I am amazed at the number of people who have grilled Joe Dumars for selecting Walter Sharpe with the 32nd pick in the NBA Draft. Granted, most of them are of the ignorant variety. I have yet to see a scathing review of the Sharpe-pick from a journalist, local or national. Still, the recriminations were so loud that you’d think Bill Davidson just announced he was moving the team to Tennessee. Apparently, Joe Dumars hasn’t earned the benefit of the doubt from the locals despite successful pick after successful pick.
I have to admit it I was initially pulling for the Pistons to take Bill Walker at #29. When the name, “DJ White” popped up, I was left in a stunned silence. There was only one player who I didn’t want the Pistons to take and that was D.J. White. Five picks later when the Pistons traded for the 34th pick, hope was renewed. I was standing in front of my TV begging for Bill Walker. When the name, “Walter Sharpe” came up on the screen, I felt like I had my spine ripped out by Sub-Zero. I watch enough college basketball to know at least a little about most American draft prospects. I had never even heard of Walter Sharpe. As far as I knew, the only player from UAB worth knowing was Robert Vaden.
While my initial hopes were dashed, my affinity towards Joe’s actions during the draft has grown considerably. I think he made a great decision to trade out of the First Round where money isn’t guaranteed. He admitted after the draft that he liked Bill Walker a lot but explained that Walker was not drafted because he said he wouldn’t be willing to play overseas next season. The Pistons don’t have roster-room for two draft picks to make the team. I would think Walker had a high enough ceiling that Joe would’ve made room fro him (i.e. the Celtics) but I can understand his reasoning. Plus, how bad would you want a guy who wasn’t willing to do what was necessary to play for your organization? Walker has a lot of talent but answering “no” would be a bit of a turnoff and I’m sure it was for Joe. Those who were clamoring for Chris Douglas-Roberts probably had a little too much of the hometown bias going on. CDR is an awkward player without a position. He does one thing well and that’s “play in transition.” Joe D didn’t miss out on anything by passing on him. However, none of that really matters. Douglas-Roberts refused to work out for the Pistons which ended up being a terrible decision on his part and potentially a great decision for the Pistons since it may have led them to Sharpe.
Since, the “Walter Sharpe” pick has been blasted by virtually everyone with a pulse in Metro Detroit, I think it’s time to dispel the notion that Sharpe is a bum. As I mentioned before, I watch quite a bit of college basketball. I’ve seen D.J. White play for four years. I’ve seen him play enough to know that he is too slow and lacks the athleticism necessary to be a force in the NBA. He will probably bounce around the league as a bench player but it’s unlikely he’ll amount to anything more than Malik Rose. When the Pistons initially drafted White, I felt I had enough background information to be unsatisfied with the pick. However, I don’t think there are 50 people in the entire state of Michigan who had enough background information on Walter Sharpe to justify the unilateral lambasting that has spread across the state. Nobody knows anything about Sharpe. All anyone knows it that they don’t know anything. Personally, in the event that I don’t know anything about something, my first inclination is to find out everything I can. That’s what everyone in Detroit should be doing.
Joe D talked glowingly about Sharpe after the draft. He sounded like he just pulled a fast one on the rest of the league. He clearly did his due diligence. Sharpe is a legitimate prospect. In fact, I’m convinced that he was the best possible pick at #32 in terms of “ceiling”. According to RealGM, “Sharpe is a great athlete who has the skills to play the game like a much smaller player. He can shoot the outside shot, has a good handle, and possesses great agility in the post. He is decidedly quick-footed and is an awesome finisher at the rim. Sharpe has a nice set of skills at the mid-post and could excel here especially well.” After reading that, my only question is, what can’t he do? The Pistons got a player in the same mold—and with as much upside—as Amir Johnson. Nobody knew who Amir Johnson was when Joe D picked him and that didn’t stop him from developing into a high-potential player. Sharpe has always been rated highly as a basketball player. When he came out of high school in 2004, he was rated in the top 45 in the country.
Sharpe initially committed to Mississippi St. before off-court problems ended his Bulldog-career. He transferred to UAB and managed to play just 12 games in 2007-08. Sharpe is a big dude. He’s 6’9 and 245 lbs. When he did play, he was dominating at times. In a game last December against Rhode Island—a team that was ranked for a good portion of the year—Sharpe went for 26 points and 17 rebounds. He also scored 16 points on 7 of 10 shooting in a win at Kentucky. He is #42 (in green) in the video below.
I’m not sure how anyone could ask for more skill out of the 32nd pick. Maybe people irrationally—and possibly subconsciously—thought Joe D was going to fix all of Detroit’s ills with this one pick. That’s the only reason I can come up with that would explain all of the venom that has been directed at Joe. The more I learn about Sharpe, the better I feel about the pick.
Plus, Joe has earned the benefit of the doubt by making very good selections in the draft (outside of the lottery anyways). Here is a brief recap of what he has accomplished in the draft with the Pistons:
2000 1. 14 Mateen Cleaves
2000 2. 44 Brian Cardinal
2001 1. 9 Rodney White
2001 2. 37 Mehmet Okur
2002 1. 23 Tayshaun Prince
2003 1. 2 Darko Milicic
2003 1. 25 Carlos Delfino
2003 2. 58 Andreas Gliniadakis
2004 2. 54 Rickey Paulding
2005 1. 26 Jason Maxiell
2005 2. 56 Amir Johnson
2005 2. 60 Alex Acker
2006 1. 60 Will Blalock
2007 1. 15 Rodney Stuckey
2007 1. 27 Arron Afflalo
2007 1. 57 Sammy Mejia
2008 2. 34 Walter Sharpe
2008 2. 46 Trent Plaisted
2008 2. 59 Deron Washington
He drafted Okur, Delfino, Prince, Maxiell, Amir Johnson, Stuckey, and Afflalo with an average draft position of 30. That is incredible. He has made seven good picks (the players mentioned above) to three bad picks (Darko, White, and Cleaves). The three “bad” picks all happened at least five years ago. Granted, Joe D has made two of the worst lottery picks in NBA history with the Rodney White and Darko Milicic selections. However, his success-rate has been extraordinary when you consider where he has been drafting from.
Anyone who thought the Pistons were going to shock the world with the 29th pick needs to brush up on their draft history. It’s not like Joe picked, say, Darko Milicic when he could’ve picked, I don’t know, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, or Dwyane Wade. There should’ve been no expectations going into the draft from a fan’s perspective. Anything more than that would’ve been unfair. Even if the Pistons had a much higher selection, it’s not as if there were superstars right and left. Seattle took Russell Westbrook with the 4th overall pick! Can you imagine being a Sonics fan right now? People can say, “OMG Darko” for as long as they want but Joe has a proven record of success in the draft and I’m willing to bet that Sharpe eventually adds to his track record. And if he doesn’t, does it really matter if the Pistons blew the 34th pick in the draft? The last four players who went 32nd overall were Gabe Pruitt, Steve Novak, Daniel Ewing, and Peter John Ramos.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Schilling is unquestionably a Hall of Famer
With the initial revelation that Curt Schilling might have thrown his last pitch, the inevitable discussion of his Hall of Fame chances followed. Schilling’s shoulder surgery went well and he has intimated that he will begin a rehabilitation program which one can only assume means he will attempt to pitch again. Nonetheless, the discussion of Schilling’s Hall of Fame status is very much in play. Hall of Fame discussions are great when they involve objectivity, facts, and due diligence. They aren’t great when they occur on Baseball Tonight for all of two minutes. It’s impossible to adequately portray an intelligent stance on Schilling’s Hall of Fame chances in just two minutes. Trying to shove everything into the debate in such a short amount of time leads to things like Orestes Destrade saying that if Curt Schilling is a Hall of Famer, then Orel Hershiser should be one, too.
First of all, Destrade never answered the question. Second, he does Schilling a disservice by turning a question about Schilling into a question about Hershiser. Comparing Schilling’s resume to Hershiser’s is ridiculous. If Destrade wants to make a case for Hershiser, then so be it. But, it should certainly not be in the form of piggy-backing on Schilling’s candidacy. Even Buster Olney’s answer was brief and not very convincing and I agreed with him. It takes a decent amount of research to come to the proper conclusion on Schilling’s case for the Hall of Fame. It’s certainly not something that can be argued in less than two minutes. Destrade and Olney never even had a chance to put forth a convincing argument either way to no fault of their own. So, I’ll attempt to finish where they barely started. Schilling’s case for the Hall of Fame is being presented as borderline at best by most. I actually don’t think there’s anything “borderline” about it. In fact, I think Schilling is easily one of the top 25 starting pitchers in MLB history.
Regular Season
Most baseball fans know that Schilling has had big moments in the post-season. I’m not sure everyone knows just how dominating he has been in the playoffs (I’ll get to that later), but people know he has been great in October. What people apparently don’t realize—or remember—is that Schilling has been a great regular season pitcher, too. In fact, his regular season credentials alone are Hall of Fame worthy. The only blemish on his regular season resume is his win-total (216) which is relatively low for two reasons: 1). He has suffered a number of debilitating injuries, and 2). He didn’t peak until he was 29 years old. Dizzy Dean, Addie Joss, Sandy Koufax, Lefty Gomez, Rube Waddell, Ed Walsh, Dazzy Vance, Rube Marquard, Hal Newhouser, Bob Lemon, and Don Drysdale all had fewer wins than Schilling. In fact, Pedro Martinez and John Smoltz have fewer wins than Schilling and they would both be Hall of Famers if their careers ended today. When Tom Glavine reached 300 wins, it became chic to suggest that he was the last 300-game winner. If Glavine is the last 300-game winner, does that mean that there will never be another pitcher to make the Hall of Fame? The 300-win mark has never been a requirement to make the Hall of Fame just like the 3,000-hit mark has never been one for hitters. Anyone who makes a decision based solely on Schilling’s win total is missing out on one of the best starting pitchers in MLB history without even knowing it.
Schilling is the all-time leader in SO:BB Ratio since 1885. He is the only pitcher in MLB history with more than 3,000 strikeouts and fewer than 800 walks. He is one of only four pitchers in MLB history to have three seasons of 300+ strikeouts (Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, and Sandy Koufax are the others). Schilling is one of only three pitchers in MLB history to record a season with 23+ wins, 75%+ winning percentage, 300+ strikeouts, and a WHIP under 1.00 (Pedro Martinez and Sandy Koufax are the others). He has three seasons of at least 21 wins. Nobody in the last 25 years has had more and only Roger Clemens has equaled Schilling’s three. Schilling led the league in complete games four times including a remarkable 15 complete games in 1998 which is the highest total of the last 20 years. He also led the league in wins, innings, WHIP and strikeouts twice each.
It’s easy to dismiss Schilling’s prominence—or lack thereof—on the all-time lists since those lists are littered with a). relievers, b). pitchers who played before 1900, and c). pitchers who had short careers. When you compare Schilling’s numbers to starting pitchers who pitched 3,000 innings (most Hall of Fame starters pitch at least 3,000 innings), his numbers become incredibly impressive. Among pitchers who pitched at least 3,000 innings after 1900, Schilling is 4th in K/9, 9th in WHIP, and 12th in ERA+. How can a pitcher with that kind of presence on the all-time lists not be a Hall of Famer?
Schilling never won a Cy Young award but he finished second three times and fourth another time. He was named the TSN Pitcher of the Year in 2000 and 2001. Schilling also finished in the top 15 of the MVP voting four times which is remarkable for a pitcher. As I mentioned above, Schilling’s post-season prowess is well-known but getting his teams to the post-season is another notch on his regular-season resume. As a full-time starter, he led every franchise that he pitched for to the playoffs and to the World Series.
Hall of Fame Tests
Schilling is a Hall of Famer on the Black Ink, Gray Ink, and HOF Monitor tests. Since 1900, every eligible pitcher above 32 on the Black Ink Test is in the Hall of Fame. Schilling has a 42. The Black Ink Test measures how often a player led the league in various categories. Post-season success does not factor into this test. Since 1900, every eligible pitcher above 135 on the HOF Monitor Test is in the Hall of Fame. In fact, a score of 130 is considered “a lock.” Schilling has a 171. Since 1900, Bert Blyleven is the only pitcher above 200 on the Gray Ink Test who is not in the Hall of Fame and he is generally regarded as one of the biggest Hall of Fame snubs of all-time. Schilling has a 205. The Gray Ink Test measures how often a player finished in the top ten of various categories. Post-season success is not factored in this test, either. Those who suggest that Schilling’s resume is heavily slanted towards post-season success might want to reconsider. By virtually all “tests” that measure regular season success only, Schilling is a Hall of Famer. Now it’s time for the…
Postseason
Along with Sandy Koufax and Bob Gibson, a good case can be made that Schilling is the greatest post-season pitcher in MLB history. He won the World Series MVP in 2001 and the NLCS MVP in 1993. He has led his teams to four World Series appearances and three World Series Championships. In 21 career post-season starts, Schilling is 12-2 with a 2.45 ERA. Among starting pitchers who pitched at least 60 innings, Schilling has the best post-season winning percentage in MLB history. In eight World Series starts, Schilling is 4-1 with a 2.03 ERA.
It's easy to dismiss Schilling in an era dominated by Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, and Pedro Martinez. I'm not going to suggest Schilling deserves to be in their class since they are four of the ten greatest pitchers in MLB history but he deserves to be recognized as one of the greats.
First of all, Destrade never answered the question. Second, he does Schilling a disservice by turning a question about Schilling into a question about Hershiser. Comparing Schilling’s resume to Hershiser’s is ridiculous. If Destrade wants to make a case for Hershiser, then so be it. But, it should certainly not be in the form of piggy-backing on Schilling’s candidacy. Even Buster Olney’s answer was brief and not very convincing and I agreed with him. It takes a decent amount of research to come to the proper conclusion on Schilling’s case for the Hall of Fame. It’s certainly not something that can be argued in less than two minutes. Destrade and Olney never even had a chance to put forth a convincing argument either way to no fault of their own. So, I’ll attempt to finish where they barely started. Schilling’s case for the Hall of Fame is being presented as borderline at best by most. I actually don’t think there’s anything “borderline” about it. In fact, I think Schilling is easily one of the top 25 starting pitchers in MLB history.
Regular Season
Most baseball fans know that Schilling has had big moments in the post-season. I’m not sure everyone knows just how dominating he has been in the playoffs (I’ll get to that later), but people know he has been great in October. What people apparently don’t realize—or remember—is that Schilling has been a great regular season pitcher, too. In fact, his regular season credentials alone are Hall of Fame worthy. The only blemish on his regular season resume is his win-total (216) which is relatively low for two reasons: 1). He has suffered a number of debilitating injuries, and 2). He didn’t peak until he was 29 years old. Dizzy Dean, Addie Joss, Sandy Koufax, Lefty Gomez, Rube Waddell, Ed Walsh, Dazzy Vance, Rube Marquard, Hal Newhouser, Bob Lemon, and Don Drysdale all had fewer wins than Schilling. In fact, Pedro Martinez and John Smoltz have fewer wins than Schilling and they would both be Hall of Famers if their careers ended today. When Tom Glavine reached 300 wins, it became chic to suggest that he was the last 300-game winner. If Glavine is the last 300-game winner, does that mean that there will never be another pitcher to make the Hall of Fame? The 300-win mark has never been a requirement to make the Hall of Fame just like the 3,000-hit mark has never been one for hitters. Anyone who makes a decision based solely on Schilling’s win total is missing out on one of the best starting pitchers in MLB history without even knowing it.
Schilling is the all-time leader in SO:BB Ratio since 1885. He is the only pitcher in MLB history with more than 3,000 strikeouts and fewer than 800 walks. He is one of only four pitchers in MLB history to have three seasons of 300+ strikeouts (Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, and Sandy Koufax are the others). Schilling is one of only three pitchers in MLB history to record a season with 23+ wins, 75%+ winning percentage, 300+ strikeouts, and a WHIP under 1.00 (Pedro Martinez and Sandy Koufax are the others). He has three seasons of at least 21 wins. Nobody in the last 25 years has had more and only Roger Clemens has equaled Schilling’s three. Schilling led the league in complete games four times including a remarkable 15 complete games in 1998 which is the highest total of the last 20 years. He also led the league in wins, innings, WHIP and strikeouts twice each.
It’s easy to dismiss Schilling’s prominence—or lack thereof—on the all-time lists since those lists are littered with a). relievers, b). pitchers who played before 1900, and c). pitchers who had short careers. When you compare Schilling’s numbers to starting pitchers who pitched 3,000 innings (most Hall of Fame starters pitch at least 3,000 innings), his numbers become incredibly impressive. Among pitchers who pitched at least 3,000 innings after 1900, Schilling is 4th in K/9, 9th in WHIP, and 12th in ERA+. How can a pitcher with that kind of presence on the all-time lists not be a Hall of Famer?
Schilling never won a Cy Young award but he finished second three times and fourth another time. He was named the TSN Pitcher of the Year in 2000 and 2001. Schilling also finished in the top 15 of the MVP voting four times which is remarkable for a pitcher. As I mentioned above, Schilling’s post-season prowess is well-known but getting his teams to the post-season is another notch on his regular-season resume. As a full-time starter, he led every franchise that he pitched for to the playoffs and to the World Series.
Hall of Fame Tests
Schilling is a Hall of Famer on the Black Ink, Gray Ink, and HOF Monitor tests. Since 1900, every eligible pitcher above 32 on the Black Ink Test is in the Hall of Fame. Schilling has a 42. The Black Ink Test measures how often a player led the league in various categories. Post-season success does not factor into this test. Since 1900, every eligible pitcher above 135 on the HOF Monitor Test is in the Hall of Fame. In fact, a score of 130 is considered “a lock.” Schilling has a 171. Since 1900, Bert Blyleven is the only pitcher above 200 on the Gray Ink Test who is not in the Hall of Fame and he is generally regarded as one of the biggest Hall of Fame snubs of all-time. Schilling has a 205. The Gray Ink Test measures how often a player finished in the top ten of various categories. Post-season success is not factored in this test, either. Those who suggest that Schilling’s resume is heavily slanted towards post-season success might want to reconsider. By virtually all “tests” that measure regular season success only, Schilling is a Hall of Famer. Now it’s time for the…
Postseason
Along with Sandy Koufax and Bob Gibson, a good case can be made that Schilling is the greatest post-season pitcher in MLB history. He won the World Series MVP in 2001 and the NLCS MVP in 1993. He has led his teams to four World Series appearances and three World Series Championships. In 21 career post-season starts, Schilling is 12-2 with a 2.45 ERA. Among starting pitchers who pitched at least 60 innings, Schilling has the best post-season winning percentage in MLB history. In eight World Series starts, Schilling is 4-1 with a 2.03 ERA.
It's easy to dismiss Schilling in an era dominated by Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, and Pedro Martinez. I'm not going to suggest Schilling deserves to be in their class since they are four of the ten greatest pitchers in MLB history but he deserves to be recognized as one of the greats.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Beasley or Rose?
The NBA Draft is on Thursday and the Pistons probably won’t have much going on. I suppose a trade is possible but I’m guessing Joe D will attempt to do his damage via a trade in July. There won’t be too many options at pick #29 but Joe D has snagged Tayshaun Prince, Jason Maxiell, and Rodney Stuckey with mid-to-late first round picks so hopefully he’ll come up with another guy who can contribute. Maybe Kosta Koufos or DeAndre Jordan will slide? Or, maybe I need to keep dreaming. In the meantime, the battle for first overall is going down to the wire.
Pat Riley has the #2 pick in one of the deepest drafts in recent memory and he’s acting as if he’s cursed—or so it seemed. Initially, reports surfaced that Riley was not enamored with Michael Beasley. Miami appeared to be so turned off by Beasley that it sparked one of the worst trade rumors in sports history. A Chicago columnist suggested that the Heat might be willing to trade the #2 pick and Dwyane Wade for the #1 pick giving Miami the chance to take Derrick Rose. Maybe the Pistons could trade Walter Herrmann for Dwight Howard? Now, reports are circulating that Riley doesn’t want Rose and really covets Beasley. I’ve never been a fan of “showing your cards” before the draft. For instance, it is widely believed that the Nets are locked in to picking Danilo Gallinari’s with the 10th pick. Why would the Nets want everyone to know that? Even if it was a leak, the front office needs to be tight-lipped about stuff like that. When I first heard the reports that Riley didn’t care for Beasley, I thought he was being careless. However, now that the same reports have surfaced about his disinterest in Rose, Riley has everyone guessing. That’s what a good GM should strive to accomplish.
If I had to guess, I’d say Riley covets Beasley. Sure, there is a big question mark surrounding his attitude. It might not end up being an issue but the uncertainty around it calls for caution. There’s also the fact that Beasley is not 6’10—his listed height in college—rather 6’8. Still anyone who watched him play at Kansas St. knows that he is a special player. In fact, he is probably the most offensively gifted power-forward I have ever seen come out of college. His numbers as an 18 year-old at KSU were astonishing. He led the NCAA in rebounding and finished third in scoring. He even shot 40% from 3-point range. There is also an underrated aspect of his game that makes him even more difficult to defend: he is a lefty. Anyone who has defended against a left-handed basketball player knows the problems that presents. Manu Ginobili is just one example. He finishes with the same move to the left, over and over again, leaving defenders shaking their heads. Right-handed players have difficulty defending left-handed players and vice versa. Beasley uses this advantage to get easy looks in the lane.
The player who Beasley compares most favorably to in the NBA right now—at least offensively—is David West. If you saw West in the playoffs, you know he is close to unstoppable. He has the inside/outside game that causes havoc. Beasley has more range and is a better rebounder. Any team looking to win an NBA Championship needs to have not only a low-post presence, but a dominating one at that. Eight of the last ten NBA Championships were won by either Shaquille O’Neal or Tim Duncan. The Pistons won in ’04 with the Wallaces. Boston won this year with Kevin Garnett. Check the resumes of the big-men in the NBA. Dominating big-men win championships. Teams with dominating point-guards lose in the second round of the playoffs. As good as Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Jason Kidd, and Steve Nash are, they’ve never won anything. They don’t have the same impact on the game as Duncan, Shaq, and KG.
The Bulls should be coveting Beasley, too. They have been looking for low-post scoring since I was born. The Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Ben Wallace, Joakim Noah lineage has to be growing old. Their predecessors—Dave Corzine, Bill Cartwright, and the three-headed monster (Will Perdue, Bill Wennington, and Luc Longley)—weren’t any better. Chicago already has a decent nucleus. A Deng/Beasley/Noah front court with Ben Gordon and Kirk Hinrich in the backcourt is pretty damn formidable. Drafting Rose leaves the frontcourt weak and the backcourt overcrowded.
Then again, maybe all of this “Pat Riley doesn’t want Michael Beasley/Derrick Rose” is just a cover for a bigger plan. Rumors have circulated over the past few days that Miami might be interested in obtaining the #1 overall pick for Dwyane Wade giving the Heat the opportunity to draft Rose and Beasley. That would be a genius moving considering a). Wade’s propensity for injuries, and b). the affordability of rookie salaries.
Pat Riley has the #2 pick in one of the deepest drafts in recent memory and he’s acting as if he’s cursed—or so it seemed. Initially, reports surfaced that Riley was not enamored with Michael Beasley. Miami appeared to be so turned off by Beasley that it sparked one of the worst trade rumors in sports history. A Chicago columnist suggested that the Heat might be willing to trade the #2 pick and Dwyane Wade for the #1 pick giving Miami the chance to take Derrick Rose. Maybe the Pistons could trade Walter Herrmann for Dwight Howard? Now, reports are circulating that Riley doesn’t want Rose and really covets Beasley. I’ve never been a fan of “showing your cards” before the draft. For instance, it is widely believed that the Nets are locked in to picking Danilo Gallinari’s with the 10th pick. Why would the Nets want everyone to know that? Even if it was a leak, the front office needs to be tight-lipped about stuff like that. When I first heard the reports that Riley didn’t care for Beasley, I thought he was being careless. However, now that the same reports have surfaced about his disinterest in Rose, Riley has everyone guessing. That’s what a good GM should strive to accomplish.
If I had to guess, I’d say Riley covets Beasley. Sure, there is a big question mark surrounding his attitude. It might not end up being an issue but the uncertainty around it calls for caution. There’s also the fact that Beasley is not 6’10—his listed height in college—rather 6’8. Still anyone who watched him play at Kansas St. knows that he is a special player. In fact, he is probably the most offensively gifted power-forward I have ever seen come out of college. His numbers as an 18 year-old at KSU were astonishing. He led the NCAA in rebounding and finished third in scoring. He even shot 40% from 3-point range. There is also an underrated aspect of his game that makes him even more difficult to defend: he is a lefty. Anyone who has defended against a left-handed basketball player knows the problems that presents. Manu Ginobili is just one example. He finishes with the same move to the left, over and over again, leaving defenders shaking their heads. Right-handed players have difficulty defending left-handed players and vice versa. Beasley uses this advantage to get easy looks in the lane.
The player who Beasley compares most favorably to in the NBA right now—at least offensively—is David West. If you saw West in the playoffs, you know he is close to unstoppable. He has the inside/outside game that causes havoc. Beasley has more range and is a better rebounder. Any team looking to win an NBA Championship needs to have not only a low-post presence, but a dominating one at that. Eight of the last ten NBA Championships were won by either Shaquille O’Neal or Tim Duncan. The Pistons won in ’04 with the Wallaces. Boston won this year with Kevin Garnett. Check the resumes of the big-men in the NBA. Dominating big-men win championships. Teams with dominating point-guards lose in the second round of the playoffs. As good as Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Jason Kidd, and Steve Nash are, they’ve never won anything. They don’t have the same impact on the game as Duncan, Shaq, and KG.
The Bulls should be coveting Beasley, too. They have been looking for low-post scoring since I was born. The Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Ben Wallace, Joakim Noah lineage has to be growing old. Their predecessors—Dave Corzine, Bill Cartwright, and the three-headed monster (Will Perdue, Bill Wennington, and Luc Longley)—weren’t any better. Chicago already has a decent nucleus. A Deng/Beasley/Noah front court with Ben Gordon and Kirk Hinrich in the backcourt is pretty damn formidable. Drafting Rose leaves the frontcourt weak and the backcourt overcrowded.
Then again, maybe all of this “Pat Riley doesn’t want Michael Beasley/Derrick Rose” is just a cover for a bigger plan. Rumors have circulated over the past few days that Miami might be interested in obtaining the #1 overall pick for Dwyane Wade giving the Heat the opportunity to draft Rose and Beasley. That would be a genius moving considering a). Wade’s propensity for injuries, and b). the affordability of rookie salaries.
Friday, June 20, 2008
He's certified!
“The Boston Three Party” hasn’t been around long enough to merit an 80s level of Celtics-hatred around these parts. In fact, I kind of enjoyed seeing them win a championship. It didn’t hurt that it prevented a Kobe/Phil Jackson media love-fest. It also didn’t hurt that KG has always been one of my favorite players dating back to his days at Farragut Academy in Chicago. He considered going to Michigan before making the jump straight to the NBA. After he was drafted in ’95, I asked for a KG jersey for my birthday. Since rookie jerseys weren’t being sold yet, my mom called the Minnesota Timberwolves and they put her straight through to Jack McCloskey. He fired off a KG jersey and I was soon wearing it every other day. So, I was happy with the outcome of the Finals and that was before KG delivered one of the all-time great post-game interviews. In fact, it may be the greatest post-game championship interview of all-time. I don’t know how many of you watched Game Six or the celebration but if you didn’t, you are about to see a man experiencing euphoria. Since I had the volume turned down, I had subtitles on and KG’s comments caused chaos in the world of closed captioning. “Anything’s possibbbbbbbbbbbbbbble!”
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
An Open Letter to Ted Bauer
If you look hard enough, you can find something incredibly ridiculous in the sports media just about everyday. You provided us with just that on June 9th when you typed An Open Letter to the City of Detroit. I’m not familiar with your other material so you might be an otherwise fine writer but this particular column was one of the worst I’ve read in any forum ever. If you’re going to pick a sports city to rip on, why not start with New York (or Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Los Angeles etc.)? What cities are Detroiters supposed to be envious of in the sports world? I have no idea how someone could get something so wrong. Only you can answer how you came to such an erroneous conclusion. In the meantime, I’ll quickly rundown what Detroit fans have to look forward to because there is plenty of it.
The Red Wings
This is a great place to start. You said, “Enjoy this Cup. It may be a rocky road for a while.” If by “a while” you mean “not a while” then you might be on to something. If you hadn’t noticed, the Wings will return every major contributor from their Cup-winning team next season. That means more Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom and all of the other players who just finished waltzing through the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Maybe the idea of a repeat slipped your mind but the Wings will likely top 100 points for the 9th straight season and be the odds-on favorite to win the Cup again.
The Tigers
If you polled the GMs in baseball asking them which roster they would choose for the next ten years, who do you think they’d pick? If you don’t think the Tigers would be one of the top five teams mentioned, then you’re crazy. Curtis Granderson, Miguel Cabrera, and Justin Verlander are three of the brightest young stars in MLB. The Tigers will shed $50 million in payroll over the next two years. They are two years removed from going to the World Series with a roster nowhere near as talented as the one they have today. Do you really think Detroit baseball fans should envy the Yankees and their $207,000,000 payroll? They’re barely playing .500-baseball. In fact, the Yankees have spent $1.4 billion on payroll over the last eight years and have no World Series Titles to show for it. The Yankees and Mets have a combined $347 million payroll this year and have a combined 71-68 record. The Tigers are on the cusp of becoming one of the annual powers in MLB. Maybe you have a short-term memory issue but the Tigers lost 300 games from 2003-2005. Are we really supposed to be depressed about a team that has underperformed for 70 games? The season isn’t half over and you’re ready to throw the Tigers into the same underachieving-boat as the Yankees? Sorry Bauer, but by my calculations, the Tigers still have roughly $1 billion to go before they are that pathetic. To suggest that the future isn’t bright for the Tigers regardless of their poor start is to declare your ignorance. Also, I’d like to take this opportunity to manipulate short-term statistics to “prove” my point as you did. You said, “The Tigers are currently 24-35, losers of three straight and 3-7 in their last ten.” Well, the Tigers are currently 32-38, winners of six of seven, and 8-2 in their last ten. Also, the Tigers have been playing above .500 since April 8 (yes, that would be the second week of the season). Does that mean they’re going to win the World Series?
The Pistons
The Pistons are in line for a fire sale? If by “fire sale” you mean they’re “exploring trade options to improve the team”, then you’re correct. Do you really think Joe Dumars is going to cash-in his best players for nothing? An outsider like you might look at the fact that Joe D is looking to make a trade as a bad sign. For Detroit fans, it’s a godsend. Do you have any idea how frustrating it is to root for a team that may or may not show up on any given night? Detroit might not make the Eastern Conference Finals next season but if you don’t think the Pistons are in excellent shape for the future with a bounty of young talent and cap-room to burn, then you aren’t paying attention. Have you heard of Rodney Stuckey, Jason Maxiell and Amir Johnson? I guess we should wish the Pistons were more like the Knicks. Parlaying $90 million—$30 million over the salary cap mind you—into 23 wins is not easy to do. Although, I must give the Knicks credit for improving on their 2006-effort that saw them turn $130 million–$80 million over the cap—into 23 wins.
The Lions
Nobody in Detroit is going to spend more than 10 seconds defending the Lions on any front but you’d have to be awfully naïve not to see that Rod Marinelli is slowly but surely putting together a defense that might actually be able to stop people. That’s more than I can say for any other Lions team of my lifetime. The Lions are certainly in no worse shape now than they’ve been in a decade.
Michigan Football
Do you have any idea how excited people around here are about Rich Rodriguez? There is more excitement surrounding the Michigan football program right now than at any point in the last 20 years. I love how you focused on the fact that Michigan “lost” Pryor but failed to acknowledge that Rodriguez secured a top-ten recruiting class in just two months on the job and already has another one lined up for next year. Rodriguez has also secured commitments from two of the top dual-threat quarterbacks in the country for 2009. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that they are immediately the mostly highly-touted QB recruits Rodriguez has ever signed. So yeah, things are just absolutely dire in Ann Arbor because Rodriguez wasn’t able to sign the #1 recruit in the country. I guess that makes every other program in the country—with the exception of Ohio St.—a disappointment. There is this thing called “the spread”. Rodriguez nearly won a National Championship at West Virginia with it. Michigan > West Virginia.
Michigan St. Football
Heck, people are even excited about Michigan St. football. You do realize that Mark Dantonio coaches MSU now, right? You may have also wanted to mention in your letter that Michigan St. went to a bowl game for the first time in four years last season. Or, that MSU lost its six games (all against teams .500 or better) in ’07 by a grand total of 31 points. Rutgers—is that the team New Yorkers claim now days?—lost to Louisville by 30 points. If you don’t think Spartan-fans are excited about the future of the program, then you did absolutely no research before typing your letter.
I’m amazed that you were permitted to publish an opinion that reflects such a skewed view of reality. You probably couldn’t find two or three sports cities with more promise for the next 5-10 years than Detroit. Detroit has the best front-office personnel in sports. If you want to know what the future looks like, look no further than its coaches and GMs. The list is impressive. Ken Holland, Dave Dombrowski, Joe Dumars, Rich Rodriguez, Mark Dantonio, Tom Izzo, and John Beilein are all universally considered among the best at their respective positions. Do you honestly think that all of these established winners are just going to start losing at the same time? Other than the Lions, there isn’t a single major sports team in the area that people aren’t excited about. Your letter was an overreaction to a poor start by the Tigers. How you made the leap from that to “Detroit sports=doomed” is a mystery. Then again, you get paid for overreactions, right?
The Red Wings
This is a great place to start. You said, “Enjoy this Cup. It may be a rocky road for a while.” If by “a while” you mean “not a while” then you might be on to something. If you hadn’t noticed, the Wings will return every major contributor from their Cup-winning team next season. That means more Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom and all of the other players who just finished waltzing through the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Maybe the idea of a repeat slipped your mind but the Wings will likely top 100 points for the 9th straight season and be the odds-on favorite to win the Cup again.
The Tigers
If you polled the GMs in baseball asking them which roster they would choose for the next ten years, who do you think they’d pick? If you don’t think the Tigers would be one of the top five teams mentioned, then you’re crazy. Curtis Granderson, Miguel Cabrera, and Justin Verlander are three of the brightest young stars in MLB. The Tigers will shed $50 million in payroll over the next two years. They are two years removed from going to the World Series with a roster nowhere near as talented as the one they have today. Do you really think Detroit baseball fans should envy the Yankees and their $207,000,000 payroll? They’re barely playing .500-baseball. In fact, the Yankees have spent $1.4 billion on payroll over the last eight years and have no World Series Titles to show for it. The Yankees and Mets have a combined $347 million payroll this year and have a combined 71-68 record. The Tigers are on the cusp of becoming one of the annual powers in MLB. Maybe you have a short-term memory issue but the Tigers lost 300 games from 2003-2005. Are we really supposed to be depressed about a team that has underperformed for 70 games? The season isn’t half over and you’re ready to throw the Tigers into the same underachieving-boat as the Yankees? Sorry Bauer, but by my calculations, the Tigers still have roughly $1 billion to go before they are that pathetic. To suggest that the future isn’t bright for the Tigers regardless of their poor start is to declare your ignorance. Also, I’d like to take this opportunity to manipulate short-term statistics to “prove” my point as you did. You said, “The Tigers are currently 24-35, losers of three straight and 3-7 in their last ten.” Well, the Tigers are currently 32-38, winners of six of seven, and 8-2 in their last ten. Also, the Tigers have been playing above .500 since April 8 (yes, that would be the second week of the season). Does that mean they’re going to win the World Series?
The Pistons
The Pistons are in line for a fire sale? If by “fire sale” you mean they’re “exploring trade options to improve the team”, then you’re correct. Do you really think Joe Dumars is going to cash-in his best players for nothing? An outsider like you might look at the fact that Joe D is looking to make a trade as a bad sign. For Detroit fans, it’s a godsend. Do you have any idea how frustrating it is to root for a team that may or may not show up on any given night? Detroit might not make the Eastern Conference Finals next season but if you don’t think the Pistons are in excellent shape for the future with a bounty of young talent and cap-room to burn, then you aren’t paying attention. Have you heard of Rodney Stuckey, Jason Maxiell and Amir Johnson? I guess we should wish the Pistons were more like the Knicks. Parlaying $90 million—$30 million over the salary cap mind you—into 23 wins is not easy to do. Although, I must give the Knicks credit for improving on their 2006-effort that saw them turn $130 million–$80 million over the cap—into 23 wins.
The Lions
Nobody in Detroit is going to spend more than 10 seconds defending the Lions on any front but you’d have to be awfully naïve not to see that Rod Marinelli is slowly but surely putting together a defense that might actually be able to stop people. That’s more than I can say for any other Lions team of my lifetime. The Lions are certainly in no worse shape now than they’ve been in a decade.
Michigan Football
Do you have any idea how excited people around here are about Rich Rodriguez? There is more excitement surrounding the Michigan football program right now than at any point in the last 20 years. I love how you focused on the fact that Michigan “lost” Pryor but failed to acknowledge that Rodriguez secured a top-ten recruiting class in just two months on the job and already has another one lined up for next year. Rodriguez has also secured commitments from two of the top dual-threat quarterbacks in the country for 2009. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that they are immediately the mostly highly-touted QB recruits Rodriguez has ever signed. So yeah, things are just absolutely dire in Ann Arbor because Rodriguez wasn’t able to sign the #1 recruit in the country. I guess that makes every other program in the country—with the exception of Ohio St.—a disappointment. There is this thing called “the spread”. Rodriguez nearly won a National Championship at West Virginia with it. Michigan > West Virginia.
Michigan St. Football
Heck, people are even excited about Michigan St. football. You do realize that Mark Dantonio coaches MSU now, right? You may have also wanted to mention in your letter that Michigan St. went to a bowl game for the first time in four years last season. Or, that MSU lost its six games (all against teams .500 or better) in ’07 by a grand total of 31 points. Rutgers—is that the team New Yorkers claim now days?—lost to Louisville by 30 points. If you don’t think Spartan-fans are excited about the future of the program, then you did absolutely no research before typing your letter.
I’m amazed that you were permitted to publish an opinion that reflects such a skewed view of reality. You probably couldn’t find two or three sports cities with more promise for the next 5-10 years than Detroit. Detroit has the best front-office personnel in sports. If you want to know what the future looks like, look no further than its coaches and GMs. The list is impressive. Ken Holland, Dave Dombrowski, Joe Dumars, Rich Rodriguez, Mark Dantonio, Tom Izzo, and John Beilein are all universally considered among the best at their respective positions. Do you honestly think that all of these established winners are just going to start losing at the same time? Other than the Lions, there isn’t a single major sports team in the area that people aren’t excited about. Your letter was an overreaction to a poor start by the Tigers. How you made the leap from that to “Detroit sports=doomed” is a mystery. Then again, you get paid for overreactions, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
