Over the last two days, a whole lot of teams, both at the collegiate and professional level, ended their football seasons. With the final day of the NFL regular season concluding yesterday, and the college football semifinals being played the day before, the offseason began for a lot of players. One of those players was Oklahoma Sooners quarterback, and reigning Heisman Trophy winner, Kyler Murray.
The Sooners lost to Alabama in the semifinals by a score of 45-34. While it was a disappointing end to Oklahoma's season, I do think that the team will look back on 2018 as an overall success, and Murray surely will, and he will have a Heisman Trophy to prove it. The focus for Murray now shifts to the offseason, and it is definitely going to be an interesting one. He could probably enter the NFL Draft and have a good chance to go into next season with at least a shot at being a starting quarterback for some team in the league. The only problem with that is, he has already been drafted by another team in another sport.
The Oakland Athletics drafted Murray in the first round this past summer and signed him to a $5 million contract to be a future star for them. The A's organization did so knowing that Murray would be playing football at Oklahoma this season. Both he and the team knew that it might be somewhat risky to play a year at quarterback, but they showed faith in him by signing him anyway. I'm sure Murray knew he could be a successful football player going into this season, but I'm not sure that he planned on winning the award as the best college football player in the country. Now that he has won the Heisman Trophy, it seems like he could actually have a better shot at getting a job in the NFL than anyone originally planned, and many people are starting to wonder if he should take that chance and throw his name into the mix for the upcoming NFL draft a few months from now.
With the NFL game continuing to evolve and ever so slightly become more and more similar to the college game, could Murray actually have a successful career as a pro quarterback? I think the answer to that right now is, yes, that could possibly happen. With that being said though, I don't think that means it is the best career path for him. There are a number of reasons for that, and I think when you factor them all into the equation, the best path to a successful athletic career for Murray is on the baseball diamond.
We do have examples through history of athletes playing multiple sports with success. Deion Sanders and Bo Jackson are the first ones to come to mind, but I'm not sure that Murray fits into that category. Murray is extremely athletic and gifted like both of those men, but he is only (listed at) 5'11" tall and 195 pounds. In reality he is probably a few inches shorter and a few pounds lighter than both of those numbers. Deion Sanders was listed at 6'1" and 195 pounds coming out of college, while Bo Jackson was listed at 6'1" and 230 pounds. So right off the bat, Murray is smaller than both of them.
We also need to take into account the position that the three men played, or in Murray's case, play. Sanders was a cornerback, Jackson was a running back, and Murray is a quarterback. So, let's take a look at the sizes of some of the best players to ever play those positions.
Running back
Barry Sanders - 5'8" 200 pounds
Emmitt Smith - 5'9" 210 pounds
Curtis Martin - 5'11" 210 pounds
Cornerback
Rod Woodson - 6'0" 205 pounds
Charles Woodson - 6'1" 210 pounds
Darrell Green - 5'8" 185 pounds
Quarterback
Tom Brady - 6'4" 225 pounds
Joe Montana - 6'2" 205 pounds
Drew Brees - 6'0" 210 pounds
So, in the case of Jackson, he was actually very big compared to those all-time great running backs. Sanders was about average. Murray however, is smaller in terms of both height and weight than all of those quarterbacks. If Murray were to enter the NFL right now, he would be the smallest quarterback in the league, and when it comes to that position, size certainly does matter. People trying to downplay size at the position point to Drew Brees and Russell Wilson (who also was drafted by a baseball team), yet Murray is still even smaller than both of them. Also, aside from Brees and Wilson, the examples of successful NFL quarterbacks that small is pretty much zero.
On the other hand, let's take a look at his size compared to some of the best Major League shortstops, both current and former.
Francisco Lindor - 5'11" 190 pounds
Carlos Correa - 6'4" 215 pounds
Ozzie Smith - 5'11" 150 pounds
Barry Larkin - 6'0" 185 pounds
The point of this is that Murray is built much more like a professional shortstop than a professional quarterback. And I haven't even mentioned the financial differences between the two sports, and how much more secure Murray could be if he played baseball as opposed to football.
Right now, Murray is projected to be at best, a late first round pick in the NFL, but is probably more likely to be drafted in the second or third round. Lamar Jackson, a quarterback who was considered somewhat small, at least based upon strength and weight, was the 32nd pick of the first round this past year, and he is due to make about $5.4 million. That means the top salary that Murray could probably expect in his first season in the NFL is not too much different from the salary he could make playing baseball.
So maybe football isn't such a bad decision then, right? After all, Murray's football stock will likely never be as high as it is right now, and with NFL teams constantly looking for quarterbacks, and often over-drafting them, maybe Murray could find a team that fell in love with him and make more money than he will make in his first year as a football player than he could in his first year as a baseball player. The biggest problem with that though, is that is what he could make in his first year. That doesn't mean he will be making that for his entire career, and the chances are very low that a career as a quarterback will last as long as a career as a shortstop.
According to the NFL Player's Association, the average career for an NFL player is just over three years long. The league claims it is six years long, so let's put it in the middle since both of those groups have somewhat conflicting interests, and say that the average NFL career is about 4.5 years long. Studies on Major League Baseball careers show that the average career in that sport lasts about 5.5 years.
So that means as the 32nd overall pick in the NFL draft (which is probably as good as it will get for Murray), he could make about $24 million. With the salary he is currently signed to in Major League Baseball, he would make about $25 million. So, if the difference is only $1 million, maybe the choice to play football isn't such a bad one.
Next though, we have to look at the contract structures of both sports, and the simplest way to do that is to look at guaranteed money. This past offseason, Kirk Cousins signed a groundbreaking deal with the Minnesota Vikings, as he became the first player in the history of the NFL to sign a contract with all of the money fully guaranteed. Aside from Cousins, every player in the history of the NFL has signed a contract in which all of the money has not been guaranteed. On the other hand, the contract that Murray signed with the A's is already fully guaranteed, and he has not even played a single game for the team. So in a sport like baseball, where the injury risk is far less than football, the benefits truly begin to show.
Football at any level is a violent game, and despite recent rules changes to make the game safer, it is inherently violent, and that is not going to change. Former players walk away from the NFL with serious medical problems. And that is not something that is a rare occurrence. It happens a lot. That rarely happens with baseball players, and even if it does, they still are much more likely to have more money, and better health benefits from the league to cover their medical expenses.
Does that seem fair? No, it doesn't. In fact, it actually seems to make no sense at all. The guys playing the sport that is clearly more violent and a much bigger risk to your health, are getting paid less. So you could point to the chances of success Murray might have playing football as lower than his chances of success playing baseball, but coupled with the health risks of the two sports, it is pretty clear to me that he should choose to pursue a career in baseball.
Murray is free to choose whatever he wants to do with his future going forward. He can strike while the iron is hot, enter the NFL draft, and as a Heisman Trophy winner, possibly go on to a very successful career as a pro football player. Or, he can play baseball, be at a much smaller risk of injury, and be guaranteed to at least make more money as a rookie. If he were to sign a second contract in baseball, he could be set financially for life. If he were to do that in football, he could be set for life, but he could also walk around with some sort of serious injury for the rest of his life, and have less money to show for it as well. It might be pointing out the extreme to try to make a case, but if you listen to other former athletes, even including professional football players, it seems that the consensus is he should play baseball.
Murray has already reached historic heights in football that only a select few have reached by winning the Heisman Trophy. The allure of being an NFL quarterback might never be bigger for him than it is right now. However, being a professional athlete, no matter the sport, is often about using a very small window for a career to earn enough money to last a lifetime. Five years from now, Murray could be a baseball player who is guaranteed to make $5 million, or he could be a football player, who is most likely going to have made less money, and more likely to have suffered at least some sort of injury that hinders his ability to be healthy for the rest of his life. As I said, he is free to choose whatever he wants, but if I were giving him advice, I would tell him that the choice should be pretty easy. Hang the shoulder pads up, pick up your mitt and bat, and become a superstar shortstop.
Daily Giants Update: While it might not be the case for players and coaches who have jobs on the line, as a fan, I think there can be moral victories in football. Some of the worse teams in the league put up little to no fight in their Week 17 games and ended the season on a very poor note, but despite a 5-11 record, the Giants were not one of those teams. They lost to the Cowboys 36-35 yesterday, but put up a valiant effort in a very exciting game. The focus now becomes the draft and free agency, and I think there will be changes to the roster, and maybe some significant ones, but I am glad the team ended the year in the fashion they did, and I am looking forward to the offseason.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers got a very nice win on the road against a good Nashville Predators team two nights ago, and currently are on the outside looking in at the playoffs as we close in on the halfway point of the season. Next up is a game in St. Louis tonight against a Blues team that has struggled this season.
Daily NBA Update: The Magic won on a buzzer beater by Evan Fournier last night, and the Raptors continued to roll as well. One team I have been pretty impressed by is the Dallas Mavericks, who are being led by superstar rookie Luka Doncic. I think they are still a year or two away from real contention, but the arrow is definitely pointing up.
Monday, December 31, 2018
Saturday, December 29, 2018
To expand or not to expand?
Yesterday, I spoke about college football players making personal decisions on how to end their playing careers. Some leave before their senior season. Some play their senior season but then skip the postseason. Some play out every game, no matter how their season ends. Since college football went to its current playoff system five years ago, this matter has become more and more popular to talk about, and Alabama head coach Nick Saban weighed in on it earlier this week.
First, let's remember that Saban is looking at this from the perspective of a coach who has had his team in the playoffs every year, so his point of view is certainly different from a lot of other coaches. However, he does deserve a whole lot of credit for leading his team to the playoffs every year, so maybe you could say that his point of view is actually the one that should be most respected in this discussion.
Saban said that he initially was not even in favor of instituting a playoff system, and that he preferred the previous BCS format, where only two teams were chosen to play for the national championship. For decades, college football never even had a formal national championship game, and a series of polls decided who was crowned as the top team in the country. The problem with that was, since there were multiple polls that were voted on by people in different positions with different points of view, many times they did not all agree on who the best team in the country was. As recently as 2003, there were co-champions, and there were even some years with three teams declared as tied at the top. In 1919, there were actually four teams that were labeled as national champions thanks to the voting in six different polls.
The point of sports is to decide the individual or team that is the best in a fair manner. There might be ties in regular season games in some sports, but at the end of a competition or season, we want there to be one winner left standing alone. So obviously, having multiple teams declared as champions after a given season did not give anyone a true feeling of clarity. The inception of the BCS system in 1998 seemingly would give us that clarity each and every year. It did that, except for a controversial 2003 season when the team that won what was supposed to be the championship game (LSU), was still only declared as a co-champion, thanks to the AP poll at the end of the season declaring someone else (USC) as champion.
The BCS system was initially disliked by many, but eventually fans, players, and coaches all seemed to accept it more and more, and looking back on it now, I think it did a pretty good job of giving us a true champion every year. However, since much of the BCS selection process was based upon computers and not human judgements, it did receive criticism, and I think rightfully so. A computer could not take things like injuries or other abnormalities into account when ranking teams, and the football world felt like the lack of that did not fully satisfy our appetites. Also, in many cases, it seemed unfair to only select two teams to compete for a national championship. In every other sport we have, more teams are able to compete in the postseason, because usually every year more than two teams in any given sport could be given legitimate odds to win a championship. That is especially true in college football, where the fact that there are so many teams really makes it impossible to judge everyone fairly. In a sport with 130 teams, is it really even possible to choose two to play for a title when most teams only play 12 or 13 games? Obviously, the answer is no.
So, that brought us to the current playoff format we have. A committee of actual people and not a room of computers decides who they believe are the four best teams in the country. With the BCS format, it is likely that the third ranked team could have beaten one of the teams ranked ahead of them, but those games never happened. Now, that third ranked team can prove themselves on the field, and not have to worry about proving themselves to a computer. It seemed like this was an improvement, but as is the case with pretty much everything in the sports world, and the world in general, people chose to point out the negatives more than the positives.
Instead of now the third ranked team being felt as though they were unjustly denied the chance to compete for a championship they could legitimately win, now the fifth ranked team in the country can make that claim. Oklahoma was ranked fourth by the committee this year, and they will play top-ranked Alabama tonight. Alabama finished the regular season 13-0, while Oklahoma finished 12-1. However, Ohio State finished the year with an identical 12-1 record, but they were ranked sixth. The committee explained that this was the case because Oklahoma's loss to Texas, by a score of 48-45, was "better" than Ohio State's only loss, a 49-20 drubbing to Purdue.
Realistically, I agree with that decision, but then why was Ohio State ranked sixth, with a 12-1 record, behind Georgia, who had an inferior 11-2 record? This is where we begin to see and understand the flaws in the system we have. Add in the Central Florida factor here, as they have been undefeated for the past two seasons in what most would consider a weaker conference, and it seems like we have an even bigger mess than we had when the BCS was used to decide the national champion.
I spoke yesterday about Deandre Baker choosing to leave Georgia now and not play in their bowl game, and the final straw that pushed him to make that decision was most likely Georgia's ranking and their being left out of the playoffs. If the field were expanded, as many people have called for, Georgia might be playing for a chance at a national championship today, and if that were happening, I would bet that Baker would be on the field. At the same time, Heisman Trophy winner Kyler Murray might not be playing tonight if we still used the BCS format, because only Alabama and Clemson would have the chance to win the national championship.
One reason I think college football seems to always be a target for criticisms like this is the fact that they are in many ways competing with college basketball. March Madness is, in my opinion, one of the most exciting things in all of sports. 68 teams have an equal chance to win a title, and because of that, we get chaos every year, and we love it. However, when you think about it realistically, you could actually claim that college basketball decides its champion in the most inefficient and random way, and often times, the best team does not win. If you played the NCAA Tournament out in any given year two separate times, the results would likely be totally different. The single game elimination component is what makes it so exciting, but it is also what makes it so inefficient. Add in the fact that the field is so big, and the randomness and inefficiency just grows and grows.
The same can be said for the NFL playoffs. While the standards for postseason qualification in the NFL are much higher than in college basketball, the fact that it is still a single game elimination format does bring in a lot of chaos and uncertainty. In the NBA and NHL, the series factor plays a large role in helping to truly crown the team that is legitimately the best in the league. A lot of teams do make the playoffs in those sports, but because a seven-game series format is used, that usually leads to the best team prevailing in the end.
Out of all our major sports, Major League Baseball could probably be the one where the champion each year is "most legitimate" of all. Since the playoff field is so small, and they use series to decide the winners, you really usually get the truly best teams playing at the end. All of these systems can be viewed from different perspectives, and you can find faults in any of them if you really want to.
People who oppose the college football playoff format can say that with only four teams vying for a title, too many legitimate contenders are unjustly denied a chance that could rightfully be theirs. Those people would likely point to the NCAA basketball format as much more reasonable and fair.
However, supporters of the college football format as it now stands would cite the fact that the playoffs in college football actually happen every week of the regular season, and because the standards for qualification at the end of the year are so high, each team needs to play each and every game as if it were for the national championship or else you might end up like Ohio State, with one sleepy Saturday against Purdue being the reason you are not playing tonight. I tend to fall more into this corner when it comes to this, because I do like the fact that every game does matter in the college football regular season. March Madness is ultra-exciting, but because of it, most people do not even pay attention to college basketball until the tournament starts, because you could actually be a below .500 team in the regular season, win your conference tournament, and have a chance to win it all. Therefore, it seemingly completely negates everything that happened during the regular season.
To get back on subject here, I think that for the most part, football fans do like the playoff format, and it has been a success since its inception. I also do believe that we have seen some issues arise because of it, and that is going to bring about some sort of change in the future.
The biggest issue I think is that people believe a four team format is not big enough. There are usually more than four teams in any given season that could win a championship, and when you add in the Central Florida factor and a team goes undefeated in consecutive years but does not get a chance to play for a title, it will likely mean playoff expansion. Also, I think that this new tendency of players from good teams choosing not to play in their bowl games has many people believing the only way to get more kids to play out the entire year is to make every game in not just the regular season, but every game in the postseason matter as well.
Exactly 100 years ago, Harvard, Illinois, Notre Dame, and Texas A&M were somehow all national champions. Looking back on that now, it seems ludicrous. One hundred years from now, in 2119, the college football world will probably look at what we currently accept as ludicrous as well thanks to some different format that is used to crown the champion in a sport with over 100 teams.
One thing we should all be able to agree on though, is the fact that we have gotten to witness some epic and historic games over the past few years to decide our national champions, with two of the games literally being decided on the final play. I understand the gripes of some teams and fans who feel as though they have been treated unfairly. If you are a fan of Central Florida or Ohio State, you can rightfully claim that your team was robbed in one way or another.
The calls of those people were heard when we moved on from the BCS format, and they will probably be heard loud enough to bring about a playoff expansion some time within the next decade. Until that happens though, let's sit back and enjoy the games tonight and then the national championship game on January 7th, because if they end up even being half as good as what they were the past two seasons, we are going to be talking about them in 2119, even if the format we used to get there seems crazy and outdated when that year comes.
Daily Giants Update: Thanks to the NFL Red Zone channel, I will be able to watch all of the games with serious playoff implications tomorrow while also watching the Giants finish off the regular season. While I don't think this is the case, it is actually possible that tomorrow will be Eli Manning's last game ever as a New York Giant, which is sad to even think about.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were off yesterday, but will be in Nashville tonight to play a very good Predators team. It will mark the beginning of a stretch of five of the next six games being on the road against Western Conference foes, and for a team from the east coast traveling across the country, that is never easy, no matter how good you are or how good the teams you are playing are.
Daily NBA Update: There were some big individual performances last night, as well as some nice wins for teams out west, including the Thunder, Clippers, and Nuggets, all of whom have been pleasant surprises near the top of the conference this season.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I will write about the supremely disappointing offseason of this team some time before spring training begins, because I have very strong feelings about what has happened to the Diamondbacks over the past few months.
First, let's remember that Saban is looking at this from the perspective of a coach who has had his team in the playoffs every year, so his point of view is certainly different from a lot of other coaches. However, he does deserve a whole lot of credit for leading his team to the playoffs every year, so maybe you could say that his point of view is actually the one that should be most respected in this discussion.
Saban said that he initially was not even in favor of instituting a playoff system, and that he preferred the previous BCS format, where only two teams were chosen to play for the national championship. For decades, college football never even had a formal national championship game, and a series of polls decided who was crowned as the top team in the country. The problem with that was, since there were multiple polls that were voted on by people in different positions with different points of view, many times they did not all agree on who the best team in the country was. As recently as 2003, there were co-champions, and there were even some years with three teams declared as tied at the top. In 1919, there were actually four teams that were labeled as national champions thanks to the voting in six different polls.
The point of sports is to decide the individual or team that is the best in a fair manner. There might be ties in regular season games in some sports, but at the end of a competition or season, we want there to be one winner left standing alone. So obviously, having multiple teams declared as champions after a given season did not give anyone a true feeling of clarity. The inception of the BCS system in 1998 seemingly would give us that clarity each and every year. It did that, except for a controversial 2003 season when the team that won what was supposed to be the championship game (LSU), was still only declared as a co-champion, thanks to the AP poll at the end of the season declaring someone else (USC) as champion.
The BCS system was initially disliked by many, but eventually fans, players, and coaches all seemed to accept it more and more, and looking back on it now, I think it did a pretty good job of giving us a true champion every year. However, since much of the BCS selection process was based upon computers and not human judgements, it did receive criticism, and I think rightfully so. A computer could not take things like injuries or other abnormalities into account when ranking teams, and the football world felt like the lack of that did not fully satisfy our appetites. Also, in many cases, it seemed unfair to only select two teams to compete for a national championship. In every other sport we have, more teams are able to compete in the postseason, because usually every year more than two teams in any given sport could be given legitimate odds to win a championship. That is especially true in college football, where the fact that there are so many teams really makes it impossible to judge everyone fairly. In a sport with 130 teams, is it really even possible to choose two to play for a title when most teams only play 12 or 13 games? Obviously, the answer is no.
So, that brought us to the current playoff format we have. A committee of actual people and not a room of computers decides who they believe are the four best teams in the country. With the BCS format, it is likely that the third ranked team could have beaten one of the teams ranked ahead of them, but those games never happened. Now, that third ranked team can prove themselves on the field, and not have to worry about proving themselves to a computer. It seemed like this was an improvement, but as is the case with pretty much everything in the sports world, and the world in general, people chose to point out the negatives more than the positives.
Instead of now the third ranked team being felt as though they were unjustly denied the chance to compete for a championship they could legitimately win, now the fifth ranked team in the country can make that claim. Oklahoma was ranked fourth by the committee this year, and they will play top-ranked Alabama tonight. Alabama finished the regular season 13-0, while Oklahoma finished 12-1. However, Ohio State finished the year with an identical 12-1 record, but they were ranked sixth. The committee explained that this was the case because Oklahoma's loss to Texas, by a score of 48-45, was "better" than Ohio State's only loss, a 49-20 drubbing to Purdue.
Realistically, I agree with that decision, but then why was Ohio State ranked sixth, with a 12-1 record, behind Georgia, who had an inferior 11-2 record? This is where we begin to see and understand the flaws in the system we have. Add in the Central Florida factor here, as they have been undefeated for the past two seasons in what most would consider a weaker conference, and it seems like we have an even bigger mess than we had when the BCS was used to decide the national champion.
I spoke yesterday about Deandre Baker choosing to leave Georgia now and not play in their bowl game, and the final straw that pushed him to make that decision was most likely Georgia's ranking and their being left out of the playoffs. If the field were expanded, as many people have called for, Georgia might be playing for a chance at a national championship today, and if that were happening, I would bet that Baker would be on the field. At the same time, Heisman Trophy winner Kyler Murray might not be playing tonight if we still used the BCS format, because only Alabama and Clemson would have the chance to win the national championship.
One reason I think college football seems to always be a target for criticisms like this is the fact that they are in many ways competing with college basketball. March Madness is, in my opinion, one of the most exciting things in all of sports. 68 teams have an equal chance to win a title, and because of that, we get chaos every year, and we love it. However, when you think about it realistically, you could actually claim that college basketball decides its champion in the most inefficient and random way, and often times, the best team does not win. If you played the NCAA Tournament out in any given year two separate times, the results would likely be totally different. The single game elimination component is what makes it so exciting, but it is also what makes it so inefficient. Add in the fact that the field is so big, and the randomness and inefficiency just grows and grows.
The same can be said for the NFL playoffs. While the standards for postseason qualification in the NFL are much higher than in college basketball, the fact that it is still a single game elimination format does bring in a lot of chaos and uncertainty. In the NBA and NHL, the series factor plays a large role in helping to truly crown the team that is legitimately the best in the league. A lot of teams do make the playoffs in those sports, but because a seven-game series format is used, that usually leads to the best team prevailing in the end.
Out of all our major sports, Major League Baseball could probably be the one where the champion each year is "most legitimate" of all. Since the playoff field is so small, and they use series to decide the winners, you really usually get the truly best teams playing at the end. All of these systems can be viewed from different perspectives, and you can find faults in any of them if you really want to.
People who oppose the college football playoff format can say that with only four teams vying for a title, too many legitimate contenders are unjustly denied a chance that could rightfully be theirs. Those people would likely point to the NCAA basketball format as much more reasonable and fair.
However, supporters of the college football format as it now stands would cite the fact that the playoffs in college football actually happen every week of the regular season, and because the standards for qualification at the end of the year are so high, each team needs to play each and every game as if it were for the national championship or else you might end up like Ohio State, with one sleepy Saturday against Purdue being the reason you are not playing tonight. I tend to fall more into this corner when it comes to this, because I do like the fact that every game does matter in the college football regular season. March Madness is ultra-exciting, but because of it, most people do not even pay attention to college basketball until the tournament starts, because you could actually be a below .500 team in the regular season, win your conference tournament, and have a chance to win it all. Therefore, it seemingly completely negates everything that happened during the regular season.
To get back on subject here, I think that for the most part, football fans do like the playoff format, and it has been a success since its inception. I also do believe that we have seen some issues arise because of it, and that is going to bring about some sort of change in the future.
The biggest issue I think is that people believe a four team format is not big enough. There are usually more than four teams in any given season that could win a championship, and when you add in the Central Florida factor and a team goes undefeated in consecutive years but does not get a chance to play for a title, it will likely mean playoff expansion. Also, I think that this new tendency of players from good teams choosing not to play in their bowl games has many people believing the only way to get more kids to play out the entire year is to make every game in not just the regular season, but every game in the postseason matter as well.
Exactly 100 years ago, Harvard, Illinois, Notre Dame, and Texas A&M were somehow all national champions. Looking back on that now, it seems ludicrous. One hundred years from now, in 2119, the college football world will probably look at what we currently accept as ludicrous as well thanks to some different format that is used to crown the champion in a sport with over 100 teams.
One thing we should all be able to agree on though, is the fact that we have gotten to witness some epic and historic games over the past few years to decide our national champions, with two of the games literally being decided on the final play. I understand the gripes of some teams and fans who feel as though they have been treated unfairly. If you are a fan of Central Florida or Ohio State, you can rightfully claim that your team was robbed in one way or another.
The calls of those people were heard when we moved on from the BCS format, and they will probably be heard loud enough to bring about a playoff expansion some time within the next decade. Until that happens though, let's sit back and enjoy the games tonight and then the national championship game on January 7th, because if they end up even being half as good as what they were the past two seasons, we are going to be talking about them in 2119, even if the format we used to get there seems crazy and outdated when that year comes.
Daily Giants Update: Thanks to the NFL Red Zone channel, I will be able to watch all of the games with serious playoff implications tomorrow while also watching the Giants finish off the regular season. While I don't think this is the case, it is actually possible that tomorrow will be Eli Manning's last game ever as a New York Giant, which is sad to even think about.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were off yesterday, but will be in Nashville tonight to play a very good Predators team. It will mark the beginning of a stretch of five of the next six games being on the road against Western Conference foes, and for a team from the east coast traveling across the country, that is never easy, no matter how good you are or how good the teams you are playing are.
Daily NBA Update: There were some big individual performances last night, as well as some nice wins for teams out west, including the Thunder, Clippers, and Nuggets, all of whom have been pleasant surprises near the top of the conference this season.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I will write about the supremely disappointing offseason of this team some time before spring training begins, because I have very strong feelings about what has happened to the Diamondbacks over the past few months.
Friday, December 28, 2018
Stay in school or go pro?
Every year around this time, as we get closer and closer to the college bowl games that actually mean something, the same debate seems to arise. The only difference from year to year is who the debate is centered around. Should kids in college stay in school to finish out their careers? Or should they jump at the chance to be drafted and go to the NFL?
A trend that has grown over the past decade is kids skipping bowl games in order to focus solely on preparing for the NFL draft and their professional careers. Each individual situation is obviously unique, but it seems like, for the most part, no matter the player or team, people usually stand on one side of the argument or the other, and are not very open to changing their stance.
First, you have the fan who says that a player skipping their bowl game to focus on the draft is a bad teammate, and somehow is abandoning his team and demonstrating a fatal character flaw that he will never be able to separate himself from.
Next, you have the fan who says that each player should look out for the best interests of themselves, and playing college football is really nothing more than basically playing minor league football, and to hell with the team and school. The players aren't being paid while playing in college, and the only thing that matters is setting yourself up for a career as a professional football player.
Usually, these feelings are based upon a number of things. A fan of Clemson might feel as though a player is putting himself before the team if he decides to skip their bowl game and focus on the NFL. However, a fan of a team who could potentially have the first pick in the NFL draft and has their eyes set on that same player, could be totally in favor of him skipping the bowl game, and they will usually cite rare cases of players being injured during bowl games to illustrate their point about how important it is to look out for yourself before anything else.
I know it isn't as interesting to stand in the middle of any debate, but I have to say that in this case, that is exactly where I stand. You can't make one blanket statement about focusing on the NFL or playing out the season for your school and apply it to every player. Each circumstance is different, and I hate that people want to come out and criticize these kids for making the decision that the kid believes is best. To illustrate this point, I want to take a look at four different examples from this year.
Since this is the NFL, and it always seems to be about the quarterbacks, I'll start there. If Justin Herbert decided to leave school and enter the draft, he would probably have been the top quarterback taken, and the chances of him going in the top five overall were pretty good. The quarterback class this year is projected to be somewhat weak compared to what the class could possibly look like next year, so Herbert could actually be hurting his draft stock by returning to school. But, do you know who that should be most important to? Justin Herbert. Not "Joe Expert," the fan sitting on their couch critiquing Oregon highlights on YouTube who has never actually seen Herbert play or played a snap of football in his or her life.
Oregon finished the regular season with an 8-4 record, and will play Michigan State in the Redbox Bowl on New Year's Eve. The Ducks ended the season in fourth place in the Big 12 North division. They did win their final two regular season games, and could finish off a nice season with a win over Michigan State next week. Herbert could also be in line for a big senior season in 2019, and maybe even a Heisman Trophy. Why does someone want to fault him for that? Even though the quarterback class may be stronger next year, maybe another big year from Herbert will put him at the top of that class. He wants to go back to school for his senior season, so go ahead and do that. If that's what he wants, then he shouldn't get any grief for doing it.
Since Herbert is going back to school, the new top quarterback in this year's class, at least at this point, seems to be Dwayne Haskins from Ohio State. Haskins is coming off a redshirt sophomore season in which he threw for 4,580 yards and 47 touchdowns. In Ohio State's final two games, against rival Michigan, and in the Big 10 title game against Northwestern, Haskins threw 11 touchdowns and zero interceptions. It doesn't get much better than that. He has the size and arm strength of an NFL quarterback, and while he has not declared that he is entering the draft yet, it appears that will be the case, and if he does so, it also appears that he has a good chance to be the first quarterback taken. If he wants to turn pro and get his money, then he is more than welcome to do so. If a college student who is an engineering major is offered a job while still in college and decides to take it, I don't hear anyone criticizing them for doing so. Why then should Haskins be criticized for doing just that in his chosen field? The answer is, he shouldn't be criticized.
Now that we have looked at both sides of the coin on the offensive side of the ball, we have a nice example this year of the same thing on the other side of the ball as well. Deandre Baker is a cornerback out of Georgia University who won the Jim Thorpe award as the best defensive back in the country this year. Following the SEC Championship Game, which Georgia lost to Alabama, Baker originally said that he would play in the Sugar Bowl against Texas, but he has since changed his mind, and will now skip the game to prepare for the draft.
Some people will look at this decision and say that Baker is putting himself before the team, and try to turn his decision into a character flaw that will live with him for the rest of his life. If you believe that, then I'm sorry, but you sound clueless. Would Baker have decided to play in Georgia's bowl game if they had won the SEC title? He probably would have, but we can't say for sure. The point is though, it doesn't matter to the masses out there speaking about something they really know nothing about. Baker will most likely be a first round pick, and could actually end up going pretty high in the first round. With a selection that high comes a nice paycheck, and just like Haskins, Baker has every right to choose to go that route.
Finally, I want to look at Chase Winovich, a linebacker from Michigan who has decided to put off a surgery that he will need to undergo until after the Peach Bowl, the Senior Bowl, and the NFL scouting combine. While the exact nature of the surgery is unclear, he has been told that he can play through the pain for now, and have the surgery in a few months. Is this a good decision? Well, in order to answer that question, you have to look at it from his point of view.
Right now, Winovich appears to have a second or third round grade from draft gurus. Unlike Baker or Haskins, he will probably not hear his name called in the first round. Therefore, because it is not anticipated that he will be a day one pick, he likely will not be starting from the outset of training camp next summer, and might have to focus on doing things other than he did in school to earn a roster spot. Guys like that usually have to display an attitude and willingness to outplay their natural abilities, so putting off surgery for a few months might make a good impression on an NFL team and demonstrate just that personality. Then again, maybe playing while not fully healthy will prove to be a setback and hinder his chances to perform to the best of his abilities during the pre-draft process. Right now, we don't know what will happen. Winovich is willing to bet on himself and play through some pain in order for it to pay off in the long run, and we should commend him for that.
The point of all this is, fans shouldn't label kids based on the decisions they make about their futures. Everyone views the potential path to the NFL differently, and we should see that and accept it. In the end, if kids are talented enough to play professionally, that will most likely happen. The same can be said for the kid who leaves college early to begin their career as an engineer.
The NFL draft process is one of the toughest things to predict in all of sports. If you want to look back on this draft 10 years from now, it will be easy to judge Herbert or Haskins or Baker or Winovich in hindsight. You can make those same judgments on Monday morning after watching your favorite team win or lose. You can say that you would have made a different decision if you already know the outcome, but you can't put yourself into any given situation in real time and know what will end up being right or wrong.
In the eyes of some kids, the college experience might be most important. If you ask another kid, maybe playing in the NFL is what they really want. Don't stand on a soapbox and preach like you know how these kids should decide their futures, because you really don't. As is the case many times in the sports world, sometimes it is tough for people to set their fandom aside when evaluating a situation, but this is one of the most important times of the year to be able to do that. And if you can't, then I'm sure these guys won't care what you think anyway.
Daily Rangers Update: The team has had a frustrating tendency to give up late goals this year, and the same thing happened last night against Columbus. While the game did go to overtime and the Rangers salvaged a point, leaving another point on the table is not going to look good later in the season in the fight for the playoffs.
Daily Giants Update: Odell Beckham will miss another game this Sunday as the season ends against the NFC East champion Dallas Cowboys. Saquon Barkley could potentially set or equal a few rookie records with a good game, as well as clinch the offensive rookie of the year award. If any of that happens, it will at least be something nice to cap off what has been another disappointing season for the Giants.
Daily NBA Update: Christmas Day usually signals the beginning of the meat and potatoes of the NBA season, and the Sacramento Kings and Portland Trail Blazers both won exciting games last night. Portland is having a nice year so far, and the Kings are vastly improved, and seem to certainly be a team on the rise that could be fighting for the playoffs for a while now.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: ……..
A trend that has grown over the past decade is kids skipping bowl games in order to focus solely on preparing for the NFL draft and their professional careers. Each individual situation is obviously unique, but it seems like, for the most part, no matter the player or team, people usually stand on one side of the argument or the other, and are not very open to changing their stance.
First, you have the fan who says that a player skipping their bowl game to focus on the draft is a bad teammate, and somehow is abandoning his team and demonstrating a fatal character flaw that he will never be able to separate himself from.
Next, you have the fan who says that each player should look out for the best interests of themselves, and playing college football is really nothing more than basically playing minor league football, and to hell with the team and school. The players aren't being paid while playing in college, and the only thing that matters is setting yourself up for a career as a professional football player.
Usually, these feelings are based upon a number of things. A fan of Clemson might feel as though a player is putting himself before the team if he decides to skip their bowl game and focus on the NFL. However, a fan of a team who could potentially have the first pick in the NFL draft and has their eyes set on that same player, could be totally in favor of him skipping the bowl game, and they will usually cite rare cases of players being injured during bowl games to illustrate their point about how important it is to look out for yourself before anything else.
I know it isn't as interesting to stand in the middle of any debate, but I have to say that in this case, that is exactly where I stand. You can't make one blanket statement about focusing on the NFL or playing out the season for your school and apply it to every player. Each circumstance is different, and I hate that people want to come out and criticize these kids for making the decision that the kid believes is best. To illustrate this point, I want to take a look at four different examples from this year.
Since this is the NFL, and it always seems to be about the quarterbacks, I'll start there. If Justin Herbert decided to leave school and enter the draft, he would probably have been the top quarterback taken, and the chances of him going in the top five overall were pretty good. The quarterback class this year is projected to be somewhat weak compared to what the class could possibly look like next year, so Herbert could actually be hurting his draft stock by returning to school. But, do you know who that should be most important to? Justin Herbert. Not "Joe Expert," the fan sitting on their couch critiquing Oregon highlights on YouTube who has never actually seen Herbert play or played a snap of football in his or her life.
Oregon finished the regular season with an 8-4 record, and will play Michigan State in the Redbox Bowl on New Year's Eve. The Ducks ended the season in fourth place in the Big 12 North division. They did win their final two regular season games, and could finish off a nice season with a win over Michigan State next week. Herbert could also be in line for a big senior season in 2019, and maybe even a Heisman Trophy. Why does someone want to fault him for that? Even though the quarterback class may be stronger next year, maybe another big year from Herbert will put him at the top of that class. He wants to go back to school for his senior season, so go ahead and do that. If that's what he wants, then he shouldn't get any grief for doing it.
Since Herbert is going back to school, the new top quarterback in this year's class, at least at this point, seems to be Dwayne Haskins from Ohio State. Haskins is coming off a redshirt sophomore season in which he threw for 4,580 yards and 47 touchdowns. In Ohio State's final two games, against rival Michigan, and in the Big 10 title game against Northwestern, Haskins threw 11 touchdowns and zero interceptions. It doesn't get much better than that. He has the size and arm strength of an NFL quarterback, and while he has not declared that he is entering the draft yet, it appears that will be the case, and if he does so, it also appears that he has a good chance to be the first quarterback taken. If he wants to turn pro and get his money, then he is more than welcome to do so. If a college student who is an engineering major is offered a job while still in college and decides to take it, I don't hear anyone criticizing them for doing so. Why then should Haskins be criticized for doing just that in his chosen field? The answer is, he shouldn't be criticized.
Now that we have looked at both sides of the coin on the offensive side of the ball, we have a nice example this year of the same thing on the other side of the ball as well. Deandre Baker is a cornerback out of Georgia University who won the Jim Thorpe award as the best defensive back in the country this year. Following the SEC Championship Game, which Georgia lost to Alabama, Baker originally said that he would play in the Sugar Bowl against Texas, but he has since changed his mind, and will now skip the game to prepare for the draft.
Some people will look at this decision and say that Baker is putting himself before the team, and try to turn his decision into a character flaw that will live with him for the rest of his life. If you believe that, then I'm sorry, but you sound clueless. Would Baker have decided to play in Georgia's bowl game if they had won the SEC title? He probably would have, but we can't say for sure. The point is though, it doesn't matter to the masses out there speaking about something they really know nothing about. Baker will most likely be a first round pick, and could actually end up going pretty high in the first round. With a selection that high comes a nice paycheck, and just like Haskins, Baker has every right to choose to go that route.
Finally, I want to look at Chase Winovich, a linebacker from Michigan who has decided to put off a surgery that he will need to undergo until after the Peach Bowl, the Senior Bowl, and the NFL scouting combine. While the exact nature of the surgery is unclear, he has been told that he can play through the pain for now, and have the surgery in a few months. Is this a good decision? Well, in order to answer that question, you have to look at it from his point of view.
Right now, Winovich appears to have a second or third round grade from draft gurus. Unlike Baker or Haskins, he will probably not hear his name called in the first round. Therefore, because it is not anticipated that he will be a day one pick, he likely will not be starting from the outset of training camp next summer, and might have to focus on doing things other than he did in school to earn a roster spot. Guys like that usually have to display an attitude and willingness to outplay their natural abilities, so putting off surgery for a few months might make a good impression on an NFL team and demonstrate just that personality. Then again, maybe playing while not fully healthy will prove to be a setback and hinder his chances to perform to the best of his abilities during the pre-draft process. Right now, we don't know what will happen. Winovich is willing to bet on himself and play through some pain in order for it to pay off in the long run, and we should commend him for that.
The point of all this is, fans shouldn't label kids based on the decisions they make about their futures. Everyone views the potential path to the NFL differently, and we should see that and accept it. In the end, if kids are talented enough to play professionally, that will most likely happen. The same can be said for the kid who leaves college early to begin their career as an engineer.
The NFL draft process is one of the toughest things to predict in all of sports. If you want to look back on this draft 10 years from now, it will be easy to judge Herbert or Haskins or Baker or Winovich in hindsight. You can make those same judgments on Monday morning after watching your favorite team win or lose. You can say that you would have made a different decision if you already know the outcome, but you can't put yourself into any given situation in real time and know what will end up being right or wrong.
In the eyes of some kids, the college experience might be most important. If you ask another kid, maybe playing in the NFL is what they really want. Don't stand on a soapbox and preach like you know how these kids should decide their futures, because you really don't. As is the case many times in the sports world, sometimes it is tough for people to set their fandom aside when evaluating a situation, but this is one of the most important times of the year to be able to do that. And if you can't, then I'm sure these guys won't care what you think anyway.
Daily Rangers Update: The team has had a frustrating tendency to give up late goals this year, and the same thing happened last night against Columbus. While the game did go to overtime and the Rangers salvaged a point, leaving another point on the table is not going to look good later in the season in the fight for the playoffs.
Daily Giants Update: Odell Beckham will miss another game this Sunday as the season ends against the NFC East champion Dallas Cowboys. Saquon Barkley could potentially set or equal a few rookie records with a good game, as well as clinch the offensive rookie of the year award. If any of that happens, it will at least be something nice to cap off what has been another disappointing season for the Giants.
Daily NBA Update: Christmas Day usually signals the beginning of the meat and potatoes of the NBA season, and the Sacramento Kings and Portland Trail Blazers both won exciting games last night. Portland is having a nice year so far, and the Kings are vastly improved, and seem to certainly be a team on the rise that could be fighting for the playoffs for a while now.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: ……..
Thursday, December 27, 2018
Giving the power to the players
Despite claims from baseball fans who were born before the Super Bowl ever existed, the biggest sport in this country is football. If you look at television ratings, it is easy to see how popular the sport is, even though it seems like there is some sort of new controversy involving the league going into each new season. The United States is still a football-first country. However, the NBA has been steadily growing, and at this point, I think it would be fair to say that it is the second most popular league we have, obviously behind the NFL.
There are many different reasons for this rise in popularity, depending on how you want to trace the steps of its growth. Some might say that the emergence of a coast-to-coast rivalry between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers was essential in making the NBA a nationally interesting league. Those two teams do have a rivalry dating back to the 1960's, but in my opinion, the rivalry did not truly advance the popularity of the game until the 1980's, when Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were at the forefront and were the faces of those two organizations.
You could also point to the greatness of Michael Jordan and the rise of the Chicago Bulls in the 1990's. It was then that young kids throughout the country really became interested in replicating their favorite players by wearing their jerseys or their signature shoes.
Now, as the game continues to grow, I think one of the biggest factors in allowing it to do so is the willingness of the league to allow its players, and most importantly, its superstars, to express themselves on social media and connect with the fans and with other players, all in the public spotlight. The old school mentality of guys hating their opponents, for better or worse, is really almost non-existent. There are no Denis Rodmans or Rick Mahorns anymore. While some people miss those days, I personally do not. There is nothing wrong with going out on the court and competing and fouling someone hard when they try to get to the basket, but doing so during a game does not mean that you have to meet an opposing player after the game and fight them. And for the most part, I think that present day NBA players feel the same way.
Thanks to Instagram and Twitter, and even more so, thanks to plain old cell phones and text messages, NBA players interact with one another on a daily basis, whether they are teammates or opponents. Not only is the league aware of it, but in many cases, I believe that the league encourages it. So, when LeBron James makes some comments about thinking how nice it would be to play with Anthony Davis, NBA General Managers and owners should not be surprised. However, that was apparently the case recently after James said those exact things.
While we aren't sure exactly what general managers made the claims, reports were that some small-market GM's were upset after hearing James say how he would love to play with Davis if the opportunity presented itself. The unnamed GM's claimed that James was violating the league's rules against tampering, since it seemed as though he were trying to persuade a fellow player, currently under contract with an opposing team, to join his team in Los Angeles. They claimed that what made it even worse was the fact that Davis is still under contract in New Orleans through next season, so Davis is not even an impending free agent, and in order for him to get to Los Angeles this season, a trade would have to happen. That meant that the Pelicans would be forced to make a deal they might not otherwise make if they knew that Davis really did have plans to leave the organization in the summer of 2020. And in all honesty, these claims are actually 100% accurate.
Maybe Davis wants to stay in New Orleans for his entire career. They did acquire DeMarcus Cousins last season, and that seemed to show the rest of the league that they might be willing to bring in pieces to help Davis win a title. However, Cousins is now a member of the Golden State Warriors, and Davis is surrounded by a cast of players that most would consider mediocre at best.
So then, maybe Davis has plans to leave New Orleans when his contract expires, and maybe he actually wants to try to get out of there even before that happens. We have seen Kyrie Irving and Jimmy Butler make moves to get themselves traded before they hit free agency, and now both of them are playing for contending teams in a very winnable Eastern Conference. So whether it is Irving and Butler trying to get to another place, or James trying to get someone else to come to him, it seems as though what many people would consider tampering is in fact not only occurring, but it is working as well.
Now that James is a member of the Lakers, he has the perfect person to speak to when it comes to the punishments that result from tampering with players on other teams. Magic Johnson, who is currently the head of basketball operations for the Lakers, has been fined multiple times by the NBA for what the league described as tampering. The Lakers were fined over a half million dollars for engaging in such activity, and the GM's who made these recent claims were calling for more fines this time as well. Since the Lakers are one of the most prominent teams in the league in one of the most prominent markets in the league, the narrative was that they were giving themselves an unfair advantage in recruiting Davis, who is one of the best players in the NBA. Following the game between the Lakers and Pelicans, James and Davis were seen dining at a restaurant in Los Angeles, and this only added fuel to the tampering fire. And really, what was going on probably was tampering, and the team probably was attempting to get the upper hand in recruiting Davis to Los Angeles.
So then the question is, what should be done to prevent this? In what I think clearly could be described as tampering, aren't the Lakers, and James in particular, violating league rules? Yes, they probably are. However, over the past decade, as the NBA has encouraged its players to voice their thoughts publicly and engage with one another publicly, I don't think it is possible to stop this stuff from happening.
Guys work out together in the offseason. They have the same agencies represent them. They play alongside each other on the international stage. They even have dinner together after games. If you want to believe that they never talk about playing together during those interactions, then you are kidding yourself. And the general managers who claim they are at a disadvantage when this happens are kidding themselves as well.
How else do contracts get signed at 12:01 AM on the day free agency begins? How else does Kevin Durant sign with the Warriors? Is it because he just happened to choose them blindly? Or is it because about half the team went to meet with him privately before he signed the deal?
The fact remains that the Lakers likely do have an advantage in acquiring Davis, either through free agency or through a trade, and part of it surely is because of LeBron James and Magic Johnson. If I had to bet on where Davis would be playing two seasons from now, I would be much more likely to put my money on the Lakers than the Hawks or the Suns.
But then, maybe New Orleans knowing Davis wants to eventually leave is actually better for them. If they were to trade him before he became a free agent, they could get something in return, instead of losing him for only money they did not have. You can really spin this however you want depending on your point of view.
One thing I do know though, is that as the NBA has encouraged its players to speak their minds about anything and everything, and it has played a huge part in the growth of the league. However, the league may not have foreseen this alleged tampering occurring because of that, and until they crack down on it, I'm not sure they can stop it. If they want to be like the NFL, and suppress the voices of its stars, then maybe Anthony Davis will play in New Orleans for his entire career, but I'm not sure that fans of the league, or Davis himself, would like that.
If Davis does end up playing with James in Los Angeles, one thing I think we can all count on is television ratings and revenue increasing every time the Lakers play. While it will likely be at the expense of teams in smaller markets, there has always been a sizeable gap between the top and bottom of the NBA standings.
From 1990 through 1999 the Chicago Bulls were 558-230. Over that same time, the Vancouver Grizzlies were 56-240. That would place the Grizzlies 512 games behind the Bulls over that span.
From 1960 through 1969, the Celtics record was 546-260, while the 76ers/Nationals record was 314-492. That puts the Celtics 232 games ahead of the 76ers.
From 2010 through present day, the San Antonio Spurs are 511-211. The Sacramento Kings are 248-474. That puts the Spurs 263 games ahead of the Kings.
The point is, the gap between the top teams in the NBA and the bottom teams in the NBA has always been large, and it will always be large. So Anthony Davis playing for the Lakers will not drastically change the course of history in the league.
General managers and owners can claim that tampering between players goes on off the court, and they would be correct. However, they also have to accept the fact that these players are the prime reason the league has exploded in popularity, and therefore, exploded in profits. Are some teams making more money than others? Yes. But with the league arguably as big as it has ever been, I think it is impossible to prevent players from talking to one another and dreaming about playing together. It may not have been anticipated by owners a decade ago, but in the long run, I think it is better for them as a whole, and certainly better if they want their teams to continue to grow.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants season will be over this Sunday after a home game against Dallas, but there have been some positive signs during the second half of the season that can bring about some optimism heading into the offseason. It will be very interesting to see what direction the team moves in as the draft and free agency approach.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers are not realistically contenders to make serious noise in the postseason this year, but they have been pretty fun to watch anyway, with a roster of mostly young players who continue to improve.
Daily NBA Update: Speaking of the Lakers, they are coming off of a very impressive Christmas Day win on the road against the Warriors, but I still do expect Golden State to come out of the Western Conference by the end of the season. The East is much more wide open, and you have to believe that at least five teams can legitimately claim they have NBA Finals aspirations.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I don't even want to talk about it.
There are many different reasons for this rise in popularity, depending on how you want to trace the steps of its growth. Some might say that the emergence of a coast-to-coast rivalry between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers was essential in making the NBA a nationally interesting league. Those two teams do have a rivalry dating back to the 1960's, but in my opinion, the rivalry did not truly advance the popularity of the game until the 1980's, when Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were at the forefront and were the faces of those two organizations.
You could also point to the greatness of Michael Jordan and the rise of the Chicago Bulls in the 1990's. It was then that young kids throughout the country really became interested in replicating their favorite players by wearing their jerseys or their signature shoes.
Now, as the game continues to grow, I think one of the biggest factors in allowing it to do so is the willingness of the league to allow its players, and most importantly, its superstars, to express themselves on social media and connect with the fans and with other players, all in the public spotlight. The old school mentality of guys hating their opponents, for better or worse, is really almost non-existent. There are no Denis Rodmans or Rick Mahorns anymore. While some people miss those days, I personally do not. There is nothing wrong with going out on the court and competing and fouling someone hard when they try to get to the basket, but doing so during a game does not mean that you have to meet an opposing player after the game and fight them. And for the most part, I think that present day NBA players feel the same way.
Thanks to Instagram and Twitter, and even more so, thanks to plain old cell phones and text messages, NBA players interact with one another on a daily basis, whether they are teammates or opponents. Not only is the league aware of it, but in many cases, I believe that the league encourages it. So, when LeBron James makes some comments about thinking how nice it would be to play with Anthony Davis, NBA General Managers and owners should not be surprised. However, that was apparently the case recently after James said those exact things.
While we aren't sure exactly what general managers made the claims, reports were that some small-market GM's were upset after hearing James say how he would love to play with Davis if the opportunity presented itself. The unnamed GM's claimed that James was violating the league's rules against tampering, since it seemed as though he were trying to persuade a fellow player, currently under contract with an opposing team, to join his team in Los Angeles. They claimed that what made it even worse was the fact that Davis is still under contract in New Orleans through next season, so Davis is not even an impending free agent, and in order for him to get to Los Angeles this season, a trade would have to happen. That meant that the Pelicans would be forced to make a deal they might not otherwise make if they knew that Davis really did have plans to leave the organization in the summer of 2020. And in all honesty, these claims are actually 100% accurate.
Maybe Davis wants to stay in New Orleans for his entire career. They did acquire DeMarcus Cousins last season, and that seemed to show the rest of the league that they might be willing to bring in pieces to help Davis win a title. However, Cousins is now a member of the Golden State Warriors, and Davis is surrounded by a cast of players that most would consider mediocre at best.
So then, maybe Davis has plans to leave New Orleans when his contract expires, and maybe he actually wants to try to get out of there even before that happens. We have seen Kyrie Irving and Jimmy Butler make moves to get themselves traded before they hit free agency, and now both of them are playing for contending teams in a very winnable Eastern Conference. So whether it is Irving and Butler trying to get to another place, or James trying to get someone else to come to him, it seems as though what many people would consider tampering is in fact not only occurring, but it is working as well.
Now that James is a member of the Lakers, he has the perfect person to speak to when it comes to the punishments that result from tampering with players on other teams. Magic Johnson, who is currently the head of basketball operations for the Lakers, has been fined multiple times by the NBA for what the league described as tampering. The Lakers were fined over a half million dollars for engaging in such activity, and the GM's who made these recent claims were calling for more fines this time as well. Since the Lakers are one of the most prominent teams in the league in one of the most prominent markets in the league, the narrative was that they were giving themselves an unfair advantage in recruiting Davis, who is one of the best players in the NBA. Following the game between the Lakers and Pelicans, James and Davis were seen dining at a restaurant in Los Angeles, and this only added fuel to the tampering fire. And really, what was going on probably was tampering, and the team probably was attempting to get the upper hand in recruiting Davis to Los Angeles.
So then the question is, what should be done to prevent this? In what I think clearly could be described as tampering, aren't the Lakers, and James in particular, violating league rules? Yes, they probably are. However, over the past decade, as the NBA has encouraged its players to voice their thoughts publicly and engage with one another publicly, I don't think it is possible to stop this stuff from happening.
Guys work out together in the offseason. They have the same agencies represent them. They play alongside each other on the international stage. They even have dinner together after games. If you want to believe that they never talk about playing together during those interactions, then you are kidding yourself. And the general managers who claim they are at a disadvantage when this happens are kidding themselves as well.
How else do contracts get signed at 12:01 AM on the day free agency begins? How else does Kevin Durant sign with the Warriors? Is it because he just happened to choose them blindly? Or is it because about half the team went to meet with him privately before he signed the deal?
The fact remains that the Lakers likely do have an advantage in acquiring Davis, either through free agency or through a trade, and part of it surely is because of LeBron James and Magic Johnson. If I had to bet on where Davis would be playing two seasons from now, I would be much more likely to put my money on the Lakers than the Hawks or the Suns.
But then, maybe New Orleans knowing Davis wants to eventually leave is actually better for them. If they were to trade him before he became a free agent, they could get something in return, instead of losing him for only money they did not have. You can really spin this however you want depending on your point of view.
One thing I do know though, is that as the NBA has encouraged its players to speak their minds about anything and everything, and it has played a huge part in the growth of the league. However, the league may not have foreseen this alleged tampering occurring because of that, and until they crack down on it, I'm not sure they can stop it. If they want to be like the NFL, and suppress the voices of its stars, then maybe Anthony Davis will play in New Orleans for his entire career, but I'm not sure that fans of the league, or Davis himself, would like that.
If Davis does end up playing with James in Los Angeles, one thing I think we can all count on is television ratings and revenue increasing every time the Lakers play. While it will likely be at the expense of teams in smaller markets, there has always been a sizeable gap between the top and bottom of the NBA standings.
From 1990 through 1999 the Chicago Bulls were 558-230. Over that same time, the Vancouver Grizzlies were 56-240. That would place the Grizzlies 512 games behind the Bulls over that span.
From 1960 through 1969, the Celtics record was 546-260, while the 76ers/Nationals record was 314-492. That puts the Celtics 232 games ahead of the 76ers.
From 2010 through present day, the San Antonio Spurs are 511-211. The Sacramento Kings are 248-474. That puts the Spurs 263 games ahead of the Kings.
The point is, the gap between the top teams in the NBA and the bottom teams in the NBA has always been large, and it will always be large. So Anthony Davis playing for the Lakers will not drastically change the course of history in the league.
General managers and owners can claim that tampering between players goes on off the court, and they would be correct. However, they also have to accept the fact that these players are the prime reason the league has exploded in popularity, and therefore, exploded in profits. Are some teams making more money than others? Yes. But with the league arguably as big as it has ever been, I think it is impossible to prevent players from talking to one another and dreaming about playing together. It may not have been anticipated by owners a decade ago, but in the long run, I think it is better for them as a whole, and certainly better if they want their teams to continue to grow.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants season will be over this Sunday after a home game against Dallas, but there have been some positive signs during the second half of the season that can bring about some optimism heading into the offseason. It will be very interesting to see what direction the team moves in as the draft and free agency approach.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers are not realistically contenders to make serious noise in the postseason this year, but they have been pretty fun to watch anyway, with a roster of mostly young players who continue to improve.
Daily NBA Update: Speaking of the Lakers, they are coming off of a very impressive Christmas Day win on the road against the Warriors, but I still do expect Golden State to come out of the Western Conference by the end of the season. The East is much more wide open, and you have to believe that at least five teams can legitimately claim they have NBA Finals aspirations.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I don't even want to talk about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)