – but not all of Lot 5. Sure enough, right on that corner spot, was what I’d been searching for. I gave the guy a $20 bill for saving the night and for all the trouble I’d caused him. He refused but I insisted, thinking of all the alternatives to the evening if we couldn’t find the car. Plus, when he retells the story, at least I’ll be a grateful schmuck.

I drove it over to where Jane was keeping the luggage company, we loaded up and, breathing a sigh of relief, headed out for the 2 1/2 hour ride to Fresno. You can imagine how much greater of an idiot I felt, when putting the card into the slot, the machine read, “$210.” For parking!

As I learned long ago:

“The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits.”

Random Thoughts from Rockets-Warriors Game 3

Friday, April 22nd, 2016

As mentioned in yesterday’s post, this blog will return on Monday, May 2.

First, let’s discuss the Houston Rockets performance. Last night they might have done something they’ll wind up regretting, i.e. they exposed themselves. They showed that they can give great effort, that they can play as a team and that James Harden and Dwight Howard can not only (when they want) co-exist but be the dynamic duo everyone had hoped they would be (well, at least for a half). The Rockets also displayed that year-long habits that doing little to none of the above can nearly doom a team – even when they are in total control of the game.

As for their opponents, the Golden State Warriors showed they can battle back from a big deficit – on the road, that when they actually run their offense they can score no matter what personnel group is on the floor and that no other NBA team can come close to the depth their roster affords them.

However, they also opened the basketball world’s eyes in ways fans could only have imagined this season. One example is their all too often disregard for the ball leads to turnovers that translate into easy points for the opposition. They chuck the rock around the gym like it’s an exhibition intramural game. In an astonishing turn of events, they let it be known that “iso” is a part of their offensive vocabulary – and not the kind that are called from the bench.

All of that said, they still only lost by a single digit. Which is exactly the point. Those were the kind of games the Warriors are known for winning. That when things aren’t going their way, they understand that if they play sloppy, even uninspired, basketball they still somehow find a way to leave the arena with a W.

Ah, don’t worry, says Dub Nation, normalcy will set in when Steph comes back. Not to be a Chicken Little, but wasn’t it that group of players who said they weren’t concerned about risking injury when going after the Bulls’ record? But this is different, the Warriors fans claim. Curry could be messing around with his main means of employment – a guy who, with his impeccable demeanor and lifestyle can positively impact so many – if he remains healthy and continues his illustrious career.

When he “tweaked” his ankle, he tried to give it a go in the second half but decided the lead was such that his guys could hold on without him – so he could be ready for the next battle. Then, he gamely attempted to go through his intense workout (most players, in the same situation, would say they wouldn’t be able to play – but give the reason as fatigue after performing his pregame routine). He was a no-go. Same with Game 3. So what? It was a game Golden State thought they could win without him and, with the fragile state of the Rockets, that would mean they’d most likely be chanting the break the huddle mantra Charles Barkley predicted at last night’s halftime: “1,2,3, Cancun!”

The Warriors claim Curry’s MRI was negative. Should that not be the case, we’d have the makings of Watergate, Monicagate, Bountygate and Deflategate all over again. For the good of the game, and more importantly, for Steph Curry and everything he stands for, let’s hope it wasn’t anything serious.

As far as the Warriors’ chances of repeating, they desperately need a healthy Steph Curry. Without him:

“There’s a good chance they don’t get out of the second round.”

Charles Barkley Is Just as Unfiltered Today as He Was Five Years Ago

Thursday, April 21st, 2016

This everyday blogging deal ain’t that easy. Tomorrow’s post will be the last for a while (I plan on resuming on or around Monday, May 2) as I’m undergoing medical procedures which, I hope, will give me some help from the chronic pain I’ve been experiencing for the past 14 years. Some days I find that nothing happens to move me enough to comment on it.

Since I’ve been blogging since 2007, there are a couple thousand or so previous entries to “fill in” when my mind goes blank. What did make an impression on me last night, as it does every time it’s on TV, is TNT’s Inside the NBA. A close friend made a comment that Charles Barkley had to be everybody’s favorite on that show – mainly because he opens his mouth and lets the words fly. Granted, there are occasions when the Chuckster makes comments, the sanity of which are questioned by his fellow analysts, but even then, under “occupation” on his taxes, he ought to put “entertainer.” What follows is a blog I posted five years ago. Read it, then ask yourself how much of a filter has Charles acquired over the years.

Charles Barkley once did a commercial in which he said he was no role model.  Events throughout his life back up this belief.  He has got to be one of the most irreverent characters of this, or any other, generation.

First of all, he, admittedly, was never a serious student. On several occasions, he’s quipped, “No, I don’t have a college degree, but I have lots of people working for me who do.” While no Board of Education wants to hire him as a commencement speaker, the line is very funny – and true.

Then, there was the time Charles was pulled over by a policeman in Phoenix for some infraction – speeding, running a light or stop sign, suspicion of drunken driving – and he not only told the cop that he was on his way to get the greatest oral sex from a prostitute but that, if the officer let him out of the ticket, Charles would tattoo the cop’s name on his butt. People love the guy. Hey, he is a classic.

Barkley is the same way in his commentary. Last night, he referred to Chucky Brown, a former player who used to (try to) guard Charles as a “limo guy.” When his #1 foil, Ernie Johnson, asked what a “limo guy” was, Barkley said that he was the type of guy you wanted to see guarding you so much, you’d send a limo for him to make sure he got to the arena.

Earlier, he asked his other straight man, Kenny Smith, what date was scheduled for the fifth game of the Miami-Philadelphia series, after the Heat took a commanding 2-0 lead by blowing out the 76ers. When the Jet asked him why he wanted to know, Charles said he was going to make plans to be somewhere else because he knew they’d be off that night.

Another Barkley-ism came following a Gatorade commercial which starred his friend Dwyane Wade. In the commercial, Wade remarked how he drinks the third of the Gatorade trio of drinks following a game because he needs to replenish for the next contest. After the commercial aired, Barkley said, as only the Chuckster can, “You know what I think of that. Gatorade don’t help you if you suck. I’m pretty sure D-Wade could drink Pabst Blue Ribbon and still be great.” Let it be noted that Gatorade is a sponsor and Pabst is not.

The answer to the question, “Why does Sir Charles say the outrageous things he does?” might be found in the quote from Richard Needham:

“People who are brutally honest get more satisfaction out of the brutality than out of the honesty.” 

How Did Teams Ever Win Before Analytics?

Tuesday, April 19th, 2016

Charles Barkley is known for blunt, honest analysis when making comments for TNT on their NBA studio show. He pulled no punches with his feelings on how to build an NBA team using analytics. Chuck is usually a black and white guy on hot button topics. He loves something or he hates it.

Analytics has entered the world of professional sports, first in baseball with the publishing of the book, Moneyball. An idea is only as good as its success rate. The Oakland A’s won without spending the money other MLB teams did (because they didn’t have it and they weren’t allowed to take a sabbatical), mainly by using a different evaluation tool, one that had never been used in baseball.

Baseball, more than any other professional sport, leans on – and clings to – tradition. The “eye test” was baseball’s best method of evaluation and the teams that drafted best usually were the ones who had the most talented scouts. In most cases, these were old timers, lifers, who’d been around the game for decades, could look at a prospect and compare him to some major leaguer from the present or past. The A’s modernized the way teams scouted, eschewing the old model, while upsetting “true baseball people” in the process. A different set of stats were employed.

Success is an interesting dynamic. Most often, people and companies that achieve it have done so by, to use the term that’s become so popular it’s now a cliche – thinking outside the box. Once that person or company carves a niche in the market, most folks study, i.e. try to copy, what the successful newcomer is doing. Yet, didn’t that group rise to the top by not copying what others were doing but attempting something different that, for whatever reason, they felt should work?

Obviously, there’s a balance between trying to duplicate someone else’s ideas (remember the movie, Multiplicity?) and incorporating some of what they do with the elements of your organization that you like. Arguably, the most successful NBA franchise over the past 20 years has been the San Antonio Spurs. The Spurs got good when David Robinson, not exactly chosen due to analytics, was selected with the #1 overall pick in the NBA draft. They got real good when another #1 selection, Tim Duncan, joined the squad.

Other players on the Spurs teams throughout the years will tell anyone who will listen (and many of those who will not) that those two guys – with their skills, demeanor, unselfishness and work ethic – combined with the coaching prowess of Gregg Popovich and his staff, are the reasons behind the Spurs’ lasting success. An organization like the Spurs is one that will take advantage of anything that will increase its chances of winning. They bought into analytics – without changing any of their core values – and incorporated ideas such as the corner three-point shot is the game’s most efficient and keeping players, especially aging ones, rested.

What many people, certainly including Barkley, have a difficult time grasping is, are those two concepts about analytics or, simply, common sense? Because the three-point line is so much father back than in high school or college, it needed to be tapered or else it would intersect with the sideline. Therefore, the line becomes parallel with the sideline 14′ from the baseline, making the corner three a shorter shot, yet still worth three points.

As far as resting older players, an NBA year is 82 games long (not including exhibitions), with back-to-back contests on several occasions throughout the regular season. It is played by the best athletes in the world and takes a physical toll on a player’s body, whether it’s fighting through screens, getting hits on drives to the basket, having masses of humanity in a confined area near the basket, fighting for the same rebound or just the pounding from running up and down the court. Wouldn’t it stand to reason, since the most important thing is winning in the playoffs (which come after the regular season), that the best players be rested rather than bruised and beaten down? Maybe if home court advantage is at stake (or if the team is trying to break the all-time records for regular season wins – and its core is made up of young guys), an exception can be made but, keep in mind, if an owner feels the chances of winning in the playoffs is compromised, coaches and front office people had better keep their resumes updated.

In addition, a couple of measurements analytics can’t give are emotion and chemistry - which, combined with talent, comprise a winning team. Ironically, in a survey done regarding analytics in professional sports, the lowest rated NBA organization was the New York Knicks, while the top rated one was the Philadelphia 76ers. It appears that can be used to prove analytics works – or it doesn’t.

While it certainly is useful in many instances:

“Just remember, you can’t spell analytics without A-N-A-L.”

Similarities & Differences Between March Madness and the NBA Playoffs

Monday, April 18th, 2016

Which is better – the NCAA tournament or the NBA playoffs? Before anyone votes, let’s keep in mind that, other than the goals of putting the ball through the hoop at one end and trying to prevent your opponent from doing the same on theirs, the post seasons of each are vastly different.

Nearly half of the college game’s tourney is made up of automatic qualifiers (32 of 68). To gain entry into the NBA playoffs, the teams must be in the top eight of the west or the east meaning that, although the ninth (or tenth) club on one side might be better than the (seventh or) eighth on the other, usually the 16 best teams get in.

In Division I college play, never has a #16 seed beaten a #1, yet on eight occasions a #15 seed has beaten a #2. In the NBA playoffs, there have been five times a #8 seed has toppled a #1. The reason #16 has never beaten #1 is because of sheer numbers, i.e. #16 seeds are the 65th, 66th, 67th and 68th best teams in the tournament. Not in the nation – just the tournament because, invariably, there was a bad team in a bad conference that caught fire (or a break or two, e.g. better teams get upset, injury to an opponent’s top player), won its post season tournament, and with it, the automatic bid – and plays one of the top four teams in the country. There are no automatic bids into the NBA playoffs. Tanking does not apply to teams that can make the playoffs, only those vying for the 28th, 29th or 30th slot.

It is true that there are many more upsets, i.e. lower seeds beating higher ones, in the NCAA tourney than there are upsets in the NBA but that is due to three words: best of seven. When the major upsets happen in college (not the #9 over #8 or even the #7 over #10), it’s because either the guys on the lower-rated team caught lightning in a bottle, played the game of their lives or the guys on the favorite stunk it up. Or all of the above. For one night.

Five of this weekend’s eight NBA playoff games (if you like competitive basketball) were absolute torture to watch. And there’s more to come (as many as three more such games in each match up). The drama is greater in college because it’s win or go home. In the NBA it’s win or lose, play again. And again. And again. . . So for drama, the college game trumps the NBA. But as far as sheer talent, seeing players do things you marvel at (but cannot be duplicated in the backyard), there’s nothing like the NBA and the best athletes in the world.

Luckily, we don’t have to choose one or the other to watch. We couldn’t handle such drama/excellence all at once. Maybe that’s why the basketball gods put them months apart. Or maybe it was so each could make more money.

So instead of comparing, why not make a choice that none of the candidates running for president have mentioned:

“Be thankful.”