Did anyone else find the trade of Ray Allen for Jeff Green to be a little odd? I can understand trading Allen. But, how many small forwards does a team need? SF is Kevin Durant's position. It is also the best position for Rashard Lewis (is there a sign and trade in his future?). Isn't Green's best pro position SF? It just seemed a little odd to me.
In another odd twist, the Atlanta Hawks finally took a PG. Unfortunately, I think they may have done it with the wrong pick in the 1st round. Mike Conley Jr. is a dynamic athlete. They passed on him to take Al Horford with the #3 pick. The Hawks then took Acie Law IV a few picks later. Law was a really good college player, but it seems like the consensus is that Conley was THE point guard in the draft. Sticking Conley with Joe Johnson, Josh Childress, Josh Smith, Sheldon Williams, etc. seems like a better idea than adding Law to the team, even if the other guy you add to the squad isn't as good as Al Horford.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Think ... then Speak
I'm a big John Mayer fan. His song "My Stupid Mouth" contains some great advice to professional athletes (and people in general):
"How could I forget?
Mama said 'think before speaking'
No filter in my head
Oh, what's a boy to do
I guess he better find one soon"
It seems like people think that saying what they think and then offering up cheesy retractions makes everything copacetic. In particular, Clinton Portis defended Michael Vick saying that if he wants to fight dogs on his property he should. There are laws that everyone is supposed to live by, including professional athletes. Does Portis also think Vick should be allowed to grow marijuana on his property, use it on his property, and allow others to use it on his property? If Portis thinks that ... fine, I guess. That's his perspective on the way things work. But, why reverse fields and issue retractions, apologies and the like? Did his perspective shift overnight?
Another example was Curt Schilling ripping Barry Bonds and then backing off it. And, there was Marvin Lewis talking about Cincy police targeting his Bengals players. I'm sure I'm overlooking a few (or a bunch) of other examples.
I have nothing against professional athletes speaking their minds, although I'm not really sure why people care so much about what they have to say. Does Gary Sheffield really know why there aren't a lot of African-Americans in MLB? It would be nice if players, coaches, etc. would put a little more thought into what they are saying because people, including kids, are listening. And, if you say what you really believe, why do you need to shy away from it at a later date? You shouldn't. You could admit to being wrong or ignorant, but that's not what happens. It's usually just a face-saving ploy and I don't understand why people are buying it.
"How could I forget?
Mama said 'think before speaking'
No filter in my head
Oh, what's a boy to do
I guess he better find one soon"
It seems like people think that saying what they think and then offering up cheesy retractions makes everything copacetic. In particular, Clinton Portis defended Michael Vick saying that if he wants to fight dogs on his property he should. There are laws that everyone is supposed to live by, including professional athletes. Does Portis also think Vick should be allowed to grow marijuana on his property, use it on his property, and allow others to use it on his property? If Portis thinks that ... fine, I guess. That's his perspective on the way things work. But, why reverse fields and issue retractions, apologies and the like? Did his perspective shift overnight?
Another example was Curt Schilling ripping Barry Bonds and then backing off it. And, there was Marvin Lewis talking about Cincy police targeting his Bengals players. I'm sure I'm overlooking a few (or a bunch) of other examples.
I have nothing against professional athletes speaking their minds, although I'm not really sure why people care so much about what they have to say. Does Gary Sheffield really know why there aren't a lot of African-Americans in MLB? It would be nice if players, coaches, etc. would put a little more thought into what they are saying because people, including kids, are listening. And, if you say what you really believe, why do you need to shy away from it at a later date? You shouldn't. You could admit to being wrong or ignorant, but that's not what happens. It's usually just a face-saving ploy and I don't understand why people are buying it.
Durant v. Oden
The Sonics have to be a little disappointed that after years of taking long shot big men in the first round (Robert Swift, Johan Petro, Mouhamed Sene, Nick Collison - more of a PF and a solid contributor), they are going to miss out on Greg Oden by 1 spot. But, Kevin Durant is a great consolation prize. Durant is a long wing, not unlike the SF they have opting out of his contract, Rashard Lewis. Personally, I'd love to see Durant, Lewis and Ray Allen playing together racking up points. Additionally, it would give them versatility implementing a zone. But, Durant is the perfect replacement for Lewis, who doesn't strike me as a great athlete for someone playing SF in the NBA.
If I were a GM, I wouldn't be concerned that Durant can't bench press 185 pounds. Now, if he can't bench press 185 pounds a year from now, that might concern me. Durant should fill out a little bit, but a 7'5" wingspan is not conducive to huge numbers on the bench. I would be concerned that Durant didn't show well in athletic tests, though. A SF should be a C in the agility drill, vertical jump and three-quarter court sprint. I don't know where Durant ranks in comparison to all the other participants, but I would have liked to see him beat Oden in something. But, if Durant's athleticism is decent, his length and skills should allow him to excel in the NBA.
Portland, Seattle's big-city neighbor to the south, has to be giddy about getting Oden because Oden will allow Portland to get rid of Zach Randolph and move LaMarcus Aldridge out of the center spot. Aldridge is not a banger and is not capable of being the main man in the middle for a Western Conference team. That being said, he is another tall, long, athletic, skilled former Texas Longhorn. Aldridge should excel at PF and will love having Oden helping him out on D and the boards. Aldridge has the range and skill set to complement Oden's developing low post game. Now, Portland needs to fill the SF spot, which they should be able to do.
If I were a GM, I wouldn't be concerned that Durant can't bench press 185 pounds. Now, if he can't bench press 185 pounds a year from now, that might concern me. Durant should fill out a little bit, but a 7'5" wingspan is not conducive to huge numbers on the bench. I would be concerned that Durant didn't show well in athletic tests, though. A SF should be a C in the agility drill, vertical jump and three-quarter court sprint. I don't know where Durant ranks in comparison to all the other participants, but I would have liked to see him beat Oden in something. But, if Durant's athleticism is decent, his length and skills should allow him to excel in the NBA.
Portland, Seattle's big-city neighbor to the south, has to be giddy about getting Oden because Oden will allow Portland to get rid of Zach Randolph and move LaMarcus Aldridge out of the center spot. Aldridge is not a banger and is not capable of being the main man in the middle for a Western Conference team. That being said, he is another tall, long, athletic, skilled former Texas Longhorn. Aldridge should excel at PF and will love having Oden helping him out on D and the boards. Aldridge has the range and skill set to complement Oden's developing low post game. Now, Portland needs to fill the SF spot, which they should be able to do.
Monday, June 04, 2007
BS Stat
Have you ever considered the blown save? I was reminded of this odd stat again tonight. Boston reliever Okajima blew a 5-4 lead against the Yankees. In doing so, he picked up a blown save. What I find interesting is that he got a blown save on a day when there was almost no shot at him getting a save (although he could have accumulated another one of those vitally important holds!). Papelbon would have, most likely, been in to finish the game.
I don't like the blown save as a stat. For closers, it is fairly straightforward. If Joe Nathan is in the game with 2 outs in the 8th, he's probably going to stay in for the 9th. So, if he gives up a couple runs in the 8th and they lose the game then a blown save makes sense. But, would other Twins pitchers stay in for the save?
The blown save is a complicated beast because the save is complicated. A pitcher may enter a close game then stay in the game for the remainder after the lead has ballooned (so the end margin is more than 3 runs). That pitcher would pick up a save in a game when a closer coming in for the 9th couldn't. So, if he can pick up a save, then if he gives up the lead in a similar situation, I guess he deserves a blown save ... but what you don't know is whether or not his team is going to score enough runs for him to get to stay in the game if he doesn't give up the lead.
And, think about this for a little bit if you don't think keeping track of blown saves for all pitchers is kind of stupid. Let's say the Yankees are up 8-1 after 6 in Roger Clemens' first start. Let's say they put in Proctor for the 7th and he gets rocked for a 2-run HR and then gives up 2 more hits before being removed. An assortment of relievers get through the inning and the 7th ends 8-6, with Proctor being charged with 4 earned runs allowed. The Yankees bring in Farnsworth for the 8th to get to Rivera and he gives up a 2-out, 2-run double that ties the game. Farnsworth gets a blown save. Proctor doesn't. Where is the sense in that?
I don't like the blown save as a stat. For closers, it is fairly straightforward. If Joe Nathan is in the game with 2 outs in the 8th, he's probably going to stay in for the 9th. So, if he gives up a couple runs in the 8th and they lose the game then a blown save makes sense. But, would other Twins pitchers stay in for the save?
The blown save is a complicated beast because the save is complicated. A pitcher may enter a close game then stay in the game for the remainder after the lead has ballooned (so the end margin is more than 3 runs). That pitcher would pick up a save in a game when a closer coming in for the 9th couldn't. So, if he can pick up a save, then if he gives up the lead in a similar situation, I guess he deserves a blown save ... but what you don't know is whether or not his team is going to score enough runs for him to get to stay in the game if he doesn't give up the lead.
And, think about this for a little bit if you don't think keeping track of blown saves for all pitchers is kind of stupid. Let's say the Yankees are up 8-1 after 6 in Roger Clemens' first start. Let's say they put in Proctor for the 7th and he gets rocked for a 2-run HR and then gives up 2 more hits before being removed. An assortment of relievers get through the inning and the 7th ends 8-6, with Proctor being charged with 4 earned runs allowed. The Yankees bring in Farnsworth for the 8th to get to Rivera and he gives up a 2-out, 2-run double that ties the game. Farnsworth gets a blown save. Proctor doesn't. Where is the sense in that?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
