Showing posts with label LeBron James. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LeBron James. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Finally the AFL season can start

This offseason has probably been the most dramatic in recent AFL history. And, not a moment too soon, the break ends tonight as Carlton take on Richmond at the MCG. Thank goodness - because as car-crashingly enthralling as reading about the "St Kilda Schoolgirl" and her ... err ... exploits has been, it will be blessed and welcome relief to jam match coverage in amongst the tabloid-style back pages to which we've become so accustomed.


The offseason of 2010-11 for the AFL really started over twelve months ago when it became apparent that "Little Gary" would not sign a contract extension with Geelong, meaning he would effectively become a restricted free agent at the end of season 2010. Since then, AFL off-field shenanigans have included (in no particular order) Mark Thompson's lie-induced burnout; Ablett's inevitable re-enactment of the LeBron James masterpiece "Leaving Cleveland"; Brendan Fevola's self-destruction; Nick Riewoldt's wang; Zac Dawson's disco biscuits; the creation of a new franchise; a Collingwood premiership and subsequent uprising of the Magpie army; the gutting of the National Rugby League as Israel Folau and Greg Inglis changed (or threatened to change) codes; James Hird's Second Coming as Essendon coach; further rumours about stars leaving their clubs for what amounts to GWS slush-funds; Ricky Nixon's precipitous fall from grace and finally, thankfully, nothing at all about Port Adelaide or Fremantle.


Andrew Demetriou must surely be relieved that Melbourne, a town notorious for it's blanket coverage of AFL-related issues, will finally have actual deliverable content to space out the negative headlines. Aside from the form of Ricky Ponting - and how many words can you print daily on that? - the scarcity of sport worth speaking about has left Melbourne newspapers with little else on which to speculate throughout the Summer. Had the ignoble misadventures of Ricky Nixon, Sam Gilbert, Fevola and the horribly overpromoted Melbourne schoolgirl occurred in the Summer of 2007 amidst a 5 - 0 Ashes victory, the Melbourne Victory's phenomenal second season and the retirements of Warne, Langer, Martyn and McGrath, the AFL's offseason of new frontiers may well have garnered only a fraction of the attention it did this year.


The spotlight thrown on this off-field malarkey was only intensified by Australia's performance in The Ashes and waning public interest in cricket. As most sport becomes fully and painfully professional, they lose much of the larrikinism and fun which attracted the mug punter to them in the first place. Faced with the choice between a team full of bullies, pouters and bores or following the World Game (with very little television coverage), Joe Public decided it was best simply to re-invest in the coming Aussie Rules season. The league revelled in the exposure, initially falling victim to the old adage that any publicity is good publicity. This theory was recently discounted somewhat in The Economist; the AFL was only to learn how wrong that statement can be in February as first Brendan Fevola, then Ricky Nixon committed professional seppuku.


The AFL plays the politics of sports much better than any other code in Australia. No other competition in the nation felt obliged to have its say on the bidding process save the AFL, yet Demetriou managed to sound both condescending and patronising to football's governing body all at once. The failed FFA bid for the 2022 football World Cup meant only more airtime and column inches. The League invited - and loved - the attention, yet as the summer wore on it became obvious that those at League headquarters couldn't wait for the season to begin. The stream of life malapropisms committed by AFL brethren had made life in the public eye nigh-on unbearable. What were once a player's endearing foibles now appear glaring character weaknesses. Football's never been played by saints - but now media coverage and the blogosphere mean for better coverage. What was once left uncovered rarely remains so now.


Finally, the season is upon us. Now perhaps we can get around to covering what really matters: the game itself.

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

What you don't realise about the Miami Heat

The Miami Heat are stronger this year than we could have imagined, especially after all the dramas in December about how LeBron and the coach weren't getting along. LeBron is having his usual, MVP-type season, Dwyane Wade is playing well, Chris Bosh's head remains exceedingly-small and the steadiness of Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Erick Dampier has offset Joel Anthony's growing pains as a pro centre. You get the feeling they're going to cause some grief in the playoffs - and that they may be the NBA's third best team after Boston and San Antonio.


But the Miami team wasn't built for this year. It was built for next year. The team knew it was still missing a couple of key ingredients for a title this year, namely a centre who can defend the paint while not being a complete zero offensively and a point guard who can shoot the trey. They were well aware of this when the Key Three signed in July - news to noone.


The Heat were hoping that during this offseason's Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations between NBA owners and players, the Mid Level Exception (MLE) isn't rescinded. The MLE was created a few years back to allow teams near or over the salary cap to sign players annually to try and improve their team. It's worth $5 million, and can be split any number of ways. Contending teams usually give the whole amount to one key role player, or split it between two older pros who can still help. The players like it - it decreases salary pressure ever so slightly, meaning more pie for the guys who play the game.


But it's increasingly looking like the Owners as a group don't see it helping them and want it removed. Existing MLE players like Ron Artest of the LA Lakers and Mike Miller of the Heat will still be paid what they're owed, but MLE deals are likely become as insubstantial as the Salary Cap will be hard. (Currently the cap is "soft", meaning teams are allowed to exceed it in certain ways such as to re-sign their own free-agents, but are penalised financially for doing so).


So where does this leave Miami? With a hard cap and no salary cap exceptions? With pretty much the same roster but very few tradeable assets unless a club is prepared to pay well over the odds for Anthony or the ageing Udonis Haslem. It's almost certain at some stage they will win a championship - they're just too talented not too - but the dynasty so many predicted may not happen simply for a lack of depth. The last couple of teams build around a "Big Three" - Boston and Chicago had excellent reserves of depth: the Celtics had PJ Brown, Leon Powe, Kendrick Perkins and a young Rajon Rondo. The Three-peat Bulls boasted Luc Longley, Ron Harper, Toni Kukoc, Brian Williams and Steve Kerr.


Miami may go the way of many championship contenders and try to pick up cheap veterans who have accepted salary buyouts from lesser clubs who don't need them anymore and want to avoid paying their hefty wages; but that limits the Heat to one guy per year who may or may not have anything left in the tank. What should be of comfort to the South Beach faithful is that with their current form and health, the Heat are an absolute lock to beat nearly everyone who comes knocking.


Until the playoffs, where Mario Chalmers, Carlos Arroyo and Juwan Howard will have to face up to playing serious minutes against younger or better opposition. It could be a glimpse of the future for the Heat. Not quite dystopian, but not the haven the wise guys in Florida expected on July 8th, The Decision day.

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Why Blake Griffin of the Los Angeles Clippers is so important

When he comes to Portland, go and see him. Atlanta, too. Hell, if he comes to Tootgarook, he’ll pack the house.

I’m waxing lyrical about Blake Griffin, the NBA’s standout rookie of 2010-2011. Astonishingly, he plays for the Los Angeles Clippers whose name has been the shorthand for crap in American sports for the entire length of their existence.

After spending all of his first year in the league injured, Griffin is making up for those lost minutes this season. He’s currently averaging 22.5 points, 12.8 rebounds and 3.4 assists per contest, about on par with the all-time greatest modern-era rookie seasons (by Michael Jordan and David Robinson). The last twenty-seven straight games he`s tallied double figures in both points and rebounds, while his 47 points against Indiana on Martin Luther King Day were the most by any player this year.

Not only do his skills get results, but those results come in the most incredible manner. Griffin’s game is predicated on his nonpareil athleticism and his first thoughts are to dunk on his opponent, whoever it is, time and again. Even the increasing numbers of hoop-o-philes who think the dunk is overrated love seeing Griffin cram it down on yet another big fella. This has led him to be the most searched basketballer on YouTube and his three dunks on the New York Knicks in December have become the stuff of legend. He’s got “Dunk of the Year” all sewn up, and probably the minor placings as well. Blake Griffin would throw it down on a T-Rex.

(Hint: watch the clip, it’s going to be important later on)

And he’s the most important player in the NBA right now.

This young man, who displays all the likeable aspects of Shawn Kemp’s early years (before the before the sulking-about-Jim-McIlvaine’s-contract era, well in advance of the dozen-ish paternity suit era and definitely pre the “Why is he wearing a fat suit”? years) and none of the sass that has come to characterise today’s NBA players could represent the most marketable force that David Stern has at his command for the next decade.

The NBA is in a tough place right now. The current Collective Bargaining Agreement finishes at the end of this season and Players Union and the Owners Collective seem too far apart in negotiations as to the division of the $4 billion revenues of the NBA is shared between players and owners. If they can’t agree on a new pay scale, it will result in a “lockout” where owners shut down the league until a compromise is reached. The players aren’t paid, the owners don’t get the crowd/concession dollars and it’s eminently possible the 2011-2012 NBA season just won’t happen.

When the NBA resumes –before or after the new season is called a wash – it’s going to need to market itself as new, exciting and most importantly of all, able to keep its own house in order. It’s only now the NHL has recovered from their 2004-05 lockout behind concepts like the Winter Classic, a new All-Star Game format and most importantly, marketable stars who can be divided along comic book lines into heroes and villains. For the heroes, Canada’s Own Sidney Crosby is the man every mother wants their daughter to marry; while the villains sport the Washington Capitals Russian sniper Alex Ovechkin, who looks like a Bond villain and loves to be the enemy. Younger guys like Steven Stamkos, Milan Lucic and John Tavares are the next generation in hockey’s goodies-versus-baddies evolution.

The NBA are going to promote heavily to reattract attention to a league, which while still in good health, hasn’t been able to cope with Michael Jordan’s 1998 departure from Chicago. Major market teams – with the exception of the Los Angeles Lakers – have slumped over the past decade: New York’s revitalisation this year is their first whimper of competitiveness in ten years, Chicago have had a few good teams but many years of heartache. Despite a recent revival, the same could be said for the Boston Celtics, Atlanta Hawks and Houston Rockets. The LA-based Clippers have been a laughing stock their entire existence.

One potential league-defining player after another has come into the game – first Shaq, then Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson, Vince Carter, LeBron James, Kevin Durant and now Blake Griffin – and none of them have managed to excite and capture the imagination of fans and mug punters alike like MJ. Several have had major and public flaws which decrease their market potential: Kobe his much-publicised run in with the law in Colorado; Allen Iverson was perhaps too “ghetto” for White America; Vince Carter’s career highlight was this dunk in the 2000 Sydney Olympics – and hasn't been the same since, quitting on every pro team he's ever been on. LeBron James’ 2010 was the greatest heel turn in Pro Sports history as he ditched hometown Cleveland for the sun, women and decreased responsibility of Miami. Durant – still plies his trade in Oklahoma City, perhaps the league’s smallest market and is, like Griffin, a low-key guy so execs are faced with the unenviable task of selling a small-town, low-key Midwest guy to New Yorkers or Southern Californians.

With LeBron now joining the “baddies” of Miami, the NBA needs a star in a big market who the crowds can get behind and support; the type of guy where people tune into SportsCenter just to see what amazing stuff he’s done. LeBron was the league’s best hope to be that amazing, likeable fella but when he “took my talents to South Beach”, his heel turn was rivalled only by American Hero Hulk Hogan joining the nWo. Griffin is David Stern’s best hope to be the frontman for The Rebel Alliance against the dark tyranny of a LeBron/Wade/Bosh led Empire.

Why can he do such things? Going back to the video clip, did you see how he reacted after posterizing the Knicks’ Center Mozgov? He was fully aware of how incredible he’d just been, but celebrated only mildly with his teammates, then went and sank the free-throw he’d earned by giving Mozgov a groin to the face. No crazy spinning in circles, no screams. Contrastingly, Carter’s dunk over Weis led “Half Man, Half Amazing” to scream like a monkey on heat. There’s no comparison. People get behind Blake Griffin because he doesn’t strut – “strutting” and “Oklahoma” seem mutually exclusive, don’t they? He just wants to play basketball. And if he plays basketball, he gets to dunk on chumps.

Much like the guy whose aggressiveness he resembles (Kemp), he’s also a Hall-of-Fame type talent, only Griffin seems grounded enough to not let the fame, floozies and transfats go to his head – or arse, delete as appropriate. He could average 24/14 for twelve years and with his talents combined with those of SG Eric Gordon, there’s the chance he could win one of the toughest battles in sport and lead the Clippers – the Clippers! – into respectability. Should he stay healthy – touch wood – Blake Griffin, his dunks and his simple ordinariness is what the NBA can build around when the coming lockout ends. Not quite 22 years old, he can be the face of the league as the NBA battles to regain popularity in the crowded US sports market.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Immaturity the reason for Spostra's strife?

Shoulder-gate! Spoelstra-watch! Player-only meetings! Other hyphenated phrases with exclamation marks! As the Miami Heat sunk to 9-8 for the season there has been an explosion of rumours concerning the team's happiness with Head Coach Eric Spoelstra. ESPN's Chris Broussard yesterday suggested the players were unhappy with the coach, feeling he was both underperforming and focused solely on keeping his job rather than on combining effectively the talent on hand.

This is after seventeen games of an eighty-two game regular season, and less than a quarter of a season into the New Miami Triumvirate's five-year reign on South Beach.

That a coach is facing a player revolt seventeen games into a five-year journey speaks volumes as to the mindset of his key men James, Wade & Bosh. Spoelstra is on a hiding to nothing - has been since The Decision, really - and now it's become public knowledge. By signing probably the best two free agents on last offseason's market and combining them with their own prize Wade, Miami were suddenly expected to win big now. That they then brought in a glue guy and a potential starting centre only increased expectations.

Unfortunately, the glue guy got hurt and the centre has sucked. The roster is mismatched: two elite players who both need the ball in their hands, a highly-paid big man who doesn't defend the rim, centre-by-platoon and point guards more at home in the Minor Leagues doesn't spell championship. The Heat have struggled against good teams as Chris Bosh has produced only the shadows of his Toronto Raptors form and Wade has struggled with injuries. Rumours of player discontent at their coach's man-management skills have gone beyond whispers creating the impression that the star players are looking for someone to blame. Perhaps the most damning indictment of the current Miami team is that no-one envies Spoelstra his job, not even Coaching Supremo Pat Riley who came out of retirement once before to relieve a head coach he thought was overwhelmed.

The easiest target is the coach: the man with the most thankless job in pro basketball today. Why thankless? Because should the Heat win public opinion will say it was due to their talent level and the coach got a free ride. Should they lose, the coach takes the fall because of that same talent, no matter how duplicitous. Spoelstra has the most to lose out of everyone around Heat because it's his job to combine the mismatched talent on hand and shape it into a winner. The old adage that it's easier to replace one coach than an entire team is particularly apposite here because once-in-a-generation players like LeBron come along less frequently than good coaches. The New Triumvirate have five-year, $90M+ contracts and an investment of that sort buys significant job security. Spoelstra was promoted from within and the investment in him is not nearly to the same level.

Player-coach meetings happen all the time. But reported "clear-the-air" talks between coach and star do not, which is why yesterday's pre-game chat between Spoelstra and LeBron was headline news. Afterwards, the coach said "There's an amount of healthy conflict within the team" and LeBron's take included the words "This is who we have". This came after last week's loss to Dallas where LeBron appeared to bump his coach. Neither statement even came close to saying "We've sorted whatever it was out" and the guess is that Spoelstra is now on borrowed time.

LeBron and Co. want to win now and for there to be no apology/explanation after a shoulder bump, player-only meetings and crisis talks means this smoke leads to a fire somewhere. If seventeen games into a season the players want their coach fired under these circumstances, it shows a remarkable degree of immaturity. Immaturity can be exemplified by any or all of impatience, shortsightedness, arrogance or an unwillingness to accept responsibility.

Red Flag One: Those seventeen games comprise 4% of their five-year term. Impatient? Check.

Red Flag Two: If they don't see the holes in their roster that are causing their failure to thrive then they may be guilty of shortsightedness. If they see those holes and think their extraordinary abilities can cover them then that's a degree of self-confidence bordering on Arrogant. Shortsighted? Arrogant? It's either one or the other.

Red Flag Three: Bosh isn't performing to his potential while LeBron and Wade seem at odds with being able to play together, settling into what looks very much to be a "My Turn, Your Turn" approach with which neither is comfortable. That they are ostensibly blaming the coach for their failure to gel together perfectly so early shows a degree of unwillingness to shoulder the responsibility. Avoiding responsibility? Probable check.

Or perhaps the coach does stink. But if so, surely that same self-confidence and talent could be used to prosper despite his inadequacy; or they would have chosen to sign for a better coach? It turns out the easiest target is also the guy with the hardest job: balancing the egos of superstars.

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Want to know now? Tough.

Last week, Greg Baum wrote an article in the Age (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/for-the-sake-of-all-ablett-must-reveal-any-decision-20100720-10ji5.html) saying that if Li'l Gary Ablett has agreed to join the Gold Coast Suns he should announce that decision publicly, allowing everyone – especially Ablett himself – to focus on football rather than his probable departure. Now it seems that by declaiming that football should be the focus in an article about someone potentially leaving his club, then you shoot your argument in the foot. But that aside, there's a few fatal flaws in the logic that fans are entitled to know a player's decision as soon as it's been made.

No one is implying that Ablett's made his final choice already. I fail to see how he could have given the Cats are among the favourites for the 2010 flag and a premiership could play a major role in whether he stays or goes. He may be a long way from decided, or pretty sure in himself but to cliche horribly, five weeks are a long time in footy. Let's say for argument's sake that Ablett is 50/50 on joining the Suns next year. In the next five weeks, Geelong could fall away badly as their older brigade are exploited for a perceived lack of mobility and suddenly he's 75% of the way to the Gold Coast. The Cats could steamroll everyone on their way to another premiership and before you know it, perhaps the decision is 40% in favour of the Gold Coast. Geelong has everything to lose or gain here and it's not Ablett's fault. If it's the case that Ablett still isn't 100%, and I think it is, then of course he shouldn't make a decision and he's a fool if he has.

Other players are unquestionably facing similar circumstances. West Coast ruckman Dean Cox is only 28, and has potentiall five years of high-class footy ahead of him yet finds himself in danger of being superseded and may well head out the door. Adelaide's Nathan Bock is also the subject of rumours, one of which is that he has signed already with GC17 and has garnered publicity from teh Adelaide and national media for his “distracted” performance on the weekend.

The most publicised incident of this “one foot out the door” attitude in recent times could equally go to the NBA's former poster child LeBron James for his insipid last home game in Cleveland, or to the Brazilian Robinho in the EPL, who quit on Manchester City as the English winter approached. Warmer climes and changed lifestyles had such a strong appeal that both played like they were preoccupied, and both had the results one would expect. Both ended up wearing the scorn of fans for their perceived lack of stomach, suspicions confirmed in LeBron's case with his “LeDecision” to join Dwyane Wade in Miami.

But do the paying public have a right to know immediately the results of an athlete's decision is? Of course not. It's complete bunkum to suggest that we as a public are foremost in the minds of our professional sportsmen. Athletes can say their primary concern is the fans until they're blue in the mouth, but in truth their first priority is themselves and personally, I have no truck with that. Careers are short and the demands on both the body and spirit would be tremendous. A player may be a certain starter with one coach, only to be completely disregarded by another for no good reason. Playing time can be plentiful or sparse depending on the whims and natures of their head coach.

The franchise is responsible for player remuneration, and they are charged by their fans to prioritise sustained success. Because of this, their first priority should be paying players who help them win, irrespective of statistics or reputation. If a player does not perform, then they should not be rewarded with raises, security or even a place in the squad. The club is concerned first and foremost with itself. As fans, we tend to identify with players who exemplary in one of two fields: work ethic or skill. For a team however, often fielding only players with a good work ethic isn't rewarding – the combination of talent and hard work is required so a hard worker and “good club man” is cut. So, if a club's first priority is to itself and they hold most of the trumps, why shouldn't a player's first priority be to him or herself?


We as fans tend to support teams rather than players. More and more recently we find the club is all-important and the Jason Akermanis/Western Bulldogs row illustrates this perfectly. He was viewed as allegedly putting his own interests above those of the club and put through the wringer because of it. But it's hypocritical to sack a player for the sin of self-indulgence: if the club will do what's best for it's long-term success, why should Akermanis be pilloried for attempting to ensure his own long-term success? Everyone on that Bulldogs side is looking after “Number 1”, just in a different manner to Aker, a more subtle way. (Do you expect subtlety from a man with peroxide hair and a black goatee?) Each Bulldog individually prioritises “Number 1” through the results of corporate success – the adoration, money and recognition that a winning team brings.

Each player's first loyalty is to himself, but the difference is in what shape that loyalty takes. For one guy, that could manifest as wanting more money. For others, it may be media or marketing interests, fame, recognition, new challenges, lifestyle, winning, security, his or her legacy and even plain and simple fan adoration. The athlete who values fan adoration is always going to be drawn to devoted supporter bases or large market teams. Those who value money are going to chase larger contracts. Those who want money, fame, girls, lifestyle at the expense of personal legacy go to Miami. With the publicity and coverage each decision receives, we pretty soon can open a window into the very heart of each player and deconstruct them, pigeonhole them into “Driven by money”, “Driven by lifestyle” et al. If this is the case, why wouldn't you keep your cards close to your chest? Why should someone risk teammate and fan ire, not to mention the match payments simply for coming out and saying “This summer, I'm going to take my talents to ...”

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

An Open letter to Gary Ablett Jr.

An Open letter to Gary Ablett Jr.

Dear Gary,

As your impending decision approaches, I would like to offer a different perspective: that of a Geelong fan living in North America. I'd also like to draw some parallels between your situation and that of a hoops star of a different breed, LeBron James, the basketballer who recently found himself in similar circumstances.

I'm sure you know of LeBron: he's arguably the best player on the planet, the runaway winner of the past two NBA MVP awards. His team, the Cleveland Cavaliers, have steamrolled through the league for the last three seasons much as the Cats have done in the AFL. Unfortunately for him tough, they've not experienced the same finals success as Geelong. Over the past year much of the media publicity surrounding the NBA has not come as a result of his or his team's performance, but because at season's end, James's contract expired and he became a free agent along with several of the best players in the league.

After an unprecedented media frenzy, LeBron's “people” scheduled a nationwide hourlong special on ESPN last Thursday where he would announce his decision. After much speculation, LeBron did as the pundits expected and chose he felt were better opportunities for the future – one with better weather - the Miami Heat. And he did it for the same money that Cleveland was offering.

I can't help but see some similarities in your respective future career choices.

As a Geelong fan, I'm obviously on tenterhooks awaiting where you'll play next year. To be honest, I couldn't fault you for going to the Gold Coast – especially for the money reportedly on offer. I can't even fault LeBron for his choice. But what I ask is that if you choose the Gold rather than Surf Coast, you don't insult your fans, your hometown, and teammates like LeBron James.

I'm not talking about choosing another city in which to continue your career. But by making his fans, teammates and club the last to know, popular opinion has swung against James so strongly that everyone now regards his ESPN special as misguided, at the very best; most agree that it was perhaps the most self-centred thing that a “team-oriented” athlete could do; some even posit that the TV special has tarnished his legacy

Most people in North America knew that LeBron was sorely tempted by Miami and it was probable he would depart Cleveland. His camp misjudged the situation however, and the hour-long special came off as self-promotion rather than explanation. The best comparison I can make was that inviting your partner onto “Jerry Springer” only to tell them you were having a baby with their sister. Sure Cleveland was upset that he'd been “unfaithful” – but the manner the news was delivered made the city want nothing to do with him ever again except boo.

If you leave, Gary, fair enough – you're completely entitled to look after yourself and your future. But if the decision is GC17, please don't tell us why. We don't have many articulate athletes and those that are get shackled by team rules and the expectation that all any player will say is “Man-Talk”: the same hackneyed cliches. We cry out for articulateness. We scream for someone who will publicly say more than “We're taking things one week at a time” or “We're excited about the prospect of playing Team X, Y or Z next week”. But this is different. This is a situation where ONLY hackneyed cliches will work.

You see, it will be seen by Geelong as a breakup. Some breakups are predestined because the parties were unsuited at the start. Other times, both parties realise it's time to go in their own directions. After two (hopefully three) premierships, a hatful of awards and recognition as one of the great teams of the modern era, perhaps you feel it's time to strike out separately.

Delivering the break-up speech, it's impossible for the “breaker” to look good by the words you choose, but you can come out looking much, much worse. After “I've decided we shouldn't see each other any more”, the “breakee” often doesn't take in a lot more due to shock. And we are, as a public, similar. Please don't let the media circus that this situation will undoubtedly generate go to your head and allow you think your motives are important to us now. In time, these factors will become completely apparent and we'll make our peace with them.

If you choose the Gold Coast it won't be a betrayal, nor should it be seen as one. But if a decision is compounded by a lack of class as LeBron's was, it seems like betrayal. We can forgive an affront, but following a breakup with an insult creates different wounds that rarely heal completely.

Choose well, Gary. We have enjoyed you for eight years, and I hope you finish your career in Geelong. The level of public interest and media coverage surrounding your decision is unprecedented in Australia. But please learn from an older, more experienced and more cynical market as you look at all your options.

Sincerely,

Matthew Wood
www.balancedsports.blogspot.com

Saturday, July 10, 2010

The Once and Future King

LeBron James will play for the Miami Heat in 2010-11, alongside a video-game roster of superstars and for a coach who may leave the club to “spend more time with his family” to be replaced by NBA Coaching Godfather Pat Riley.

Last night The Once and Future “King” announced his choice of team for the next five seasons after a year of utter madness in NBA circles due to his impending free agency. At times during the season – most notably at home in Game 5 of the Eastern Semifinals where he performed listlessly – it seemed as if he was distracted by the choice in front of him: Home; the Opportunity to become a Global Icon; South Beach; Russian Supermodels or Following the footsteps of your boyhood hero.

Each potential location presented its own perks: an Ohio native, James grew up supporting the Cleveland Cavaliers and almost single-handedly brought them back into basketball relevancy. New York City is the single greatest market in the World, allegedly James' favourite city: a city in which he would save basketball by winning, and be worshipped for it forever. In Chicago lay young All-Stars Derrick Rose & Joakim Noah and the potential to bring another “max” free agent. Also, Chicago was Michael Jordan's realm, giving LBJ the chance to emulate his boyhood hero. The New Jersey pitch revolved around young talent and a crazy Russian owner willing to spend big to win; whereas Miami efforts relied heavily on lifestyle (read: Cuban Supermodels and Great Weather) and established superstar Dwyane Wade.

In sixteen words at 9.27pm EST – LeBron told the world “This Fall, I'm going to take my talents to South Beach and join the Miami Heat”. And with that one sentence, he ripped the heart out of his followers in Cleveland and to a lesser extent, those worldwide. With that one sentence, LeBron's legacy changed forever.

The most quotable media release on Thursday before “The Decision” was “He doesn't want to be 31 with bad knees and no title”. Over the last two seasons it became obvious that LeBron was frustrated at the Cavs' inability to win it all and felt that he needed help to do so. So, Cavalier management bent over backward to surround him with a vast array of “suitable” second bananas and supporting cast to soothe his troubled soul: Mo Williams, a washed-up 37 year old Shaq, Antawn Jamison, Anthony Parker, Jamario Moon – each rubber-stamped by James himself. The organisation mortgaged its future on these players and from a basketball-economics standpoint won't recover until Jamison's contract comes off the books in 2012.

In order to keep the best player in the game happy, Cleveland danced to his tune – and this, coupled with the wins, the adoration and the speculation seems only to have fueled James' ego and self-awareness. And what this decision says about LeBron James is that he is overconscious – scared, even – of his own legacy.

It's completely understandable that LeBron wants to win, and win now. But very rarely do superstars – especially players of this era, and those who skipped college even moreseo - win early in their careers. Often it takes years to reach the pinnacle of the NBA: and the most appropriate example is LeBron's childhood hero Michael Jordan. During the late 1980s, Chicago's roster developed slowly to the point where they had matured enough both physically and mentally to win the 1991 NBA championship. They then went on to win six. And it should/would have been eight.

Because LeBron is so aware of his standing (a process not helped by the intense speculation generated by free agency) and so conscious of his legacy, his legacy demands that he wins and wins now. So he placed demands on his front office in order to help him do so, who obliged. Given the constant tinkering and the roster didn't get the growth from within it needed to progress, only a mishmash of stars making coaching exceptionally difficult.

We've also learned that perhaps the most talented player ever doesn't want the responsibility of leading a franchise. That he's departed Cleveland rather than competing with Wade to recruit other free agents to join him in Cleveland is telling – he wants to walk straight into a winner and not bother with the leadership involved in building a team. Only two players have hads that instinctive leadership and it translated into instant pro success: Magic Johnson and Russell. Bird learned quick and early, while for Jordan, Chamberlain, Barry, Hayes, Moses and Erving it all took significantly longer. But given his astounding abilities, whichever team he plays for will always be a contender – and that unwillingness to take his own road implies he is scared to take responsibility for winning a championship himself.

By choosing South Florida LeBron tacitly admitted that he is a follower. And that's OK – he's 24. Very few people are effective leaders at that age and most grow into that role. By signing with the Heat, it also implies that he doesn't want to work at (can't be bothered?) turning into a leader and is content to submit to the preeminence of Dwyane Wade, making him the world's best-ever second banana. Now, this may work well or not, but I get the feeling that the most talented player we've ever seen should be the Leader on his team.

And – let's not forget this – LeBron was undecided until at least Wednesday. After both committed to Miami, Both Bosh and Wade said they had no idea where James would sign and I think that they honestly didn't know. Each just seemed happy that they had each other. The biggest domino was the last to fall. As the market played out, LeBron's options diminished and he found himself painted into a corner where his realistic options became: Rebuild in Cleveland, Create in Chicago, Self-Promote in NYC or Follow in Miami. And he chose follow. No matter what, his legacy will always be tarnished by this: the Greatest should never follow, they should always lead.

There are laudable aspects of James' decision-making process. After Dan Gilbert's puzzling and bewildering email tirade (see here: http://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/gilbert_letter_100708.html) and the public knowledge that LeBron has not answered or returned his messages for two months, we can credit The Once and Future “King” with foresight. Gilbert's business sense amongst NBA owners is nearly nonpareil, but his quick temper seems to have bested him here. He had every right to be mortified by James' methods, but his rebuttal overshot the mark and it may brand him with the same chalk as some of the NBA's other loopy owners. Just think: Who's going to risk crossing a man like that? No one, better to just avoid the situation altogether.

Public statements have been made by all of James & Bosh confirming their willingness to accept less money to move to Miami – a decision by a Superstar (or three, in this case) for which we've been hoping for years. We love a story of sacrifice, it's built-in to us. Miami's top trio should be applauded for taking less to play together and win: in fact, given the Heat's lack of trade chips to orchestrate a sign-and-trade, it was the only way they could fit all three under the salary cap. LeBron initially comes out well as making a sacrifice for the sake of the team.

But to examine LeBron's a little deeper reveals the real crux. “The Decision” has revealed only the opposite: it's categorically proved LeBron's self-involvement. I don't mean in a basketball sense or even in a team sense: LeBron absolutely should do what's best for himself and his family. But his actions concerning “The Decision” special on ESPN were all at once self-conceited, misguided and cruel. Being an Ohio native, LeBron knows and has experienced the agonies of Cleveland sports fans (look up “The Drive”, “The Shot” and “The Fumble”). But “The Decision” – floated and arranged by his camp – turned what could or should have been a touching farewell into a savage circus. As Bill Simmons wrote (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100708), if you're going to cut the heart out of your hometown, you don't do it in a one-hour television special. Whatever happened to grace, or class? “The Decision” as an idea was so badly conceived that it turned LeBron from “Guy who just wants to win” into “Misguided, Shameless Self-Promoter”.

Cleveland fans are now well-entitled to look upon his last game in the Quicken Loans Arena – his lackadaisical Game 5 against The Celtics – as a harbinger of the cruelty to come.