Latest Entries »

Few developments in the NBA this season have been more surprising than the Grizzlies becoming a playoff contender, or, more specifically, the Grizzlies being led to playoff contention by Zach Randolph. After spending the last few years on the Knicks and Clippers, Randolph was so far removed from playoff contention that he wasn’t even able to watch the playoffs on TV – he had to travel 100 miles to the nearest sports bar in order to watch them. Now he’s the best player on a team fighting for a playoff spot in the Western Conference.

What does this tell us about the NBA? I see at least three things:
Lots of players come into the league with lots of hype, at
a very young age. If they don’t produce quickly, they are written off as disappointments. Yet, even after a few years of disappointing play, they are still young and talented. Randolph is only 28 years old. In other walks of life, it isn’t considered strange for a person to be better at his job and more mature when he’s 28 than he was when he was 24. It shouldn’t seem all that crazy when a 28-year-old player finally “gets it,” and starts to approach his potential.

The game is not “evolving” to a place where good post players are obsolete, as some have wondered. Teams with guys who like to operate in the paint have an advantage over teams that try to win exclusively from the perimeter.

We’re at a moment now where there are very few excellent post players. So, the opportunity exists for a guy like Zach Randolph to step up and dominate. Consider: KG is now a shell of his old self. Things like this now happen to Shaq. More importantly, three of the best young big men are out for the season; Yao, Greg Oden, and Blake Griffin. Plus, the stars of the future, like Jordan Hill, are just getting their feet under them. Actually, strike that last sentence. I got to see much of the Cavs-Knicks game yesterday, and it became clear that Jordan Hill is simply another version of Anderson Varejo, but one that grabs fewer rebounds and makes fewer hustle plays.

Still, the point remains that three of the best young big men in the Western Conference are injured this year. The table is set perfectly for Zach Randolph to sit down and feast. If he’s an All-Star NEXT YEAR, then that will be a big deal. Becoming an All-Star this year is a good accomplishment, but, really, he’s just filling a void.

Leave a Comment:

Random Thoughts

I had the good fortune to attend two live NBA games in the last 8 days. The first was the Knicks-T’Wolves game on January 26th. Remarkably, the Knicks – who were 17-26 the moment the ball tipped – completely squashed the Wolves. The Knicks jumped out to a 15-0 lead, and were up by 28 at one point in the first quarter. Yes, the first quarter. The only reasonable conclusion to draw was that the Wolves had to be one of the worst teams in league history to get pounded so badly by a 17-26 team. Then, 5 days later, the ‘Wolves pounded the Knicks by 21. Thus, the Knicks are bad enough to get pounded by a team that was humiliated by a 17-26 team only a few days before.

I’m not sure what conclusion to draw. Perhaps the teams are inconsistent. Perhaps they are just both bad basketball teams, each capable of being absolutely horrific on any given night. Or perhaps they are both very good at home. Um, no. That’s not it. It must be something else.

On a different note, I was at the Celtics-Lakers game on Sunday. What a joy to watch. The teams were good, and, no less importantly, it actually felt like a basketball game. They didn’t have ridiculous entertainment during each timeout, like the Knicks and the Heat have (as I’ve blogged before). During timeouts, they played music to get the crowd going, and showed pictures of fans cheering for the home team on the JumboTron. Good for the Celtics.

Separately, I was hoopserving the All-Star rosters today, and noticed something. If you believe that a player is usually in his prime between the ages of 29 and 31, then the ages of the guys on these rosters are almost the exact opposite of what you would expect them to be. Check it out: of the 24 All-Stars, 7 were born before 1/1/79, which means that they are at least 31 years old. 14 of them were born after 1/1/82, which means that they are not yet 28 years old (for purposes of simplicity, I’m pretending today is January 1st instead of February 3rd).

A digression for a second… two of the All-Stars, Derrick Rose and Kevin Durant, were born in 1988. Yup. Nineteen-friggin’-eighty-eight. I was already getting rejected by girls in 1988; these guys weren’t even crawling yet. Sigh.

Digression over… Only 3 of the 24 All-Stars were born in 1979, 1980, or 1981, even though the guys born in those years are the guys one would expect to be in their primes right now. So, there are 7 guys over 31, 14 guys under 29, and only 3 guys who are 29, 30, or 31.

I, for one, have no idea why this is. Was there some rule change in AAU basketball that impacted the guys from ’79, ’80, and ’81? Did something happen in the NCAA around the time those guys were in college? Is there any reasonable explanation for why this would be the case?

Leave a Comment: