The Book of Basketball (continued…)

29 11 2009

I’m on page 500.  Amazingly, there are 200 more to go. I must say that Simmons’ writing style is waring me down. There has been a growing anti-Simmons presence on the Web in the past year or two (Deadspin is a leading Simmons basher), and I’m starting to understand why. The guy’s insistence on telling us everything he foresaw is beginning to grate on me.

This was brought up by my buddy Chris, who already finished the book. At first, I refuted it and believed that maybe Chris had been spending way too many hours looking at Deadspin. But I see his point. Throughout the footnotes, Simmons continually pounds into the reader’s head how we predicted this or that, or how we was responsible for inciting a particular event through his writing. What capped it for me was on page 499 when he said in a footnote that a 2007 column in which he bashed LeBron James helped spur James to finish the ’06-’07 season on a rampage.

If Simmons were to make these types of references a handful of times, then it could be funny. Instead, he insinuates his role in players’ success so often that it’s almost too obnoxious to continue reading. And yet I still do.

Oh, one more thing that I can’t stand (yet I predicted before I read the book!) is his nonstop gloating of all things Celtics. I can’t recall him going to town on one Celtic in his player rankings, and I just passed Cousy. When there is a negative point to be made about one of his beloved Celtics, he conveniently references another person to dole out the criticism. Of course, I’m expecting roughly 7 rape jokes in the Kobe chapter, whom I predict he’ll rank at #14.





The Book of Basketball (continued…)

26 11 2009

Well, well. It’s Thanksgiving Eve, and I’m on page 442. I’ve failed my mission. I vowed to complete the epic The Book of Basketball by Thanksgiving Day, which I’m obviously 240 or so pages short of doing.

I dig the player ranking section in that I’m young enough to not have seen most of the players in live action. A lot of his discussions about the ’70s and ’80s have inspired me to create a YouTube channel for myself in which I just gobble up all those videos.

Even watching YouTube videos from the late ’90s and early ’00s has been refreshing. I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have done it had I not read this book.

I’m going to try to finish the book tomorrow. Until then.





Southern Cal Patriots

26 11 2009

The NFL and NCAA each has one team it could call its “Team of the Decade.” For the NFL, it’s surely the Patriots and for the NCAA, it has to be the University of Southern California. That’s not surprising, since nearly every decade can be marked by the esteemed play of one particular team. What’s unique about the representative teams for each level of football this decade is the similarities shared by both squads.

Total domination

Let’s get the easy part out of the way. The Patriots have 109 regular season wins since 2000 (second behind the Colts’ 111), 6 AFC East division titles, 14 playoff wins and 3 Super Bowl victories (both tops this decade).

Southern Cal has 94 regular season wins since 2000, 7 Pac-10 championships, 6 bowl game wins, and at least a share of 2 national championships.

It’s safe to say that both teams have set a track record by which all other teams measure themselves.

Coaching

Both teams have been symbolized by their head coaches — Bill Belichick (took over in 2000) for the Pats and Pete Carroll (2001) for USC. Ironically, Carroll preceded Belichick as the Pats head coach.

Of course, the coaches couldn’t appear to have more divergent personalities and approaches to how they manage their teams. I won’t go into it much since it doesn’t help the point of this post, but the perceived differences are clear: Belichick is aloof, methodical and boring. He hides in his hypothetical PatCave before games and draws up gameplans to destroy the competition while being notoriously frank with the media. Carroll is gregarious, charming, invites celebrities to stand on the sidelines during games and plays pranks on his players. While he’s just as diligent and prepared as Belichick, he represents himself in a far different manner.

Anyway, both coaches have clearly used the success of their teams to become the masterminds of their respective leagues. Players want to go to bat for them and they seem to have no problem in recruiting top-notch talent. (The Pats get tons of veterans who want to be “coached” and win a Super Bowl or two.)

Transcendent teams that ultimately failed

During their decade-long reign, the Pats and USC each produced a season which seemed transcendent at the time.

The Pats’ 2007 squad went 16-0 in the regular season, and it was their first eight weeks that transformed them into a likeable team of overachievers (how they were perceived since their massive Super Bowl upset of the Rams during the ’01 season) into the Evil Empire of the NFL. They scored 331 points in those first eight games for an average of 41, never scoring fewer than 34. Their average margin of victory was 26 points. They became the first team since the ’72 Dolphins to make it undefeated through a regular season, with Tom Brady (50 passing TDs), Randy Moss (23 receiving TDs) and their offense (589 points) setting all-time NFL records. (To make it even more dramatic, Brady and Moss set their TD records on a 65-yard pass, catch and run in the 4th quarter of their last regular season game.)

The Pats used their undefeated regular season to stretch their consecutive games won steak in the regular season to 19, ultimately lengthening it to 21 after Week 2 of the ’08 campaign.

Southern Cal’s 2005 team was equally legendary in their throttling of the competition. They went 12-0 during the regular season, never scoring fewer than 35 points and reaching 50-plus points seven times. Their roster was absolutely stocked with NFL players. As in, at least 27 players. A couple of them didn’t play, like freshman Mark Sanchez, but that team had talent bursting at its seams. There were seven first-round NFL draft choices and 10 second-rounders. The QB (Matt Leinart) and one primary RB (Reggie Bush) were first-rounders and the other primary RB (LenDale White) and both starting WRs (Steve Smith, Dwayne Jarrett) were second-rounders. So, you could say this team had talent.

Southern Cal had won 34 straight games (including bowls) before the loss to Texas. In other words, they didn’t lose a game from Oct. 4, 2003 until Jan. 4, 2006. Of course, they actually won 38 straight regular season games before falling to Oregon State, 33-31, on Oct. 28, 2006.

Of course, both teams that year ultimately failed because each lost their championship game on a last-second defensive collapse (Eli-to-Plax vs. the Pats, Vince Young’s rush TD vs. USC). The Pats and Southern Cal were heavily favored to win their respective games (if not in Vegas then at least in the minds of fans), but they appeared to run out of steam after a season full of media adoration/hatred. For the Pats, they were the high-octane offense that trounced its opponents in an unsporting way. For Southern Cal, they were the team with a squeemish defensive backfield that had faced only one really good team (Notre Dame) before the Texas match.

On both accounts, it appeared to be an incredibly odd and anti-climatic way to end what had been such a memorable season.

The irony of those teams shouldn’t be forgotten either. Both teams, at their peak, were offensive monsters with the defenses ultimately holding them back. Yet the head coaches (Belichick and Carroll) had earned their coaching reputations through their defensive mastery.

Defections

Each team has struggled to remain atop their respective league since those championship game losses. The Pats missed last year’s playoffs despite winning 11 games (without Brady, who tore his knee in the first eight minutes of the first game) and their bad luck since that Giants Super Bowl game crested with the Colts game a couple weeks ago. I don’t care to break down Belichick’s 4th-down call since it’s been analyzed approximately 3,419 different ways.

As for Southern Cal, they’ve continued to lose random Pac-10 games through the years (Oregon State ’06; Standford, Oregon ’07; Oregon State ’08) before this season’s washout. They lost to Washington and were routed by Oregon and Stanford.

A lack of player talent hasn’t been what’s hurt both teams. They still have top-quality players. Instead, a breakup of their coaching staffs is what has potentially ended their dynasties.

Look at the Patriots’ coaching staff from their 2003 season, the last campaign in which they won the Super Bowl.

  • Outside Linebacker coach: Rob Ryan (left after ’03 for Oakland)
  • Offensive Coordinator: Charlie Weis (left after ’04 for Notre Dame)
  • Defensive Coordinator: Romeo Crennel (left after ’04 for Cleveland)
  • Defensive Back coach: Eric Mangini (left after ’05 for New York Jets)
  • Dir of College Scouting: Thomas Dimitrioff (left after ’07 for Atlanta)
  • Def. Coaching Asst.: Josh McDaniels (left after ’08 for Denver)
  • VP of Player Personnel: Scott Pioli (left after ’08 for Kansas City)

That’s a lot of coaching and management talent to leave in the span of five seasons. The Belichick Tree has grown in the NFL to the detriment of the Patriots.

As for Southern Cal, check out their 2004 coaching staff, the year before their landmark season:

  • Offensive Coordinator: Norm Chow (left after ’04 for Tennessee)
  • Asst. Head Coach: Ed Orgeron (left after ’04 for Ole Miss)
  • Wide Receiver coach: Lane Kiffin (left after ’06 for Oakland)
  • Eventual Off. Coord.: Steve Sarkisian (left after ’08 for U of Washington)

Kiffin would also serve as an offensive coordinator, so the Trojans eventually lost Chow, Kiffin and Sarkisian in the span of four seasons. That’s a huge coaching drain on the offense, no matter what level of talent is brought in. USC’s caliber of talent in ’05 was just so great that they were able to mask the losses of Chow and Orgeron for one more run.

I’ll finish here because this post is getting out of hand. It’s evident how many similarities Southern Cal and the Patriots have shared. They were each the unofficial Team of the Decade at their level of football. Both have defensive-minded coaches who presided over legendary offenses during the peak of their dynasty. Despite gut-wrenching championship game losses and a mass defection of coaching talent, both have still remaine very competitive, albeit less than dominant. We’ll see how they recover for the new decade.





MLB Productions World Series film

18 11 2009

I have a lot to say about this story that came out today on SI.com. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to elaborate. I’ll do so later, but I wanted to post a link to the story. You can find it below and the story should be linked through SI.com’s homepage and SI.com’s MLB page soon. Enjoy the video, too. More to come once I get a moment to reflect.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/the_bonus/11/18/mlb.video/index.html

 





3 reasons the Knicks should sign AI

17 11 2009

Sometimes a team and a player are just meant for each other. Montana and the 49ers. Jordan and the Bulls. Jeter and the Yankees. Iverson and the Knicks.

If you’re a Knicks fan these days, it’s safe to say you’re working hard every game to extract something enjoyable from the team. That is, if you actually watch their games. I tried doing just that when they played the Warriors last week. I turned the channel after roughly seven minutes.

Not only is Walt Frazier a terrible announcer, but the team doesn’t have one likeable player. Not one. I don’t like Nate Robinson’s selfishness, David Lee’s hair, Chris Duhon’s ineptitude, Danilo Galinari’s body language or…shit, I can’t even name another Knick.

That’s why Allen Iverson, he of the 24,040 career points and 27.0 scoring average over 14 seasons, is the perfect target for the Knicks. Here are three reasons:

1. Name recognition. They haven’t really had a drawing card since Stephon Marbury was traded to them in Jan. 2004. (Newly hired GM Isiah Thomas seemed to pull off a brilliant move at the time by acquiring an exciting, Brooklyn-bred point guard who was one of NYC’s most famous high school ballplayers.)

Some might argue with the ascertation that Iverson could ever be confused for a likeable player, but at least he’s a future Hall of Famer who still has game. Since the Knicks are probably going to be atrocious the rest of the year, wouldn’t it make sense to bring in a big name player who could sell some jerseys, inspire an array of newspapers stories and drum up interest in Knicks and basketball fans alike? Hell, even people entirely removed from any notion of being an NBA fan would hit the Garden just to see Iverson in a Knicks uniform.

2. Perfect system. Iverson’s persistent offensive style is tailor-made for Mike D’Antoni’s run-and-gun offense. It’s not like Knicks fans could be turned off by AI’s dalliances with himself, the ball and the basket. They seem to revel in Nate Robinson’s game whenever he goes off (which happens only when he’s finished giving himself high-fives on the bench).

AI is just as selfish as Nate but has all the toughness and greatness that Robinson could ever hope to have. Seriously, Iverson could effectively take over Robinson’s role and Rob could become the de facto cheerleader.

Ive would thrive with D’Antoni. (That’s my one play-on-words ode to Mr. Frazier.) He would have Madison Square Garden as his stage — the greatest basketball arena in the world — and he could use what’s left of his speed and quickness to continue his march toward 25,000 points. And there’s a marketing effort right there! “AI’s drive to 25″

3. No other options. What else is enticing about the Knicks? Fans might not realize what has Knicks management most excited at this moment. It’s the possibility that if Fat Eddy Curry returns to action and runs the basketball floor like a normal human being, there’s a chance — a chance — that another team might take him off their hands via trade. (Curry has a $10.5 million salary this year and an option for $11.2 million next year, so a team could gain huge cap clearance after next season.) That’s the most exciting scenario for the Knicks.

If that happens, then they would have sufficient cap room this summer to offer a max deal to a second elite player, keeping the hope alive that they can sign two from the LeBron/DWade/Bosh threesome.

Oh, and they hope Jordan Hill and Toney Douglas aren’t terrible. And the Knicks pray that Galinari’s back doesn’t flare up as it did last year.

These are the “exciting” topics churning through the Knicks franchise at the moment. So, yeah, they could certainly use a future Hall of Famer who’s seemingly meant to play in an offensively-favorable system at a historic basketball arena in one of the NBA’s most passionate basketball cities.

Just do it, Knicks. Sign AI.





Bill Simmons stole my idea

16 11 2009

Alright, the title probably isn’t true. I like Bill Simmons and won’t tear into him like Deadspin does. But it’s very eery that his 18th recommendation of 33 to improve the NBA — detailed on page 264 of The Book of Basketball — is precisely what I proposed in a May 2 post on this blog. It’s essentially that Isiah Thomas, due to all the horrific decisions he’s made during his career (ruining the CBA, ruining the Knicks), should have a reality show in which he operates various businesses.

Here is the idea from his book:

“18. I wish Isiah Thomas would be given his own reality TV show where he takes over businesses, stores and companies and runs them into the ground (like a cross between 30 Days and Wife Swap). In one episode, he could take over a popular Starbucks and immediately fire the most popular barista, raise the prices of chewy marshmallow squares and trade the store’s only espresso machine for a six-month supply of soy milk. The following week, he could become a casino pit boss in Vegas and immediately raise every blackjack table to $25, ban smoking, get rid of every American-born blackjack dealer and force the waitresses to wear more clothes. On and on it would go.”

You can read my post here:

http://kylestack.com/2009/05/02/the-isiah-thomas-show/

Odd, indeed. I’m sure Simmons came up with the idea on his own. He’s been torching the man for years (and rightly so). It’s just cool to see that people think alike on the ideas of embarrassing Thomas. Now an entire generation of young basketball fans knows him only from his failures and not from his greatness as one of the NBA’s best point guards and fiercest competitors.

P.S. It’s November 15, and I’m on page 265.





A rant on taunters

14 11 2009

I have to make a quick rant before I go into the real reason for this post. Bear with me. (If you’re wondering, it is ‘bear’ and not ‘bare.’) Last night, the Lakers were shellacked by the Thugge…oops, Nuggets, 105-79. I didn’t watch the game but had it securely taped, ready for viewing today. Of course, things didn’t turn out as planned, and as a result, I received several threatening to non-threatening e-mails/texts from people taunting me on the defending NBA World Champions’ loss.

miranda_kerr_wallpaper_1280_4

Making out with Miranda Kerr just after another Lakers championship is what life is all about.

Here’s what I love: it’s mid-November. Even though it’s too early to begin thinking about the playoffs, it’s never too early for fans to brag about inconsequential wins. Great, their team won a random blowout. I know my buddies were busting my chops. I get that. But I just can’t match the same emotion of my taunting friends for a mid-November NBA game.

I’ve learned through extensive fan playoff experience (because, you know, the Lakers have missed the playoffs twice since I’ve been alive ['93-'94, '04-'05]) that in the NBA world, you have to build your emotional levels with the season. Therefore, I can practically be mistaken for Patrick Bateman’s long-lost brother during the season’s first two months. That’s how devoid of emotion I am. It’s because the first two months are merely a feeling-out period. They’re more or less the weed-out months. The real title contenders are only concerned with not wasting too much emotion during the first months and with trying to keep their best players as healthy as possible.

Once January rolls around, I begin caring about how the Lakers build momentum heading into the All-Star break. Yet most of my concern is still wrapped up in the team’s state of health. By March, I begin warming up. I start to evaluate the Lakers’ chemistry, differences I detect from how they played in January/February, who’s heating up, whose body looks like it’s breaking down, how the team reacts to one another after the first four months of the regular season, and so on. By April, I start breathing fire. I’m wrapped up in every game, but not yet on a quarter-by-quarter basis. I try to establish patience.

When mid-May comes around, I’m gearing up. I’m doing bench presses while daydreaming of Kobe smashing one down on Birdman Anderson. I’m doing bicep curls like I’m preparing to go toe-to-toe with Carlos Boozer. I’m in the mindset of focusing on every quarter, trying to establish if the Lakers are hitting their stride or moving past their peak once the Finals enter into the picture.

And once the Lakers make the Finals (it’s happened seven times since I started paying attention to the NBA, six times since I was a serious fan), I’m a fucking nervous wreck. I yell at the TV during timeouts. I pace around the room. Every minute of the game is scrutinized. I contemplate life and why I became a sports fan.

When they win (it’s happened four times during my NBA fan career), I feel invincible. I own everything and everyone, and nobody can stop me. I could walk up to Miranda Kerr on the street and make out with her. (And she would like it.) I could finally bicep curl the plates. (Weight room lingo because I’m such a meathead.) I could tell someone to piss off and he/she would thank me for acknowledging their existence. That’s how jubilant I feel after the release of my pent-up emotions that were built over the course of a season.

Needless to say, I’m not wasting my time with a mid-November game. Screw you Denver sports fans.

 

P.S. This wasn’t even my intended post for the day, so I’ll try to make another one before the day is out.





The Book of Basketball (continued…)

13 11 2009

It’s Friday the 13th, which means I should be shutting myself off from all human contact today. I’m a clutz, and we don’t do well on this particular day. Anyway, I’m currently on page 224. That’s 64 pages from where I was Nov. 8, which isn’t terrible. But it’s also not the pace I need to finish a 697-page book by Thanksgiving. I will not give up hope. Just call me Andy Dufresne.

(SPOILER ALERT)

I just finished my favorite part of the book thus far — the 33-question “What If” section. What I enjoy most about Simmons’ take on the NBA is his enthusiasm and creativity to explain different scenarios that could have played out if a trade hadn’t been made, or if a team had selected a different player, or if a guy hadn’t gotten injured. He has an amazing ability to make sense of irrational and unrealistic situations, if that makes sense.

He’s always rapped about the Len Bias situation, and for good reason. Ironically, I finished the Len Bias “What If” just before watching Without Bias, the documentary that’s apart of ESPN’s 30 for 30 series. The film was outstanding in a tragic sense. Even though Simmons has written about Bias’ death and its related effect on the Celtics for years, I had never fully understood the events that led to Bias’ death and the resulting effect it had on the NBA, his family and parts of our society. It was perhaps the most symbolic moment of the Cocaine Era in our country (I’m guessing roughly 1974 to 1989).

I won’t go into details on Without Bias for those who haven’t yet seen the documentary, but the way his passing was taken by his friends and family was truly saddening — and real. Filmmaker Kirk Fraser needs to be recognized in some fashion for making a truly great film about a very seminal moment in NBA history and in our country’s dealing with drug-related issues.





Veteran’s Day

13 11 2009

I’m a day late writing about Veteran’s Day, but it’s never too late to thank the brave men and women who fight and have fought for our country. I don’t consider myself a patriot, necessarily. I prefer not to label myself as a particular type of person. But I feel like I have the self-awareness to step out of my little own world and recognize why I can sit here at 10:58 on a Thursday night drinking a beer (Sam Adams Blackberry Witbier) and watching NBA ball. It’s because our country has always contained a certain group of people courageous and motivated enough to voluntarily defend our country.

Even in cases where our citizens have been drafted, they’ve shown the capacity to adjust and carry out their duties. It doesn’t take much to recognize the incredible effect our armed forces have had on our nation’s development. It doesn’t even take a ‘thank you’ to a veteran when you see one. (Although that’s never a bad idea.) All it takes is for everyone to spend five minutes of their day to remind themselves how thankful they should be that there is a group of men and women willing to fight to protect us and our country’s values.





Redesign

10 11 2009

This wasn’t necessarily my first choice for a new theme. I actually wanted INove, but for some reason it doesn’t seem to permit the posting of PDFs. What I mean by that is if you click on the link to any of the Pages on the toolbar above here or to the right, such as ‘amNew York’, you’ll be presented with the articles I’ve written for that publication. Then it takes two more clicks before rapidly opening the PDF to view the article. INove, for whatever reason, doesn’t provide a clickable link to the PDF. If it does, and you know how to set that up, please e-mail me at kyle.stack@gmail.com.

I’ll probably stick with this theme for awhile, although it bothers me that I can’t fit all the Pages at the top. Such is life. We don’t always get everything we want. Hope this theme is more ‘readable’ and, as always, feel free to post any comments.





A theory on big league pitching

10 11 2009

A friend recently asked me why Major League Baseball teams burn through so many pitchers per game. I explained that relievers have become more specialized over the years, both as a result of managers tending to overmanage to justify their rising salaries and because players seem to be more injury-prone than ever.

littleleague_130b

"You pansies could beat the real Cincinnati Reds if your balls would drop." -- Typical overbearing parent who's contributed to increased stress on kids in amateur sports.

The latter point led me to think why pitchers are so much more fragile. They’re not all taking steroids and HGH, which build up the body to the point that the body’s structure can’t handle the increased weight and eventually starts breaking down. (That is truly a sentence coming from someone who has never even sniffed a medical book.)

The conclusion I came to, and this is not groundbreaking since plenty others have likely elaborated on it, has to do with innings. Not only the number of innings. The stress of innings. And that is linked, in my mind, to cultural changes in our amateur sports landscape over the last 30 or 40 years, perhaps even the last 20.

A kid in the ’60s or ’70s competed in Little League ball in the ’50s or ’60s. At the time, baseball was revered as America’s unquestionable national pastime. Every kid wanted to be Sandy Koufax or Micky Mantle. But there wasn’t a mindset that boys should train from an early age to prepare themselves for high school and college sports, which in turn would make them more appealing to big league scouts.

Sure, boys back then wanted to be professional baseball players when they grew older. Yet it was more of an innocent desire, with the reality that they would eventually become a doctor or a lawyer or a scientist. (This was back when our federal government actually made a big deal about educating kids in math and science.)

Therefore, all the innings logged in Little League and high school didn’t carry the weight they do today. Kids weren’t trying to put themselves in position to become pros. Games, while I’m sure competitive, probably weren’t treated with the intensity they are today. And there surely weren’t traveling amateur squads playing year-round like there are today for even pre-teenagers.

Since salaries began exploding in the ’90s, through the ’00s, there hasn’t just been a wider scope of kids who want to play professional baseball — there’s a larger range of parents who want to cash in on the potential million dollar arms they created. So now, you have parents angling to get their kids into as many leagues as possible. Kids play more organized games now. Everything is more competitive, more cutthroat. There isn’t time to be wasted on sandlot ball, where kids imagined what life could be like as Willie Mays in center field. Now kids expect to become the next Matt Kemp or Carlos Beltran in center field. Those guys aren’t just their heroes — they’re potentially future competitors, in their minds.

Young boys who pitch prepare themselves from an earlier age to throw hard, to throw fast and to log copious amounts of innings. As a result, they don’t just throw more. They do so under harsher conditions, under more pressure and with more intensity than ever before. As a result, we see more big league ballplayers who have pitched longer and under more stress than ever before. This isn’t a new phenomenon, obviously. But it sure is a disturbing one.





Three pet peeves

9 11 2009

My favorite all-time show is Seinfeld for one obvious reason: Jerry and the crew complain about the most useless crap. Jerry once broke up with a girl on the show because she ate her peas one at a time. Elaine couldn’t go out with a guy who painted his face for hockey games. I don’t have any outstanding breakup stories, but I have my list of complaints. Actually, there’s a lot of them. I’m just going for three here, but truth be told, I could make 30 articles of three pet peeves. Consider this an ongoing list…

Pet Peeve #1: A person who answers his or her cell phone to have a conversation while you’re having a conversation with him or her.

One of my friends actually does this. It’s utterly irritating because how are you supposed to tell if the person who typically does this is even listening to you in the first place? I think all cell phone talking should be done alone in a separate room. Firstly, nobody wants to hear someone rant about their day to someone else in the phone. Secondly, nobody wants to hear someone argue with the person on the phone. Those are all conversations meant for the private quarters of a bedroom.

Now, I don’t mind someone answering the phone during a conversation to say that they’re busy talking and they’ll call back. That’s fine. Totally legit. But to just cut off the conversation to begin a second one? That’s basically telling the first conversee (I made that up), “Hey, why don’t you chill for 15-20 minutes and wait to talk to me again while I talk to someone more interesting about something more important than what we were just discussing?” It’s really the ultimate “fuck you.”

Pet Peeve #2: The guy/gal who yells “move to the middle” as everyone boards the subway.

Okay, this one straight pisses me off if it happens in the morning. Nobody likes taking the subway. We New Yorkers understand it’s just a fact of life, even for those lucky few who have a car. The subways here suck, especially in the summer when they’re sweltering hot. The MTA has decimated its budget to the degree that some of us have to wait two or three subway arrivals before we’re able to finally cram in like we’re trying to set a Guinness World Record for most people lodged into one subway car. Believe me, I’ve seriously considered “moshing” just to get out of a couple taller dudes’ arm pits.

So when we elbow our way into a subway, trying not to touch the body parts of people we don’t want to touch or trying to keep a lookout for the inevitable Bad Breath Guy, the last thing we need to hear is some jackass at the door yelling, “Hey move to the middle, go to the middle, CREATE SOME ROOM!” Not only is that guy stupid for choosing a middle car and not wisely waiting for a back-end one, he’s a complete lunatic for not slyly pushing his way to the front of the platform before the subway rolls up. That’s key. For those of you who haven’t had the pleasure of taking a rush hour NYC subway, remember that nugget of advice. It’ll get you a primo spot in the car upon its arrival.

Pet Peeve #3: Bitchy, humorless bartenders.

Ohhhhh, man. It’s 2:30 p.m. two Fridays ago and I wanted to get a beer at a bar. Just a thirsty guy looking to get out of the rain, get his weekend drinking ON. (Don’t ask why I got out of work so early.) I stop by PS 450 on 31st and Park. Once inside, I saddle up to the bar and ask an attractive yet obviously unhappy blonde for a beer.

She brings it, I slightly smile and say thanks, then make some innocent joke about something. I really can’t remember what it was, but I know for a fact it wasn’t especially tacky or revolting. It was just a middle-of-the-road “test” joke. You know what I mean. The safe joke to get a feel for someone’s sense of humor. I was expecting a harmless laugh, followed by a quick wipe of the bar with a towel and an even quicker turnaround to go do something else. But all I received was a two-second expressionless face, followed by a slight roll of the eye. Let me tell you — nobody likes that girl. At least I don’t.

I feel that if someone is going to bartend, the least he or she could do is to laugh at even the safe jokes. If they want tips, that is. I’ll gladly tip 30-35 percent if I feel the bartender plays along and just shows some personality. If I’m at a bar, I’d rather not be bored or depressed. I want to talk in that situation — about anything. But a bartender who’s tight-lipped, with bad body language and a “Don’t fucking talk to me” attitude makes the experience a total drag. Why bartend if you’re just going to make people miserable?

Only two things should reasonably matter in hiring a bartender: an ability to multi-task at a decent pace and the versatility to converse with a number of people. That’s it. Anyone can learn how to make drinks, especially when half the battle is just pouring draft beers. Yet a smile and a good fake laugh will earn brownie points every time.





The Book of Basketball (continued…)

8 11 2009

It’s November 8, and I’m on page 160. That’s 131 pages from a week ago. In fairness, I’ve had an incredibly busy last few days with freelance stuff and studying HTML + CSS and, well, drinking.

A few thoughts (SPOILER ALERT)

I dug the section on Isiah Thomas and The Secret. I feel bad for Isiah in a couple ways. He’s known to an entire generation of younger sports fans as an aloof, ego-centric mess after completely tanking with the Knicks. (And some people might remember the scalding Sports Illustrated story almost a decade ago about how Isiah blew up the CBA.)

What people don’t realize is the guy was not just a great player but also a decent judge of talent. Remember, he drafted Tracy McGrady, Damon Stoudemire (a very solid PG for seven or eight years) and Marcus Camby (struggled out of the gate but became a dominant rebounder and shot blocker) when he was with the Raptors. And he chose, among others, Trevor Ariza during his Knicks tenure. A lot of people forget about that pick, since Ariza’s Knicks career was overshadowed by Larry Brown’s cantankerous handling of young’ns, which resulted in Ariza getting traded to Orlando.

Anyway, Thomas also was a great player. He’s probably top 25 at least, maybe top 20. I haven’t made it to Simmons’ top 100 player rankings, which I’m assuming is somewhere in the 500s. But Thomas was one of the seven or eight most important NBA players during the ’80s, the league’s Golden Age, and he deserves the proper recognition for being such an incredible player and teammate. (Though not an respectable opponent, as his walking out on the Bulls in ’91 without shaking hands and myriad of other slimey tactics should have forewarned people with how poorly he would work as an executive. Because, you know, you have to actually communicate and get along well enoughwith people to get stuff done at that level.)

I plenty more thoughts but that’s enough for now. More along the way.





The Dude and the Doctor

5 11 2009

NBA Injury Report

The thinking for my new RotoExperts.com NBA Injury column (syndicated on Yahoo! Sports) is simple: Get a medical professional to dispense information and opinions on player’s injuries. Since I’m not a medical pro — you cannot trust me because I’m not a doctor — I restrict myself to providing fantasy advice and leave the medical details to the doc.

Beyond just providing fantasy NBA advice, I hope that the readers of this column find value in the fantastic medical information. Who knows, maybe someone is wondering exactly what a shoulder subluxation is. And maybe someone can learn how to treat their sprained wrist or pulled hammy if he or she incurs it on the basketball court or football field. It’s also about delivering valuable information in an entertaining fashion, so that’s what I’ll strive to do in this column during the NBA season.





The Book of Basketball

1 11 2009
IMG_1068

700 pages, 5 lbs and probably four months worth of reading.

I received Bill Simmons’ book in the mail yesterday and have a tentative goal of finishing it by Thanksgiving. I’ll give various updates on my pace, mostly to embarrass myself with my incredibly slow reading style. (The only books I’ve raced through are Moneyball by Michael Lewis and Fantasyland by Sam Walker.)

So, I started October 31. The book is 697 pages. I’m on page 29 as of Sunday morning, Nov. 1. The race is on.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.