On Swish Appeal, a good friend asks the question "How will UConn do in the AAC long-term?" It's such a good question that it deserves an expanded answer.
If things really don't change between now and x number of years down the line, Connecticut bumps into the select mortality problem. Select mortality is an actuarial science concept dealing with life insurance. There is something called a mortality table which is used to set rates for life insurance. However, when you underwrite life insurance, you're not going to sell any to a 40-year old with terminal Stage IV cancer. In general, the group of people to whom you sell life insurance is a select group, with mortality rates slightly better than the average American. This allows you to lower the prices a little bit, and to be competitive in the market, because the probability of a person in the select pool dying in the short term is less than that of the general population.
As a rule, however, after something called the select period, the pool you started out with starts to look more and more like the general population. After this period, the mortality of your starting group is no different from that of the average American. That period could be two years, three years, five years depending on how you underwrite, but after x amount of time you can no longer assume that your underwritten pool members are any healthier than Joe or Jane Six-Pack.
Thus, Connecticut. Connecticut is in the American conference, which I have as a mid-major conference. Will Connecticut be superior this year? Yes. But the forces of being in a mid-major conference - decreased access to money and media attention - will slowly wear Connecticut down and after some given select period, Connecticut will be no different from any good mid-major team. Good for maybe one or two wins in the big tournament, but going no farther.
Geno Auriemma is what, 59? He's good for probaby another decade, if he stays healthy. But you never know. Pat Summitt is only two years older than Geno, and health took her out of the picture at Tennessee. As you get older, your energy flags and health problems which were non-existent at 20 and nagging at 40 become serious at 60. Do you really think that Auriemma can fight being in a mid-major conference single handed? Connecticut won't have the cash for facilities or salaries that the power conferences have. The Huskies will start to fall behind on the athletic side, and if there's another Pat Summitt out there waiting in a power conference, then you can't even confirm that Auriemma can make the American Conference great single-handedly.
Of course, this is all if things stay the same. But they don't.
Zhou Enlai, first premier of the People's Republic of China, supposedly said about the impact of the French Revolution that "It is too soon to tell". That would be the right answer to give, it's too soon to tell.
A lot can happen "in the long term":
SCENARIO ONE
The American Conference is a very poachable conference. By "poachable", I mean that its membership can be picked off for future expansion.
Cincinnati: Could end up either in the ACC or Big 12 someday.
Central Florida: A longshot to ACC if Miami or Florida State leave, but would be behind South Florida.
Houston: Big 12 if Big 12 loses members.
Louisville: Already out the door to the ACC next season.
Memphis: Big 12 if Big 12 loses members.
Rutgers: Already out the door to the Big Ten next season.
South Florida: If either Miami or Florida State leaves the ACC, South Florida could be the replacement.
Southern Methodist: Future Big 12 option.
Temple: Longshot to the ACC, see below.
East Carolina (2014): Probably not going anywhere after they join the American. A great football team without a television market.
Tulane (2014): Really shaky, also glad to have a home somewhere.
Tulsa (2014): Ditto.
So as you can see, many current teams in the American could be snatched if either a) a power conference wants to expand someday, or b) a power conference gets poached by another power conference and the victim needs an emergency replacement.
But what about Connecticut? Connecticut brings ESPN. The problem is that
a) geographically, the team isn't a fit for the Pac-12 or the SEC.
b) the academics at Connecticut aren't good enough for a Big Ten team.
c) the Big Twelve probably doesn't want to expand that far.
The only real fit is the ACC. God knows Connecticut wants to be in the ACC; they'd jump ship in three seconds if given any sort of opportunity. But Boston College doesn't want them in the ACC - there's some bad blood between both schools.
If the ACC gets poached - or wishes to expand - the Huskies could team up with Temple and join the conference in a two-fer. Hey, stranger things have happened. Coming in with UConn would be the only way Temple could ever get into the ACC.
What does this mean for women's basketball if it happens? A lot. Being in the ACC would give Connecticut instant credibility and Geno can be on top of the mountain all he wants to be. On the other hand, if other teams EXCEPT Connecticut get poached and the conference has to replenish itself with the Sun Belt teams of the world, then expect the deceleration to happen sooner rather than later.
SCENARIO TWO
Connecticut gets better at football. Unfortunately, we don't really know if football is expected to be the driving engine of the Connecticut athletic universe. Basketball had that job previously, and I think that Connecticut has only had a D-I team for less than 20 years (and they ain't doing so hot this season).
But if Connecticut could somehow transform itself into a powerhouse - well, a lot of conferences will make a lot of exceptions for a great football team with an ESPN affiliation. A powerhouse football team would bring revenue, which means revenue for women's basketball.
Either that, or the entire conference (including Connecticut) gets better and somehow lifts itself to true automatic qualifier status. I don't see that happening with the current motley crew in the American.
So what are Connecticut's chances of being a Top Four Division I women's basketball team?
Short run: good
Long run: depends on football or conference realignment. And Connecticut shouldn't hang its laundry on either one of those. The chances are better than even that Connecticut will decline. That's just the way things go.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Who Needs a Championship Trophy?
We're rolling on into the women's basketball season again. On Twitter, someone quoted a comment from Geno Auriemma (or maybe from an Auriemma fan) that out of the handful of players that have left the Connecticut program, none was ever successful anywhere else.
I countered with two. One was Elena Delle Donne, but both of us agreed that Delle Donne's case comes with a big asterisk. The other case is that of Samarie Walker, now a senior at Kentucky. Walker averaged 6.2 ppg/5.8 rpg during her lone season as a Huskie. At Kentucky, she's slightly better:
2011-12: 8.7 ppg/7.2 rpg
2012-13: 8.7 ppg/8.1 rpg
Maybe Walker was no more successful at UK than at UConn - but you couldn't argue that she was less successful, and she'll probably be a WNBA Draft pick.
The important thing - in Samarie Walker's eyes, anyway, is the following stat:
2010-11: 18.8 mpg
2011-12: 20.7 mpg
2012-13: 26.6 mpg
Walker left supposedly because she had other priorities - lost her passion for basketball, wanted to study design in Chicago, whatever - it looks like Connecticut cut her loose and basically shoved her out the door.
Anyway, the details aren't important to the point I want to make. The point I want to make comes from, of all places, one of those awful Star Trek paperback fiction novels I used to be into. It was about Commander Chekov's career outside of the Enterprise in a book that took place in the (old) movie universe.
Chekov faced a dilemma in his life. He was a talented officer, but he wasn't James T. Kirk. Chekov was never going to command the Enterprise, or a ship even remotely like the Enterprise. He thus faced two choices: he could be a first officer on a so-so ship like the Reliant, or he could be a role-player on a elite ship like the Enterprise. So which one is it going to be?
This is a question that a lot of recruits face. Take a look at the bottom part of Connecticut's bench. That would have been Kiah Stokes and Heather Buck if I'm reading things right. Both of them started a grand total of one game. They averaged 2.8 and 0.8 ppg, respectively.
At a low major program, they probably would have started. But they chose to be role players at Connecticut. They're the Ensign Chekovs of the Huskies.
Why? Well, I assume if you asked them in an unguarded moment, they'd say, "Because Connecticut wins national championships, and I want to win a national championship."
To which - if I'm being perverse here - I might ask, "Why?" (If I were recruiting against Connecticut, I'd ask this question.) What exactly do you get out of being the 10th or 11th bench player on a championship team? Not much, I'd say. You might get to go on a lot of trips and have Obama shake your hand. You might get a ring out of it and the chance to tell some great stories.
You also get a front row view of everyone else playing basketball, while you applaud from your bench seat. You also get to work as hard - even harder, perhaps, than Mosqueda-Lewis or Faris for the privilege of NOT getting to play.
Everyone knows who Diana Taurasi and Sue Bird are? Can you name the 10th or 11th players off the bench on those teams? Ever hear of Kiana Robinson or Stacey Marron? Unless you bleed Connecticut blue, you're probably scratching your heads. (Geno never talks about them.) Diana Taurasi might have heard of them; they were the bench players during the 2003-04 season when UConn beat Tennessee.
Someone recently pointed me to an essay on the movie Glengarry Glen Ross, particulary the famous "motivational" scene from Alec Baldwin. My wife - who is in sales - loved this movie, and I hated it because Baldwin's character was such a preening narcissist. But I finally understood it and appreciated it.
In it, Baldwin has been assigned to light a fire under an under-performing sales staff:
Blake: You certainly don't pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. The bad news is you've got, all you got, just one week to regain your jobs, starting tonight. Starting with tonights sit. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. 'Cause we're adding a little something to this months sales contest. As you all know, first prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. Anyone want to see second prize? Second prize's a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You got leads. Mitch and Murray paid good money. Get their names to sell them! You can't close the leads you're given, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
In the essay, the author talks about the idea of "prizes" as motivators. You can always work hard to get a set of steak knives. And if steak knives don't motivate you, there's always the negative motivator of being fired. The problem is that Levene and Moss and Aaronow need some kind of motivation, positive or negative.
But the essayists makes the point that guys like Blake aren't even motivated by the first prize - the Cadillac Eldorado. Oh sure, he'll show it off. "That watch cost more than your car". But the Blakes in this world are motivated to be the best. They don't need external motivations to do what they do.
"It takes brass balls to sell real estate," he later says, using an appropriate prop. That's Blake's motivation. To show the world that he has brass balls.
Pete Rose used to say that he'd run through hell in a gasoline suit to play basketball. I think that Diana Taurasi is the same way, she'd play just as hard for Binghamton as she'd have played for UConn.
So what is the point of playing basketball? It's to get better. The best players want to get better all the time. But if you're not on the court, how on earth are you really going to get better? You can't get better at basketball unless you play basketball. Who knows, maybe Kiah Stokes and Heather Buck are really, really great basketball players. But looking at the box scores, that's kind of hard to say.
The number one consideration for any basketball recruit should be playing time. There are lots of coaches out there who can make you better; Geno Auriemma doesn't hold the monopoly. Can you honestly tell me that Auriemma is really a better coach or a better developer of basketball talent than Kathy Delaney-Smith over at Harvard? And don't point to the national championships; Delaney-Smith will never have the raw talent that Auriemma has. One of Delaney-Smith's teams was the only team in NCAA basketball history where a #16 seed beat a #1 seed (with caveats).
You really think that Auriemma can make you a better player than Delaney-Smith could? Really? Tell me what metric measures that.
If I were in the shoes of the 11th or 12th player on the UConn bench, if it looked like I'd be saying "nice job!" to the Maya Moores and Tina Charleses and Sue Birds of the world, I'd ask for a transfer immediately. An NCAA basketball player gets four years to play basketball. A recruit should go to the place where her chances of playing basketball are maximized - period - because how is she going to get better if she doesn't play?
"But you'd be giving up a national championship!" That's an externality. That's like playing for the Cadillac Eldorado. The best players don't need the external motivation. They want to be the best they can be whether they're playing at Division I or Division III. The best players play hard all the time, no matter where they're playing. (Not coincidentally, those are exactly the players that Auriemma looks for.)
If someone told me that the cost of transferring out of UConn was abandoning a national championship, I'd reply that I'd rather be Chekov on the Reliant than Chekov on the Enterprise. You might end up with an earworm digging a tunnel into your brain -- but at least you'd be in command.
I countered with two. One was Elena Delle Donne, but both of us agreed that Delle Donne's case comes with a big asterisk. The other case is that of Samarie Walker, now a senior at Kentucky. Walker averaged 6.2 ppg/5.8 rpg during her lone season as a Huskie. At Kentucky, she's slightly better:
2011-12: 8.7 ppg/7.2 rpg
2012-13: 8.7 ppg/8.1 rpg
Maybe Walker was no more successful at UK than at UConn - but you couldn't argue that she was less successful, and she'll probably be a WNBA Draft pick.
The important thing - in Samarie Walker's eyes, anyway, is the following stat:
2010-11: 18.8 mpg
2011-12: 20.7 mpg
2012-13: 26.6 mpg
Walker left supposedly because she had other priorities - lost her passion for basketball, wanted to study design in Chicago, whatever - it looks like Connecticut cut her loose and basically shoved her out the door.
Anyway, the details aren't important to the point I want to make. The point I want to make comes from, of all places, one of those awful Star Trek paperback fiction novels I used to be into. It was about Commander Chekov's career outside of the Enterprise in a book that took place in the (old) movie universe.
Chekov faced a dilemma in his life. He was a talented officer, but he wasn't James T. Kirk. Chekov was never going to command the Enterprise, or a ship even remotely like the Enterprise. He thus faced two choices: he could be a first officer on a so-so ship like the Reliant, or he could be a role-player on a elite ship like the Enterprise. So which one is it going to be?
This is a question that a lot of recruits face. Take a look at the bottom part of Connecticut's bench. That would have been Kiah Stokes and Heather Buck if I'm reading things right. Both of them started a grand total of one game. They averaged 2.8 and 0.8 ppg, respectively.
At a low major program, they probably would have started. But they chose to be role players at Connecticut. They're the Ensign Chekovs of the Huskies.
Why? Well, I assume if you asked them in an unguarded moment, they'd say, "Because Connecticut wins national championships, and I want to win a national championship."
To which - if I'm being perverse here - I might ask, "Why?" (If I were recruiting against Connecticut, I'd ask this question.) What exactly do you get out of being the 10th or 11th bench player on a championship team? Not much, I'd say. You might get to go on a lot of trips and have Obama shake your hand. You might get a ring out of it and the chance to tell some great stories.
You also get a front row view of everyone else playing basketball, while you applaud from your bench seat. You also get to work as hard - even harder, perhaps, than Mosqueda-Lewis or Faris for the privilege of NOT getting to play.
Everyone knows who Diana Taurasi and Sue Bird are? Can you name the 10th or 11th players off the bench on those teams? Ever hear of Kiana Robinson or Stacey Marron? Unless you bleed Connecticut blue, you're probably scratching your heads. (Geno never talks about them.) Diana Taurasi might have heard of them; they were the bench players during the 2003-04 season when UConn beat Tennessee.
Someone recently pointed me to an essay on the movie Glengarry Glen Ross, particulary the famous "motivational" scene from Alec Baldwin. My wife - who is in sales - loved this movie, and I hated it because Baldwin's character was such a preening narcissist. But I finally understood it and appreciated it.
In it, Baldwin has been assigned to light a fire under an under-performing sales staff:
Blake: You certainly don't pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. The bad news is you've got, all you got, just one week to regain your jobs, starting tonight. Starting with tonights sit. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. 'Cause we're adding a little something to this months sales contest. As you all know, first prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. Anyone want to see second prize? Second prize's a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You got leads. Mitch and Murray paid good money. Get their names to sell them! You can't close the leads you're given, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
In the essay, the author talks about the idea of "prizes" as motivators. You can always work hard to get a set of steak knives. And if steak knives don't motivate you, there's always the negative motivator of being fired. The problem is that Levene and Moss and Aaronow need some kind of motivation, positive or negative.
But the essayists makes the point that guys like Blake aren't even motivated by the first prize - the Cadillac Eldorado. Oh sure, he'll show it off. "That watch cost more than your car". But the Blakes in this world are motivated to be the best. They don't need external motivations to do what they do.
"It takes brass balls to sell real estate," he later says, using an appropriate prop. That's Blake's motivation. To show the world that he has brass balls.
Pete Rose used to say that he'd run through hell in a gasoline suit to play basketball. I think that Diana Taurasi is the same way, she'd play just as hard for Binghamton as she'd have played for UConn.
So what is the point of playing basketball? It's to get better. The best players want to get better all the time. But if you're not on the court, how on earth are you really going to get better? You can't get better at basketball unless you play basketball. Who knows, maybe Kiah Stokes and Heather Buck are really, really great basketball players. But looking at the box scores, that's kind of hard to say.
The number one consideration for any basketball recruit should be playing time. There are lots of coaches out there who can make you better; Geno Auriemma doesn't hold the monopoly. Can you honestly tell me that Auriemma is really a better coach or a better developer of basketball talent than Kathy Delaney-Smith over at Harvard? And don't point to the national championships; Delaney-Smith will never have the raw talent that Auriemma has. One of Delaney-Smith's teams was the only team in NCAA basketball history where a #16 seed beat a #1 seed (with caveats).
You really think that Auriemma can make you a better player than Delaney-Smith could? Really? Tell me what metric measures that.
If I were in the shoes of the 11th or 12th player on the UConn bench, if it looked like I'd be saying "nice job!" to the Maya Moores and Tina Charleses and Sue Birds of the world, I'd ask for a transfer immediately. An NCAA basketball player gets four years to play basketball. A recruit should go to the place where her chances of playing basketball are maximized - period - because how is she going to get better if she doesn't play?
"But you'd be giving up a national championship!" That's an externality. That's like playing for the Cadillac Eldorado. The best players don't need the external motivation. They want to be the best they can be whether they're playing at Division I or Division III. The best players play hard all the time, no matter where they're playing. (Not coincidentally, those are exactly the players that Auriemma looks for.)
If someone told me that the cost of transferring out of UConn was abandoning a national championship, I'd reply that I'd rather be Chekov on the Reliant than Chekov on the Enterprise. You might end up with an earworm digging a tunnel into your brain -- but at least you'd be in command.
Saturday, October 19, 2013
Fred, We Hardly Knew Ye
As time passes, more and more ties are broken from the founding of the Atlanta Dream franchise. When Fred Williams was fired on Friday - let's skip the euphemisms, we're adults here - the only person who is either a player or coach still left from 2008 is Erika de Souza - and she didn't even start playing at the beginning of the season due to injury.
So why get rid of Senor Fred? Clearly, the DFO weren't happy about the Dream's oh-for-three again in the Finals. (They had to pay for a game in Gwinnett that they were probably going to lose. That cost money.) That 25 percent or so shooting game in Game One of the Eastern Semifinals might have sealed Williams's fate right there.
The fact is, in basketball a team can get lucky in a short three-game series and more so in the WNBA because there's more parity there than in the NBA. The Noll-Scully Index for the league this year was 1.88 - much better than 2012's 2.49 or 2011's 2.30. (As a matter of fact, 1.88 is the weighted average Noll-Scully across all 17 seasons.)
Not a single team in the league finished with less than 10 wins. The last time that happened was in 2009, the most competitive season in WNBA history.
So with so much parity (relatively speaking for basketball), the Dream escaped the first round alive when Washington handed Game 2 right back to them and the Fever choked. The DFO should have been happy that Senor Fred even got as far as the Finals; it wasn't as if anyone thought the Dream had a chance anyway.
Why was he fired? Who knows? Williams was a player's coach, and sometimes it showed. McCoughtry playing one-on-four against the Lynx in the paint. Thomas jacking up shots less than 10 seconds into the shot clock.
The problem the DFO have is that the current configuration of the Dream won't work with anyone but a player's coach. I suspect that Williams was more McCoughtry's traveling confidante/psychiatrist than anything else. The Dream were playing smart ball the first 11 games of the season; then Lyttle got hurt and it was back to the same old McCoughtry-vs-the-world gameplan.
You could get Corey Gaines as our new coach, I suppose. Hey, the Dream wouldn't even have to play defense under him! But who wants that?
As someone said on RebKell, there are three scenarios that could explain why Williams had to eat boot.
1) "Pump and dump": The owner of the Golden State Warriors has been talking about getting a WNBA franchise to match his NBA toy. However, he doesn't want an expansion franchise that will stink up the joint for 10 years (see: Lynx). So he's in the market for a experienced franchise with talent.
Therefore, the Brock/Loeffler team are going to make one last push. They'll spend what they're allowed to and connive as much as they can. If the team can't win with Williams, they'll get a new coach and a deeper bench to make that push. Maybe another conference championship.
Then, when the Dream stock is high again, they call Mr. Golden State. He offers them a couple of million dollars for their losses over the years and guess what? We have the California Dream. (Hint: if the new coach is Jenny Boucek, players should start looking for apartments in Oakland.)
2) McCoughtry left for Europe and her Turkish season sometime around Thursday. She had a hand in getting rid of one coach, why not get rid of a second one before the European season starts? When Meadors lost her power struggle with McCoughtry, that meant that McCoughtry ran the team in the eyes of the DFO. McCoughtry - never one to blame herself - might have put a bug in Brock or Loeffler's ear.
"Hey, if Williams wasn't our head coach, we could have won." Dolchstoss!
3) It could be that frankly, the DFO is tired of McCoughtry's bullshit.
There are three constants over these three finals - Erika de Souza, Armintie Herrington, and McCoughtry. We got in a new coach; nothing changed. More finals failure. If it's not the coach's fault, then it must be the players.
So who do you get rid of? You get rid of the biggest pain-in-the-ass, McCoughtry. (It's not like we're selling tickets because of her, anyway.) Willliams's dismissal gets rid of her defender. The new coach (whoever that is) is told to deal McCoughtry off. I bet Bill Laimbeer is pounding his pillow at night in frustration, swearing because he has no player of McCoughtry's caliber to deal. Of course, if the Libs get the #1 pick...then he'd get Charles, who isn't the PITA that McCoughtry is.
The idea is that the old order doesn't work, so you blow crap up. No one is safe. Not Williams, not McCoughtry, not nobody. We get a new coach and a brand new team after all the parts are dealt. (Hey, why not get Laimbeer as head coach? He'll call a few friends!)
What do I think about Fred Williams? I think he's a great guy. I think that under the right circumstances, he's a great coach. (Although he's definitely laid back.) He can evaluate talent. With the right mix of players, he's just as capable a head coach as anyone out there.
He's a great person. Easy to talk to. I'll miss him, definitely.
I suspect that Julie Plank is going to be offered the baton next. Rumor I heard was that Fred Williams was let go because Tulsa started asking about Julie Plank and the Dream didn't want another Carol Ross situation to happen. Don't know what Julie Plank is like. I might have the chance to find out.
SIDE RANT: The 2013 Lynx finished 1.377 standard deviations above the mean in the regular season. That won't even get you into the Top 14 WNBA teams of all time, and yet Minnesota's fans talk as if Minnesota is the 1927 Murderer's Row. Sorry, but you need a lot deeper bench and you need to play against a lot tougher competition to be considered a dynasty. (Furthermore, if Minnesota is so great, how did they lose to Indiana in 2012 in four games? The Fever finished fourth overall in the WNBA and no WNBA team to win a championship had ever finished so low overall.)
So why get rid of Senor Fred? Clearly, the DFO weren't happy about the Dream's oh-for-three again in the Finals. (They had to pay for a game in Gwinnett that they were probably going to lose. That cost money.) That 25 percent or so shooting game in Game One of the Eastern Semifinals might have sealed Williams's fate right there.
The fact is, in basketball a team can get lucky in a short three-game series and more so in the WNBA because there's more parity there than in the NBA. The Noll-Scully Index for the league this year was 1.88 - much better than 2012's 2.49 or 2011's 2.30. (As a matter of fact, 1.88 is the weighted average Noll-Scully across all 17 seasons.)
Not a single team in the league finished with less than 10 wins. The last time that happened was in 2009, the most competitive season in WNBA history.
So with so much parity (relatively speaking for basketball), the Dream escaped the first round alive when Washington handed Game 2 right back to them and the Fever choked. The DFO should have been happy that Senor Fred even got as far as the Finals; it wasn't as if anyone thought the Dream had a chance anyway.
Why was he fired? Who knows? Williams was a player's coach, and sometimes it showed. McCoughtry playing one-on-four against the Lynx in the paint. Thomas jacking up shots less than 10 seconds into the shot clock.
The problem the DFO have is that the current configuration of the Dream won't work with anyone but a player's coach. I suspect that Williams was more McCoughtry's traveling confidante/psychiatrist than anything else. The Dream were playing smart ball the first 11 games of the season; then Lyttle got hurt and it was back to the same old McCoughtry-vs-the-world gameplan.
You could get Corey Gaines as our new coach, I suppose. Hey, the Dream wouldn't even have to play defense under him! But who wants that?
As someone said on RebKell, there are three scenarios that could explain why Williams had to eat boot.
1) "Pump and dump": The owner of the Golden State Warriors has been talking about getting a WNBA franchise to match his NBA toy. However, he doesn't want an expansion franchise that will stink up the joint for 10 years (see: Lynx). So he's in the market for a experienced franchise with talent.
Therefore, the Brock/Loeffler team are going to make one last push. They'll spend what they're allowed to and connive as much as they can. If the team can't win with Williams, they'll get a new coach and a deeper bench to make that push. Maybe another conference championship.
Then, when the Dream stock is high again, they call Mr. Golden State. He offers them a couple of million dollars for their losses over the years and guess what? We have the California Dream. (Hint: if the new coach is Jenny Boucek, players should start looking for apartments in Oakland.)
2) McCoughtry left for Europe and her Turkish season sometime around Thursday. She had a hand in getting rid of one coach, why not get rid of a second one before the European season starts? When Meadors lost her power struggle with McCoughtry, that meant that McCoughtry ran the team in the eyes of the DFO. McCoughtry - never one to blame herself - might have put a bug in Brock or Loeffler's ear.
"Hey, if Williams wasn't our head coach, we could have won." Dolchstoss!
3) It could be that frankly, the DFO is tired of McCoughtry's bullshit.
There are three constants over these three finals - Erika de Souza, Armintie Herrington, and McCoughtry. We got in a new coach; nothing changed. More finals failure. If it's not the coach's fault, then it must be the players.
So who do you get rid of? You get rid of the biggest pain-in-the-ass, McCoughtry. (It's not like we're selling tickets because of her, anyway.) Willliams's dismissal gets rid of her defender. The new coach (whoever that is) is told to deal McCoughtry off. I bet Bill Laimbeer is pounding his pillow at night in frustration, swearing because he has no player of McCoughtry's caliber to deal. Of course, if the Libs get the #1 pick...then he'd get Charles, who isn't the PITA that McCoughtry is.
The idea is that the old order doesn't work, so you blow crap up. No one is safe. Not Williams, not McCoughtry, not nobody. We get a new coach and a brand new team after all the parts are dealt. (Hey, why not get Laimbeer as head coach? He'll call a few friends!)
What do I think about Fred Williams? I think he's a great guy. I think that under the right circumstances, he's a great coach. (Although he's definitely laid back.) He can evaluate talent. With the right mix of players, he's just as capable a head coach as anyone out there.
He's a great person. Easy to talk to. I'll miss him, definitely.
I suspect that Julie Plank is going to be offered the baton next. Rumor I heard was that Fred Williams was let go because Tulsa started asking about Julie Plank and the Dream didn't want another Carol Ross situation to happen. Don't know what Julie Plank is like. I might have the chance to find out.
SIDE RANT: The 2013 Lynx finished 1.377 standard deviations above the mean in the regular season. That won't even get you into the Top 14 WNBA teams of all time, and yet Minnesota's fans talk as if Minnesota is the 1927 Murderer's Row. Sorry, but you need a lot deeper bench and you need to play against a lot tougher competition to be considered a dynasty. (Furthermore, if Minnesota is so great, how did they lose to Indiana in 2012 in four games? The Fever finished fourth overall in the WNBA and no WNBA team to win a championship had ever finished so low overall.)
Monday, October 14, 2013
The Off-Season
The WNBA has a ridiculously long off season. It will be seven or eight months before we even see as much as a pre-season game. The players are now in the process of fleeing to their clubs overseas; we might not see some of them back until the season starts (if then).
There's a saying that "idle hands are the Devil's workshop" and it's never been truer with me. In the past, I've tried two things to try to pass the time.
1) Cover Georgia Tech basketball. The problem is that it's not only generally hard to get to a Georgia Tech game (Georgia Tech's in the city, same as the Dream), but it's cold. I also got the impression that despite my single-handed efforts, no one really cared much about Georgia Tech women's basketball.
2) Cover basketball overseas. Even fewer people cared about that than Georgia Tech. No sense in doing hours of work a week with virtually no feedback. No writer wants to feel like he's talking to himself.
Now, if I wanted to cover Connecticut or Tennessee women's basketball, then bar the door! You'd definitely get page views if that was your be-all and end-all goal. But UConn is too far away and really, so is Tennessee. I really feel for these fans who love a team but live nowhere near it.
Therefore, I think I'll give girls prep basketball a try. Why not? I really don't know much about the scene anyway and it might be interesting to experience firsthand - to watch players at the prep level and see how they progress (or fail to) over the season. There are lots of good schools in the area and I'm sure I can see lots of good basketball over the winter.
I once posted on Twitter about possibly creating a website dedicated to Atlanta Prep basketball. A friend strongly advised against it, thinking that I was trying to create a scouting service. He said that a lot of people who produce scouting reports for pay are okay, but there are a lot of people who are just in it for the wrong reasons (fame/power/influence) and he hoped that I wouldn't be one of those people.
To which I might respond. "Yeah, but everyone knows that I don't know what I'm doing." It's not like I'm trying to keep my overall lack of knowledge a secret. Anyone who buys a scouting report from me is throwing his money away.
So you might be reading about my adventures of sitting on wooden benches over the winter. One month (maybe) till prep season!
There's a saying that "idle hands are the Devil's workshop" and it's never been truer with me. In the past, I've tried two things to try to pass the time.
1) Cover Georgia Tech basketball. The problem is that it's not only generally hard to get to a Georgia Tech game (Georgia Tech's in the city, same as the Dream), but it's cold. I also got the impression that despite my single-handed efforts, no one really cared much about Georgia Tech women's basketball.
2) Cover basketball overseas. Even fewer people cared about that than Georgia Tech. No sense in doing hours of work a week with virtually no feedback. No writer wants to feel like he's talking to himself.
Now, if I wanted to cover Connecticut or Tennessee women's basketball, then bar the door! You'd definitely get page views if that was your be-all and end-all goal. But UConn is too far away and really, so is Tennessee. I really feel for these fans who love a team but live nowhere near it.
Therefore, I think I'll give girls prep basketball a try. Why not? I really don't know much about the scene anyway and it might be interesting to experience firsthand - to watch players at the prep level and see how they progress (or fail to) over the season. There are lots of good schools in the area and I'm sure I can see lots of good basketball over the winter.
I once posted on Twitter about possibly creating a website dedicated to Atlanta Prep basketball. A friend strongly advised against it, thinking that I was trying to create a scouting service. He said that a lot of people who produce scouting reports for pay are okay, but there are a lot of people who are just in it for the wrong reasons (fame/power/influence) and he hoped that I wouldn't be one of those people.
To which I might respond. "Yeah, but everyone knows that I don't know what I'm doing." It's not like I'm trying to keep my overall lack of knowledge a secret. Anyone who buys a scouting report from me is throwing his money away.
So you might be reading about my adventures of sitting on wooden benches over the winter. One month (maybe) till prep season!
Friday, October 11, 2013
2013 WNBA Finals: Minnesota @ Atlanta (Game 3)
I guess you could call Atlanta "Titletown". I've been fortunate enough to see three WNBA champions crowned at my home arena; the problem is that none of those three champions were called the Atlanta Dream.
I suppose that the best analogy to the Dream losing Game Three and getting swept again is like being in a bad relationship with someone. You know things are going downhill, and you hope that you can reignite that spark. So the two of you stick it out, but you've had two nasty arguments and you suspect that on Thursday, she's going to talk to you and tell you that she never wants to see you again.
Sure enough, Thursday comes, and she says softly "It's not working out." As she walks out the door, frankly, you're glad that it's over. You can now begin to put the heartache away, and frankly, the suspense was killing you.
The Dream have really been against the wall in those three years. The combined playoff records of the three teams they played are 21-1, only Minnesota in 2011 dropped a game against San Antonio. All three of those teams - Seattle in 2009, Minnesota in 2010 and 2011 - were full on first seeds, regular season champions of their conferences.
It makes you wonder how things would have gone if:
a) Sancho Lyttle was healthy. She injured her foot on July 9th in a game against Minnesota. (How apropos.) Atlanta was simply a different team without Lyttle, a difference as stark as blood and water. If the defense on Angel McCoughtry became too heavy, she could always look for either Lyttle or de Souza; Lyttle's foot injury limited her options and the Dream took a long time to adjust.
Really, the Dream never adjusted. Le'coe Willingham was no Sancho Lyttle. Henry was at best a stop-gap and the Dream stumbled into a surprisingly effective small ball lineup out of necessity.
b) We had played a weaker Western Conference team. There are those voices calling the 2013 Minnesota Lynx the Greatest Of All Time; I think the old Comets or Sparks teams would have begged to differ. If the Dream had played, say, the 2008 San Antonio Silver Stars things might have worked out differently.
c) The Dream had made substantial changes after Game One. Most people don't think that the Fred Williams Dream is different than the Marynell Meadors Dream, but there is a difference - the present-day Dream defends harder; Meadors's teams were more offense-based. However, the Dream's offense doesn't seem to have changed much - either McCoughtry shoots or the ball is shoved into the post, with the point guard as facilitator and a decent shooter to distract defenses.
Everyone on the Lynx knew where the ball was going. Our playbook has been around since 2008.
d) We had a decent three point threat. Oh, the effort that has been wasted to try to get someone who could hit a three-point shot. As Meadors said, "We don't hit threes, but we sure get a lot of twos." Minnesota showed the disadvantages to that strategy.
Last night, we actually hit three-pointers and stayed in the game for big stretches.
e) McCoughtry had decided to pass more. Sometimes you just can't pass to someone because they're not open; but sometimes I feel that she just didn't look. It's odd that the Dream did a lot better with McCoughtry on the bench for a while; Minnesota had to adjust to NOT expecting her to play one-on-three ball in the paint.
All of the above? Doesn't mean anything. Coulda, shoulda, woulda - didn'a.
f) Thomas and Bentley didn't jack up so many shots early in the shot clock. Sometimes, you saw shots and wondered "what they hell were they thinking?"
So congratulations to the Minnesota Lynx. They are clearly an excellent team; they've shown it all season. I think the dynasty label is a bit too early to hand out; being a dynasty is a step up from winning a championship. If Minnesota wins it all in 2014 well, three titles in four years (and four visits to the Finals in four years) will cement their dynasty status.
But right now, I'm still in the dumps from last night.
Attendance was...uh...not great. The calls came out again to move the Dream, but what the fuck did you expect?
* Playing all the way out in Duluth. Our transportation-challenged fans who use MARTA couldn't get there.
* We had been stomped two games and it looked like a third-game stomping was sure to come.
* That late 8:30 start on a weeknight? That's a killer. You don't get home to 11 pm and people have to work in the AM. I went to bed around 2:30 am last night; I'm still feeling it.
So no, WNBA - you're stuck with us. We might be the least popular kid on the block, but we're not moving unless ownership wants to move. President Richie isn't going to move the Dream. Why would she if Brock and Loeffler are still willing to pay the bills? (Although she might want to firm up their commitment.)
The best revenge for 2013 would be coming back in 2014. Lyttle healthy. Some needed personnel shakeups on the Dream's side. (And don't tell me Minnesota's bench is particularly deep; they only played seven players last night.) An even better revenge would be coming back against the Lynx in 2014 with Atlanta wearing the mantle of underdog.
No, there's not going to be a trade of McCoughtry. You're going to trade the top scorer in the WNBA? For what? Unless that name is "Delle Donne" I'd suggest you consign those theories of a McCoughtry trade to the realm of fantasy. People claim that Bill Laimbeer would trade his first round draft pick for McCoughtry and add value; but a bird in the hand is worth a lot more than one in the bush.
We will recover. The Dream players will scatter. McCoughtry will probably win another championship in Turkey; ditto for Lyttle in Spain. They'll take that feeling of victory and want to translate it into reality in 2014. That's something you can bet on.
I suppose that the best analogy to the Dream losing Game Three and getting swept again is like being in a bad relationship with someone. You know things are going downhill, and you hope that you can reignite that spark. So the two of you stick it out, but you've had two nasty arguments and you suspect that on Thursday, she's going to talk to you and tell you that she never wants to see you again.
Sure enough, Thursday comes, and she says softly "It's not working out." As she walks out the door, frankly, you're glad that it's over. You can now begin to put the heartache away, and frankly, the suspense was killing you.
The Dream have really been against the wall in those three years. The combined playoff records of the three teams they played are 21-1, only Minnesota in 2011 dropped a game against San Antonio. All three of those teams - Seattle in 2009, Minnesota in 2010 and 2011 - were full on first seeds, regular season champions of their conferences.
It makes you wonder how things would have gone if:
a) Sancho Lyttle was healthy. She injured her foot on July 9th in a game against Minnesota. (How apropos.) Atlanta was simply a different team without Lyttle, a difference as stark as blood and water. If the defense on Angel McCoughtry became too heavy, she could always look for either Lyttle or de Souza; Lyttle's foot injury limited her options and the Dream took a long time to adjust.
Really, the Dream never adjusted. Le'coe Willingham was no Sancho Lyttle. Henry was at best a stop-gap and the Dream stumbled into a surprisingly effective small ball lineup out of necessity.
b) We had played a weaker Western Conference team. There are those voices calling the 2013 Minnesota Lynx the Greatest Of All Time; I think the old Comets or Sparks teams would have begged to differ. If the Dream had played, say, the 2008 San Antonio Silver Stars things might have worked out differently.
c) The Dream had made substantial changes after Game One. Most people don't think that the Fred Williams Dream is different than the Marynell Meadors Dream, but there is a difference - the present-day Dream defends harder; Meadors's teams were more offense-based. However, the Dream's offense doesn't seem to have changed much - either McCoughtry shoots or the ball is shoved into the post, with the point guard as facilitator and a decent shooter to distract defenses.
Everyone on the Lynx knew where the ball was going. Our playbook has been around since 2008.
d) We had a decent three point threat. Oh, the effort that has been wasted to try to get someone who could hit a three-point shot. As Meadors said, "We don't hit threes, but we sure get a lot of twos." Minnesota showed the disadvantages to that strategy.
Last night, we actually hit three-pointers and stayed in the game for big stretches.
e) McCoughtry had decided to pass more. Sometimes you just can't pass to someone because they're not open; but sometimes I feel that she just didn't look. It's odd that the Dream did a lot better with McCoughtry on the bench for a while; Minnesota had to adjust to NOT expecting her to play one-on-three ball in the paint.
All of the above? Doesn't mean anything. Coulda, shoulda, woulda - didn'a.
f) Thomas and Bentley didn't jack up so many shots early in the shot clock. Sometimes, you saw shots and wondered "what they hell were they thinking?"
So congratulations to the Minnesota Lynx. They are clearly an excellent team; they've shown it all season. I think the dynasty label is a bit too early to hand out; being a dynasty is a step up from winning a championship. If Minnesota wins it all in 2014 well, three titles in four years (and four visits to the Finals in four years) will cement their dynasty status.
But right now, I'm still in the dumps from last night.
Attendance was...uh...not great. The calls came out again to move the Dream, but what the fuck did you expect?
* Playing all the way out in Duluth. Our transportation-challenged fans who use MARTA couldn't get there.
* We had been stomped two games and it looked like a third-game stomping was sure to come.
* That late 8:30 start on a weeknight? That's a killer. You don't get home to 11 pm and people have to work in the AM. I went to bed around 2:30 am last night; I'm still feeling it.
So no, WNBA - you're stuck with us. We might be the least popular kid on the block, but we're not moving unless ownership wants to move. President Richie isn't going to move the Dream. Why would she if Brock and Loeffler are still willing to pay the bills? (Although she might want to firm up their commitment.)
The best revenge for 2013 would be coming back in 2014. Lyttle healthy. Some needed personnel shakeups on the Dream's side. (And don't tell me Minnesota's bench is particularly deep; they only played seven players last night.) An even better revenge would be coming back against the Lynx in 2014 with Atlanta wearing the mantle of underdog.
No, there's not going to be a trade of McCoughtry. You're going to trade the top scorer in the WNBA? For what? Unless that name is "Delle Donne" I'd suggest you consign those theories of a McCoughtry trade to the realm of fantasy. People claim that Bill Laimbeer would trade his first round draft pick for McCoughtry and add value; but a bird in the hand is worth a lot more than one in the bush.
We will recover. The Dream players will scatter. McCoughtry will probably win another championship in Turkey; ditto for Lyttle in Spain. They'll take that feeling of victory and want to translate it into reality in 2014. That's something you can bet on.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
2013 WNBA Finals: Atlanta @ Minnesota (Game Two)
“The Bourbons never forgot anything and never learned anything.” - old French saying
I don't know if the Dream forgot anything, but they certainly didn't learn anything from their Game One loss to the Lynx except to start Aneika Henry. Once Minnesota adjusted to that, the game was over because Atlanta's game plan was exactly the same otherwise. I wasn't in Minneapolis, obviously, but what little we saw of Fred Williams on the screen, his emphasis was repeated - do what got you here. Stick with the game plan.
This, apparently, was Atlanta's game plan.
* - Allow McCoughtry to drive to the basket at will against three or four Lynx defenders all stacked up in the lane. Minnesota knows all too well McCoughtry's tendencies, they're beating her to her spots, drawing charges, and challenging her in the paint.
Remember Maya Moore's massive block of McCoughtry? (WNBA.com will not let you forget it for the next five years.) Moore comes off the weakside and reads her like Green Eggs and Ham. She couldn't have blocked McCoughtry's shot any sweeter if she (Angel) had cooperated.
* - Take dumb shots. Take them early in the shot clock and make sure they're as far away from the basket as possible. Atlanta needs to stretch out the Lynx defense - we get that - but they are not a 3-point shooting team and now is not the time to learn how to become one.
* - Don't help out McCoughtry, since you know that she's going to face pretty much every Lynx player defending her at one point, double-teaming her at times. The strategy is simple - keep a fresh body on McCoughtry at all times. Make her play a full thirty minutes; make sure that no one Lynx player guards her more than ten.
* - Don't find Erika de Souza in the paint. However, it might be the Lynx to blame for that - sometimes, you just can't pass the ball. All Erika could do was sail around in the paint like a rudderless boat with no one to get the ball to her. She scored when she got it, but she barely got it.
Okay. That's about it.
Officiating? This wasn't Game Two of the 2011 WNBA Finals, which I feel was flat-out robbed from us and which I'm still mad about. (Minnesota's 2011 win comes with an asterisk.) Yes, the WNBA referees were pretty bad, but a) we've all seen poorly officiated games before, and b) even if they were in the tank for the Lynx trust me, the Lynx didn't need any help in that respect.
It's a sad comparison between this series and the 2011. In 2011, the better team won. Both teams were good, but Minnesota was better than us (at least two out of three times, anyway). This year, the Dream have stunk up the joint.
* Two 25 points losses in a row.
* Their eighth straight WNBA Finals loss. They are now 0-8 in the Finals. Someone said that the Dream are the Buffalo Bills of the WNBA; the New York Liberty are the Minnesota Vikings. They were previously the worst team in the WNBA Finals at 1-7; now they've lost that title at last.
These losses are so bad that someone on RebKell proposed that the current Finals format be scrapped. (Can't have the Dream going oh-for-the-Finals again. It's bad for business, is the argument.)
Minnesota shot a Finals record 56.9 percent. we shot 35.8 percent. Game over.
Armintie Herrington went 1-for-5, Tiffany Hayes 3-for-9, Alex Bentley was 3-10. McCoughtry? 5-for-18, fouled out. Both McCoughtry and de Souza had three fouls on them early on; no Dream player broke 30 minutes. In the fourth, Riley and Clements were back on the court, and we had struck the tent.
Of course, after the game, Angel McCoughtry became her own worst enemy again. Some choice quotes:
"I feel like I played football, not basketball," McCoughtry said. "I mean, the game should be respected better than that. We are two teams and we are going to fight until the end, we are all going to play hard. But there's a difference, you know?"
...
"The whole pulling me down on the fast break, all that crap, it's not needed," McCoughtry said. "I really hurt my elbow when Maya pulled me down on that play. I feel like it wasn't needed. We don't play that way. We are going to play hard and we are going to play scrappy, but we aren't going to pull you down and hurt you. I just felt like I deserve a little more respect than that."
It doesn't matter if it's true or if it's not true. It makes you look bad complaining about the other team's tough play when you got blown out for 25 points in the second game in a row. It seems like whining rather than an honest complaint.
As for respect, well, respect is earned. I think it comes with winning a title.
There was an image last night of Armintie Herrington - clearly the team's leader - with her head buried in a towel, possibly to hide her tears. The three of them - Herrington, McCoughtry, de Souza - have showed up to the Finals eight games, and have been turned away each time. If Herrington is shaken up, does the rest of the team follow?
No time to think about it. Tomorrow, we have Game Three in Gwinnett, although I wonder if anyone will show up given the Game Two rout. One of my basketball friends has declined to come. He said he would show up if the Dream had a chance of clinching a win at Gwinnett, but they would have needed to win one game in Minneapolis. So no dice.
I'll be there. Hopefully, the Dream I saw at the beginning of the season will be there too, not the Dream of Games One and Two. Hey, the Lynx lost three games in a row in August this year. It could happen.
I don't know if the Dream forgot anything, but they certainly didn't learn anything from their Game One loss to the Lynx except to start Aneika Henry. Once Minnesota adjusted to that, the game was over because Atlanta's game plan was exactly the same otherwise. I wasn't in Minneapolis, obviously, but what little we saw of Fred Williams on the screen, his emphasis was repeated - do what got you here. Stick with the game plan.
This, apparently, was Atlanta's game plan.
* - Allow McCoughtry to drive to the basket at will against three or four Lynx defenders all stacked up in the lane. Minnesota knows all too well McCoughtry's tendencies, they're beating her to her spots, drawing charges, and challenging her in the paint.
Remember Maya Moore's massive block of McCoughtry? (WNBA.com will not let you forget it for the next five years.) Moore comes off the weakside and reads her like Green Eggs and Ham. She couldn't have blocked McCoughtry's shot any sweeter if she (Angel) had cooperated.
* - Take dumb shots. Take them early in the shot clock and make sure they're as far away from the basket as possible. Atlanta needs to stretch out the Lynx defense - we get that - but they are not a 3-point shooting team and now is not the time to learn how to become one.
* - Don't help out McCoughtry, since you know that she's going to face pretty much every Lynx player defending her at one point, double-teaming her at times. The strategy is simple - keep a fresh body on McCoughtry at all times. Make her play a full thirty minutes; make sure that no one Lynx player guards her more than ten.
* - Don't find Erika de Souza in the paint. However, it might be the Lynx to blame for that - sometimes, you just can't pass the ball. All Erika could do was sail around in the paint like a rudderless boat with no one to get the ball to her. She scored when she got it, but she barely got it.
Okay. That's about it.
Officiating? This wasn't Game Two of the 2011 WNBA Finals, which I feel was flat-out robbed from us and which I'm still mad about. (Minnesota's 2011 win comes with an asterisk.) Yes, the WNBA referees were pretty bad, but a) we've all seen poorly officiated games before, and b) even if they were in the tank for the Lynx trust me, the Lynx didn't need any help in that respect.
It's a sad comparison between this series and the 2011. In 2011, the better team won. Both teams were good, but Minnesota was better than us (at least two out of three times, anyway). This year, the Dream have stunk up the joint.
* Two 25 points losses in a row.
* Their eighth straight WNBA Finals loss. They are now 0-8 in the Finals. Someone said that the Dream are the Buffalo Bills of the WNBA; the New York Liberty are the Minnesota Vikings. They were previously the worst team in the WNBA Finals at 1-7; now they've lost that title at last.
These losses are so bad that someone on RebKell proposed that the current Finals format be scrapped. (Can't have the Dream going oh-for-the-Finals again. It's bad for business, is the argument.)
Minnesota shot a Finals record 56.9 percent. we shot 35.8 percent. Game over.
Armintie Herrington went 1-for-5, Tiffany Hayes 3-for-9, Alex Bentley was 3-10. McCoughtry? 5-for-18, fouled out. Both McCoughtry and de Souza had three fouls on them early on; no Dream player broke 30 minutes. In the fourth, Riley and Clements were back on the court, and we had struck the tent.
Of course, after the game, Angel McCoughtry became her own worst enemy again. Some choice quotes:
"I feel like I played football, not basketball," McCoughtry said. "I mean, the game should be respected better than that. We are two teams and we are going to fight until the end, we are all going to play hard. But there's a difference, you know?"
...
"The whole pulling me down on the fast break, all that crap, it's not needed," McCoughtry said. "I really hurt my elbow when Maya pulled me down on that play. I feel like it wasn't needed. We don't play that way. We are going to play hard and we are going to play scrappy, but we aren't going to pull you down and hurt you. I just felt like I deserve a little more respect than that."
It doesn't matter if it's true or if it's not true. It makes you look bad complaining about the other team's tough play when you got blown out for 25 points in the second game in a row. It seems like whining rather than an honest complaint.
As for respect, well, respect is earned. I think it comes with winning a title.
There was an image last night of Armintie Herrington - clearly the team's leader - with her head buried in a towel, possibly to hide her tears. The three of them - Herrington, McCoughtry, de Souza - have showed up to the Finals eight games, and have been turned away each time. If Herrington is shaken up, does the rest of the team follow?
No time to think about it. Tomorrow, we have Game Three in Gwinnett, although I wonder if anyone will show up given the Game Two rout. One of my basketball friends has declined to come. He said he would show up if the Dream had a chance of clinching a win at Gwinnett, but they would have needed to win one game in Minneapolis. So no dice.
I'll be there. Hopefully, the Dream I saw at the beginning of the season will be there too, not the Dream of Games One and Two. Hey, the Lynx lost three games in a row in August this year. It could happen.
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Would you rather that your city win an NFL championship, or have $5?
This question is almost a slam dunk question - which is funny because we don't have many slam dunks in the WNBA. The Super Bowl's future locations are determined all the way to 2017, where Houston will host the game. So there's no direct economic benefit to Atlanta in the Falcons winning a Super Bowl. (The last time the ATL hosted a Super Bowl was in 2000.) Some Atlanta players might get paid more and might spend some more in the city but there's no proof of that. I certainly won't see more than $5 worth of benefit if the Falcons win it all.
With economic benefit off the table, the question is "is the emotional experience worth $5"? To that, I can answer a resounding no.
I follow the NFL entirely through cultural osmosis. By "cultural osmosis", I mean that phenomenon by which most people know who Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock are without necessarily watching a single Star Trek episode. Generally, you can't escape the NFL and certain players/teams/incidents are going to break into the popular culture. If you study sports at any level, you can find some intersection with the NFL.
But in terms of caring whether the Falcons go 16-0 vs. going 0-16? Well, if the Falcons lose I feel some sympathy for my close friends who do follow the Falcons. I do generally want to see Atlanta sports teams do well.
But to give up $5 so that the Falcons do well? As Clay Davis would say, "Sheeeeeeeeet!" The Falcons have enough fans, frankly. Yes, the city will be hitting visitors with money from the hotel-motel tax, but the Atlanta taxpayers - of which I am one - will be paying for the upkeep of this stadium boondoggle until the year 2050. So I have to pay for the Falcons in one way or another regardless of how well they do.
If you count the bundling cost of the NFL Network - which I do not watch but am pretty much forced to pay for - that's a monthly fee of $0.75 I am paying out of my cable bill. So I end up paying $9.00 a year to the fucking NFL, regardless of if I want to or not.
Furthermore, if we do win a NFL championship, that means one thing - riots in the streets by fratboy douchebags of all races. That's just what I need to see on my local news.
In summary, give me the $5.00. Frankly, you should be giving me an extra $5.00 for next year, when we don't win either.
____________
(*) This is my response to the "would you rather that your city have a WNBA championship or have $5?" poll that seems to make the rounds every year.
(**) My opinion might change if it were some other sport that the NFL. Fuck the NFL.
(***) If my friends were to beg me to reconsider in this hypothetical bet so that the Falcons could win a Super Bowl strictly out of the sake of friendship, I would forego the $5. But they owe me a bennie somewhere down the line.
With economic benefit off the table, the question is "is the emotional experience worth $5"? To that, I can answer a resounding no.
I follow the NFL entirely through cultural osmosis. By "cultural osmosis", I mean that phenomenon by which most people know who Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock are without necessarily watching a single Star Trek episode. Generally, you can't escape the NFL and certain players/teams/incidents are going to break into the popular culture. If you study sports at any level, you can find some intersection with the NFL.
But in terms of caring whether the Falcons go 16-0 vs. going 0-16? Well, if the Falcons lose I feel some sympathy for my close friends who do follow the Falcons. I do generally want to see Atlanta sports teams do well.
But to give up $5 so that the Falcons do well? As Clay Davis would say, "Sheeeeeeeeet!" The Falcons have enough fans, frankly. Yes, the city will be hitting visitors with money from the hotel-motel tax, but the Atlanta taxpayers - of which I am one - will be paying for the upkeep of this stadium boondoggle until the year 2050. So I have to pay for the Falcons in one way or another regardless of how well they do.
If you count the bundling cost of the NFL Network - which I do not watch but am pretty much forced to pay for - that's a monthly fee of $0.75 I am paying out of my cable bill. So I end up paying $9.00 a year to the fucking NFL, regardless of if I want to or not.
Furthermore, if we do win a NFL championship, that means one thing - riots in the streets by fratboy douchebags of all races. That's just what I need to see on my local news.
In summary, give me the $5.00. Frankly, you should be giving me an extra $5.00 for next year, when we don't win either.
____________
(*) This is my response to the "would you rather that your city have a WNBA championship or have $5?" poll that seems to make the rounds every year.
(**) My opinion might change if it were some other sport that the NFL. Fuck the NFL.
(***) If my friends were to beg me to reconsider in this hypothetical bet so that the Falcons could win a Super Bowl strictly out of the sake of friendship, I would forego the $5. But they owe me a bennie somewhere down the line.
Monday, October 7, 2013
2013 WNBA Finals: Atlanta @ Minnesota (Game One)
So how was it?
It was pretty bad. It wasn't historically bad. We didn't beat the record for Worst Defeat in a WNBA Finals, although we certainly threatened it. Other teams have suffered big losses in Game One of the Finals and came back to win, but I'm not getting a Detroit Shock kind of vibe around the Atlanta Dream.
It was the seventh time we've lost a WNBA Finals game - in seven attempts. We're 0-for-7. Our seventh loss ties the New York Liberty, who are 1-7 all time in Finals games.
So why did we lose? Lots of reasons. It was rumored that Janel McCarville was injured, but not only was she *not* injured but she had a very good first quarter. Maya Moore hit a couple of big threes early on, and away we went.
The second quarter was a Lost Quarter, which is what I call any quarter where one team scored less than ten points. Teams generally don't win games with a Lost Quarter, unless the other team also has a Lost Quarter to match it. We scored nine points in the second quarter - the Lynx just played Great D - and we were down by 20 points at one point coming into the half.
Minnesota would eventually lead by 31 at one point. Late in the fourth quarter both sides were playing their scrubs. It was Atlanta's time to strike the tent, shake it off and as someone suggested on the air, watch more tape of that regular season game where we beat the Lynx. (And hope that the Lynx haven't ever watched that game since their loss.)
Part of the problem was McCoughtry. There is no nice way of saying it. On RebKell, they coined the phrase "Hero Ball", which I intend to steal. Hero Ball is where the game plan is to put the ball in the hands of your most talented player and hope she can carry the team to victory on her back.
I don't think that was Fred Williams's plan, but it was Angel McCoughtry's. You could almost predict when she was going to take a shot; at times it seemed like shot selection or ball distribution were foreign concepts. It reminded me of Geno Auriemma's friendly (?) knock that MCcoughtry wouldn't even pass someone the ketchup at lunchtime. (To which she might reply, as before, "I get paid to score, not to pass.")
McCoughtry was willing to go full Iziane Castro Marques on Minnesota, playing 1-on-3. The only reason the Lynx didn't have more players in the lane waiting on her was that they couldn't fit that many large women into such a small space. She has moments of pure transcendence where she's unstoppable, but I wonder if Hero Ball can really work against such a complete team like the Lynx.
It showed in the box score stat. MCCoughtry went 6-for-24. But in her defense, it wasn't exactly like she could trust that anyone on the Dream was going to step up. De Souza scored her 10 and 7 but seemingly with little impact. Aneika Henry came off the bench with a great game, 14 points and 14 rebounds.
Everyone else? Not so much:
Jasmine Thomas? 3-for-15, a veritable black hole of offense.
Alex Bentley? 2-for-9.
Dream outside shooting? 0-for-15.
McCoughtry could answer me, "Okay, JB, tell me who I was supposed to give the ball to?"
Minnesota switched off on her multiple times. They must have had everyone but the intern who brings the Gatorade guarding her at one point; Reeve always had a fresh body to put on McCoughtry. "You want to play Hero Ball? Fine. But we'll make you work for it."
Maya Moore was Maya Moore, 23 points and seven rebounds. Monica Wright had a great game, 20 points, and doing all the little things well. (Although I still believe that Wright is the Most Overrated Player in the WNBA. She can be good, but not when she's a starter.) Given Atlanta's abysmal output, Moore and Wright were really all that the Lynx needed; everyone else just needed to be decent and play good defense.
So now it's on to Game Two on Tuesday. Some people are predicting a "rout" on the order of Detroit/San Antonio in 2008. But that wasn't much of a rout. Detroit won by margins of +8, +8 and +16. For Atlanta, starting at -25 is like being two games down.
It was pretty bad. It wasn't historically bad. We didn't beat the record for Worst Defeat in a WNBA Finals, although we certainly threatened it. Other teams have suffered big losses in Game One of the Finals and came back to win, but I'm not getting a Detroit Shock kind of vibe around the Atlanta Dream.
It was the seventh time we've lost a WNBA Finals game - in seven attempts. We're 0-for-7. Our seventh loss ties the New York Liberty, who are 1-7 all time in Finals games.
So why did we lose? Lots of reasons. It was rumored that Janel McCarville was injured, but not only was she *not* injured but she had a very good first quarter. Maya Moore hit a couple of big threes early on, and away we went.
The second quarter was a Lost Quarter, which is what I call any quarter where one team scored less than ten points. Teams generally don't win games with a Lost Quarter, unless the other team also has a Lost Quarter to match it. We scored nine points in the second quarter - the Lynx just played Great D - and we were down by 20 points at one point coming into the half.
Minnesota would eventually lead by 31 at one point. Late in the fourth quarter both sides were playing their scrubs. It was Atlanta's time to strike the tent, shake it off and as someone suggested on the air, watch more tape of that regular season game where we beat the Lynx. (And hope that the Lynx haven't ever watched that game since their loss.)
Part of the problem was McCoughtry. There is no nice way of saying it. On RebKell, they coined the phrase "Hero Ball", which I intend to steal. Hero Ball is where the game plan is to put the ball in the hands of your most talented player and hope she can carry the team to victory on her back.
I don't think that was Fred Williams's plan, but it was Angel McCoughtry's. You could almost predict when she was going to take a shot; at times it seemed like shot selection or ball distribution were foreign concepts. It reminded me of Geno Auriemma's friendly (?) knock that MCcoughtry wouldn't even pass someone the ketchup at lunchtime. (To which she might reply, as before, "I get paid to score, not to pass.")
McCoughtry was willing to go full Iziane Castro Marques on Minnesota, playing 1-on-3. The only reason the Lynx didn't have more players in the lane waiting on her was that they couldn't fit that many large women into such a small space. She has moments of pure transcendence where she's unstoppable, but I wonder if Hero Ball can really work against such a complete team like the Lynx.
It showed in the box score stat. MCCoughtry went 6-for-24. But in her defense, it wasn't exactly like she could trust that anyone on the Dream was going to step up. De Souza scored her 10 and 7 but seemingly with little impact. Aneika Henry came off the bench with a great game, 14 points and 14 rebounds.
Everyone else? Not so much:
Jasmine Thomas? 3-for-15, a veritable black hole of offense.
Alex Bentley? 2-for-9.
Dream outside shooting? 0-for-15.
McCoughtry could answer me, "Okay, JB, tell me who I was supposed to give the ball to?"
Minnesota switched off on her multiple times. They must have had everyone but the intern who brings the Gatorade guarding her at one point; Reeve always had a fresh body to put on McCoughtry. "You want to play Hero Ball? Fine. But we'll make you work for it."
Maya Moore was Maya Moore, 23 points and seven rebounds. Monica Wright had a great game, 20 points, and doing all the little things well. (Although I still believe that Wright is the Most Overrated Player in the WNBA. She can be good, but not when she's a starter.) Given Atlanta's abysmal output, Moore and Wright were really all that the Lynx needed; everyone else just needed to be decent and play good defense.
So now it's on to Game Two on Tuesday. Some people are predicting a "rout" on the order of Detroit/San Antonio in 2008. But that wasn't much of a rout. Detroit won by margins of +8, +8 and +16. For Atlanta, starting at -25 is like being two games down.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
I Scream at Kids for a Living
Okay, they're not exactly "kids" and his job description isn't limited to just screaming. I'm writing about Keith Brown, the head coach of the Georgetown women's basketball program, who according to the Washington Post was suspended (along with an assistant) for:
"unprofessional conduct and the use of inappropriate language in coaching the Georgetown University women’s basketball team"
This is more interesting for what it doesn't say that what it does say. What sort of conduct? What kind of language? The reader is left to guess. What type of language does the Georgetown athletic department not consider appropriate? This is written in admin speak.
In June, 2013 the Georgetown University Athletics Department adopted a new policy, “Maintaining a Respectful and Professional Relationships with Student Athletes. In addition, members of the Georgetown Athletics Department attended mandatory training sessions led by University leadership and outside counsel to ensure understanding of the new policy and to discuss issues relating to appropriate behavior between coaches, trainers and student athletes.
Note the lack of closed quotes, and the disagreement between plural and singular. Someone's asleep on the job either at Georgetown or the Washington Post. You can try to find this policy somewhere on the web, but you won't have any luck.
Georgetown is a Catholic school - nominally, anyway - and I don't think a "shit" or a "fuck" tossed out a few times would get someone canned. (Unlike that coach at Ave Maria who probably got fired for that very reason - as someone put in the comments thread, "I know of NO sports activity in which profanity is NOT used including high school athletics....What happens when their opponents use such language in their gym? Is the game stopped and forfeited?")
It gets weirder:
ABC7 News has learned from multiple sources that a member of the women’s team attempted to take her own life a few days prior to the coaches being suspended. And while there is nothing to indicate a connection between the two events, the news is startling to those on campus.
...
Five players on the team - for of whom were freshmen - came to ABC7 news and stated that:
...they admit he swears at them when they make a mistake and that he is very demanding – but they say they don’t take it personally.
...
“I think a lot of this is blown out of proportion. It’s unnecessary, to be honest,” said McCormick. “We just want to play. That is all we want to do and we want our coach back."
Sports Illustrated goes into even more detail:
According to a report from WJLA in Washington, D.C-Maryland-Virginia, several players on the team said Brown’s treatment left them “broken and demoralized.” The report goes on to say that Brown used “swearing, demeaning, and humiliating tactics” with his players. Two of the players who had been on the team while Brown was on staff reportedly left the Hoyas because of “run-ins” with the coach, according to the report.
(* * *)
No matter how this plays out, it's going to end badly.
Brown loses job/guilty of charges - coach screwed up and lost his job.
Brown loses job/not guilty of charges - coach was run out on a rail by a clique of players with an axe to grind. Not good for the program.
Brown doesn't lose job/not guilty of charges - coach now has to deal with a divided squad one month before the women's BB season starts.
Brown doesn't lose job/guilty of charges - Brown now has an axe to grind with certain players.
I wonder (without any evidence) if this is just a bad hire. I've had a suspicion that Georgetown really didn't give much of a damn about women's basketball - Terri Williams-Flournoy fled to Auburn when she got the chance. He was an easy hire as Williams-Flournoy's assistant (translation: they didn't look very hard). Brown's background is in AAU basketball, more recruiting/evaluation than coaching. Maybe he just wasn't prepared and crossed a line that he didn't know he shouldn't cross.
I guess we'll either know more, or we won't. I think I've covered all of my bases here.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
What WNBA fans need to know about the Gwinnett Center (or rather, what I know about it)
I've been to see games at the Gwinnett Center a few times. I saw the infamous Elmo Game in 2009, and I also saw a few Georgia Tech games at Gwinnett when their arena was being renovated. Here are some things that you might want to know:
1) It's smaller that Philips Arena, obviously. The listed capacity for basketball is about 12,000, so you'll be able to get all of the Dream's fans (and then some) inside. Attendance for the Elmo Game in 2009 was listed at 4,780 although it seemed a lot smaller than that.
2) The impression I got is that seating is a little bit farther back than Philips, so expect to crane your neck a little.
3) Parking is ample.
4) There is no overhead jumbotron. The electronic scoreboards are at either end of the arena.
5) If you're press, I expect they'll do what they did for the Elmo Game - they'll put a row of tables at one of the baselines. Which means that you will get to experience the game up close and personal when an errant basketball sails in your general direction.
6) The innards of the arena are a little bit confusing. Phillips's innards are more straightforward; leave the court, and then turn left (or right) respectively for the locker room area. You'll need a little bit more direction at Gwinnett.
7) Georgia Tech did have press parking, but I don't know what they're going to do about Gwinnett.
8) Concessions? I don't know.
9) There is a hotel nearby, but dogged if I know what the name of it is.
10) I don't know how hard it is to get to Gwinnett by car. I got there early during the Elmo Game. I suspect that the Dream fans that depend on MARTA to get to the games are going to be screwed.
1) It's smaller that Philips Arena, obviously. The listed capacity for basketball is about 12,000, so you'll be able to get all of the Dream's fans (and then some) inside. Attendance for the Elmo Game in 2009 was listed at 4,780 although it seemed a lot smaller than that.
2) The impression I got is that seating is a little bit farther back than Philips, so expect to crane your neck a little.
3) Parking is ample.
4) There is no overhead jumbotron. The electronic scoreboards are at either end of the arena.
5) If you're press, I expect they'll do what they did for the Elmo Game - they'll put a row of tables at one of the baselines. Which means that you will get to experience the game up close and personal when an errant basketball sails in your general direction.
6) The innards of the arena are a little bit confusing. Phillips's innards are more straightforward; leave the court, and then turn left (or right) respectively for the locker room area. You'll need a little bit more direction at Gwinnett.
7) Georgia Tech did have press parking, but I don't know what they're going to do about Gwinnett.
8) Concessions? I don't know.
9) There is a hotel nearby, but dogged if I know what the name of it is.
10) I don't know how hard it is to get to Gwinnett by car. I got there early during the Elmo Game. I suspect that the Dream fans that depend on MARTA to get to the games are going to be screwed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)