Dallas vs Miami - the NBA Finals rematch noone predicted (or wanted)

When Miami signed Chris Bosh and LeBron James in July last year, not only sports fans but the world sat up and took notice. The best player in the league changed teams of his own volition and took deserved heat (oww ... unintentional pun) for leaving his hometown club for beaches and booty. And rings.

When the Heat filled out their roster with a few role players - Mike Miller and Udonis Haslem - and a series of stiff big guys like Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Juwan Howard, Jamaal Magloire, Erick Dampier and Joel Anthony, they were the popular tip to make the NBA finals even though their squad wasn't originally built for this year. Their start was slow - what would you expect with three new major cogs? - but as the 2010-11 NBA regular season rounded to a close, the Heat had gathered speed to the point where they dominated East playoff opponents Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago.

Of Dallas, it seems only Jason Terry really believed the team was destined for the NBA finals. Their playoffs have been a symphony conducted by Dirk Nowitzki and with feature solos from Terry and mighty mite Jose Juan Barea. The squad, hard and veteran, have coped admirably with the loss of starting SF (and likely LeBron stopper) Caron "Tuff Juice" Butler. They ploughed through Portland, the Lakers and Oklahoma City on their way to the rematch.

Rematch, because the teams met in the 2006 Finals. Only four players remain from those squads - Nowitzki, Terry, Dwyane Wade and Haslem; but the hurt still encompasses the Mavericks organisation. Much of the backroom staff remains the same and it's an easy bet that Mark Cuban wants an NBA Championship so badly he can taste it. But it's not the popular rematch that league observers throught we were getting: before the playoffs started, most analysts predicted a Chicago/Los Angeles decider, harking back to the twentieth anniversary of their 1991 encounter, a series which launched "Michael Jordan ... oh ... spec-TACK-ular move", a rain of John Paxson threes and the last games in Magic's first Lakers stint.

Nobody wanted this finals match outside Florida and Texas because, quite simply, the Heat are the bad guys (see WWE Superstar Chris Bosh at 2:15 - so schlock it's funny) and Dallas, until the playoffs, were seen as the "same old" - a veteran squad with minimal personnel changes from an ultimately unsuccessful 2010 campaign. As rematches went, the ones people thought likely were Lakers/Bulls, Lakers/Celtics and perhaps even Bulls/Blazers. But not the Mavs and the Heat. That both clubs have managed to proceed to their current peak is testament that really, nothing beats experience - or all-timers playing out of their collective skins, as LeBron and Dirk have.

As much as the Heat are nigh-on unstoppable, the popular vote will swing to Dallas. For redemption (game six, 2006, the infamous game brought into question by disgraced referee Tim Donaghy), for popular star Nowitzki, who's dominated the Western Conference playoffs and cohort Jason Kidd who has toiled for seventeen years without a Championship. Finally, they'll be favoured just because they're not the Heat. The South Floridians became the league's arch-enemy so fast thanks to that gaudy opening ceremony and the kerfuffle surrounding "The Decision" that it would take another Kobe case to dethrone them. A ring would start the process, but only increase the target on their backs next year (if there is one).

Predictions: Going with the head rather than heart here - Dirk and JJ Barea dominate just enough offensively for designated Wade and LeBron stoppers to do the same (just enough) to get the Mavericks through in seven.

Thanks to Bill Simmons for spec-TACK-ular phrasing & Chicagonow.com for the photo.

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 ...”

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