So, I finally saw the Lebron James video.
I know you know the one I'm talking about.
First, it was "the video that Nike confiscated of Lebron James getting dunked on by a high schooler."
Then, it was "the video that the public had the right to see."
Next, it was "well, I mean, the camp does have a 'no outside photography or recording' policy."
Finally, it was "oh somebody leaked the video. I'm shocked. We might as well watch the footage from someone's cell phone video camera."
And this is the type of trending that is keeping me out of the sports writing industry?
I even heard Dan Patrick say that Lebron didn't get dunked on; he actually just got out of the way and let the kid have his moment.
Well, as stated, I finally saw the video, and... umm... King James got dunked on by a high schooler.
He caught a face full of shoulder, gave a "swing-and-a-miss" attempt at a block, and then stumbled backwards upon landing.
That is textbook "posterization."
Perhaps, as some talking head hypothesized, Lebron could have blocked the kid if he wanted to, but we'll never know that because Lebron, that I know of, hasn't really addressed it.
Not that it matters, since getting dunked on or dunking on someone is no indicator of actual talent, but I would love to hear the interview that would occur if Lebron and a reporter had a completely truthful and accurate conversation about the incident.
"Mr. James...excuse me...rumor has it that you got... posterized at your recent camp. Is this true?"
"Why yes I did. Haven't you seen the video? It's all over every website that calls itself a news outlet, most of which are actually run by high school dropouts with poor senses of humor and decency. (Glares menacingly at the kid wearing the star trek t-shirt and no press credentials)"
"But Mr. James, I heard Nike confiscated the tape. Don't journalists have the right to everything that happens anywhere at anytime, regardless of rules in place in those locations?"
"Well yeah, they tried to keep that tape from getting out. Truthfully, nothing that happens in a private location is any of the media's business, and the camp had a rule against recordings done by anyone other than Nike. That rule is really just for the protection of the 16-17-year-olds that are attending the camp, but it actually would've been really convenient for me this time. (insert cheesy Lebron commercial smile)"
"Lebron, some have said you let the kid dunk, but I've seen the video. He made you look pretty bad; am I right? (looks around for a high five)"
"Well truthfully, I'm probably the most naturally gifted athlete on the planet, so, were I playing at game intensity and focus, I would've sent the ball into the sixth row. But I wasn't, because it's a camp and I'm the host. Thus, that high schooler dunked on me, and it should be on a poster. Because that video is nasty."
Granted that conversation won't ever happen, but that's my take on the issue.
The King got thrown down upon, but it's not really that big of a deal.
The score is still Lebron 2,000,000...the world 1.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
Clash of the Titans
I've heard much talk on sports radio over recent months about the level of parity in particular professional leagues.
The hosts on these shows begin to banter about which leagues have the most level playing field amongst its teams, then they move on to discuss whether parity is really important.
My personal stance is that, to the fan of mediocre teams, parity is paramount.
If your team just missed the MLB wild card by a game and a half or finished as the eight seed in the NBA's eastern conference and got spanked by the Cavs, it's nice to think, "My guys might have a chance next year."
For everyone else, especially league officials, total parity is like "ending women's suffrage."
The phrase itself sounds better than the meaning of the words.
Total parity means that this year's champion might be terrible next year.
See 1997 or 2003 Marlins.
Total parity means that fans just get frustrated when their Super Bowl Raiders disappear for years afterwards.
Are their Angels fans anyhwere outside of California because of that title the Halos won in 2002?
Did anyone else even remember that the Angels won a World Series in 2002?
On the flip side, how many Celtics and Lakers fan exist outside of Massachusetts and California simply because of the 1980's?
Take me for example, I've only seen the United Center once in the seven days I've ever spent in Chicago, but I still cheer for the Bulls as much as possible because of the Jordan era.
I'll go a step further and say that I wouldn't even watch the NBA now if Jordan's Bulls hadn't erased the word parity from the NBA lexicon in the mid-90s.
All that said, the NBA is building to what I think may be the best NBA season in years because, for once, parity isn't happening.
The teams that are making the biggest moves are last season's contenders.
The Lakers decided, "what we need is a grumpy, lanky dude."
Thus, Ron Artest.
The Celtics said, "We'll see your grumpy, lanky dude, and raise you a scruffy beard."
Thus, Rasheed Wallace.
Questionably, the Magic gave up a little too much, but they picked up Vince Carter, and I can't wait to see Vince jump off Dwight Howard's back for a 360 through his legs.
Even the Cavaliers signed Shaq, which is a way better deal than a lot of people realize for situational and match-up reasons.
Basically, the Eastern conference power forwards, or fours, should start a support group.
Imagine yourself having to decide who to help, your small forward who's getting destroyed by the King or your most likely undersized center that's getting pushed around by the Big Aristotle.
Have fun with that.
Also don't forget that the Rockets and Blazers have been reloading, and D-Wade is forcing the Heat's hand on some moves in Miami.
The NBA was already gaining popularity, but I think this may be one of the most interesting eras we've ever seen in sports.
This is no one or two-team race, but this is also no NFL, where contenders change year-to-year.
What we're about to see is essentially an eight-or-nine team league of contenders that fill their schedules with 20 or so minor-league teams.
I mean, does anyone actually view the Bucks and Andrew Bogut as anywhere near the same level as Kobe and the Lakers?
Personally, I love this direction.
Why?
Because I think it sounds more exciting to see Shaq, LeBron, Kobe, Pau, and Ron Artest on the same court without All-Star jerseys on than it would be to see Michael Redd and those ugly green uniforms get swept out of the second round.
The hosts on these shows begin to banter about which leagues have the most level playing field amongst its teams, then they move on to discuss whether parity is really important.
My personal stance is that, to the fan of mediocre teams, parity is paramount.
If your team just missed the MLB wild card by a game and a half or finished as the eight seed in the NBA's eastern conference and got spanked by the Cavs, it's nice to think, "My guys might have a chance next year."
For everyone else, especially league officials, total parity is like "ending women's suffrage."
The phrase itself sounds better than the meaning of the words.
Total parity means that this year's champion might be terrible next year.
See 1997 or 2003 Marlins.
Total parity means that fans just get frustrated when their Super Bowl Raiders disappear for years afterwards.
Are their Angels fans anyhwere outside of California because of that title the Halos won in 2002?
Did anyone else even remember that the Angels won a World Series in 2002?
On the flip side, how many Celtics and Lakers fan exist outside of Massachusetts and California simply because of the 1980's?
Take me for example, I've only seen the United Center once in the seven days I've ever spent in Chicago, but I still cheer for the Bulls as much as possible because of the Jordan era.
I'll go a step further and say that I wouldn't even watch the NBA now if Jordan's Bulls hadn't erased the word parity from the NBA lexicon in the mid-90s.
All that said, the NBA is building to what I think may be the best NBA season in years because, for once, parity isn't happening.
The teams that are making the biggest moves are last season's contenders.
The Lakers decided, "what we need is a grumpy, lanky dude."
Thus, Ron Artest.
The Celtics said, "We'll see your grumpy, lanky dude, and raise you a scruffy beard."
Thus, Rasheed Wallace.
Questionably, the Magic gave up a little too much, but they picked up Vince Carter, and I can't wait to see Vince jump off Dwight Howard's back for a 360 through his legs.
Even the Cavaliers signed Shaq, which is a way better deal than a lot of people realize for situational and match-up reasons.
Basically, the Eastern conference power forwards, or fours, should start a support group.
Imagine yourself having to decide who to help, your small forward who's getting destroyed by the King or your most likely undersized center that's getting pushed around by the Big Aristotle.
Have fun with that.
Also don't forget that the Rockets and Blazers have been reloading, and D-Wade is forcing the Heat's hand on some moves in Miami.
The NBA was already gaining popularity, but I think this may be one of the most interesting eras we've ever seen in sports.
This is no one or two-team race, but this is also no NFL, where contenders change year-to-year.
What we're about to see is essentially an eight-or-nine team league of contenders that fill their schedules with 20 or so minor-league teams.
I mean, does anyone actually view the Bucks and Andrew Bogut as anywhere near the same level as Kobe and the Lakers?
Personally, I love this direction.
Why?
Because I think it sounds more exciting to see Shaq, LeBron, Kobe, Pau, and Ron Artest on the same court without All-Star jerseys on than it would be to see Michael Redd and those ugly green uniforms get swept out of the second round.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)