Thunder-Lakers: Lots of media attention
The Thunder has garnered tons of media attention by playing the Lakers. Not just from the Los Angeles media, which is vast, but nationally. Sports Illustrated, ESPN, Yahoo, AOL. All have been following the Thunder in this series.
The Thunder has generated a ton of interest because of how they’ve played and who they’re playing. I’ve been on several radio shows across the country — Syracuse, Vancouver and Bakersfield, Calif. — just in the last 2-3 days. Here is a link to the Bakersfield interview, if you want to know the kinds of things on the minds of California media: https://www.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8971678e60626e7db2a9
Of course, the media attention will only soar if the Thunder wins Game 6. Right now, four of the eight first-round series are over, all in less than seven games, and Phoenix-Portland could join them.
If Thunder-Lakers goes to seven games, it will be a wild scene in Los Angeles on Sunday. It could be the only first-round series to go seven, and it would be the ultimate storyline. A novice team and franchise against the stately Lakers, winning of 15 NBA titles. The media glare, led by ABC’s Sunday afternoon audience, will be huge.
NCAA Tournament expansion: Could be worse
The NCAA Tournament is expanding to 68 teams, a thoroughly terrible idea that has one redeeming value. It could be a lot worse.
And the NCAA even prepared us for it, floating the idea — almost to a certainty — that the tournament would expand to 96 teams. When compared to 96 teams, 68 doesn’t seem so bad.
It’s a little like the teen-ager coming in and telling his parents how close to death he came, getting them all concerned and thankful that little Johnny is OK, then springing them with the news that he made straight D’s in his report card.
Anyway, 96 teams would have been the biggest mess in the history of sport, cramming 95 games into a 19-day span. A field of 68 we can live with, after the near-death experience.
The new format means the following:
* While the NCAA says no details have been determined for the 68-team format, don’t believe it. The format means four play-in games instead 0f one, and it won’t be Syracuse or Kansas State or Auburn in those play-in games. Eight low majors will be paired in the four play-in games. Arkansas-Pine Bluff vs. Robert Morris. South Carolina State vs. Monmouth. Etc.
Texas coach Rick Barnes supported this exact model when we chatted in March, and Barnes said the format would give three extra little schools a chance to win an NCAA Tournament game.
I don’t buy it. Beating Arkansas-Pine Bluff is not what the NCAA Tournament is all about. Beating Villanova, which Robert Morris almost did last March, is what the NCAAs are all about for the little guy.
This format is about giving three extra major-conference schools a slot in the NCAA.
* The new format could lead to some bigger seed upsets. We’ve never had a 16-seed beat a No. 1 seed, but we’ve had some No. 15′s beat a No. 2 (Coppin State over South Carolina; Hampton over Iowa State; Richmond over Syracuse; Santa Clara over Arizona). And even more No. 14′s have beaten a No. 3.
We’ll see more seed upsets now. Because the old No. 15′s now will be No. 16′s, which means the old No. 14′s will be 15′s. The old 13′s will be 14′s. A 13 over a No. 4 seed is not that big a deal, but under the new format, that same team will be a 14 seed.
So expect more upsets.
* The pressure on coaches will INCREASE. The biggest reason coaches support expansion of the tournament is to counter the pressure of not making the field. Coaches don’t want to lose their jobs, and anyone from a major conference who doesn’t make the field is in danger of being booted.
With three extra slots, that releases the pressure on three coaches. But it turns up the pressure on every other coach. If you can’t make the cut at 68, your credibility is further weakened.
But it’s better than if the field had expanded to 96, which would have meant a vast majority of major-conference schools would have been invited. And if you didn’t make the field of 96, what’s the possible reason you should keep your job?
Even at 68, the pressure isn’t relieved on coaches. It’s increased.
Thunder-Lakers: Kobe pays Westbrook ultimate compliment
Kevin Durant outscored Kobe Bryant 17-13 Tuesday night. Down night for both superstars? Hardly.
Kobe was the star of the Lakers’ 111-87 rout in Game 5 of this Western Conference playoff series. Kobe said it was one of the Lakers’ best games of the year, and considering the stakes, probably ranks No. 1.
It also was one of the milestone defensive games of Kobe’s career. Just as Durant was hailed for his all-around performance in Game 3 (19 rebounds; tough fourth-quarter defense on Kobe), Kobe’s performance in neutralizing Russell Westbrook will be long remembered in LaLa Land.
Oklahoma City Thunder guard Russell Westbrook, left, shoots past Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant during the first half of Game 5 of a first-round NBA basketball playoff series, in Los Angeles, Tuesday, April 27, 2010. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)
Laker coach Phil Jackson said Kobe came to him Monday wanting the assignment of guarding Westbrook, who has toyed with Laker veteran Derek Fisher. “We had to make some adjustments,” Kobe said. “Ron (Artest) has been working extremely hard on Durant. Russell has just done such a great job of getting into the paint. I think I’m a pretty good defensive player myself. So I took the assignment.”
Consider it the ultimate compliment to Westbrook. That’s how good he’s gotten. Kobe Bryant not only wants to guard him as a challenge, Kobe feels he needs to give the Lakers a chance to win.
Westbrook played mostly miserable; 4-of-13 shooting, 15 points, six assists, five rebounds and eight turnovers. That shows you how good Westbrook is. Even on a terrible night, he’s still getting things done.
Meanwhile, Durant didn’t have a good game: 17 points on 5-of-14 shooting, with just three rebounds, three assists and three turnovers. The Thunder won’t win many games with Durant scoring 17 points. These guys aren’t the Lakers; there are no Pau Gasols and Andrew Bynums to throw the ball to.
Speaking of which, it’s high time Jeff Green started making shots. The Thunder can survive with Durant and Westbrook carrying the load, but it sure would help if Green started shooting above 30 percent. Green made three of 10 shots Tuesday; he’s 17 of 58 in the series, 29.3 percent.
Green never has much revealing to say about his play, good or bad. He did address the slow start; for the fourth time in five games, the Thunder stumbled early. This time, the Thunder missed its first 13 shots while allowing the Lakers to make 12 of their first 15 shots.
“We can’t come out lackadaisical like we did,” Green said. “We can’t allow them to get such a good lead on us in the first quarter. We can’t dig ourself a hole like that.”
Now the question is, will the series remain on home-team-dominant course, or have the Lakers commandeered the momentum? That’s a troubling scenario for the Thunder, but it’s also the same question, the other way, that we had after Game 4.
Laker coach Phil Jackson said his team wants to end the series in OKC. “There will obviously be tremendous crowd energy there for the young team, and they will feed off that energy as a young team will do. We have faced this for so many years, we understand we will have to save some energy for their surges and we will play through.”
Why can’t the Lakers play like this every night? “We ask the same question,” said backup point guard Jordan Farmar. “It’s tough; they do a great job at home. They come out really firing and their crowd gives them a different kind of life. We have to try to come out the way we did tonight and take the crowd out of the game.”
Thunder-Lakers: Frenzy continues
True story. Driving down Interstate 10 in Santa Monica, Calif., today, on the way to the Thunder shootaround at Santa Monica High School, we listened to 710 AM, the Lakers’ flagship radio station. The talk is non-stop Lakers.
Like everyone else in America, the LA media is all smitten with the Thunder. Only it’s worse. Some Cavaliers fan called in from Cleveland and said he’s pulling for the Lakers. Said he’s been hoping someone out West could take care of the Thunder and help clear the way for the Cavs.
Thunder fans celebrate during the NBA basketball game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the NBA playoffs at the Ford Center in Oklahoma City, Saturday, April 24, 2010. Photo by Nate Billings, The Oklahoman
Scott Brooks laughed at the story. But despite the Thunder becoming a national phenomenon, Brooks says his players remain well-grounded as Game 5 approaches tonight.
“They respect the game,” Brooks said. “They respect the opponent. You gradually gain respect throughout the season, and we’ve done that.”
Brooks said he thinks the Lakers respect the Thunder. “We’ve always felt we going to give whoever we played a good series.”
The Thunder faces some ominous history. Since moving to Los Angeles, the Lakers are 18-0 at home in Game 5′s in which the series is tied 2-2. And the Lakers are 11-1 in Game 7′s at home, losing only to the Celtics in the 1969 NBA Finals.
But Brooks said his 14-year-old son never has beaten him in a variety of sports. And he tells his son to keep at it, that it will happen some day.
We’ll see if some day is night.
Chat Recap: Berry Tramel
Thunder-Lakers: Another late night for the weary
Another 9:30 p.m. (or later) start awaits Oklahomans enjoying the frenzy over the Thunder-Lakers series. So far in this series, we’ve had starts of 9:40 p.m., 8:40 p.m., 8:40 p.m.
People are staying up to watch — the Thunder television ratings are exponentially higher than they’ve ever been — but it makes for bleary eyes in Oklahoma work places. And get used to it.
Oklahoma City's Kevin Durant (35) moves to the hoop past Pau Gasol (16) of L.A. during the NBA basketball game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the NBA playoffs at the Ford Center in Oklahoma City, Saturday, April 24, 2010. Photo by Nate Billings, The Oklahoman
The Thunder is headed for a lot of years in the Western Conference playoffs, and the NBA isn’t planning to change the scheduling format.
I asked commissioner David Stern last week if the league was concerned about the late tip times in the Central Time Zone or if the NBA planned to do anything about it.
The answer was a simple no.
Stern made two points: 1. The ratings INCREASE as the game goes later. 2. The NBA has fans in California, too.
Almost all Western Conference playoff games start at 8:30 p.m. (or a few a minutes later) or 9:30 p.m. Central time. If the game is played in the Pacific Time Zone, it’s usually 7:30 local, which makes for 9:30 in Oklahoma. If it’s back in the middle of the country, it’s 8:30 local. At least the NBA doesn’t start any games later than 8:45 or so local time.
I asked Stern why couldn’t all Western Conference games start at 8:30 p.m. Central, which would be 9:30 Eastern time and 6:30 in California. He basically said the TV networks have been great partners and the league cooperates. You can’t argue with money.
The problem is, some games are ending ridiculously late. Thunder-Lakers Game 2 ended at 12:33 a.m. Oklahoma time, which is 1:33 a.m. on the East Coast. You think there are some NBA fans in New York who wanted to see if Kevin Durant could make that 3-pointer with eight seconds left and the Thunder down two? If so, they had to stay up literally until the middle of the night.
The only salvation for Thunder fans is Sunday afternoon games. Game 7, if it gets that far, almost surely would be Sunday afternoon back in LA. Even that would cut into the sleep time of Oklahoma City fans. No Sunday afternoon nap.
Thunder-Lakers: NBA’s best series
These NBA Playoffs largely have been duds. With a few notable exceptions. Ranking the eight playoff series so far.
1. Thunder-Lakers: Tied 2-2. Three tight games and an underdog blowout. The ascension of a ridiculously-young team with stars. Hard to ask for more.
Oklahoma City's Serge Ibaka grabs a loose ball from L.A.'s Derek Fisher, middle, and Lamar Odom during the NBA basketball game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Oklahoma City Thunder in the first round of the NBA playoffs at the Ford Center in Oklahoma City, Saturday, April 24, 2010. Photo by Sarah Phipps, The Oklahoma
2. Spurs-Mavericks: San Antonio leads 3-1, and three games have been compelling to the end. Plus the startling revelation that Manu Ginobili is the Spurs’ best player.
3. Suns-Blazers: tied 2-2. Not great games, with only one good finish. But great theater, with Portland persevering despite massive injuries and Phoenix winning despite almost blowing up its roster.
4. Jazz-Nuggets: Utah leads 3-1 despite being without Mehmet Okur and Andrei Kirilenko, while Denver has staggered without coach George Karl. The two 3-1 series in the West are led by the team without homecourt advantage.
5. Celtics-Heat: Boston leads 3-1. Hard to get excited about a series that was 3-0 Boston before Dwyane Wade went off Sunday, but at least Boston-Miami has had three single-digit finishes. The rest of the East has been awful.
6. Magic-Bobcats: Orlando leads 3-0, but at least two of the games were decently-contested. In the East, that counts as a good series.
7. Cavs-Bulls: Cleveland leads 3-1. Three blowouts and a Chicago victory.
8. Hawks-Bucks: Atlanta leads 2-1. Double-digit decision all three games.
Did you notice a trend? The best serieses are in the West.
Emails in on Thunder-Lakers
Tony: “It appears like the Lakers are moving in slow motion compared to the Thunder. What’s up with Kobe? I can’t believe he just got up and let the bench while his team was still playing, not a good sign of a leader. I guess with Kobe it’s all about him; if he’s not the main attraction he has to get up and leave so people will still notice. The TV sports announcer said he had to get his knees iced down. Looks to me like that is something that can be done while sitting on the bench while still supporting your team.”
Oh, I can buy the Kobe ice deal. When you wave the white flag, you wave the white flag. Go get ready for Game 5. But the first point is fascinating. I agree; the Lakers look like they’re in slow motion. This entire series has been about age. That was a negative going in for the Thunder, but it has become a positive. The Thunder’s youth has been turned into plus.
Dan: “I expect you to eat a little crow since you picked the Boomers (your word) to lose in four. Your cynicism is getting repulsive.”
When in doubt, I say fry it. Everything from calamari to okra is danged good fried. No reason crow shouldn’t follow suit.
Trent: “I respect your opinion and like yourself I’m working extremely hard while being handed nothing in life. When writing about the Thunder, can you ease up on the bias towards youth? The Lakers in four pick and constantly harping on the lack of experience, Durant is scoring too much too young, the article of reverence towards how hard Kobe works at an advanced age. Like I said, I work extremely hard for everything I have and most likely will have. I’ve learned not to resent those that work just as hard but success seems to come more natural. Because of the Boomers, you are a national columnist that has more opportunities to be a guest expert. Try to look at the positive. I enjoy your columns except for this bias.”
Who said I was working hard? I’m on the back porch, sipping mint juleps, watching the gardeners manicure the croquet court. Like I said, age is the overriding theme of this series. It has shifted from a negative to a positive for the Thunder, but it remains the overriding theme. As for my bias, that strikes me as a peculiar word use. Durant scoring too much? That’s not an accurate description of what I wrote. What I said was, I didn’t want to see emphasis on individual records, which the Thunder clearly fell into there during Durant’s streak. And I didn’t say one word about how hard Kobe was working. I said he was old. If you think he’s working hard, that’s on you.
Bob: “I was listening to an ESPN national show and the sportscaster said it was time to drop the nicknames. Superstars go by their first name only: Michael, Kareem, Kobe, LeBron, Magic or Ervin. I am sure you can extend this list.”
I’m not extending the list. I’m contracting the list. What’s next? Take away cotton candy from the concession stand? It’s not even true. Oscar was the Big O. Wilt was the Big Dipper and Wilt the Stilt. Magic was Magic. His nickname became his name. I love nicknames. I’m not crazy about KD, and I like Durantulas for the team better than Durantula for the ballplayer. But no way will I take to calling him Kevin.
Tom: “I agree with the Kobe article, but I almost wish the article was published after the series. It is still good article. I guess I am just a little suspicious about bulletin board material at any level. Sometimes it comes back and bites like heck.”
Turns out Kobe’s not a regular reader of The Oklahoman or newsok. Either that, or he’s got the good sense to believe what he reads. Looks like my column had the opposite effect. He didn’t even take a shot the first 15 minutes. Maybe tomorrow I’ll write about the economy.
Jim: “I was in Tulsa for a networking event on Thursday night and missed the game. I got back to my hotel room at halftime of the Thunder game and watched the broadcast of the second half on. The crowd was beyond awesome, even on TV. Beyond the OKC victory, the best part was the post-game breakdown on TNT with Barkley, Kenny Smith and the gang. Kenny Smith said that within three years Kevin Durant would be the best player in the NBA. Chris Webber, also on the panel, made him repeat the statement. Barkley’s jaw dropped and then he said. ‘LeBron is rolling over in his grave.’ I just howled. What a great comeback. The good news for me is that I get to go to Saturday night’s game, courtesy of my mother in-law.”
It’s possible you’ve got the mother-in-law of the year. How about this. How about we post a no-bashing-your-mother-in-law zone? I had a fabulous mother-in-law; cancer claimed her 25 years ago. All kinds of people we can rip. Let’s honor our mothers-in-law.
Jeremy: “Are the NBA playoffs over YET? What a nightmare for me. I can’t even enjoy watching the national media ignore the miniscule importance of last night’s cute little game at the Ford Center (where it could barely muster third-tier importance behind the NFL draft and the Cavaliers losing) because all they want to talk about is Tim Tebow. Welcome to my sports apocalypse.”
All kinds of NBA-haters still around, but I tell you, you’re trying to stop a water wave. No chance. My mom, who has never cared one hoot about the NBA, watched the game Saturday night. A 70something man in my church stayed up to the very end of Game 2, the one that ended at 12:33 a.m. Oklahoma time. The Thunder is building a wide fan base.
Donna, the wife of the late Jim Koch, who coached Alvan Adams and the great 1972 Putnam City High team, wrote: “It’s been an exciting week. Loved your columns. Keep it up. Maybe the OKC Thunder will come out on top. Don’t you just love it when they slap down those blocked shots? Wish Coach Jim was here to enjoy all this.
Thanks, Donna. You made a great point. This great ride provided the Thunder is not just a monument to Presti/Brooks/Durant etc. Not just a tribute to the great college hoops tradition. This basketball frenzy is partly the work of all the great coaches from decade after decade who helped build basketball interest.
Carl had two beefs: “1. If you happen to bump into any of the dubious folks from ESPN or TNT, could you gracefully remind them that we are not Oak City? It’s either OKC or Oklahoma City. That’s their only choices. 2. Did you see the Laker fan with the sign that read ‘Seattle Got Robbed!’ I would love to see someone tonight with a sign that reads ‘Minneapolis Got Robbed!’”
I’ll give you one of the gripes. I’ll give you No. 2. If you want the Laker-Thunder series in Seattle, you’ve got to want it in Minneapolis, too. But No. 1, who cares. Oak City. OKC. Whatever. Our late publisher, Edward Gaylord, didn’t care for the OKC term. So we rarely used it. Now it’s become really popular. Those things don’t matter. The only problem is if you raise a ruckus. When Cal State-Northridge used to come to the Women’s College World Series, its officials would lecture everyone on what to call their school. Made them seem awfully pompous.
Dustin: “I disagreed with your statement that Jeff Green ‘isn’t really a 3-point shooter.’ This season he’s shooting 33% (which isn’t great) but last season he shot 39% from three on 247 attempts. He’s already shown he can shoot the ball, and I believe he can get back to his 2009 shooting percentage. In the meantime if Green is open from three, he should shoot the ball.”
I’m not so sure. You’re right, Green was solid last season. But now he’s shooting too much; 247 last year, 312 this season. That’s too many for a guy making a third of his 3-pointers. Green is occasionally solid as a spot-up 3-point marksman, but he’s much more effective driving the ball, and he’s not driving nearly enough.
James: “I liked your article today, very good except one part: ‘No way is the Thunder going to win this playoff series.’ I can’t believe you don’t give the Thunder even a small chance. Everyone knows they aren’t the favorite, but statements like yours zap enthusiasm from the fans like me (and then made me mad enough to write you). Kooky things happen, you know, Bryant or Gasol or Bynum could get re-injured or the Thunder could catch fire from the perimeter, Durant could go to the foul line 20 times a game in OKC, etc. or the Thunder could just simply play better than the Lakers.”
James wrote this Wednesday morning. He certainly looks even better now. Doesn’t seem like I zapped much enthusiasm. It’s like going to Vegas. You know you’re not winning the jackpot, but you still hold out hope. I still don’t think the Thunder will win. It’s a best-of-three series, with two games in LA. Tough, tough assignment. So far, the home team has won every game. The Thunder has been the surprise team in these NBA playoffs. But if they win this series, they will lap their surprise status to this point.
Jim: “I am not much of a pro basketball fan, but as I watch a little of the playoffs, I am more convinced that the players could care less what the coaches say during the game. All that writing up plays on their little boards mean nothing, and the speeches they give during timeouts, give me a break, I heard better talks in high school. Only thing the coach is good for during the game is substituting players and hollering at the refs. And why do they need a zillion assistants sitting there? If they want to keep up with fouls, they need one guy.”
The assistant coaches do their jobs on off days, with practices and scouting reports, etc. And generally speaking, Jim’s quite cynical. But he’s got a point. Some teams and players DON’T listen to their coach much. That’s what makes the Thunder so different.
Edgar: “Love you, bro. Miss the old call-in show. But drop the Boomers. It’s lame and not appropriate since Cowboy fans enjoy the Thunder as well. It’s much more than annoyance from readers, it’s visceral anger. Just to let you know. Colonel Schnelly? Good one. Nicknames are organic. I like Brian Davis’ Big Blue. Is that not the Michigan nickname, though? Seems I’ve heard it before.”
Kentucky is Big Blue. And the name of the Stillwater city lake is Boomer Lake. So that visceral anger really is just people looking for something to be offended by.
Mike: “Please ditch the ‘Boomer’ nickname for the Thunder. To me it sounds bush league.”
I think singular nicknames sound bush league. Singular nicknames are what demands a secondary nickname.
Rumar, a Kobe fan: “I think it’s foolish on your part to underestimate greatness. You come up with a headline and title it, ‘Thunder shouldn’t fear Kobe’? It just shows that you most definitely don’t understand who he is as a player, if you’re going to go by particular playoff scoring averages, then you’re even more naive. I guess you’re saying that the Thunder shouldn’t take him seriously, huh? It’s dumb analysis on your part. Kobe doesn’t have to average 30 some points in the playoffs in his career to be great. Just because other players have averaged 30 for their playoff careers doesn’t take away who Kobe is, which is great. You should know better than to provoke someone whose career has been skyrocketing for 14 great years.”
I’m serious with this question. Has the sports world ever seen any group of people more irrational than Kobe Bryant fans? I mean, the guy is a wonderful player, has been for a long time, but his fans revere him more than Catholics revere the Virgin Mary. I have to say, that piece of insight I wrote a week looks pretty darned good now.
Andrea: “With two hours until Game 1 tipoff, I’m just wondering what could have been. Is the worst loss of the season against Golden State? Win that one, and then the Thunder would be the seventh seed playing Dallas. I think the Thunder would have a decent chance against Dallas, despite how good the Mavericks have been playing. But against the Lakers? Thunder are lucky if they win one.”
Losing to Golden State after a 19-point lead was ridiculous. But here’s the deal. Drawing the Lakers was the greatest thing in the world for the Thunder. Look at the confidence the Thunder has grown, win or lose. You don’t get that against Dallas.
Let’s get to some OU football. Don: “Correct me if I’m wrong, but when Sam Bradford got hit in the BYU game, the tackler came in past Trent Williams at left guard.”
OK. Since you asked, Williams was playing left tackle, and the BYU guy was a blitzer who didn’t get picked up. I have no idea who was responsible.
James: “Consider writing a piece on the status of the USC caper. Bush just paid the Lake guy 300k for the money he gave Bush while he was at SC. That means the deposition transcripts that would have been available to the NCAA won’t be. SC & Mike Garrett’s defense is ‘we didn’t know.’ Yeah, right. My thought is that Bush probably didn’t claim the 300k as income for the tax year that he got it, and that’s likely confirmed by the U.S. attorney and IRS criminal division agents being present at meetings with Lake. By repaying the money, classifying it as a loan and amending the tax return for that year, Bush can likely avoid an indictment. What the payment does to the NCAA investigation is anyone’s guess. OU has a huge stake in this dogfight. If SC has to forfeit all of their victories, will that mean another national championship to Norman? Will Vince Young then get the Heisman? Good questions.”
Great insight. Terrible questions. Can everyone please put to rest the idea that OU will somehow get the national title if USC is taken down? You don’t win national titles six years after the fact. You don’t win Heismans that way, either. The Sooners would be embarrassed to even be asked if they want the BCS trophy, considering how they were schooled in that Orange Bowl. But the tax issues seem right on point. Bush isn’t trying to dodge the NCAA. He might be trying to dodge the IRS.
Jon: “It’s totally crazy that Charles Thompson is playing in an OU legends game on Owen Field. Charles was part of a time that dragged the OU program through the mud! I believe in second chances, but a legend? This is a disgrace to the fans who have attended OU game for more than 30 years. David, Joe and Bob should be ashamed for letting this happen.”
Well, legends is not the right word for that game. It’s an alumni game. I believe in second chances. Maybe CT has turned over a new leaf. Many credible people say he has. I’m not all that crazy about a world void of redemption.
Several readers were motivated by the 20-inning Cardinal-Met game. Bill: “The 20-inning game brought to mind some changes I would make if I were commissioner. First, professional football is the only major sport that has figured out that there must be an end to a game, sometime. In other words, games can end in ties. Time was, only baseball had a rule that one team or the other must win. The other three recognized a tie after regulation. I don’t have any problem with overtimes as long as it is reasonable. The Cards game the other night is one that should have ended after 12 innings. The vast majority of the crowd in St. Louis, a well known baseball town, agreed with me. Nobody I know of is interested in watching baseball for seven hours. Here are the other changes I would make: 1. Put a clock on the pitcher. Ten seconds is plenty of time to get a sign and pitch. Fifteen seconds is not unreasonable. 2. Why pitch four times to someone who we want to intentionally walk? Tell the ump and wave him to first. 3. If someone gets hit in the head, as happened on the Cubs-Mets game Monday night, he gets credited with a run. Not just first base. 4. I have often wondered why baseball does not at least experiment with offensive and defensive specialists. Dick Stuart was a great hitter but only so-so in the field. Mickey Mantle was also great at the plate but his bad knees made him only average in centerfield. Willie Mays could have played full time, as could many others. Why is a pitcher pulled simply because the manager needs a pinch-hitter. Leave a good pitcher in to pitch. He ain’t going to hit in the AL anyway.
I like marathon games. There’s something cool about an 18-inning game played past midnight. If you’re tired of the game, go home, which a lot of people do. But for those who want to keep watching, the game remains. I don’t mind the four pitches for an intentional walk, and I wouldn’t give someone four bases for getting hit in the head. How about we just stiffen the penalties for throwing at batters? Finally, we do have specialists. The DH rule is exactly what Bill advocates. The DH rule is a pinch-hitter pinch-hitting for the pitcher, with two exceptions. 1. The pinch-hitter can keep returning to pinch-hit in that spot as long as he isn’t skipped. 2. The pitcher gets to keep coming back.
Keith: “Did you watch the 20-inning game? I am a lifelong Card fan and was very frustrated with how LaRussa managed that game. However, nobody at FOX during Saturday night’s game or on ESPN during Sunday night’s game had one comment on the sorry job LaRussa did. Are they afraid to question LaRussa? I place that loss squarely on LaRussa’s shoulders. Joe Morgan did comment that when LaRussa removed Holliday from the game and put the pitcher’s spot behind Pujols that it hurt them several times. Ya think? That was not the only blunder, but it was a big one.”
I cut LaRussa some slack. I didn’t watch the game, but you never manage late in a game on how you might be affected in the 13th or 16th or 20th inning. You try to win the game in the ninth or 10th inning.
Joe: “We watched the 20-inning Mets-Cardinals game. As a lifelong Cardinal fan, I’ve never been more disgusted. St Louis had a good chance to win several times, but Tony LaRussa let pitchers bat twice in the late innings with the bases loaded, two outs. He could have pinch-hit at least once. He used position players to pitch for the last several innings because he didn’t want to use a spot starter to get a few outs. So: Mets 2, Cards 1. Don’t know what you think of LaRussa, but there are times when I think he does not want to win enough to overcome his stubborn arrogance, if it means disturbing his starting rotation, etc. Because he’s won a lot of games in the past, I believe he thinks he is bullet-proof, and if his unorthodox managing tactics fail, he isn’t hurt and the (maybe) 25 percent of the time they succeed they will call him a great manager. I for one will be glad when he’s no longer the Cardinal manager.”
Here’s what you have to remember about baseball. Decision-making is not always about one particular game in baseball. Sometimes you have to let a game become endangered to keep the squad in line for future success.
Holland wrote about OU basketball, the flavor of the week last week: “Please tell me Joe Castiglione will remove Jeff Capel if we have another season next year like this past? The program is a joke; four players returning and one of them shouldn’t even be on scholarship. We may go 0-16 in the Big 12 next year and even worse, the LNC will have more OSU fans for Bedlam and probably KU fans for the KU game than OU fans. Embarrassing.”
I don’t think anyone should look at the record next season. They should look at the program. Have quality individuals been brought in? Is there hope for the future? Has the roster stabilized? That’s a lot more important than if the Sooners beat Nebraska.
Dan: “I agreed with your Capel analysis and had a few comments on his press conference and subsequent interviews. First, he always comes off well because he speaks well and presents himself very professionally. The problem is the same thing that you see in politics all the time where people confuse ‘polish’ and public speaking skills with actual substantive commentary. I would suggest that this is the case with Capel as well. I am always much more concerned with the content of what is being said than the packaging of the material. We still haven’t addressed the fact that ALL of these problems that face OU basketball are owned by Capel. 1. Players don’t play hard – his problem. 2. Players aren’t a team – his problem. 3. Players are selfish – his problem. 4. Players don’t work hard enough – his problem, etc., etc. We could go on for days but the bottom line is that he created and owns this nonsense. The scary thing for me is that I do not hear him stating this. He said he honestly doesn’t believe there is one thing he could have done differently last year. Wow. Now that is scary. Worst team in 40 some odd years and nothing he could have done? Can’t wait till next year! All I want to hear my coach say is ‘I own this, I have learned from it, I will correct it.’ Capel was 0 for 3 in my book, for what it’s worth.”
I can’t argue much with Dan. I think he made great points. I do think there is value in coming across well; it makes the fan base feel better.
Commissioner duel: Stern shines
Thursday was a big night for commissioner. Bud Selig laid low, but the NFL’s Roger Goodell and the NBA’s David Stern were front and center, both standing up for their sport.
Goodell hosted the NFL Draft, a day or two after he ordered a six-game suspension for wayward Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. OU’s Gerald McCoy ended all talk that Goodell might have little support among the young players.
McCoy, drafted third overall by the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, broke down in tears, celebrated with his family and finally took the stage. And bearhugged Goodell, setting off a series of hugs for the commissioner among drafted players.
A few minutes later, Stern conducted a press conference in Oklahoma City’s Ford Center and suddenly switched from his normally-jovial, intellectual self into a hard, well, stern leader. Stern grew clearly agitated when asked about the constant criticism of NBA referees by coaches and players.
“If someone wants to try me the rest of these playoffs, make my day,” Stern said of additional hefty fines or suspensions. “The game is too important. I don’t think people who trash it are respectful, and we’ll do what we have to do.”
The Lakers’ Phil Jackson and Orlando’s Stan Van Gundy have been fined this month for their harping about officiating.
“I wish I had it to do all over again,” Stern said. “Starting 20 years ago I’d be suspending Phil and Pat Riley for all the games they play in the media. You guys know our referees go out there and knock themselves out and do the best job they can.
“Our coaches do whatever they can to work them publicly. What that does is erode fan confidence and then we get some of the situations we have. Our coaches should be quiet because this is a good business that makes them good livings. If they don’t like it, they should go get a job somewhere else.”
Stern didn’t say that whimsically. He said it stern.
So, which of the commissioners had the better Thursday? I say Stern.
Stern is right. The constant criticism does erode confidence in the product. NBA games are well-called. Refs doing a mostly-fantastic job. Do they miss some calls? Absolutely. Is the game difficult to call? Absolutely. I’ve written this before; one of the advantages of getting a close seat, which I do for most Thunder games, is a clearer view of how strong is the officiating. You can’t appreciate it on television. In real life, the officiating is superb.
Some of the ref-ripping is deserved, because of Tim Donaghy, the scandalized ref who admitted to manipulating games. The NBA should have snuffed him out long ago and is now paying the price.
But the idea that refs are determining games is a credibility-killer for the sport.
“It’s corrosive,” Stern said. “Because of the pressure cooker that is the NBA playoffs over the years, I’ve let it go.”
He’s letting it go no more. Stern clearly was upset and sent the message he wants it stopped now. That’s what a leader has to do, for the good of his game.
No way was it easy for Stern to get so riled up. So clearly emotional about the subject. But it needed to be done, and Stern did it.
Roger Goodell had a good Thursday. Stern had a better Thursday.
Thunder-Lakers: Pre-game chat with Phil Jackson
Phil Jackson was his usual interesting self at the Lakers’ shootaround early this afternoon at the Ford Center. A portion of the informal press briefing.
What do you want your team to think about tonight more than anything?
Jackson: “Good shots. Take good shots. Rebound. Those are two things I thought we failed a little bit. That part will take care of the rest of the game.”
When you have open shots, and the Thunder is giving you some open shots, are they hard not to take?
Jackson: “Yeah it’s hard. But I thought in the fourth quarter (Thursday night), we took some contested shots. Their defense was in us, up on us, and we took shots anyway.”
You’re not getting calls, but is part of working through that taking the ball to the basket?
Jackson: “We always take direct lines of principle. If you’ve got a direct line to the basket, you’ve got to go with it. Things will happen the right way out there.”
How much more emphasis will there on passing the ball inside?
Jackson: “We have to get the ball inside, there’s no doubt that. That’s where our strength is. We’re also not going to force the ball in there if it costs us the basketball. We have to be judicious about it, yet persistent.”
What can you do to get Lamar Odom going?
Jackson: “He’s going to find his way. Things happen for people. You get a defensive stop, you get a rebound, things will happen. That’s one of the things, he’s the best in the open floor when he rebounds the ball. Right now, they’ve done a good job, Green and Ibaka have done a real good job of playing him. You have to give them credit. That happens.”
Odom’s minutes are down. Is that by choice or just the way the game’s gone?
Jackson: “Cominbation of both. How much his presence is felt on the floor and how the game is going.”
Ibaka looks like he’s jumping at everything, trying to block shots. Is that something you can take advantage of?
Jackson: “Experienced players know how to do that. They certainly should. Last game, they had four team blocks as opposed to 17 the game before. So that’s a big difference. Some of that has to do with how many outside shots we took. Theyinfluenced the game in that regard.”
It looked like Artest did another good job on Durant on Thursday night?
Jackson: “Ron did a good job. Some came when Kobe was guarding him. Situations, they cross-matched effectively, to have space. Different defender on him. But Ron did fine.”
Tonight is a chance to keep this series from coming back here? How important is that?
Jackson: “It’s about homecourt advantage. It really is. You want to take it away from your opponent. You want to store the homecourt advantage you have. So that’s what it’s about. It’s not about, if we lose, we have come to Oklahoma. No. It’s about coming here and trying to take something away from them.”
Russell Westbrook likes like a developing star. What do you do as a team to stop him?
Jackson: “We really have asked our big guys to keep focus on him. When they turn their back, when they start getting a little bit lazy coming back on defense, we lose the advantage of walling him off. Put people between him and the basket. That’s really the effectiveness we have to have.”
Most Phil Jackson teams are inconsistent late in the season. Not this one. What do you expect tonight?
Jackson: “I usually have a gut feeling about it, these games. Right now, I’m just kind of weighing it. Maybe I’m hungry. Maybe I better have lunch.”
