Get Up Eight Times

Russia vs. Iran

• This one was over quickly. 5 point first quarter. FIVE POINTS.
• That Iranian center can ball. But everyone else doesn’t seem to understand how to penetrate a zone defense.
• Kirilenko and their point guard Jon Robert Holden, they can ball. Everyone else seems a bit on the stiff side.
• This game was pretty close to a civil warNeither of these teams will last long if they play like this.

Germany vs. Angola

• Angola has some good outside shooters. They definitely have the potential to upset a few contenders in this round if they keep on stroking those shots.
• Unfortunately their second unit is not quite up to the task. A +15 run for the Germans puts them way ahead.
• Chris Kaman is, as expected, dominating. No one on Angola has the size to match up with him, although I still think it funny that Kaman is even eligible to play for the Germans considering he’s from here.
• Jagla (the backup center) has an awesome outside jumper.
• Dirk’s outside stroke has been there all night.
• Definitely an interesting strategy for Angola in the second half will be how their second unit runs. They can’t really play halfcourt, so I’d just gamble on the defensive end and then go all out in that fourth quarter. Their starters definitely have the 3 point game going, but not enough size to defend against Dirk, Kaman and the big men.
• 80% 3 point shooting in the first half. Angola tried to beat them with 3s and they’re giving up 8 of 10 on their side. Yikes.
• One thing Angola will have to work on is developing a big man for future Olympics. Right now they have plenty of guys who can play the two and the three (i.e. take a dozen threes), and a pretty good perimeter passing game, and can run the fastbreak, but when they get into the halfcourt they can’t really guard anyone. They don’t really have any one who can play the four or five (layup after layup after dunk given to the German offense). Also Their defense has been pretty decent on the outside, but it doesn’t matter because the big jump shooters have at least a foot on them.
• Mingas would be a great two guard in the NBA if we didn’t have a thousand two guards (17-48 from the field after 3 quarters won’t get it done on any level). Sadly, this Angolan team is still a step behind their competition. Here’s hoping for 2012 to be the year they break through.
• Looks like it’ll be second units for the fourth quarter. Time to move onto the next game!

USA vs China

• Is that…Roundball Rock? YES!
• You can already see the principles that can and could be sued to beat the US in future matchups. Good penetration and kickouts, excellent 3 point offense (it’s pretty much the only thing keeing China in this game), and pretty bad 3 point defense. Unfortunately for the Chinese, they won’t have enough bench depth to take them far, and they sure as hell don’t have the legs to keep up with Dwight Howard and the US big men.
• China definitely can’t play full-court; as Chuck would say, they got to slow the pace of the game down.
• Sure enough, the moment they start playing full-court, Chian starts getting blowing apart.
• See, if President Bush had just spent his eight years doing silly foreign dignitary stuff like getting into the huddle with the Olympic basketball team and pretending to care if they won, I might have enojyed his presidency ten times more than I already do. So not that much.
• Not much to say about US-China; we know the US’s strengths (great full court team, strong pressing defense, attacking offense at the rim, fast low post players) and weaknesses (difficulty guarding 3s, difficulty making 3s). Spain’s going to give them everything they’ve got, as will Greece and (if they meet them) Argentina. Lithuania might have a better team, but they don’t match up well against the US.
• Yi Jianlan has been  terribly disappointing. Other than that powerdunk over Carmelo, he’s been totally out of sync. Obviously that first year in Milwaukee took more on a toll of him than expected. If this is the big men the Nets hoped would lure LeBron to Brooklyn in 2010, they’re going to be in for a shock.
• On the other hand, I’m very impressed by Sun Yue (good block, nice shot step, pretty good passing skills). You worry if he has TOO many skills for the Olympic games.
• Jason Kidd watching Misty May and Kerri Walsh…too…many…jokes…
• I also like the Chinese outside shooters, but as we expected, it’s a bit of an incomplete team.
• People either think Yao Ming is underappreciated or overrated. I go on the first side, and have always enjoyed his work ethic and his in game talents. He still can’t guard a pick and roll to save his life, but you’ve got to love a guy who doesn’t mail it in down by 35. He doesn’t do this in the NBA either. Great to watch.

Player assessments of the US team
LeBron–best player on this team right now. Rebounding, blocking, scoring, outside shot. I just wish he could get that midrange jumper going.
Wade–great offensive moves right now (he’s regained most of his 2006 steps), but he’s also recklessly gambling on defense. He’s usually a step behind the offender or he goes to double and leaves the jump shooter open.
Chris Bosh–his offensive rebounding skills and defensive intensity will be key when those 3 point shots stop falling.
Dwight Howard–dunk machine. Still not sure how well he’ll play Gasol though; Yao clearly was at around 70 percent in this one.
Kobe–he’s going to get to the basket a lot against the weaker opponents, and they haven’t even utilized his post fadeaway game. His defensive skills won’t be tested until he faces the tougher shooters in Spain and Greece.
Chris Paul–gets into the lane at will. This man breaks down zone defenses like Shaq breaks down the buffet table at Roscoe’s. Plus he can nail 3s in the international game because of the reduced field goal line.
Deron Williams–I love the Paul/Williams backcourt combo. Paul’s the insider point guard who can break down the lanes to find people outside or find the big man for teh alley-oop, while Williams roves on the perimeter for the stepback jumper or the drive to the paint.
Carmelo Anthony–not crucial in this one, with no need for stepback jumpers over defenders in close situations. Anthony may find a role later on, but his game isn’t tailored for international play quite as well as James or Bryant. He’ll be crucial in closer games.
Michael Redd–here to nail 3s. If he keeps on missing them though…
Carlos Boozer–would like to see him in more pick and roll plays; his offensive rebounding skills have broken down pretty decent zone Ds.
Tayshaun Prince–getting manhandled by Yi in garbage time. Worrying sign, although we’ll assume it’s just garbage time play.

The US still should be in a dominant position though, and they’re in much better shape than they were in 2004.

Will try and find the other three games and assess them in another post.

From TrueHoop:

Anyway, talk of posterizing, breaking ankles … that’s all about humiliation, and that’s absolutely a part of basketball. A big part of it.

And when it comes to using basketball to humilate your opponent, there is a certain scale. Shooting a jumper over someone is maybe a one. Beating someone to the hoop for a layup might be a two. Dribbling through your legs as you do so could make that worth three, dribbling through their legs as you do might get you up to six. Sevens are garden variety dunks and blocks, while there is a special carve out somewhere around eight or nine for using your crossover to make the defender actually fall over.

But up at the top of the humiliation hierarchy, right there with doing many of the above things with the game on the line, is an explosively humiliating move whose handy shorthand might not belong on this family-friendly website.

There’s a reason I don’t play much pickup basketball in the States. One is that a lot of typical pickup players don’t know how to play anymore. For all the skills they’ve got, their teamwork is so shoddy it’s absolutely painful to play with a lot of them, because I have the body of a point guard and I’m often consigned to spot shooting because players ballhog and lowpost when they have no game to lowpost. Occasional passing and cutting, but otherwise pretty slipshod.

But also underlying is this whole humiliation aspect. It diminishes the joy of typical pickup basketball into a two guard streetball game, where the best shooters with the best moves always dominate over everyone else. Point guards are relegated to spectators and the taller ones just look like their hands are stuck in mud. It becomes a “Who has the bigger pair of cajones” contest, a contest of wills outdoing one another in a one-on-one battle for supremacy. And often the winner moves on to the next stage, triumphant in his arena; the loser is often scarred unless they have the capacities to move beyond. Look at what happened to poor James Felton and look at how T-Mac rose from that.

And that’s what makes basketball so compelling. In almost every other team sport everyone else has to come together or fall apart; in basketball an individual can transcend the game, or bring himself to rise above it. Or once in a lifetime, he can do both.

I don’t usually talk about how bad announcing coverage is for any sporting event just because it seems like sour grapes, but it’s worth discussing how bad ESPN’s coverage for The Open Championship has been. And this is generally surprising. Normally I don’t notice golf announcers; they provide a little bit of background, they talk about club selection, they talk about where the putts will break, they attempt storytelling (*cough* Nantz *cough*), and then they move on. Unless you’re Johnny Miller or Nick Faldo, the less I notice you the better.

However, it seems the Tiger Woods injury has made everyone at Bristol a little antsy. They knew the ratings would be down, they know that the casual sports fan. And I’m sure if it was just a typical tournament with a bunch of the usuals contending.

But the moment Greg Norman started hanging around, it seems they went through. They talked about how cool it was, and then went out of their way to jinx him for about 24 hours during the slowest sports cycle of the year. If Norman still gave a damn about winning, he should mail a turd sandwich express to the WWL for the assist in his last Sunday collapse.

The usually steady Mike Tirico has either been overworked, or is getting pressured from the producers upstairs: Stick to storyline. It doesn’t help that his analysts were more wooden than Steven Segal’s acting. Paul Azinger seems to be spending most of the broadcast trying to fill out his Ryder Cup roster, occasionally returning to utter some half-baked “this is the toughest round of his life” cliche nonsense. And Tom Watson might be a class citizen for all I know, but how interested would you be in Tim Duncan broadcasting a basketball game?

I’ve never had anything against him before, but everytime Tom Rinaldi has opened his mouth this weekend I’ve wanted to stuff my dirty gym socks so he could gag on them. Then I’d ask him how he feels at this moment. Getting RickReillyed wasn’t the most pleasant experience of my life, but to say it was the most pleasant part of ESPN’s coverage should be saying a lot. And I just felt sorry for Judy Rankin, who had to actually interview Chris Evert and come up with reasonable questions.

Everything has been glossed over. No analysis, minimal golf chatter, just feelings and emotions and enough jinxes to make any professional gambler queasy. Is this the Open or Grey’s Anatomy?

This seems to be symptomatic of ESPN on ABC, which seems to try to outdo everyone in terms of storyline. They saw Tiger’s leg injury and tried their best to play up the Shark’s revival. They keep on playing Monday Morning QB when they should be covering an event, trying to write the denouement before the game’s even been played.

There was one silver lining; the venerable Peter Alliss’s two hour cameo in the middle of coverage. The moment Alliss started talking, everyone shifted back to professional, and all the maudlin crap.

(Posted this originally on Yardbarker Backyard)

How often do athletes bring out the best in each other?

It’s an interesting question to ponder after Rafael Nadal took Wimbeldon away from Roger Federer in the fading English light. It was one of those titanic clashes you never forget watching. It was the equivalent of watching Beethoven and Mozart compose a piano concert together, with clashing styles of power and grace coming together, hitting the wrong notes every now and then, but ultimately combining for a product greater than what the two might put together individually.

Of course we know Beethoven and Mozart never worked together, but if there was a tennis equivalent, this might’ve been it. And in sports, we rarely get the opportunity to see two players, two teams bring out the best in one another. Sports aren’t often a matchup of the ideal–they happen rarely, even in a world where the number of sports we watch borders on the infinite.

In football it’s rare to see two great teams bring out the best in one another because they’re too busy knocking the hell out of one another to appreciate the game of the other. This year’s Super Bowl brought out the worst in the Patriots (doing just enough to stay ahead) and the best in the Giants. Baseball suffers from the same problem; it is more dependent around the surrounding historical context (the Yankees trying to win their fourth straight under the specter of 9/11, the Red Sox battling against their own history) to have added resonance with the viewer.

Hockey and soccer is full of plenty of great finishes, but in between the drama and goals is plenty of interlude, defense, and penalties. In basketball the instances where both teams are playing at their best have been minimal–you could argue that during the 2008 NBA Finals, neither team played great basketball at the same time. We want to see teams giving each other their best shots, but it doesn’t happen often. You could probably name games where both teams were playing well at the same time on your fingers.

Ultimately, it’s harder for both teams to play at the same level at the same time because it requires a group to succeed collectively. It nevertheless doesn’t make. People have pined for Tiger and Phil, but they have never played their best golf at the same time. Even when Woods has won his fights, he has never seemed vulnerable. He was fighting the course and his swing more than anyone else. Even his great win was more of an endurance of will than upping the ante with Rocco Mediate. We still haven’t seen anything like Nicklaus and Palmer and Player to develop–Tiger has stood on his own. Everyone else falls.

To delve even further into the individual sports, only in the one-on-one sports have we ever seen intense personal rivalry develop. It was Schmeling and Louis, Ali and Frazier, Leonard and Hearns which connected boxers to the masses, and provides it with its color; mixed martial arts is beginning to realize that too. But the individuals were at the center, not the game. Fighting by its very nature brings out the most primal in each and every one of us, and even though it’s compelling, it’s by no means bringing out the best in each other.

No sport has needed more elevation of rivlary than tennis, which has depended on Borg, McEnroe and Connors, Sampras and Agassi, and the Williams sisters. Now in step Federer and Nadal, who barely let each other be broken during Sunday’s match. Nadal dictated pace and power, yet didn’t look ready to take it away from the defending champion. Federer didn’t look dominant, but everytime it seemed he was about to fall over he came right back, taking 0-30 defecits and eviscerating them ace by ace. Everytime he looked down he came back. He didn’t give away Wimbledon. Nadal simply outlasted him.

Of course these guys are comparable to Ali and Frazier only when they step into the arena; their dynamic force on the field of play does not translate into real-life chraisma. Federer maintains all the ferocity of a cuddly teddy bear, while Nadal’s chewing habits will probably earn him great admiration from the beaver folk. They’re tennis robots, which is to be expected of the current generation of great personalities.

They don’t need to be colorful off the field. They let their games speak for themselves. And last night they delivered what could be their magnum opus.

Discussion for the readers: When have you seen athletes bring out the best in each other?

Charles Barkley says it often: “A series don’t start until you lose on the other team’s floor.” Well, the San Antonio Spurs just throttled the Phoenix Suns, one of the most dominant road wins I’ve seen. That was a dynasty win, a win that great teams get. Take a look at all the other teams that lost Game 3 up 2-0, and you’ll know why the Spurs are still the class of the NBA. They’ve turned the most intriguing series of the first round into a laugher so far, and it’s all by playing smart.

Steve Kerr made the Shaq trade to focus in on stopping Tim Duncan. Shaq’s done nothing wrong. He’s played pretty good defense on Duncan when the Spurs ran the post game in the first two games. But Gregg Popovich is the master of adjustment, and so far Mike D’Antoni has not made the necessary counteradjustments.

See, the problem with Phoenix was never that they couldn’t stop Tim Duncan–it’s that they could NEVER EVER stop Tony Parker. Now Parker is reaching the prime of his career, and he’s weaving through five defenders and running the pick and roll to perfection. Along with Ginobili, the Spurs backcourt has picked an aging Suns team apart, and they’re one win away from an amazing sweep.

You have to admire the great coaching by Pops. Duncan was rarely set up once in the post, neutralizing Shaq’s defensive importance altogether. They ran pick and roll after pick and roll after pick and roll, switching Shaq onto Ginobili and Parker about three dozen times, and they took him to the basket or had wide open jumpers. Phoenix went to the zone to stop the pick and roll, Parker went right to the basket and knocked it out to Bowen, Thomas and Finley for their few field goals.

The Spurs (especially Parker) got into their rhythm early. The Suns never got into theirs until it was way too late.

Duncan doesn’t give a crap if he scores 10 or 30, and he’s been playing smart basketball. As have all the Spurs.

Now, is the situation salvageable for the Suns? Yes. They’re just going to have to adjust to the situation, something their coach and players have as yet appeared unwilling to do.

1) Full court press on Parker. It’s time. Stop reacting to him and make him work on both ends. I don’t care if you make Raja Bell drive to the basket five to ten times. Make Parker use up energy on the defensive end. He’s juat the little TGV that could if he’s only working offensively.

2) Forget about Duncan. Let him score 40. Hell, let him score 50. Just don’t let Parker and Ginobili get theirs. Duncan has a terrible record if he’s the only one scoring.

3) Take Steve Nash off of Parker, put him on the slowest player on the court. It’s ghastly to see him try and guard Tony; his legs are almost shot at this point.

4) Nash and Stoudemire should be pick and rolling right back at the Spurs. That was their bread and butter move in Game 1, and now they’re just dribbling and setting up some funky looking jumpers. My goodness.

5) I know this is going to sound ridiculous, considering what Phoenix gave up to get to this point. But I’m going to throw it out there anyway:

Shaq’s role has to be minimized on the defensive end.

At this point in his career, O’Neal is useless in the pick and roll. He can’t rotate, he can’t switch off. He’s only good at defending big men. Put him on Kurt Thomas or Oberto, but put Stoudemire back on Duncan. It doesn’t matter what Duncan gets, but at least Stoudemire has the ability to guard Parker or Ginobili on the switch better than Shaq.

Or set him up on the defensive end selectively. I’d think you’d put him on Duncan if they go into the post, but if Tim goes out to set a pick, put Stoudemire on him. It’s amazing that D’Antoni hasn’t tried this ONCE with O’Neal and Stoudemire both in the game.

These are just some suggestions, but anything works better than getting burned on the pick and roll for the thousandth time. Phoenix may have the greater talent, but they’re getting outcoached in circles. And that’s why they’re on the verge of getting swept.

I was doing this for the Play in California earlier today. Here’s the record of the liveblog.

Again, this post was originally at the Play in CA.

Did this at the Play in CA here, saving it here to make sure I remember doing it.

As college basketball wrapped up last night, I’m impressed by how tense the game was from start to finish. It was crisp, it was quick, it was fast. But it also reminded me flawed the NBA game is right now, and I think it’s a good time to present some of the issues.

Let’s look at how the NBA has always done this wrong–full timeouts at the end of games. I’m fine with full timeouts early in quarters, but when there are two minutes left in a game the flow gets interrupted with timeout after timeout. First of all, full timeouts make the casual fan impatient with say, a five-six point lead with fifteen seconds left. I’ll see people stream out of the stands and to their cars, and I’ll start paying attention to other things, like YouTube videos or what not at home. In other words, the end of the game feel stilted compared to the 47 minutes preceding its finish. Is it like this in any other sport? Anti-climactic is the word we’re looking for.

But there is a little tinkering we can do. If teams can’t have say, a two timeout limit, let’s convert all full timeouts after two minutes left into 20-second timeouts. This makes it easier for fans at home, because they don’t have to sit through all the stupid TV commercials they’ve already seen five to six times (do you really think I’ll visit AutoTrader.com the SEVENTH time around?). It makes it easier for fans at the game who have enjoyed great flow for two hours and twenty-five minutes only to watch it to grind to a halt in the final five. More importantly, players who are hot are likely to stay hot if there is less interruption at the end of the game.

Also, get rid of this “advance the ball to halfcourt” rule, one of the most retarded ideas ever. Halfcourt sets are more crowded, less frenetic, and less likely to produce a meaningful result. You’re likely to see someone like Kobe, LeBron, Dirk, Wade, spot up, try to be like Mike, hold the ball for five-six seconds, and see a ridiculous fadeaway shot. I hate this. This isn’t real basketball. Play full court and run a real play. Ball movement, set up something in the post, or run a screen and roll. A halfcourt set is more likely to produce a static result.

In college, while there are full timeouts, they’re a little bit shorter than NBA full timeouts. And there is no advancing into the frontcourt. So the flow isn’t interrupted that much. The NBA needs to adapt to make their game more palatable. I don’t know what the stats are, but I RARELY see a team come back to win anyway. In college basketball, you don’t have anyone advancing the ball. So speed the pace up and let the game keep flowing the way it does.

Continuing from the 3rd quarter.

Cut shot to Phil Jackson wearing Jordan Nikes. Sweet.

Speed lineup in for the Pistons, with Thomas, Salley and Rodman and Laimbeer all in. MJ driving to the hole guarded by Rodman…ends up getting blocked out by Salley. Here are the Bad Boys.

Pippen with a nice block, but no one’s boxing out for Chicago. Two putbacks by Laimbeer and Thomas.

Scottie can’t buy a jumper, and he leaves Rodman alone in the paint for a layup. Chicago only has a two point lead now.

Another offensive board for Detroit. Someone might think of putting Bill Cartwright back in.

Salley missing two dunk opportunities, but Detroit gets another rebound and the Microwave ties the game. You’ve got to love Doug Collins coached teams–they blew leads like no one’s buisness.

MJ goes into triple coverage and make a layup. This does not bode well for Chicago if that’s their fallback strategy. Read the rest of this entry »