Jack’s Blog

Taking charges was once hailed as a talent - something only the toughest players would do, the guys who would give up their body against a massive beast driving to the hoop.  A charge would be called and teammates would rush to help their brave man to his feet, while the color commentator would gush with compliments.  “Taking a charge is as important as hitting a big shot, more so because of the momentum swing it gives a team.”

Seldom, however, did it seem the superstar made this defensive move.  There were reasons for it.  As much as players like to hear their names and get patted on the back, the risk vs. reward for the charge was often too high, e.g. it could wind up as an injury, possibly even a career-ending one.  It was said the guys who were taking charges were doing so because they didn’t have any (other) skill.  Or it was a way for a washed-up veteran to hang on to a roster spot.  Some guys who performed this defensive maneuver wound up with cult hero status.  Dennis Rodman was the president of the club.  On the flip side, Kobe Bryant called it “a chump move.”

The essence of the move was to try to get the referee to buy not only that there was contact, but that it was excessive.  Even if the offensive player barely touched the defender.  As things tend to work in the NBA, if this move worked for one side, why not the other?  Soon fans were watching games in which a dribbler coming off a screen where the screener’s defender stepped out and the ball handler made like he was mugged.  Or a guy taking to the hole and flails when a defender nudged him.

Like anything else, at first, it was kind of slick; then it became annoying; finally the act got tired.  The once proud move became known as “flopping.”  Whether done at the offensive or defensive end of the floor.  Everybody started to complain about it and by everybody, we mean coaches (always the first to complain - something about gaining/losing an advantage), players, referees, fans, even play-by-play men and color commentators.  The bitchin’ got all the way to the commissioner’s office and one thing David Stern doesn’t care for is negative publicity.  Truth be told, he nor his advisers didn’t care for flopping either.

Public opinion got so bad the league did what it seems to do best.  It decided to legislate against it.  Call it the “anti-flopping” rule.  What happens when rules are broken by NBA players and coaches?  Warnings, fines and suspensions, those are what.  While it seems like a means of cutting down, if not eliminating the problem, it becomes another way for players to lose money.  First-time offenders get a warning, second-time is a $5K fine, naturally increasing to possible suspension on number six.

So what happens when there’s a disagreement between players and the league?  Don’t tell me another strike.  No, that’s just the last resort and those involved in the last one claim it will be just that - the last one.  Prior to any action (I imagine including the kind that takes place on the floor), the players’ union needs to get involved.  It is currently claiming that implementing the rule would be tantamount to an unfair labor practice.  Particularly when it involves an unclear rule.  The players’ union allege the whole problem is an overreaction by the commish’s office.  Which means they’re upset they weren’t contacted first before their league made the rule.  Someone needs to explain to these millionaires (and, contrary to the football players who say only a few of them are that highly paid, basketballers really are all millionaires) how being an employee works.  OK, only 95% of them.

Imagine if the players had involvement on this decision?  I wonder who the player reps would be?  Shane Battier?  Anderson Varejeo?  Manu Ginobli?  Derek Fisher?  Paul Pierce?  Maybe Kobe could argue for both sides.  It should be stated for the record:

“Be careful what you wish for; you may just get it.”

After a year on my self-imposed DL, I’m back and ready to entertain, share my views and stimulate thought with the reader.

Game One of the NBA finals is in the books and reactions are exactly as expected.  The Heat jump out to a 13 point lead in the first half at OKC, only to have the Thunder catch and pass them in a 105-94 victory.  Even the “experts’ ” opinions were quite predictable, e.g. Spoelstra must start Bosh, LeBron must guard Durant, cross matches kill them in transition and then - the beauty of them all from none other than Mr. Know-It-All himself, Jon Barry (the mastery of all things basketball and grating personality must be inherited).  He made the statement that 13 first half points by Shane Battier were “fool’s gold,” that the Thunder have no problem with that.

What’s so preposterous is that, as the game is going on, the shots Battier is making are exactly the ones all the prognosticators are saying -  before the game - that he would have to make if the Thunder force the ball out of the hands of James and Wade.  At the outset of the game, Jeff Van Gundy (arguably the best commentator for people who know basketball) made the statement that when he coached Battier (at Houston), he had complete trust in him because, of everybody on the roster, Battier understood the game plan and what the coaches wanted better than the rest.

In last night’s match up, this was evident in the first half.  Battier was taking shots that were “his shots,” shots in his wheelhouse tht he was confident of making, shots the offense was designed for should the Thunder guard in the manner they did.  Imagine if he hadn’t taken them?  “Battier needs to step up and take those shots.  They’re what the defense is giving him.“  Or one of the most overused terms, Battier simply was “letting the game come to him.”

I have a tough time thinking OKC’s game plan is to let Battier open enough from three to measure shots.  Now, they may have told their guys if it means helping on James and Wade or staying closer to Battier to chose the former.  If so, they may re-think that because I can’t believe they want to give Battier uncontested threes.  Joel Anthony maybe, but not Shane Battier.

Had the Heat gone on to win, I think post game remarks would have sounded like: “I know the Thunder have a history of letting a team jump out on them and than kicking it into gear but, hey, this is the NBA finals so they’d better change whatever their pregame routine is or this could be a short series.”  Or “When will Russell Westbrook realize the Thunder’s offense needs to go through Durant and KD should be taking the most shots?”  Or “Eric Spoelstra’s decision to cross match and putting LeBron on Perkins, freeing James to roam on defense, was nothing short of brilliant” (which was how the move looked in the first half).  Or the one that fits all in this series “The Thunder better work on their transition defense.  The Heat get way too many fast break points.”  First of all, if anybody thinks there’s a way to stop either of these to score in the open floor, short of making that priorities number 1, 2 and 3, I’m sure both coaching staffs would be delighted to hear from you.

Second guessing has been around since games were invented.  “Dr. Naismith, don’t you think something bigger than a peach basket would make the game more fun?”  It gives us something to do for hours days after the competition has ended.

Everyone ought to be able to express whatever opinions they want - although the Internet has taken this to levels that occasionally cross the line.  Just make sure you keep in mind the quote:

“Don’t take yourself so seriously.  No one else does.”

Every fan in America, and probably some people who don’t consider themselves fans, have heard the warning: “You’ve got to come to play every night!” 

If there’s anyone who doesn’t understand what that means, if you saw yesterday’s one-sided game between LA and Houston, you do now.  First off, the game should have been one-sided.  The Rockets big man, Yao Ming, played the final few agonizing minutes of Game 3 with what turned out to be a fractured foot.  Should anybody question the heart of Yao (he seems to constantly miss games - regular season and playoff - each year due to some injury or another).

The guy is 7′6″ tall and the pounding his feet, knees and hips must take during the course of a season has to be exponentially worse than “normal” sized people.  He’s a dominant low post player (one of a vanishing breed) on offense and just as much of a factor as a shot blocker/changer on D.  Plus, he’s the best free throw shooter on the team!  When I was a kid, if a center (a guy 6′6″) made a free throw, it was cause for a parade.  Yao makes around 77% of his FT’s - and he’s a foot taller than the giants I played with and against.

So, without Yao and Tracy McGrady (who?), the Lakers prepared (or did they) for yesterday’s contest in Houston.  It’s a stange occurrence in sports, that when a seemingly unconquerable event takes place, two oddities often happen simultaneously.

One is the team who benefits from the tragedy doesn’t take the task at hand as seriously as they would have had the playing field not been suddenly tilted in their favor.  The other thing is the team struck with the misfortune somehow pulls together.  It doesn’t happen all the time - naturally - or the lucky team would realize the need to be just as focused, and then, this phenomenon wouldn’t occur because of the increased awareness.

Many people on the periphery fuel the fire by simply stating the obvious.  In this particular case, everyone I heard talking about the game, especially those who report it for a living, said things like, “Well, the Rockets played well, but now there’s no chance for them to compete, much less beat, the Lakers without Yao.  Houston’s low post presence on offense has been taken away and on the other end, LA will be able attack the basket at will, knowing there’s no shot blocker there.”

This is not a criticism.  I heard what was being said and my reaction to it was, “Duh.”  What reporters, both in the print and electronic media, were typing and saying was so apparent it almost wasn’t even necessary to mention.

The problem is that the Lakers heard, and felt, it too.  They knew how much more difficult it was to play the Rockets with Yao than without him and watching television, listening to a radio or reading a paper only confirmed what they already were fairly certain of - that they were already being moved on - in ink - to the next round.

The dynamic on the other side is infinitely more interesting.  If the team’s leaders are strong minded individuals (a category that would definitely include Ron Artest and Shane Battier) and they have the ability to, not only summon up their own courage and inner strength to meet what looks like an overwhelming situation, but affect their teammates - some of them not knowing they had such fortitude - in a similar fashion, the team’s culture immediately changes.

Prior to the game, if you heard Artest’s comments, you would have thought it was an even game, a fair contest, now that Yao was out.  There was no concern in his voice, other than he felt bad that Yao couldn’t be part of the on court celebration.  Then the game started and Battier started knocking done “I-told-you-so” threes and the rest of the Rockets seemed to say, “No wonder those guys are considered the heart and soul of this franchise.”  

What ensued was a Rockets’ blowout.  Now it’s Kobe Bryant’s and Derek Fisher’s turn to do the same for their team.  As the former head of the Leadership Institute at USC, Warren Bennis, would always say: 

“A leader is a purveyor of hope.”