Jack’s Blog

After the Orlando Magic absolutely destroyed the Atlanta Hawks in an elimination game in Orlando, Charles Barkley, in his postgame comments said the Hawks made a big mistake.  Sir Charles said that, although the Hawks were up 3-1 in the series and heading to Atlanta for game 6, they never should have mailed it in. They needed to keep it close because they had the Magic doubting whether they could actually beat them.  Allowing the Magic to blow them out gave Orlando confidence they didn’t have.

The Memphis Grizzlies had the San Antonio Spurs on the ropes in game 5 of their series, caught a break when Manu Ginobli hit an apparent game tying three-pointer but, following review, it showed he had his toe on the line, making it only a two, giving the Griz a one-point lead with a couple seconds to go.  Two free throws later, with noly a couple seconds to go, they chose not to foul and got burned by a three at the buzzer, subsequently losing the “sure win” - in an elimination game!

The question posed to the talking head former pros in the postgame analysis was about what the pshychological effect would be on Memphis.  The overwhelming opinion was the favorite phrase. “They need to have a short memory.”

Yet, both the Hawks and the Grizzlies managed to defeat their opponents in the next game.  True, each victory was on their home court, but the point is a simple one.  And it’s surprising former players wouldn’t verbalize it in this manner.  One the ball is tipped, no one is thinking about the previous game - or any other for that matter - but the one they’re competing in . . . because of the total focus necessary to compete. 

Far be it from me to overrule the experts, i.e. the guys who were actually in the arena, but the extreme increase in the level of the intensity during playoff games requires everything a player has.  Watching these guys, it’s so evident that nothing could possibly be going through their minds but the task at hand.  

How can I be so sure?  Naturally I can’t but to even think a professional basketball player would be thinking of a past game in the middle of a present one just defies credulity.  It’s just so surprising that the guys who were there don’t see it that way.  

 Maybe this enigma can be summed up by Burton Hillis who said:

“There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons that sound good.

College players are often criticized for coming out too early.  The University of Washington’s Jake Locker experienced the polar opposite.  He had become the poster child for staying too long.  During the 2009 football season, the (not-so) experts were predicting Locker to be the first overall pick in the following draft.  Jack snaked everyone when he decided to return to the U for another year.

After the so-so season the Huskies, led by Locker, had in 2010, his decision appeared to be one of the classic bonehead moves of all time.  The same guys who had him pegged as numero uno now backpedaled and began listing his inferior skills that the season had exposed.  He was projected as a second round pick, meaning he’d earn a pretty good living, but it also meant he lost out on a fortune.

Before coming down too hard on him, consider what has ultimately (until today, anyway) happened to Locker.  Even better, think about what he didn’t have to face.  From all indications, Jake Locker is a reasonably intelligent individual.  He must have weighed his options and, for whatever reason - he didn’t think he was ready to play professionally, he enjoyed college life so much and realized he would be drafted the following year, or some other unknown factor - he decided to continue his college career.  For a while, it certainly was tough - hearing how wrong everyone had been about him the previous year, that he was overrated, that he couldn’t do whatever the pundits claimed he did better than anybody a year ago.

Consider what would have been his plight had he left school last year.  Although we’ll never know, chances are he would have struggled mightily in the NFL and would have been booed to an even greater extent, if for no other reason than all the money he was making.  Instead, he patiently waited, obviously improved his game (especially the part about dealing with adversity) and still got picked eighth in the first round!  Sure, expectations of the Tennessee fans will be high (especially after they dumped Vicne Young who had a 30-17 record as their starting QB) but nowhere near what he would have had to endure had he selected #1 overall.

And he doesn’t fare so badly when it comes to the financial end.  Oh yeah, he lost a lot of money, but how much does a guy his age need?  It’s not like he’ll be on food stamps anytime soon.  In many people’s minds, he made the right decision, which seems to have been based on the adage:

“Pigs get fat; hogs get slaughtered.”     Â

In order for a company to be successful, everyone needs to be on the same page, pulling in the same direction.  With that thought in mind, it’s mind boggling that an NBA franchise, any franchise, can actually pull it off.  Or maybe it’s because . . . someone has to win.

Consider the makeup of an NBA organization:  First, there’s the owner.  If you’re not sure where the owner’s priority lies, allow me to direct you to the current NFL (and inevitable, future NBA) lockout.  It’s about money.

Then, there’s the front office, made up of, but not limited to, a president, a general manager, a director of player personnel and various other titles, e.g. scouts, assistants or vices.  Since in most cases, they are the ones who decide which players are drafted and which trades are made, i.e. which players are expendable and which others are necessary to acquire, their number one interest is in the production of those individuals.

Of course, there’s the coaching staff whose goal is simple: win - and as much as possible whether that means the whole thing (Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Heat - this year), advance as far as possible (the next level clubs) or just get into the playoffs (the rest).

Finally, there are the players.  What, you say, isn’t their goal to win too?  Yeah, but each guy is also more interested in getting his numbers.  They play for pay at this level.  Big pay.  Since their agents get 2 or 3 or 4% of that pay, well, suffice to say, that a small percentage of a very large number is significant.

A team that’s winning, say 55% of its games, team but has a combined salary deep into the luxury tax - and is not selling out - doesn’t have a happy owner. 

A club that’s winning and whose arena is packed on a nightly basis, but whose draft picks are buried deep on the bench and whose newly acquired players aren’t performing well (especially if those who were given up in the trade are excelling at their new locale) has front office personnel squirming.  It could get so bad that on a road trip to Toronto, after seeing the “Drink Canada Dry” billboard, they try to do just that.

Coaches are easy to figure out.  If their squad’s not winning, keep them away from sharp objects.  Particularly if they’re in the last year of their contract - or if another current or former “hot” coach owns a house in their city.

One night in the ’90s, when I was on the coaching staff at USC, I stopped by the Sports Arena to visit with a couple of NBA coaching  friends whose team was in town to play the Clippers.  The name of a Pac-10 player who was a notoriously bad defender was brought up and I asked them why a team wouldn’t simply isolate on that guy every time he was on the floor.  They told me that I didn’t understand the NBA game.  That strategy would never fly in their league because everybody needed their “touches.”  

“Even if it meant you’d win?” I asked.

They just laughed and told me to go diagram some new plays.

According to coaches I know who are in the league today, that way of thinking is even more prevalent as agents have become stronger influences toward their “clients.”

They’re the greatest athletes in the world but the product will never reach its maximum effectiveness as long as all the participants don’t adhere to the cliche:

“It’s amazing how much can be accomplished when nobody cares who gets the credit.”

       

Statistics have taken on a life of their own in the sporting world.  Due to the fans’ obsession with tidbits that can make them sound smart, there are stat guys who have made spewing such numbers their actual profession.  Numerous others simply have it as a time consuming hobby.

But there are some statistics that are, for lack of a better word - meaningless.  One such is a stat I saw last night when Kobe Bryant left the game in the final minutes of the Lakers’ comfortable victory over the New Orleans Hornets.

The stat didn’t take into account that, prior to the game, Kobe was a game time decision due to the ankle injury he sustained near the end of Game 4, yet during last night’s contest, he had two magnificent, inspiring dunks - one with each hand.  Instead, the statistician came up with the following: when Kobe was in the game, the score between the two teams was dead even but when he was on the bench, the Lakers outscored the Hornets by 15 points.  Therefore, a reasonable person would then conclude that LA would be better served by not playing Bryant!

I needn’t point out not only how foolish this thought is but that, if someone were to use it, the question posed to that person would be:

“How long have you been with this organization - not counting tomorrow?”

While I was traveling through Southern California this past weekend, I heard Stephen A. Smith’s radio show on 710 ESPN out of LA.  He made the statement, “Unless a kid is assured to be a top 5 pick, he should remain in school.”  Sounds like pretty sage advice until draft time and the kids who stayed in college - and completed their eligibility - are roasted for all their deficiencies.

Comments leveled at the graduate are not-so-hidden statements that sound like, “If he was any good, why didn’t he come out early?”  Charges of seniors who “might have already peaked” force many an underclassman to reconsider staying another season for fear of losing the “potential” label that some, if not all, franchises seem to be guided by.

When Tyler Hansbrough’s skills were dissected, he heard much of the above - plus “that Pycho T crap might work in college but the big boys play 82 games and guys are equally (or more) talented than he is.”  Once given the opportunity, the NBA found out “that Psych T crap” works well at their level too.  In fact, there are a number of players in the league whose sweat is so rare it could possibly cure a number of diseases.  Usually these guys don’t find this out until they get their orders to report to the D League.

Now it’s Kyle Singler’s turn to hear the negatives about his game, many of which might be true.  It’s just that without the intrigue factor of “will he or won’t he?” Singler will be forced to listen to how his stock has dropped.  AS with every player drafted, only time will tell whether he’s another Larry Bird or another Adam Morrison - or somewhere in between.

After looking at the past several drafts, the question isn’t whether someone should stay in school or not, it should be “is he ready for the NBA?”  Past drafts speak loud and clear.  The NBA is drafting younger and younger.  Staying in school might be great for guys who don’t have the requisite skills to be a pro.  Duh!  But there’s more.

Coming out early only works if a player is physically, mentally and emotionally ready for the rigors of NBA competition and life.  Especially physically.  For all the underclassmen drafted, there are many, many more who don’t get selected.  Of course, that doesn’t mean they would have gotten good enough had they stayed in school.

So the advice for guys who leave early should be to get a personal trainer - there are no shortage on those, although as with other professions, some are vastly superior to others - and improve their skills to maximize their opportunities, whether in the NBA or elsewhere.

That counsel seems rather blunt but, as a good coaching friend of mine just as bluntly says:

“College is not for everyone.”

Heading to SoCal for an AAU tourney sandwiched between a couple campus visits.  The blog will return Tuesday.

Kobe Bryant is deified by many and vilified by others.  Much of both he brings on himself.  His past transgressions, some quite hideous, have added fuel to the fire set by his detractors.  Although it’s difficult to set aside his misdeeds, when he’s to be evaluated as a basketball player, it’s difficult to find much fault in his game.

True, as a youngster in a man’s league, he waved off the greatest human screener, Karl Malone, in the All-Star game.  His play reeked of immaturity during his early seasons. Taking into account his age, it’s understandable.

The fact that his game has become such that he can lay claim to the title of the greatest active winner is a testimony to how serious he takes his profession.  His workouts (he refers to them as “blackouts”) have improved his enormous skill set beyond that of most, if not all, of his competitors.  Watching the “how-did-he-do-that” off-balance shots he makes - and realizing that he’s practiced every one of them innumerable times - is inspiring to wannabe superstars.

However, it was what he displayed in Game 2 of the current Lakers-Hornets series that showed the real player Kobe Bryant has always professed he wanted to be.  Chris Paul had torched LA in Game 1 for 33 points and 14 assists in the most talked about upset of the opening set of games.  While Kobe didn’t guard Paul the entire contest, there were occasions he took him on.

Kobe Bryant has an assortment of skills unlike any other, yet it was the defensive effort he displayed during the possessions he guarded CP3 that were astonishing.  He is blessed with long arms and extraordinary quickness for a guy his size.  But it was his unbelievable hustle, his “I-don’t-care-how-this-looks” performance that was so beautiful to watch.  At least for a former coach.

What made it all the more incredible was that there were times Paul beat him, yet he wouldn’t show any discouragement.  He only came back even more relentlessly the next time.  It was clear that the only thought in Bryant’s head was to do whatever was needed to win.  If he accomplishes his goal this time around, it will mean a sixth title for him and his teammates.

As Denis Waitley said:

“Winners are people with definite purpose in life.”

When Jason Kidd went to Cal, I was an associate head coach at USC.  Our schools had some memorable battles during his stay in Berkeley.  I recall we beat them in the Sports Arena with an incredible comeback, down six with under a minute to play.

I believe it was the same season in the game at Harmon Gym when Jason Kidd showed he understood how to do what needed to be done.  Our scouting report on Cal, as with every good report, contained their offensive plays and tendencies, defensive philosophy, fast break, special situations (side and under OBs, press attack, late game situations) and personnel descriptions.  Regarding Jason Kidd, it said, “Play him as a passer first, then a penetrater.  He’s not a good shooter, nor does he look to shoot often.  Space on him, keep him in front and let him shoot.  Very good defender, really knows how to play.”

On that day, our guys were following the game plan perfectly.  We were ahead relatively late in the game when Jason decided to veer from his normal routine.  He hit a three pointer.  After he did, we told our players to stick with our strategy, that shooting wasn’t his game.  Let him shoot.  After he hit back-to-back threes, the momentum totally changed and they ended up beating us.

Later that season, I was watching Cal in the NCAA tournament.  There was a play that separated Kidd from others who played the game.  Near the end of a close contest, with Cal clinging to a one or two point lead, the ball was tipped into the backcourt.  One of the Cal players was running it down.  Jason was trailing his teammate.  The Cal player managed to grab the ball but was running so hard it was evident he wasn’t going to be able to control it and stay in bounds.  Kidd ran directly at the referee, frantically signaling time out.  Since the Cal player had control of the ball when Kidd called the TO, the official granted his request and Cal maintained possession - and the lead - and won the game.

As happens in the coaching profession, by choice or by chance, several of the guys who’d gotten into coaching around the same time I did wound up in the NBA.  One of my NBA friends called one day to ask about the Pac-10 players.  When he asked me about Jason Kidd, I gave him a quote that summarized his game perfectly.  To this day, when my friend and I have occasion to speak, he still brings it up.

One of the most difficult aspects of coaching is to transfer the inordinate amount of knowledge coaches have to their players - without screwing them up in the process.  Every time I see Jason Kidd play, I know my evaluation was right on:

“Jason Kidd plays the game the way coaches would play if they had the skill.”

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, 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 guest 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 off, Charles would tattoo the cop’s name on his butt.  People love the guy.  Hey, it is classic.

Barkley is the same way in his commentary.  Last night, he referred to Chuckie 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’s 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.” 

Yesterday I blogged about how much more important one game in the NCAA tournament is compared to the NBA playoffs.  Here’s something to consider regarding the professional game.

While I was watching the Lakers-Hornets game, there was a rebound in which no less than five players went after it.  They were Andrew Bynum, Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom of LA and Emeka Okafor and Aaron Gray of NO.  It was then I realized that most insiders and, for that matter, fans would consider each of the three Lakers superior to their Hornet counterparts.  Yet, when Okafor and Gray were in college, they were considered “studs.”

So what’s the point?  Simply put, the collective talent of the participants on display during an NBA contest - especially one with playoff intensity - dwarfs that of any college game.  The viewer is watching the absolute best athletes in the world - and what they can do is just remarkable.  So much so that much of it taken for granted.

There was a sensational, acrobatic move by Los Angeles’ Shannon Brown on a reverse layup and a couple marvelous floaters by New Orleans’ Willie Green.  Highlight type plays.  And while plays such as these might be seen during a college hoops game, consider that the guys who made those buckets were substitutes!  

So, for those who argue the NBA game is better, or vice versa, just appreciate what you’re witnessing because as Voltaire said:

“Appreciation is a wonderful thing.  It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well.”

So the first day of the NBA playoffs has passed and exactly how much excitement have the fans witnessed?  The answer depends on whether you’re in “NBA mode” yet.  The overall top-seed, the Chicago Bulls, were down for nearly the entire game until MVP favorite Derrick Rose decided to, once again, put the club on his back and scored or assisted the Bulls to 16 of the game’s final 17 points.  The Bulls won, 104-99.  Whew!  That was a close one.  Had they not made the final surge, . . . they would have lost their home court advantage.  The second-seeded Miami Heat also avoided such a scenario by slipping past the scrappy 76ers.Orlando wasn’t as fortunate although Dwight Howard put up monster numbers (46 & 19, 31 of the 46 points in the first half).  The Magic were defeated by the Atlanta Hawks, the team that was embarrassingly swept by the same Orlando squad last year.

Had this been the NCAA tourney, the country would be abuzz what with a near upset of the tourney’s overall #1 seed being knocked out - in the first round!  The airways would be filled with talk of Rose keeping the Bulls from making dubious history.  As far as the Heat, with the overall greatest “recruiting” class ever, their fans would continue holding their breath as the team everyone loves to hate escaped to fight another day.

The Magic wouldn’t be so lucky.  Their fans would suffer, their promising season over.  The worry over whether Dwight Howard would return or enter his name in the draft, the rumors about Stan Van Gundy losing his job and all the other water cooler topics that surface after the team is eliminated.

Instead, the way the NBA playoffs work, the mind set is whether the Pacers and Sixers can actually steal a game on the higher team’s home court (or if they can at least keep from being swept) and whether Howard’s teammates will give him some support so they can advance as usual.

Which playoff system is better?  For immediate drama, the NCAAs have it.  If you want to see the best athletes in the world, the NBA is your choice.  But which is better?

Take it from Friedrich Nietzsche:

“You have your way.  I have my way.  As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”