Due to popular demand (okay, one guy asked), I'm compiling all the pieces in the Volunteer Commissioner Series into one helpful post.
In the VCS, I graciously offer my services to fix broken sports. Or rather, to enhance sports who have not asked for my help. Some of my suggestions have already been enacted (You're welcome Baseball!) and some I've changed my mind about (the USA-Portugal match in the 2014 World Cup showed me the entertainment value of a draw).
Anyway, enjoy:
Fixing Softball (Women's softball)
The Loser's Out Manifesto (Pick-up basketball)
The Beautiful Game's Flaw (soccer)
The Slowest Game (lacrosse).
The Winter Classic (Major League Baseball)
Swimming is Boring (Swimming...which is unfixable.)
I was going to help out Major League Baseball again - incredibly long low-scoring games are not good for the sport - but MLB is already testing out some of the suggestions I was going to make.
And eventually I'll get around to fixing Women's Lacrosse, which has the single stupidest - and easily fixable rule I've ever seen in any sport.
Showing posts with label basketball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label basketball. Show all posts
Thursday, December 4, 2014
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Why I Rooted for Lebron James
Being a sports fan is a lot like belonging to a religion.
There is a core belief system that makes perfect sense to you, but seems ludicrous to others*. There are sacred stories, fiery preachers, and creation myths. Among the congregation are the fanatical, the merely devout, and the ones who only show up on the High Holy Days. There are prayers.
There are houses of worship - some old and majestic and rich in history, some new and modern and rich in technology. Conversions are rare, and usually caused by marriage or moving far away. Pilgrimages are made, saints honored, and sacrifices endured. The child is often raised in the religion of the parent, and people of the same region often have the same beliefs. Perhaps most importantly, there is faith – a faith that is often challenged, occasionally doubted, and sometimes rewarded.
And there is heresy.
* To quote the great Dave Barry: “…the thing about religion is that everybody else’s always appears stupid. For example, if you read about some religious sect in India that believes God wants people to drink their own urine, you don’t say to yourself, ‘Isn’t that amazing, the diversity of belief systems Man has developed in his never-ending quest to understand and cope with the intricate moral dilemmas posed by a complex and uncertain world?’ No, what you say to yourself is, ‘These people have the brains of trout.’”
I have been guilty of a terrible heresy these past few weeks. You see, I’ve been rooting for Lebron James and the Miami Heat to win the NBA Championship. Yes, yes, I know all the reasons I should be burned at the stake. As a Knicks fan, my Heat hatred pre-dates the Decision. And the Decision itself is indefensible - I won't spent a single pixel on this screen defending it. And all those Miami fans in white - they seem like a High Holy Day bunch, don't they - have not earned the joy of a championship**
** Though if anyone deserves it less, it's that blue-clad crowd in OKC, who stole their team from Seattle, and near as I can tell are unfamiliar with even the basic rules of the sport.
But my religion has a core belief. If you're a regular reader you know that I have long believed there is a great debate that happens in sports - the debate over the Great Player who piles up statistics, records, and awards, but either don't win enough titles (Wilt Chamberlain), take too long to win (Manning, Elway, A-Rod), or never win (Marino).
Most fans believe there is something inherently wrong with these players. Sure, they break dozens of records, hit hundreds of homers and score thousands of points. But they don't know how to win.
Critics ignore the weakness of their teammates. They unfairly focus on a few post-season struggles. And they exaggerate the abilities of lesser players who were blessed with superior teammates and/or coaching (Russell, Jeter, Montana, Brady).
In an ESPN poll conducted before the Finals - done in Electoral College fashion - 49 states voted that the Thunder would win the title (the lone dissenter being, of course, Florida). They weren't merely rooting for OKC - they believed OKC would win. They had so convinced themselves that Lebron had some sort of character flaw that his scoring, rebounding, assisting, and defending skills couldn't overcome.
This was complete nonsense. Lebron James had carried a bunch of horrendous Cavaliers teams far deeper into June than they had any right to go. In his first season with the Heat, he won the Eastern Conference Championship and went to Game 6 of the Finals. His career is absolutely filled with playoff and 4th quarter heroics. And his game is so damned complete - he does EVERYTHING at a ridiculous high level - it seemed unlikely to me that these teenagers in powder blue had a chance.
And of course, I was right. Oh yeah - that's the other reason I was rooting for the Heat. Pre-season, I predicted they would go all the way, and was told by many people that they lacked all the necessary qualities of 'true champions'.
And boy, I love being right. Or to go back to our religious analogy, righteous.
Related Content:
Manning-Brady: Best "Who's Better?" Debate Ever
What do Robert E. Lee and Derek Jeter Have in Common?
The Duper Level: Why Lebron should come to the Knicks
There is a core belief system that makes perfect sense to you, but seems ludicrous to others*. There are sacred stories, fiery preachers, and creation myths. Among the congregation are the fanatical, the merely devout, and the ones who only show up on the High Holy Days. There are prayers.
There are houses of worship - some old and majestic and rich in history, some new and modern and rich in technology. Conversions are rare, and usually caused by marriage or moving far away. Pilgrimages are made, saints honored, and sacrifices endured. The child is often raised in the religion of the parent, and people of the same region often have the same beliefs. Perhaps most importantly, there is faith – a faith that is often challenged, occasionally doubted, and sometimes rewarded.
And there is heresy.
* To quote the great Dave Barry: “…the thing about religion is that everybody else’s always appears stupid. For example, if you read about some religious sect in India that believes God wants people to drink their own urine, you don’t say to yourself, ‘Isn’t that amazing, the diversity of belief systems Man has developed in his never-ending quest to understand and cope with the intricate moral dilemmas posed by a complex and uncertain world?’ No, what you say to yourself is, ‘These people have the brains of trout.’”
I have been guilty of a terrible heresy these past few weeks. You see, I’ve been rooting for Lebron James and the Miami Heat to win the NBA Championship. Yes, yes, I know all the reasons I should be burned at the stake. As a Knicks fan, my Heat hatred pre-dates the Decision. And the Decision itself is indefensible - I won't spent a single pixel on this screen defending it. And all those Miami fans in white - they seem like a High Holy Day bunch, don't they - have not earned the joy of a championship**
** Though if anyone deserves it less, it's that blue-clad crowd in OKC, who stole their team from Seattle, and near as I can tell are unfamiliar with even the basic rules of the sport.
But my religion has a core belief. If you're a regular reader you know that I have long believed there is a great debate that happens in sports - the debate over the Great Player who piles up statistics, records, and awards, but either don't win enough titles (Wilt Chamberlain), take too long to win (Manning, Elway, A-Rod), or never win (Marino).
Most fans believe there is something inherently wrong with these players. Sure, they break dozens of records, hit hundreds of homers and score thousands of points. But they don't know how to win.
Critics ignore the weakness of their teammates. They unfairly focus on a few post-season struggles. And they exaggerate the abilities of lesser players who were blessed with superior teammates and/or coaching (Russell, Jeter, Montana, Brady).
In an ESPN poll conducted before the Finals - done in Electoral College fashion - 49 states voted that the Thunder would win the title (the lone dissenter being, of course, Florida). They weren't merely rooting for OKC - they believed OKC would win. They had so convinced themselves that Lebron had some sort of character flaw that his scoring, rebounding, assisting, and defending skills couldn't overcome.
This was complete nonsense. Lebron James had carried a bunch of horrendous Cavaliers teams far deeper into June than they had any right to go. In his first season with the Heat, he won the Eastern Conference Championship and went to Game 6 of the Finals. His career is absolutely filled with playoff and 4th quarter heroics. And his game is so damned complete - he does EVERYTHING at a ridiculous high level - it seemed unlikely to me that these teenagers in powder blue had a chance.
And of course, I was right. Oh yeah - that's the other reason I was rooting for the Heat. Pre-season, I predicted they would go all the way, and was told by many people that they lacked all the necessary qualities of 'true champions'.
And boy, I love being right. Or to go back to our religious analogy, righteous.
Related Content:
Manning-Brady: Best "Who's Better?" Debate Ever
What do Robert E. Lee and Derek Jeter Have in Common?
The Duper Level: Why Lebron should come to the Knicks
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
The Duper Level
I suggested that Lebron James will be tempted by the Big Apple and make his way to the New York Knicks. They dismissed this as typical New York arrogance, and clearly believed that Madison Square Garden harbored snakes as evil as any in the Garden of Eden.
Like all good sports arguments this one got me thinking, and I thought I would helpfully share my thinking with Knicks management as they prepare to make their case to Lebron. They all fall under the broad argument of achieving what we'll call the Duper Level. In other words, there is no doubt Lebron is already a superstar, but if he wants to be a Super Duper Star, he's got to come to New York. Here are a few ways of thinking about The Duper Level.
The Lucille Test
One way to look at whether or not an athlete has achieved the Duper Level is the Lucille Test. Lucille is my Mom, and she is aware of sports but not what you'd call a passionate fan. And I just had the following conversation with her:
Me: Do you know who Lebron James is?
Mom: Who?
Me: Lebron James.
Mom: Legron?
Me: Lebron. With a B.
Mom: Lebon James...wait, I know that name. He's some kind of sports player. I know this because I just read it somewhere. He plays sports.
Me: Do you know what sport?
Mom: (pause). Football?
Now, my Mom knows Tiger Woods (and not because of recent scandals). She knows Derek Jeter and Peyton Manning and Kobe Bryant and Brett Favre, and back in the 90's she knew Michael Jordan and Larry Bird. But if Lebron James walked into her kitchen right now and said "Hi, I'm Lebron James and I play for the Cleveland Cavaliers", she'd have no idea what the hell he was talking about.
There are Lucilles all over this great land of ours and across the globe and part of achieving the Duper Level means having the Lucilles know who you are. Play in New York, and I assure you, you'll pass the Lucille Test.
Stern's Nightmare
There's a pretty good chance we'll see a rematch of Kobe vs. Lebron in the NBA Finals. But it's not unlikely we'll see Denver-Cleveland, or even worse, Utah-Cleveland. David Stern's nightmare is wasting the greatness of Lebron James on a Utah-Cleveland series. That thing might get Stanley Cup ratings.
But Lebron in New York? A Knicks-Whomever Finals? This could return the NBA to its glory days. And what is good for the NBA is good for Lebron - yet another step on the way to the Duper Level.
The Jeter Parallel
Another way of thinking about this is to remember my old friend Derek Jeter. Now Derek Jeter is a fine ball player, but he's no Mickey Mantle. He has won no MVPs, no batting titles, no home run titles. And yet, he is a Super Duper Star while clearly superior players like Albert Pujols couldn't pass the Lucille Test if you spotted her the Albert and the Pujo.
And why has he achieved the Duper Level? Because 15 years ago a Yankee team that did everything well went on a 5-year run, and he was arguably the best player on that team. Amazing what winning titles in New York will do for you.
What is Lebron Thinking?
Of course none of this matters if Lebron wants to stay in Cleveland. He's a hometown boy, can make a higher salary in Cleveland than anywhere else, and already has national endorsement deals. One could forgive him for thinking he is quite Duper enough already, thank you very much, regardless of what Lucille thinks.
And of course you don't have to play in New York to go Duper. Peyton Manning plays in the tiny little town of Indianapolis, population 784,118, where until recently the NFL was the fourth most popular sport behind college hoops, auto racing, and cow-tipping. Brooklyn has neighborhoods bigger than that. At rush hour, the 7 train holds more people than that. And yet Peyton is as Duper as you get.
But the NBA has lost some of its power to create stars. Random fun fact: the two worst-selling newstand issues that Sports Illustrated and ESPN Magazine had in 2009 were ones featuring Dwight Howard on the cover. The NBA does not have the star-making power it once had.
That said, I think the results of this year's playoffs could impact his decision. If, for example, the Cavs choke in the postseason, he may feel he needs to stay and win a title for Ohio. And good for him if he does.
But if he wins a ring for Cleveland, and does so over Utah in a 6-game series that gets lower ratings than Conan O'Brien, he just might want to hear what those folks in the Garden have to say.
Monday, April 14, 2008
The Losers Out Manifesto
In nearly all things, I am a moderate.
I have voted for Republicans and Democrats. I drink, but not to excess. I exercise but I’m not a fanatic about it. I go to Church, but not every Sunday.
In one thing only do I have a radical opinion – a position so outside the mainstream that I am looked upon with disdain. Strangers inch back in mute disgust and friends wonder if I harbor other immoral and dangerous beliefs. This disdain is accompanied by the fervent hope that I will not preach my heresies to convert them to my satanic ways.
You see, in pick-up basketball, I believe in Losers Out.
Street Sports: Mimicking the Real Game
In all pick-up sports, you modify the rules of the actual sport because you lack the necessary players, equipment, and/or playing surface to play by the official rules.
The most common baseball modification, used in Whiffle ball or stick ball, is automatic rules (ground ball past the pitcher is a single; line drive past the oak tree is a double; Eismann’s roof is a homer). You play automatic because you can’t put fielders on every base.
In football, it is common to replace line play with a Mississippi-count and to replace “10 yards for a first down” with “3 receptions for a first.”
And in basketball, the ingenious solution for a smaller group is the half-court game. Upon rebounding the opponent’s shot, a team must bring the ball “back”, generally to the free-throw line or beyond the arc, to re-set the court, as if you are now taking the ball the other way.
Winner’s Out?
But what if one team scores?
Here’s where pick-up ballers veer from the real rules. In real basketball, after a score the ball goes to the other team, who inbound and take it the other way. In other words, Loser’s Out. Every full-court basketball game in the world is played with “Loser’s Out” rules, from the NBA to CYO, from the Olympics to Intramurals, from Harlem to Hong Kong. Even pick-up full court is played Loser's Out.
But in half-court, for reasons nobody has ever been able to explain to me, we play Winner’s Out. After you score, you get the ball again.
This is an obvious perversion of the real rules and one that is easily avoidable.
I have asked many people why they believe in Winner’s Out. First, I get the same look I’d expect from the folks at Augusta National if I suggested they switch the Green Jacket to a Lavendar sweater-vest. Then, they sort of stammer out that it is the way it is done, the way it’s always been done, and begin to wonder how such a person as I had found his way to the courts.
When pressed for some practical reason to play Winner’s Out, for some explanation as to why the real rules are perverted, all they can come up with is, “When you score, you deserve a reward.”
This is not without precedence in sports. In football you are rewarded with more downs if you achieve some yardage. In baseball you get more at-bats if you keep getting hits.
But in basketball, Kobe has to run back on defense after hitting a shot. We should mimic that in street ball.
In addition to staying true to the rules of the game, there are practical benefits to Loser’s Out. Well, one anyway: it prevents blowouts. A 21-19 game is always more fun than a 21-6 win, even for the winners. But Winners Out naturally lends itself to blowouts
Progress
So I will continue my crusade for Loser’s Out, even if I’ve already failed in my own Sunday morning game. But I will do so with faith that progress is being made. For in my own research for this piece I learned that Hoop It Up, the largest half-court basketball organizer in the world, plays Loser’s Out.
They don’t call it that, though. This is from their Rules & Regulations:
No "Make It Take It":
The ball changes possession after each scored basket.
In addition, wise souls that they are, play "Everything Back". Don’t even get me started on that…
Editor's note: The eagle-eyed copy editors out there will notice I've switched back between Loser's Out, Losers Out, and Losers' Out. That's because they are all equally valid and I can't decide which one is correct. Hopefully William Safire will weigh in on this important question.
I have voted for Republicans and Democrats. I drink, but not to excess. I exercise but I’m not a fanatic about it. I go to Church, but not every Sunday.
In one thing only do I have a radical opinion – a position so outside the mainstream that I am looked upon with disdain. Strangers inch back in mute disgust and friends wonder if I harbor other immoral and dangerous beliefs. This disdain is accompanied by the fervent hope that I will not preach my heresies to convert them to my satanic ways.
You see, in pick-up basketball, I believe in Losers Out.
Street Sports: Mimicking the Real Game
In all pick-up sports, you modify the rules of the actual sport because you lack the necessary players, equipment, and/or playing surface to play by the official rules.
The most common baseball modification, used in Whiffle ball or stick ball, is automatic rules (ground ball past the pitcher is a single; line drive past the oak tree is a double; Eismann’s roof is a homer). You play automatic because you can’t put fielders on every base.
In football, it is common to replace line play with a Mississippi-count and to replace “10 yards for a first down” with “3 receptions for a first.”
And in basketball, the ingenious solution for a smaller group is the half-court game. Upon rebounding the opponent’s shot, a team must bring the ball “back”, generally to the free-throw line or beyond the arc, to re-set the court, as if you are now taking the ball the other way.
Winner’s Out?
But what if one team scores?
Here’s where pick-up ballers veer from the real rules. In real basketball, after a score the ball goes to the other team, who inbound and take it the other way. In other words, Loser’s Out. Every full-court basketball game in the world is played with “Loser’s Out” rules, from the NBA to CYO, from the Olympics to Intramurals, from Harlem to Hong Kong. Even pick-up full court is played Loser's Out.
But in half-court, for reasons nobody has ever been able to explain to me, we play Winner’s Out. After you score, you get the ball again.
This is an obvious perversion of the real rules and one that is easily avoidable.
I have asked many people why they believe in Winner’s Out. First, I get the same look I’d expect from the folks at Augusta National if I suggested they switch the Green Jacket to a Lavendar sweater-vest. Then, they sort of stammer out that it is the way it is done, the way it’s always been done, and begin to wonder how such a person as I had found his way to the courts.
When pressed for some practical reason to play Winner’s Out, for some explanation as to why the real rules are perverted, all they can come up with is, “When you score, you deserve a reward.”
This is not without precedence in sports. In football you are rewarded with more downs if you achieve some yardage. In baseball you get more at-bats if you keep getting hits.
But in basketball, Kobe has to run back on defense after hitting a shot. We should mimic that in street ball.
In addition to staying true to the rules of the game, there are practical benefits to Loser’s Out. Well, one anyway: it prevents blowouts. A 21-19 game is always more fun than a 21-6 win, even for the winners. But Winners Out naturally lends itself to blowouts
Progress
So I will continue my crusade for Loser’s Out, even if I’ve already failed in my own Sunday morning game. But I will do so with faith that progress is being made. For in my own research for this piece I learned that Hoop It Up, the largest half-court basketball organizer in the world, plays Loser’s Out.
They don’t call it that, though. This is from their Rules & Regulations:
No "Make It Take It":
The ball changes possession after each scored basket.
In addition, wise souls that they are, play "Everything Back". Don’t even get me started on that…
Editor's note: The eagle-eyed copy editors out there will notice I've switched back between Loser's Out, Losers Out, and Losers' Out. That's because they are all equally valid and I can't decide which one is correct. Hopefully William Safire will weigh in on this important question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)