So Lebron James, the biggest hype since oh-let-me-see…Yao? played awful against LA yesterday - big deal! I wish NBA would just stop hyping up individual talent to the point of ignoring really good teams around the league, already. Sometimes the NBA hype machine makes me sick the teams and people they choose to highlight - Vince Carter (bust!), Lebron James (who knows! - more importantly, who cares when the Cavs won’t even make playoffs), LA (the all-geezer team gets more respect than the defending champs). Seriously, I wish they would hype people like Tim Duncan who won championship rings with a team of scrubs than Kevin Garnett, who set a record in the number of first-round playoff exits. Bleah!
All this talk of course, is as stupid as most sportswriters and so-called experts predicting the Mavs might as well get ready to be a lottery team now that, that powerhouse scorer.ball hog called Nick Van Exel is no longer with us. It isn’t like we have one of the best PGs in Nash, one of the top 5 players in Dirk and an excellent team leader in Finley - I wonder if those that taken by Nick’s attitude in the Sacramento series last year even remember what he did against SA in the next series - I will tell you what! A big, fat nothing! He took more shots shooting at 37.5%, while Fin was sizzling at 50% shooting and trying ot lead the team to victory! So much for experts!
Posted by shanti at October 17, 2003 9:17 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.realwomenonline.com/scgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/2933
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ho-hum!:
You got it right! My explanation for this is advertising value. A player’s selling power is determined more by his pose, behavior rather than statistics. Remember, we had a similar discussion before.
I think the NBA is desparately looking for another Jordan to increasing its ratings. It had bet first on Carter (similar profile as MJ, #1 pick, college: North Carolina). But he did’nt live up to the hype (I am not sure otherwise how he was selected #1 in All-Stars. There was this “Canadian voting for him like crazy” theory.)
Then came Kobe, pretty good. Was almost predicted to be the next MJ, but then came all-famous episode.
The next bets are Yao (target: young Chinese) and James (target: you know who …)
L.
Posted by: L. at October 17, 2003 9:51 AM
LOL, L - the problem as I see it is that people really worthy of hype, like Tim Duncan are just not flashy enough. Good, old fundametal basketball and responsibility doesn’t seem to sell much really. All that matters is how you can dunk and how many people you can fly over to do so.
Posted by: Shanti at October 17, 2003 11:05 AM
If hype made rational sense then it wouldn’t be hype. It’d be respect. MJ commanded both. Kobe seems to be commanding both, grudgingly (and don’t count him down yet. If the trial is muddled and the Lakers win in 2004, Kobe will probably rise back up). Whether you like it or not, Duncan doesn’t have the presense of an MJ or KG or Kobe. He commands respect for his play, but can’t get the hype because he’s so low key when doing it. The same can be said about Stockton (and to a lesser extent, Malone).
And to continue the old KG argument…KG is playing for the 5th or 6th best team in the West (arguments can be made for the blazers before and houston/phoenix now). There is no question that the T’Wolves could contend for the Eastern crown, but they’re stuck in the west. Simply put, KG and the T’Wolves are good, but the top 4 in the West are better.
Posted by: Chris C. at October 17, 2003 12:02 PM
I agree completely, Chris - I am just saying that compared to Duncan, KG’s team is slightly better - take Duncan out and the Spurs are a lottery-bound team. KG had Wally, Rasho, Troy Hudson and Kendall Gill (last season), who were much better than Tony Parker or Ginobili without Duncan.
Duncan should be credited for achieving as much as he did with as little as he had - I do agree that he is too non-controversial to be highlight-reel-worthy ;) I think that is why he is one of my favorite players.
Posted by: Shanti at October 17, 2003 12:10 PM
Ahh, here’s the disagreement, then. I think Rasho is worse than Robinson/Rose (they’re basically even individually). Similarly, I think Parker and Hudson are basically a wash. Wally is better than all the Spurs SF, but that’s the only place, and Wally tends to fade under pressure.
Statistically, Duncan and KG were about even last season (actually, KG did about 2 APG and .5 RPG better). It’s hard to see how much more KG could do. The only thing there might be is if KG vanishes int he playoffs, but I don’t have playoff stats in front of me.
Posted by: Chris C. at October 19, 2003 2:57 PM
See, even taken thus, there is not enough difference between the Spurs without TD and the Wolves without KG that the Spurs were able to beat the Lakers straight up, while Minnesota couldn’t get it done when it mattered.
Like you said, the playoff numbers about who stepped their game up and who didn’t might make a pretty good comparison between Duncan and KG. I think barring Shaq, Duncan is hands-down the best player in NBA right now.
Posted by: Shanti at October 20, 2003 9:15 AM