Bleacher Report - Articles by Alan Thomson

Tiger Woods: Should We Have Expected Any Different?

Alan Thomson — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:40:14 -0500

Once again, one of society’s preeminent personalities has been exposed as a philandering cad. Oh, the shock of it all. How many more times does something like this have to happen before we finally understand?

Apparently, to some folks, Tigergate is beyond jaw dropping. To these people, allow me to suggest that you retrieve your lower mandible from wherever it has fallen and, at long last, accept the fact that this is to be expected.

No, I am not a proponent of adultery. It is obviously an egregiously hurtful and destructive act. But from the perspective of a prodigy turned mega-celebrity, this is par for the course. And Tiger Woods is as great as they come at performing eminently better than par.

Accounts of his boorish behavior and indiscretions are now seeming to emerge from every orifice, no pun intended, of virtually every place he has ever set non-golf shoed foot. While some of these may prove to be dubious at best, there is no reason to believe that enough truth hasn’t been spewed to qualify the formerly antiseptic-repped links-maven as an accredited debaucher.

Shocking? Not really. Why? Because that’s what the “superstars of society” are programmed to do. I could list all of the names of such known transgressors, but I’d like to finish the article while there is still time left for me to Christmas shop.

OK, I’ll name-drop a few. Michael Jordan comes to mind. Babe Ruth was notorious for it. I think Bill Clinton may have dabbled a bit as well. And possibly Michael Jackson, but I’m not even going to get near that one.

In the case of true prodigies such as Tiger, these are people who have been idolized and ass-kissed by virtually everyone around them since their youths. They have unwittingly developed an innate sense of entitlement. Their reality is vastly different from yours or mine. Many of the accepted rules of society have never been enforced on them.

They are programmed to get what they want while having any "questionable" behavior if not outright approved of, receive a blind eye turned toward by the sycophants who huddle around them. These includes coaches, school administration, occasionally the police, of course girls, and oftentimes their own parents.

Combine these things with the fact that superstar athletes never seem to mature in the manner in which the rest of us do because they don’t go through the same rites of passage that we do. Most of us progress through various stages in which our priorities change and evolve. The importance of high school gets replaced by that of college or trade school, followed by the beginning and assorted stages of growth within our careers.

Superstar athletes have one main priority from grade school through middle-age: their sport. Their world hinges upon the very same thing is has since they were children.

So what you end up with after all of this is an immature, athletic and virile, narcissistically programmed young mega-millionaire celebrity.

It should come as a shock to anyone that a personality of this type would cheat on his spouse?

Husbands who have cheated account for, according to some studies, more than half of all married men. There are still many who don’t, but according to my observations, do you know one of the reasons for this? Because a good portion of these men rarely, if ever, find themselves in situations where they easily can.

As non-celebrity, non-pro athlete civilians, we tend to live relatively mundane lives. When the most handsome, dapper, and suave among us strolls into a crowded Starbucks, he does not elicit a crowd of adoring women. At best, he may catch a glance or perhaps even a quick smile. Even the most genial and polished of men are very rarely able to parlay this type of interaction into a situation where the acquisition of latex is highly recommended.

Now imagine that you are an astronomically wealthy, young, athletic, and overwhelmingly popular and adored mega-celebrity. Your work leads you to travel more often than you are able to stay at home. Inevitably, you are going to be sought out by and find yourself in the vicinity of continuous bevies of attractive to “forgive me father for I have sinned” types of stunningly beautiful women, whether you choose to do so or not.

How then does a man like Tiger Woods, along with the baggage of his conditioned behavior described above, navigate through a near daily, unending stream of adoring women who would like nothing better than to get their hands, and other parts, on his, uh...driver?

I feel sincerely sorry for Elin Nordegren and other spouses of the blinged and notable who have found themselves on the disconsolate side of an adulterous affair. She doesn’t deserve that. I’m not condoning or excusing what happened and I certainly am not endorsing adultery.

I’m just wondering why we would expect anything different from someone at Tiger Woods’ station in life. It would almost be unnatural.

Why Floyd Mayweather Will Beat Manny Pacquiao

Alan Thomson — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:51:41 -0500

For several months now, ever since the realistic possibility of a Manny Pacquiao vs. Floyd Mayweather fight had begun to loom, I’ve been sifting my brain to try to determine who I thought would win.

And for the majority of that time, the winner has seemed about as clear to me as what may have transpired between Tiger Woods, the fire hydrant, his wife, and the golf club at 2:25 am that November morning in Orlando.

But take heart my fellow boxing fans, for I have, at long last, projected a winner. And Floyd be thy name.

While I am quite aware that somewhere on the order of ninety-two million Filipinos and a respectably large segment of Western society will disagree with me, they will not change my mind.

Few fighters in pugilistic history have gone on more of a roll than the one on which Manny Pacquiao now finds himself. He has been annihilating some of the best boxers in the world.

He made Oscar De la Hoya look like a fraternity pledge going through a hazing. And what he did to Ricky Hatton was plain obscene. It should have been televised on Cinemax during the wee hours of the morning in place of the softcore porn which normally airs there.

After a competitive first five rounds, which also happened to include two knockdowns by Manny, he found his rhythm and proceeded to tyrannize Miguel Cotto, adding a couple of complimentary new tatts to the face of his heavily tattooed adversary in the process.

Mayweather’s ascent to the top of the pound-for-pound charts was not nearly as abrupt or dazzling as was the Pac Man’s. After a virtuoso performance against undefeated Diego Corrales in 2001, a fight that many experts had picked Corrales to prevail in, he simply kept winning. And he did so almost always quite convincingly against a healthy sized collection of high quality opponents.

He really hasn’t been in a tightly contested fight since facing Jose Luis Castillo twice in 2002. His win over De la Hoya was by split decision, but there are few, if any, people outside of East L.A. who felt that Oscar won.

Floyd started out slowly, surveying his opponent while taking little risk, as Floyd tends to do, and slowly dialed up the thermostat, counterpunching and potshotting Oscar into abandoning his strategy along with his WBC belt.

And most recently, little Floyd masterfully dominated Juan Manual Marquez, a fighter whom Pacquiao had monumental issues dealing with in two bouts, which resulted in a draw followed by a disputed win.

Looking at the common opponents of Money and the Pac Man, the aforementioned De la Hoya and Marquez, it is difficult to get any insight into predicting a winner. The common opponents theory is known, even by casual fans of the sport, to have little relevance in determining fight outcomes.

The saying that “styles make fights”, although old and worn, is probably the truest axiom in the business. This is precisely why I’m picking Floyd to win the fight. Not only does he have the style known to give Manny fits, but also the speed and ring savvy to execute it like no other.

Attempting to beat Pacquiao by standing and boxing with him, as De la Hoya and Cotto aspired to do, is about as promising as the hope that the Browns will be playing the Rams in the upcoming Super Bowl. He’s just too quick and capable of throwing powerful shots from unusual angles.

Trying to pressure and brawl with him is about as smart a bet as Lamar Odom and Khloe Kardashian making it to their golden anniversary. Ask Ricky Hatton, assuming that he has regained any memory of the fight, his nationality, or his name after the epic smackdown the Pac Man laid on him.

What type of style does it take to deal with the Filipino superstar? That of a sharpshooting counter-puncher. This is the style of Juan Manuel Marquez, whom many feel beat Pacquiao in their last fight. It is also the style of Mr. Floyd “Money” Mayweather, Jr. And no one is better or quicker at it than he.

Pacquiao’s M.O. is to attack. And he does so in a very skillful and slick manner, using in-and-out as well as side-to-side movement while throwing sharp, fast punches at times from nearly inconceivable angles.

Even a fighter with the appalling quickness and defensive skills as Mayweather would have difficulty attempting to trade hands with Pacquiao. But Floyd doesn’t trade. Never has.

His game is to use his prodigious foot speed to stay out of harm’s way, spot openings, and fire lightning-quick, accurate, and precisely timed shots and then move away again until he recognizes the next opportunity.

Marquez found quite a few of those opportunities. Floyd will find more. There exists a gaping difference in speed and defensive ability between Floyd and Marquez, as exhibited during their recent fight.

One could argue that Manny has improved since his last fight with Marquez nearly two years ago. I don’t disagree. Were they to fight for a third time, Pacquiao would be an ample favorite and deservedly so. Even so, for the first five rounds of their fight, Cotto got to Manny. And he got to him often.

Mayweather, a faster and more skilled fighter with a proven style for making life difficult for Pacquiao, is going to get to him more often and for a longer stretch of the fight.

But in order to pull this off, Floyd will have to remain vigilant and on the move for the entire fight.

He will sometimes allow his opponents to get close to him and then depend on his considerable defensive skills to evade their punches at close range. He will relax to the point that the opponent will cross midfield, but he’ll be damned if he’s going to let them into the red zone, let alone the end zone.

I don’t see this working effectively against Manny. His hands are too quick, and he punches at such befuddling angles. If you let the Pac Man cross midfield, he’s got the skills to make it into the end zone.

But Floyd has always been prepared for his opponents. I have yet to see him gassed or unable to maintain his distance for the full 12 rounds. And when he has been determined to make a statement, he has tended to do so emphatically.

Considering the skill of Pacquiao, I don’t see an emphatic win for Mayweather. I’m predicting a victory by close decision in a fight that will have its share of shifting tides and in which Floyd will get hit far more than he ever has in any of his previous fights.

Ultimately, I see Floyd’s movement, timing and hand speed overcoming Manny’s quick-handed, sharp punching attacking style.

We may never find out what happened that early morning between Tiger Woods, the fire hydrant, his wife, and the golf club. But come fight night, the real pound-for-pound king will be revealed.

Either way, we’re going to see two all-time greats fighting while still in their respective primes. This is something that happens, on average, less than once a decade, my friends. It doesn’t get any better than this.

White Sox—Orioles: Chicago Power Outage

Alan Thomson — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:44:01 -0400

Jose Contreras got roughed up for the third time in three starts this season, as the White Sox dropped the first of a three-game set to the Orioles 10-3.

Despite a 116-minute rain delay, Orioles pitcher Brad Bergesen pitched well in his major league debut, holding the White Sox to just one earned-run and four hits in five and two thirds innings.

Aubrey Huff began the festivities with a two-run blast in the third inning, the first of his two dingers on the night.

The White Sox tied the score at two in the fourth. RBI singles by Jermaine Dye and Paul Konerko were responsible for the damage.

The Sox took the lead 3-2 on a run scoring ground out by Brian Anderson in the fifth. That lead was short-lived, however, as an RBI double by Nick Markakis, followed by a run-scoring single by Luke Scott put the Orioles ahead for good in the bottom of the fifth.

Contreras got the hook with one out in bottom of the sixth after surrendering another run. Clayton Richard took the bump and promptly gave up an RBI single to Markakis, who ended up four-for-four on the night, making the tally 6-3 in favor of the birds.

The rest was academic.

The White Sox managed only five hits. The main concern is the performance of Contreras, whom the Sox are counting on at the tail end of the rotation.

The good news is that Alexei Ramirez was two-for-four, after having started the season with just five hits in his first 40 at-bats.

Game two of the series is scheduled for Wednesday evening with John Danks slated to face the Orioles Jeremy Guthrie.

Is David Haye All Wrong For Wladimir Klitschko?

Alan Thomson — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:45:42 -0400

There is a scene in the movie Rocky II where Apollo Creed’s trainer, speaking of Balboa, says, “He’s all wrong for us baby. We don’t need no man like that in our lives.”

I wonder if Emanuel Steward or anyone from Universum, Klitschko’s promoter, has uttered, or at least thought, those very same words regarding the quick-handed, hard punching David Haye, Wladimir’s next opponent.

Wlad is widely regarded as the best heavyweight in the division, much to the annoyance of some fans. It’s not so much that they feel Klitschko can’t fight. It’s more about the fact that he doesn’t often do so.

I don’t mean that he doesn’t box frequently enough. He fought three times last year; a goodly amount for a modern heavyweight champ.

The issue is that he is a “safety first” fighter who does everything in his power to avoid having to trade punches with his opponents.

Wladimir’s strategy is consistent. He uses his height and reach advantage to control his opponents with his jab, and then starts dropping right hands on them and occasional hooks when he deems the situation safe to do so. He rarely even goes to the body for fear of leaving his head open to counterpunches.

You can’t fault a fighter for understanding his strengths and weaknesses. Wlad knows who he is in the ring. He is tall and doesn’t have a good chin, so he fights like a guy who is tall and doesn’t have a good chin.

The danger for the good Dr. Steelhammer is that Haye is not the type of fighter who is going to stand on the outside and let himself be controlled. He will take the risk of getting to the inside where he can let his hands go and swing for the parking lot.

Barring a quick KO, at some point Wlad is going to have to fight,and he’s going to taste Haye’s power. They don’t call him “The Hayemaker” without reason. He can bang.

Team Klitschko is no doubt planning to use Haye’s willingness to take risks against him. And at 215 pounds, they see an undersized heavyweight with a suspect chin of his own, having been KO’d by journeyman Carl Thompson.

I have to applaud Wladimir for taking this fight. If he wins, his critics will say that he beat a blown up cruiserweight who had two heavyweight fights under his belt.

And if he loses his critics will lambaste him for losing to a blown up cruiserweight with two heavyweight fights under his belt.

The fight may come down to who has the better chin. Wlad is favored and rightfully so. But he didn’t need to take this fight. Outside of the UK, fans were not clamoring to see it.

Again, kudos to Klitschko for taking the fight. I just wonder if he is miscalculating his risk. As I recall, Creed lost that fight in Rocky II to a man that he “didn’t need in his life.” I wonder whether the Rocky movies ever made it to Ukraine.

The Story of Freddie Roach

Alan Thomson — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:21:14 -0500

Nicknamed “La Cucaracha” for obvious reasons, as well as “The Choir Boy” for less apparent ones, former professional boxer turned trainer Freddy Roach is rolling large and in charge.

The chief cornerman of reigning pound-for-pound monarch Manny Pacquiao, Freddie is one of the best and most sought after trainers in the sport.

But life for the bespectacled pugilistic guru isn’t exactly a dance at the prom. Never has been.

One of seven children of an abusive father, Freddie grew up in the projects of Dedham, Massachusetts. All five boys would become boxers at the behest of their father, former fighter Paul Roach. Paul won the New England featherweight championship in 1947, a title that Freddie would also claim some 32 years later.

Freddie turned pro in 1978 at the age of eighteen. He hung up his trunks for good at age twenty-six after compiling a record of 39-13 with 15 knockouts. Notable names on his resume include Hector Camacho, Greg Haugen and Bobby Chacon. He lost to all three.

He never made much money as a prizefighter. Upon retiring and in need of an income, he went to work as a telemarketer. It wasn’t for him.

The only thing he knew was boxing and he soon found himself back in the gym, this time as an assistant to renowned trainer Eddie Futch who had grown his legend in the corners of fighters such as Joe Frazier, Larry Homes and Ken Norton.

La Cucaracha eventually nailed up his own shingle and currently owns the Wildcard Boxing Club in Los Angeles where he trains Pacquiao and thirteen others.

His client roster has included Oscar De la Hoya, James Toney, Mike Tyson, Michael Moorer, and Bernard Hopkins, among many others.

He has also begun working with mixed martial arts fighters as the boxing trainer to UFC stars Anderson Silva and Andrei Arlovski.

He has trained twenty-two world champions, was named Trainer of the Year in 2003 by the Boxing Writers of America and has been enshrined in the World Boxing Hall of Fame.

And The Choir Boy has happened to make a few denaros along the way as well. His take as Pacquiao's trainer for the De la Hoya fight was reportedly more than a million dollars. And there’s more where that came from.

While it is his boxing background that has led him to his current success and the status which accompanies it, it is that same background which has caused him his greatest suffering. He has Parkinson’s disease, which was caused either fully, or in part, by his life in the ring.

As a result, he has difficulty walking, slightly slurred speech and general physical awkwardness. Medication has helped but he also combats the disease with exercise and a proper diet.

Not only is he a master of fight strategy and preparation, but his battle with Parkinson’s has also made him highly sensitive to the well being of the boxers in his charge. When he sees the signs of impending ring damage in his fighters, he tells them, advises them to seek medical attention and then stops training them.

Life with Parkinson’s is a daily battle for Freddie. But he’s a fighter and always has been. It’s how he was raised.

“Some people look at me and feel sorry for me and I can’t understand it. I love my life,” says Roach.

And judging by the roll he’s on, life apparently loves him as well. Roll on Freddie.

Report: Floyd Mayweather Jr. Coming out of Retirement to Fight Manny Pacquiao

Alan Thomson — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 05:22:02 -0500

Well, it didn’t take long. Floyd Mayweather Jr. appears to be ready to come out of retirement for a crack at Manny Pacquiao.

Floyd Mayweather Sr., along with other members of the Mayweather clan, is quoted in the Grand Rapids Press as saying that little Floyd wants to be the next in line for Pacquiao and that he wants his sometimes estranged father to train him.

There is also an unsubstantiated report that Manny Pacquiao has also been quoted by a newspaper in the Philippines as saying that he has heard from Team Mayweather and that Floyd is ready to come out of retirement and get down to some business with the Pac-Man.

So will the dream matchup actually occur? Well, anyone who has been a fan of professional boxing long enough can tell you that not all rumors of this variety end up panning out.

Floyd Jr. has long had a jagged relationship with his father and until the words actually come out of the mouth on the face of the Pretty Boy himself, I’m going to contain my excitement.

Should the bout take place, details would, of course, have to be worked out. Freddy Roach has previously stated that should it occur, he would want it at a catch weight, somewhere between 140 and 147 pounds. Floyd is likely to seek agreement for a 147-pound limit.

There would also be dollar issues to contend with.

In the meantime, I’m not going to get too excited until I hear something more concrete. But I would be lying if I said that this isn't the fight, more than any other, that I would love to see.

And we can always hope, can’t we?

The Legacy Of Oscar De La Hoya

Alan Thomson — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:34:40 -0500

I have a friend whom I recently found out had somehow never managed to see the movie Office Space. As a cult classic with a huge and loyal following among his demographic, I took it upon myself to enlighten and educate the lad by giving him a copy of the DVD.

The next time I saw him, I asked how he had liked it and his response was that it wasn’t a great movie but it sure was entertaining. In other words, it won’t go down in history as one of the best of all-time but it was enjoyable to watch.

Such is the legacy of Oscar De la Hoya.

He never beat a great fighter who was in his prime. But it wasn’t for lack of trying. He spent a career seeking out the biggest names and the best fighters.

He went up in weight to challenge Bernard Hopkins and came down to fight Manny Pacquiao. He also tussled with the likes of Floyd Mayweather, Felix Trinidad and Shane Mosley while all were undefeated and at the top of their respective games.

The biggest names on the win side of his resume came against sub-prime versions of Julio Cesar Chavez and Pernell Whitaker. Both were at least thirty-five years-old at the time of the fight. The same age that Oscar checked in at for his matchup against Manny Pacquiao, strangely enough.

De la Hoya also won his share of fights against some quality competition.

He steamrolled Rafael Ruelas, Jesse James Leija and unbeaten Genaro Hernandez. He impounded the WBC welterweight title from undefeated, hard punching Ike “Bazooka” Quartey in a dramatic battle. And he has TKO victories over both Fernando Vargas and Ricardo Mayorga.

Contrary to what some are saying about the latter part of his career, it was never about money for De la Hoya. It's been a long time since he's been short on cash. You won’t see him standing on a corner with a tin cup and a monkey anytime soon.

Oscar sought greatness in the ring. His quest was to go down in history. Hence the two fights against the best pound-for-pound fighters in the sport in Mayweather and Pacquiao.

Professional prizefighting is a mix of both sporting competition and show business. On the sporting side of the equation, Oscar will probably be remembered as being a good notch or so below great. On the show business side however, he was the greatest of his era.

In the big picture, that’s not such a bad place to be.

What's Next for Manny Pacquiao After Downing Oscar De La Hoya?

Alan Thomson — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 04:35:11 -0500

Many people felt that for Manny Pacquiao to beat Oscar De La Hoya, it would take a feat so amazing that the fight was better suited to be held under a circus big top than in a traditional boxing venue.

So if you’re Pacquiao and you have just leap-frogged two weight classes to not only defeat The Golden Boy but completely dominate and dismantle him, where do you go from here?

The answer, of course, is anywhere you want to.

Pacquiao began the year as a 130-pound super-featherweight before moving up to 135-pounds to win the WBC lightweight championship. The win over De La Hoya now establishes him as a legitimate force in the 147-pound welterweight division.

The fact that he can fight and win in so many divisions leaves him with an awful lot of options. And as a huge pay-per-view draw, he offers an enormous payday for whoever climbs through the ropes to square off against him.

He didn’t simply beat De La Hoya. He knocked him off his perch as the hottest commodity in the sport.

What then is the next logical move for Manny? Does he return to lightweight and try to unify the title against triple-belt holder Nate Campbell? Does he make a third fight with Juan Manuel Marquez after his recent narrow and controversial decision win over him?

Or does he do what many expect and go after Ricky Hatton at junior-welterweight? This would be a classic match-up, with two very aggressive and offensive minded fighters banging away at each other.

Another option would be to remain at welterweight and hunt for large prey. But how would he fare against the likes of tall, steamrolling, titanium jawed Antonio Margarito?

Paul Williams has voiced his desire to slip back down to welterweight should an opportunity present itself. But is Pacquiao game to get after it with a six-foot-one inch southpaw?

Miguel Cotto is another option at some point as well. And of course there is young, fast WBC champion Andre Berto.

When you’ve reached the station in professional boxing that Pacquiao has, tradition and business sense dictate that you take the biggest money fights possible, against the best known fighters out there.

At this point, Ricky Hatton, still enjoying his victory lap after throttling Paulie Malignaggi, seems to be the candidate that best fits that description.

For now, no one knows in which direction Manny will decide to wander. But it you’re Pacquiao, it sure must feel good to have all of that open road.

I don’t know that Manny Pacquiao is the best fighter from junior-lightweight all the way through welterweight, but I do know one thing: he's no circus act.

MLB Winter Meetings: What's The Deal?

Alan Thomson — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:14:35 -0500

Ever since I was a kid I’ve wondered what exactly the deal was with the baseball winter meetings. Yeah, I know that it’s where GMs get together to discuss trades and meet with players’ agents and whatnot.

I guess I just never quite understood why the meetings were necessary.

The other fifty-one weeks out of the year, deals are made just fine over the phone. Is there something about Walt Jocketty being able to gaze into the eyes of Dave Dombrowski when discussing a deal that somehow adds to the transaction?

I keep trying to get a picture in my mind of how exactly things happen there. For example, what is the format? Is it like GM speed dating?

“Hi. I’m Brian Cashman. I’m looking for a starting pitcher to spend the next seven years with. I enjoy fastballs, sinkers and sliders. I offer a fat wallet, a brand new home to play in and all the media attention a person could ever want.”

Or is it less formal?

Will Jim Hendry just happen to bump into Kevin Towers in the Bellagio lobby where they’ll decide to catch a show, play a few slots and end up at a strip club talking about Jake Peavy while getting lap dances? Talk about a man thinking about baseball in order to keep his mind preoccupied.

And how must Scott Boras feel?

Does he slink about with his hand over his drink so no one drops something unmentionable into it? I can just see him sitting there as a couple of nearby GMs try to control their laughter while another strolls by and flips him off behind his back.

Although you do have to admire Boras’ ability to inflate the asking price of his players so high that when they are finally signed, for less money than his original demand but still far more than they’re worth, GMs are left feeling as though they’ve gotten a four-hour prostate exam, but at a bargain price.

And why are this year’s meetings being held in Las Vegas, by the way? What kind of message does that send to fans, children and Pete Rose?

Of course the biggest star of the 2008 meetings is C.C. Sabathia, who is still dragging his feet over whether to accept the Yankees offer. Apparently a $140 million contract is not something a fellow haphazardly rushes into.

And then there is Manny Ramirez, who, by the way, happens to be represented by Boras, waiting for the call that his four-year, $100 million contract is inked and awaiting his signature.

What must that relationship be like, I wonder, with Manny being Manny and Scott being Scott?

Although as Manny’s agent, when negotiating on his behalf, Scott has to be Scott being Manny. Scratch that. Scott being Scott has to be Scott being Scott being Manny being Manny. Is it even possible to measure the beastliness of such a creature?

At least with the meetings taking place in Las Vegas there is hope that a couple of fun stories will emerge.

Perhaps Drayton McLain will gamble away his ownership stake in the Astros to Peter Magowan. Or maybe Omar Minaya will get caught slipping down to the sportsbook to lay a bundle on his team to win the Series, just before announcing the signing of C.C. Sabathia, Manny Ramirez and Mark Teixeira.

To be honest, I don’t really care whether Major League Baseball has its winter meetings or not. I’m still not convinced of their necessity, but they do tend to make for some interesting reading.

Cristobal Arreola vs David Haye: Who Would Win?

Alan Thomson — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:27:26 -0500

The best American heavyweight versus the best British heavyweight. Two fighters who enter the ring with the same intentions—to seek and destroy.

What would make this fight so compelling is that both men have huge power and are not without their defensive flaws.

Apologies to my British friends, but Haye can be a bit wild with his punches. And sorry my American compatriots but Arreola is defensively challenged. He is about as evasive as a lamppost.

And raw power mixed with openings created by either wildness or lack of movement adds up to a knockout.

Both men have good boxing skills honed in notable amateur careers. Haye was a silver medalist at the World Amateur Boxing Championships in 2001 where, after giving Cuban legend Odlanier Solis a standing eight count, lost via third round TKO.

For those unfamiliar with Solis, he is an Olympic gold medalist and three-time world amateur champion who has never lost in any type of world tournament.

Arreola had an amateur career consisting of approximately 200 fights and won the U.S. National Golden Gloves tournament in 2001.

So who would win?

Arreola, despite the fact that he gets hit early and often, is like a freight train that never stops coming. He absorbs punishment and finds a way to dole it back out. He is 26-0 as a pro with 23 knockouts. Actually only one of his bouts has even gone to a decision, and that was fifteen fights ago. His other two wins were by disqualification.

But he’s never faced anyone with the combination of quickness and power that Haye possesses.

Haye has used his hand speed and sharp, powerful punching to knock out 21 of his 23 opponents. His lone loss was by TKO to 40-year old Carl Thompson as a Cruiserweight back in 2004. After unloading everything he had on Thompson’s head for nearly five rounds, Thompson turned the tide and began battering Haye, causing his corner to throw in the towel near the end of the round.

So the questions are, would Arreola be able to withstand the quicker Haye’s assault until he could land meaningful punches of his own? And if and when he did, how would Haye react to them?

This is a fight that’s almost too close to call. It may come down to who has the tougher beard.

My feeling is that, in a fight resembling a World War II tank battle, Haye would be just a bit too quick for Arreola to deal with. I can’t imagine this fight going the distance, so after dealing with some adversity, I see Haye winning by stoppage sometime in the middle rounds.

But when two bombers like these step into the ring, anything could happen.

And I sure would like to see it if it does.

Rating the Best Players in the NBA: Nene Hilario #1?

Alan Thomson — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:20:25 -0500

Okay, I may have been out of line with that headline about Nene Hilario being the best player in the NBA.

But at this point in the season, he is the league's most-efficient scorer.

Granted, not only does being the most-efficient scorer not make you the best player in the league, it doesn’t necessarily even make you one of its better offensive players.

There can be some serious cleavage between being efficient and being good. Unless you are of the opinion that Tyson Chandler was the second-best offensive player in the league last season.

I sometimes take heat from other NBA fans regarding the weight that I give to field-goal percentage in assessing performance. “Field-goal percentage is only a part if it.” they say, “There are also rebounding, assists, turnovers, and steals to consider when doing a statistical evaluation.”

I completely agree. Except at the end of the day, if a team can’t put the ball through the hole they are not going to win. Not very often at least.

Two STATS studies, covering the 1992-1994 and 1998-2002 NBA seasons, concluded that field-goal percentage was the singlemost-important statistic in winning games. Both studies found that the team that shot the higher field-goal percentage had won the game 78.7 percent of the time. I stand by my assertion that making shots matters. A lot.

Simply looking at the stats and seeing that a particular player’s shooting percentages are .421 overall and .401 from three-point land, for example, can be misleading. On the surface, it might seem that he’s pretty lame in two-point range but is the shiznit from downtown.

But if, say, fifty-eight percent of his shots had come from beyond the arc, he is a very efficient shooter. If he can knock down treys at a .401 clip, that is the equivalent of shooting .6015 from two-point range, accounting for the fact that a trey is worth fifty-percent more than a two-point shot. (I am using the actual shooting stats from Raja Bell’s 2007-08 season.)

There is a statistic called Adjusted Field-Goal Percentage (AFG%) which accounts for the extra value of a three-pointer by giving them a 50-percent greater value than two-pointers. This is the category in which Nene Hilario leads the league, although Nene is not a three-point shooter. He just makes an awful lot of his two-point shots. Raja’s AFG% was .538 in ‘07-08, making him one of the top shooters in the league.

As an example, let's say that Hilario shot six for 10 in a given game and that all were two-pointers. His field-goal percentage would be .600. And suppose Raja Bell was also six for 10 but two of his field goals were three-pointers and four were two-pointers. His field goal percentage would also be .600.

But because of the three-pointers, he scored more points, so he deserves more credit.

So you would add four for the two-pointers and three (two three-pointers multiplied by 1.5) to get a total of seven. So he effectively shot seven for 10, and his AFG% would be .700.

But is this the best way of determining who the best offensive player is? Kobe Bryant had an AFG% of .503 last season. Does that make Raja Bell a more effective scorer that the Kobester? And how do guys like Tyson Chandler fit into the discussion?

Let’s start with Chandler. He posted a .623 AFG% last season with an 11.8 ppg average. Is he efficient? Indubitably. Is he a good shooter? Hardly. So is he effective? Yes, but in a very limited capacity.

He is an opportunistic scorer. He gets a very high percentage of his hoops on dunks, put-backs and at very close range. He is not proficient at creating shot opportunities for himself, so attempting to get him more involved in the Hornets' offense would result in a drastic reduction in his AFG% and therefore his effectiveness.

There are some players who are only effective at close range, but capable of creating opportunities for themselves. Shaq is legendary for doing this. He was an offensive superhero, averaging 27.6 points while shooting an AFG% of .577 through the first eleven years of his career.

The only players who come anywhere close to this combination of production and efficiency today are Amare Stoudemire (25.2 ppg / .592 AFG% in ’07-08) and Dwight Howard (20.7 ppg / .599 AFG% in ’07-08).

Stoudemire is most impressive in the fact that he also has a good mid-range jump shot. Although when you’re Dwight Howard and can pretty much dunk from mid-range, who needs a jumper?

Since opportunistic scoring of the Tyson Chandler variety can’t be manufactured, teams must ultimately be proficient at creating scoring opportunities.

Yes, ball movement often creates good looks for shooters. And in a well-balanced offense, this is where guys like Ray Allen, Peja Stojakovic, and Raja Bell come up huge.

But a significant enough percentage of the time, good opportunities don’t present themselves in the flow of the offense. A team’s center can’t get great position on the block or a stingy defense prevents an open look or good penetration. This is where guys like Kobe and LeBron excel. It’s what makes them great.

They are go-to guys. And go-to guys have to consistently create opportunities when none can be found. Yeah, they get their share of open looks and transition buckets, but they are as valuable as they are because of their ability to manufacture.

The yearly league average AFG% for teams tends to fall right around 49 percent. If all opportunistic and open-shot scoring were to be eliminated, this percentage would drop dramatically. So to have a guy like Kobe who can create shots and score 28.3 ppg at a .503 AFG% clip is huge.

It was surpassed only by Stoudemire and LeBron James—who put up 30.0 ppg with an AFG% of .518.

So, as in many other cases, statistics alone don’t tell the whole story. Who the best scorers and players in the league are is always subject to debate. Looking at the combination of Adjusted Field-Goal Percentage and offensive production, while also considering the more qualitative factors is one approach in determining a player’s quality.

And just for fun, here’s a look at the top AFG% for players for the current season, by position, as well as a few notable players:

Point Guard:

1. Steve Nash 15.1 ppg .584 AFG%

2. Mike Bibby 16.2 .575

3. Nate Robinson 14.5 .552

4. Steve Blake 11.5 .550

5. Tony Parker 23.1 .549

Shooting Guard:

1. Delonte West 11.4 ppg .606 AFG%

2. Ray Allen 18.4 .579

3. Roger Mason 14.3 .574

4. Raja Bell 10.2 .559

5. Mike Miller 11.5. .554

Small Forward:

1. John Salmons 19.2 ppg .542 AFG%

2. Trevor Ariza 9.9 .540

3. Danny Granger 24.4 .533

4. Thaddeus Young 14.1 .528

5. C.J. Miles 10.7 .526

Power Forward:

1. Boris Diaw 8.2 ppg .581 AFG%

2. Amare Stoudemire 22.1 .572

3. Carlos Boozer 20.5 .559

4. Pau Gasol 17.4 .556

5. David Lee 14.4 .554

Center:

1. Nene Hilario 15.2 ppg .642 AFG%

2. Shaquille O’Neal 14.9 .599

3. Dwight Howard 21.5 .593

4. Emeka Okafor 11.7 .574

5. Chris Kaman 13.9 .571

Notables:

LeBron James 27.4 ppg .519 AFG%

Kobe Bryant 25.1 .497

Dwyane Wade 28.4 .512

Tracy McGrady 15.6 .459

Allen Iverson 17.9 .436

Paul Pierce 18.6 .458

Chris Paul 20.6 .541

Tim Duncan 20.9 .516

Kevin Garnett 16.5 .511

Yao Ming 18.2 .516

Chicago Cubs 2008 Season In Brief Review

Alan Thomson — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:58:55 -0500

What words does one begin with when attempting to sum up the Cubs 2008 season?

“Ay Carumba” seems appropriate. “Oy vey” works nicely.

I can think of a few others, although they might land on the wrong side of the foul pole of the editorial guidelines of this site.

Perhaps a humorous approach would be best: “The Cubs arouse fans, then go limp and end up losing their Woody.”

Unfortunately I don’t think Cub fans’ sense of humor is going to even start to kick back in until sometime after the all-star break. And that’s only if they’re winning.

The one sentence that I am not going to use is “Wait 'til next year.” I think we’ve all been walked down that plank just a few too many times.

Well, we all know what happened, so in order to avoid a painful, drawn out recap, here it is in nutshell:

Dempster came out of nowhere
Fukudome disappeared out of sight
Zambrano was all over the place

Hill lost control
Harden was in total command
Lou won the award for taking charge

DeRosa broke out
Soriano broke down
Someone broke a water pipe

Samardzija was called up
Fukudome got sat down
Woody’s been sent away

Soto was great
The all-stars numbered eight
Once again the same old fate

That’s all I’ve got Cub fans. See you in April.

Wladimir Klitschko vs Hasim Rahman: Analysis and Prediction

Alan Thomson — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 07:07:37 -0500

Trying to predict the winner of a Wladimir Klitschko fight has never been the easiest thing to do. As a fighter whose technical skills are superior to all of his opponents and who has consistently enjoyed a height and reach advantage, all signs have invariably pointed to him having the edge over his adversary.

And fifty-one out of fifty-four times in his career, those advantages have carried him to victory. But I, like many boxing fans, seem to have a difficult time eradicating myself of visions of the Ukrainian Dr. Steelhammer on the seat of his shorts as the result of fist-missiles launched by the likes of Corrie Sanders, Lamon Brewster, Samuel Peter, and a fighter named Ross Purity early in his career.

Granted, he avenged his TKO loss to Lamon Brewster with a dominating TKO of his own. And although his backside sampled the canvas three times against Peter, he won the decision. And the Ross Purity thing was a decade ago and was more the result of him having expended too much energy early and running his fuel tank dry by the eleventh round.

I just don’t seem to be able to convince myself that the good Dr. Steelhammer has been cured of his ailing chin. But with his last loss by KO coming nearly five years ago, I sometimes wonder if I’m being unfair. So while I continually pick him to win his fights, I wouldn’t want to put my money down on him.

And with visions of boxing bums dancing in my head (no, I don’t think that either fighter is a bum. I just couldn’t resist the line, what with it being the holiday season and all), that brings me to Hasim Rahman.

Rahman has spent his share of time curled up on the canvas bed himself. Oleg Maskaev recently rocked him to sleep for the second time in their rematch two years ago. Prior to that he went out horizontally against both Lennox Lewis and David Tua.

Although The Rock is not without boxing skills, he is seriously overmatched in that department by Klitschko. While he’s had thee TKO wins in his last three official fights, they came against opponents by the names of Dicky Ryan, Cerrone Fox and Zuri Lawrence.

Wlad, for his part, has been on stage with a more talented cast consisting of Ray Austin, Lamon Brewster and undefeated fighters Calvin Brock and Sultan Ibragimov, as well as once beaten Tony Thompson. All but Ibragimov exited stage left via TKO.

I see Klitschko winning the fight in standard-issue Wladimir beatdown fashion. Outside of his KO of Lewis in 2001, Rahman hasn’t beaten a major name in the division. And at 36 years-old, I just don’t think he has the speed or the game to contend with Wlad.

Look for Klitschko to dominate with the jab from the opening bell, begin to work power punches in as he starts to get comfortable and then dismiss the crowd sometime in the middle rounds.

Baseball, Steroids & the Conscience of America

Alan Thomson — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 05:17:53 -0500

The cork is out of the bottle so to speak.

The Mitchell Report was the official declaration that performance enhancing drugs have infiltrated Major League Baseball on a mass scale. Commissioner Bud Selig and baseball’s powers that be have shifted into full crisis management mode, attempting to minimize the steroid related spillage and restore their venerable product’s reputation.

In any other sport, this would not be the public relations nightmare that it is. Baseball, however, like no other sport, is held to the loftiest of standards by both its fans and sportswriters.

The reason for the collective outrage over the steroid flap is the very reason that baseball will survive: Baseball is a brand that is inextricably connected to the conscience of America.

Performance-enhancing drugs are known to be rampant in sports, both amateur and professional, and have been for quite a number of years. Athletes from virtually every sport imaginable have tested positive for steroids including tennis players, swimmers and yes, even a ping pong player back in 2003.

Yet, until it had crossed inside the foul lines of the baseball diamond, it somehow seemed to be taken in stride by the public, the writers and sports fans in general. Tennis is as popular as ever, the retirement of Anna Kournikova notwithstanding.

We still tune into the Olympics every fourth year and root for our shower-capped compatriots to dominate the pool and win the gold.

As for ping pong, I doubt that there are any fewer basements with a folded up ping pong table wedged into a corner as the result of any failed drug tests.

Granted, tennis, swimming and ping pong are not exactly the staples of American sports. But even when compared to the other major sports, baseball is looked at through a different set of sports goggles.

It’s almost as though no one has ever turned on a television set on a blustery Sunday afternoon in the fall. Isn’t it obvious that perhaps some of these football playing 340-pound lineman and running backs with biceps the size of Barry Bonds now infamous head have been fed something a bit more potent than corn?

Yet, the masses remain unvexed. Not so when it comes to baseball. Baseball carries with it its own yardstick.

Why is baseball held to a higher standard than any of the other major American sports?

Basketball certainly doesn’t want for fan sentimentality, but it lacks baseball’s illustrious heritage. Football is smash mouth; it is without baseball’s inherent aura of innocence. It is where we go for three hours on shivery Sunday afternoons to rant and rave and let loose of the angst that we have accrued throughout the week.

Hockey is more of a northern U.S. and even Canadian sport. And soccer is...well, soccer.

Baseball is an extremely unique brand that represents something much deeper than athletes gallivanting across a field, tossing a ball about.

In order to understand what a brand represents, we need to understand its history. Baseball is a rare commodity in that it doesn’t just have a history. It is a part of history. It is Babe Ruth and Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle.

It has served as a crutch that helped the nation through the Great Depression, World War II, and Vietnam. No matter what the circumstance, through our darkest hours, there stood the boys of summer, pinstriped and existing in a seemingly magical world where grown men could play a boys game.

And on Sept. 25, 2001, exactly two weeks after the attack on the World Trade Center, the Yankees returned home to Yankee Stadium for one of the most emotional nights in not just the history of sports, but perhaps in recent American history as well.

The nation watched as members of the New York police and fire departments joined the players on the field in a tearful pregame ceremony, an enormous American flag covering the outfield. Baseball is quintessential America.

Now, as the result of its players having used illegal performance enhancers, baseball and the American conscience have taken a hit. Throughout history there have been many issues which have hit at the conscience of America, yet we persevere. What sustains us as a nation is our heritage, our history.

So it shall be with Major League Baseball. Its history is our history. The goodwill of its brand is rooted in the history of the goodwill of a nation. This is a type of brand equity that other business entities can only dream of. Rather than simply resting on its legacy, that legacy must be heavily promoted, at least until the crisis blows over and becomes footnoted as the “steroid era” of baseball.

Just as the nation has leaned on baseball in its times of trial, baseball now leans on the nation. But not to worry. Baseball and the nation are one and the same. People just need to be reminded. Nothing that some quality PR work can’t handle.

Yank vs. Brit Boxing Fans: What's All The Fighting About?

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:15:53 -0500

Despite rumors (or shall I say rumours?) to the contrary, apparently all of the major disputes between the Yanks and the Brits were not settled with the Treaty of Paris.

Certain boxing websites, blogs and forums have grown rife with animosity between fans domiciled on both the east and west ends of the Atlantic.

One doesn’t have to search these places very long before encountering a Brit who views Yanks as rude, arrogant sods who stop spewing verbal rubbish only long enough to stuff another hamburger into their fat faces.

And at least a few Americans view their British counterparts as either obtuse, insular blokes “hanging on in quiet desperation” as the mighty Floyd once proclaimed, or pub dwelling, perpetually pissed (we in the States have an entirely different meaning for that word) miscreants possessing all of the social graces of John Lydon circa 1977.

The apparent cause of the vitriol seems to be the perceived disrespect of British boxers shown by some American bloggers and writers. The Americans, for their part, feel the Brits to be too thin skinned regarding their fighters, unable to swallow even the least bit of criticism as well as demonstrating an anti-American attitude in general.

I have to agree that indeed some of these American “writers” seem to exist for the sole purpose of getting under the skin of British fans by trashing their fighters. At the same time, if the Brits better understood the culture of American sports fans, they would probably be less likely to take offense to the more reasonable criticisms made by legitimate American writers.

As a long time boxing fan from America who has only recently been exposed to my fellow British fans en masse, I was quite surprised to find this “Yank versus Brit” sniping occurring.

I was surprised because here in the States, among my many friends and acquaintances, I have yet to hear a single word of anti-British sentiment. My hand to God. I cross my heart. On my grandmother’s grave. Not a word.

Of course, in the arenas on fight night where national anthems are being played and booed, flags are being waved and songs are being sung and shouted down, it is a different story. I’ve been to fights like this. It is a two-way street. Fans from both camps tend to become very vocal and nationalistic.

Of my American friends and acquaintances, more than half were pulling for Calzaghe to beat Hopkins and all but one wanted Hatton to lump Mayweather – and he was from Floyd’s hometown. Floyd’s skills are revered in the States but his attitude is generally loathed.

The rubbish that is being strewn toward British fighters by some of these American so called “writers” is exactly that - complete rubbish. The talentless hacks who write this nonsense are generally identifiable by their inability to string two coherent sentences together.

They are not legitimate writers, journalists or spokesmen for American boxing fans. They are a small but irritatingly vocal minority who apparently have nothing better to do than rabble rouse within the safety of cyberspace. Unfortunately ignorance and stupidity are not constrained by nationality, creed or gender.

That being said, American fans and sportswriters tend to be very demanding. They have a “show me” attitude. There is very little coddling of American boxers in the States. If someone is touted as an up and coming fighter, he had better perform like one because if he shows any flaws the fans and writers will let his shortcomings be known.

Oscar de la Hoya, a U.S. Olympic gold medalist, had his abilities as a fighter continually questioned well into his professional career. Jermain Taylor, another U.S. Olympic medalist, even after having beaten Bernard Hopkins twice was relentlessly criticized in defeating Kassim Ouma and Cory Spinks.

For better or worse, this is American sports culture. The bar is set high and fans demand top-notch performance. They’ve done it to the most beloved of American fighters, they did it to Lennox Lewis and now they’re doing it to Joe Calzaghe, Ricky Hatton and David Haye.

Lewis cleaned out the heavyweight division, redeemed himself from a couple of mental lapses and is now somewhat of an icon in the States.

Calzaghe is much respected in the U.S. as a truly gifted fighter. Unfortunately, until a couple of years ago his fights had rarely been shown on American television. And American fans are used to seeing more of a fighter before enshrining him into their psyches as a true legend of the ring. They adore their legends but need to have their inherent doubts erased before knighting one.

Which brings us to one of the main debates regarding Calzaghe. The mentality in the States leans toward the idea that the fighter who either wears the belts or sits atop the pound for pound list is the man and all others are challengers who need to come to them in order to present their challenge.

If a fighter wants to be known as the best he must seek out the best at whatever cost necessary to make the fight happen.

Hence the ongoing sniping over whether Calzaghe ducked Jones or vice versa. The truth is that Joe didn’t duck Roy. They never fought due to business reasons. Joe was raking in the cash filling seats in the UK and Roy, as pound for pound king, didn’t feel the need to leave the continent to fight in anyone’s backyard.

So among educated U.S. fans, the feeling is that Calzaghe didn’t duck. He just didn’t seek at any cost and as a result we can only be left to speculate as to who would have won.

Today, if anyone wants a piece of Calzaghe, who sits at or near the top of most pound for pound lists, he had better be prepared to fight at Millennium Stadium in Cardiff if that’s where Joe wishes to fight. No one expects Calzaghe to make a pilgrimage to Budapest or Dresden in search of undefeated WBO light-heavy champ Zsolt Erdei.

And if a junior welterweight from the States wants to have a go at Hatton and is not game to jump on a plane, catch a boat with steamer trunk in tow or swim his way to the UK he doesn’t deserve to be granted the challenge. And when he gets there he had better be ready to fight at Wembley, M.E.N. Arena in Manchester or in the alleyway behind Ricky’s favorite pub if necessary.

To that end, if David Haye is expecting to take a crack at one of the Klitschko boys, let’s hope that he’s mapped out his commute to Germany.

Above all else, American sports fans respect quality performance. Professional sports leagues in America have become diversified with foreign talent to the point that fans don’t think twice about it. They shower foreign athletes with both the same criticism and adoration, when earned, as they do American athletes.

The most popular player in the most popular sport in the U.S. in recent years has likely been Ichiro Suzuki, a baseball player from Japan. Germany’s Dirk Nowitzki was voted America’s National Basketball Association’s MVP in 2007.

Americans, the majority of whom are of European descent, are more than willing to embrace British fighters. They just have their methods of scrutinization which apply to all athletes, American and non-American alike.

I don’t suspect that one article is going to stop the bickering. The jackass “writers” who live to slam British fighters will continue to do so. And anti-American sentiment tends to die hard so I assume that I’ll be criticized by some, for one reason or another, as being a “typical Yank”.

I think that people just tend to like to fight. Maybe that’s why we’re all such avid boxing fans. Well, I gave it my best shot. So back to the blogs and forums. And let’s get ready to rumble!

Phil Jackson: The Most Overrated Coach In History?

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:42:06 -0500

How does one go about becoming known as perhaps the greatest coach in NBA history?

Many have aspired to this, but unfortunately there is no book on how to do it. Perhaps Phil Jackson should write one, because it would be impossible to script such a thing any better than what his experience has been.

First you inherit a vastly improving team that has just reached the conference finals. On it you have a young player who is tearing up the league and set to enter his prime years who goes by the name of Michael Jordan.

You also have a dynamo named Scottie Pippin who is about to stake his claim as the most versatile player in the game and one of the fifty greatest of all-time.

You then add to the potpourri a coach already in the team’s employ named Tex Winter, who happens to be the architect of a little known offensive system called "the Triangle".

When speaking to reporters about your players, you use words like “angularity” and “personal actions”. You continually wax philosophical and hand out books about Gandhi and Zen Oneness for your players to read.

After winning six championships with the best duo in the league’s history, an offensive scheme created by an inherited assistant and a whole lot of capable role players, you take a year off.

You decide to return to the league with a team which had finished the previous season with a .620 winning percentage. On it happens to be a player who is as close to unstoppable as anyone who has ever played the game. His name is Shaquille O’Neil. Then add a budding superstar named Kobe Bryant to the mix. Oh yeah, and call your old pal Tex Winter to sit beside you on your fold-up throne.

You snag a few more rings, and after two consecutive years of failing to win another you get run out of town by the team’s superstar.

A year later you’re called back into service with the same team that had hurled you into the alley just 362 days prior. After two seasons of playing barely above .500 your team is in disarray with your superstar player going viral on YouTube where he can be found screaming and pleading to be saved from drowning in the Lake(ers).

Just over halfway through the next season your team is in fifth-place in the conference. You wake up one morning and find Pau Gasol stuffed into your resident Goodwill box and realize that whoever donated him has also hauled away and assumed the nine-million dollar lease on your trash can. You know, the one with the words Kwame Brown stenciled on it.

You go 28-9 the rest of the way, finish with the best record in the conference and once again find yourself in the NBA finals.

So there you have it. Sort of an “Idiot’s Guide to Becoming Known as the Greatest Coach in NBA History” outline.

I live in Chicago and my greatest experiences as a sports fan revolved around the Bulls’ dynasty of the nineties. I’m really not against the Zenmeister. I actually like the guy.

Is it his fault that he was hired to coach the Bulls when he was? Or that the Lakers came calling when they did? What coach in his right mind is going to turn down either one of those gigs?

My point is that to measure him based on his ring collection and career win-loss record is misleading. Does anyone honestly believe that the Bulls would not have won those championships anyway?

And if he had coached any other team during that period, he, in all likelihood, would not have gotten the tap on the shoulder to take over the L.A. Shaqkobes either.

He’s certainly not a bad coach. He does seem to be able to win when he has the best talent to work with and I suppose there is some merit to that. But how much can be told about the skill of a driver who tends to win races when he has the fastest car?

That being said, Red Auerbach had some nice talent to work with as well, although he was a strategic pioneer who changed the way the game is played.

The bottom line is that no coach is going to win without outstanding talent. The best measure of a coach is whether he can make the whole of his team greater than the sum of its parts.

Maybe the best a coach can do in today’s world is to somehow convince his players to play as a team. He seems to have generally been able to do that, Kobe Bryant’s occasional periods of one-on-five play notwithstanding.

He may not be the most overrated coach in sports history but he certainly has lived a charmed life as one.

And don’t look now but his Lakers have the best record in the league.

Whether they have the most talent is debatable.

My First Chicago White Sox Game & the Pee Trough at Old Comiskey Park

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:10:38 -0500

I grew up just outside the southwest side of Chicago. The house that I was raised in contained a total of two television sets.

One was a good sized color set, positioned obligatorily in my parent’s bedroom. The other was a 19" black and white that I shared with three siblings and a grandmother.

Fortunately for me, granny had taken a serious interest in the White Sox and every game that was telecast was proudly displayed in our den in living monochrome.

My first visit to a White Sox game, or any major sporting event for that matter, came when I was 10 years old, at the old Comiskey Park.

It was one of the most memorable days of my youth for a few reasons. Upon entering the park that first time, I encountered my first surprise of the day:

I was immediately struck by the colors I was seeing. Most of the games I had ever seen had been on that old black and white TV. I felt like I had fallen down the rabbit hole into a dimension of psychedelic retinal bliss.

This sensory nirvana even seemed to drown out the fact that the Sox had quickly begun to get drubbed by the Yankees.

Late in the game, after the crowd had become thinner than Ally McBeal, I spotted an opportunity and snuck down to an empty seat just behind the Sox bullpen dugout.

As a relief pitcher who was warming up got called in for mop-up duty, he tossed the ball over the top of the dugout and I caught it. That had been the third surprise of the day.

The second surprise, experienced sometime around the fourth inning, had been just as shocking but not nearly as enjoyable...my first experience at the pee trough.

As I entered the bathroom I immediately halted in my tracks as I caught a glimpse of several grown men standing shoulder to shoulder urinating into what appeared to be a long trough, like the kind that was used to feed horses.

I had never seen or imagined such a thing in my life.

In my limited experience at the time, urinating was in no way a spectator sport. The pee trough had positioned it to become not only a spectator sport, but a contact sport as well and I was terrified.

The only other option was to wait for a stall. Noticing that the line was much too long for my adolescent bladder to hold out on, I wedged myself in between two large scruffy men and proceeded with my business.

Without delving too deeply into the mechanics of the process, suffice it to say that as I was finishing I noticed a small drop of my urine fly up and hit the guy standing to my right on his left cheek, just below his eye. He somehow hadn’t noticed and I decided to slip out of the bathroom before he had time to figure it out.

So that’s the summation of my first experience at a big time sports event. I had seen my first live game, caught a ball, and urinated on a grown man’s face. It had been the greatest day of my life.

Roy Jones' Legacy

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:02:04 -0500

He dominated his sport like few others before him. For a decade he reigned as the best pound for pound fighter in boxing. And for the first 15 years of his career, he rarely lost a round. But since turning 35 years old in 2004, life just hasn’t been the same for old Roy.

He didn’t simply begin to slip down the other side of the hill. He fell into a precipice.

The reason for his sudden demise was the very reason that he had been so great for so long—speed. He had lost it. No, he hadn’t suddenly gotten slow. He remained one of the faster fighters around. But he had drifted back into the range of normal human reflexes, albeit still at the high end.

His foot speed had diminished to the point that he had lost the ability to jump in with lead right hands and hooks and then move out of his opponents’ range, sometimes literally before they knew what had hit them (I had begun to wonder at the time whether HBO would need to upgrade its video equipment from 24 to 32 frames per second in order for fans to actually see him fight).

He had mutated back into normal human form.

He was never a well schooled boxer because he never had to be. His style was centered around his athleticism. Boxing historians are still searching for clues as to whether the words “Roy Jones” and “jab” have ever been used in the same sentence. So when his inhuman speed had forsaken him, he was left as a fighter with very good hand speed, tired legs and mediocre boxing skills. Hence the demise.

Of course prior to this he did manage to accomplish a few things inside the square. Save for a DQ loss to Montell Griffin, he was unbeaten in 49 fights across five weight classes through age 35.

He became the first middleweight since 1897 to have won a heavyweight title after beating John “Is This Guy Ever Gonna Retire?” Ruiz. He beat Bernard Hopkins and James Toney while both were in their prime.

And he did pull off a gutsy win in his first fight against the “legend in his own mouth” Antonio Tarver.

The knock on him is that he was a safety-first fighter. Not only did he not like to take chances inside the ring but he was also a business minded prizefighter who seemed to prefer to maximize his risk/reward ratio by fighting opponents who really didn’t pose much of a threat.

Do the names Richard Frasier, Richard Hall, David Telesco, and Glen Kelly ring a bell? Roy fought all of them while in his prime. Not a one of them won even a single round.

But should this disqualify him from debates by the crusty old, cigar chomping aficionados of the ring as to who were the greatest fighters of all time? I think not.

Sugar Ray Robinson is thought by many to have been the best middleweight in history. But he spent his entire time at middleweight as a 30-plus year old who was not what he had been in his younger, lighter days.

Others believe that Bernard Hopkins is the best. Roy beat him pretty handily. Marvin Hagler and Carlos Monzon tend to get a healthy amount of press as possibly the best ever as well.

At light heavyweight, names like Archie Moore, Billy Conn, and Ezzard Charles are the most frequently mentioned as the greatest ever.

Super middleweight, as a relatively new weight class is not often the subject of debate as to whom its greatest fighter was, although besides Jones, it would be very difficult to make an argument for anyone other than Joe Calzaghe.

In my opinion, you can pick any fighter in history from middleweight through light heavy and I will say that at Roy’s best I would be hard pressed to bet money against him.

Why? Because more than toughness, fundamental skills or possessing a crowd pleasing style, boxing is about hitting and not getting hit. And at his best Roy did that as well or better than anyone. Ever.

So how will Roy Jones Jr. be remembered? Like Michael Jordan, he should be remembered as a great athlete who just happened to stay a little too long at the hookah party.

When people look back on Jordan’s career, I’m certain that virtually all of them will remember him as the “His Airness” of his younger days rather than the nearly 40 year old “Floor Jordan” of his time with the Wizards. Let’s hope that Roy gets the same consideration.

Stephon Marbury: Enigma, Head Case, Philanthropist

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:41:39 -0500

Stephon Marbury reportedly duked it out with his coach on a team flight and later blackmailed that same coach after he had been removed from the starting lineup.

He chose to undergo a season-ending surgery that his team had determined to be unnecessary.

His feuding with another coach, one of the most respected in history, has been cited as one of the reasons for the coach's firing—I'm talking about Larry Brown, not Isaiah Thomas, in case you were wondering—just one season into a five-year deal worth more than $50 million.

He has also fired both of the agents he's had, and now rolls alone in that department.

And when his team had only eight players available for a recent game, he refused to play despite his $21.9 million salary.

Yet he has somehow managed to make The Sporting News' list of "Good Guys in Sports" three times.

Allow me to introduce Stephon Marbury—enigma, head case, philanthropist.

Sure, he has made himself so unwanted that his team would rather eat his mammoth contract than let him play. But believe it or not, off the court he is quite the humanitarian.

In his effort to "change the world," he teamed with Steve & Barry's store to provide affordable but high quality sneakers and clothing. His Starbury basketball sneakers sell for just $14.98 and all items in the Starbury collection sell for the same amount or less.

He hosts an expenses paid four-day camp for underprivileged students which concludes at his house in Maryland.

His Starbury Stars program provides free tickets to every Knicks home game to local youth groups.

He has been spotted dishing out Thanksgiving meals to the needy while his Team Marbury Charitable Foundation also donated 2,000 turkey dinners.

He hosted a Starbury Fantasy Weekend that included youth educational clinics and a fundraiser for which he won an NBA Hometown Hero award.

So in a word, how does one best describe Stephon Marbury? "Dichotomous" certainly comes to mind.

Is his a case of basketball genius and madness? I don't know. But to be honest, I, for one, am willing to accept his basketball-related borderline psychosis in exchange for his off the court generosity.

I wouldn't want him on my team, but I'm glad he's around. You know what I mean?

The NBA: Guys Who Can't Shoot

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:20:55 -0500

When a major league baseball player has 200 hits in a season, there tends to be near unanimous agreement that he is a good hitter. But if it took him 800 at-bats to do so, would people still feel the same as they took note of his .250 batting average?

Since at-bats in baseball are essentially limited, no one bats 800 times during a season. But in the NBA, where there are fewer restrictions on shot attempts, players who are known as good scorers tend to be awarded such accolades based solely on how many points they score, not on the percentage they shoot.

You can take a scrub off of the end of any bench in the NBA and watch him average 20 points a game. The worst of these may shoot a paltry 30 or 35 percent in doing so, but it can almost certainly be done as long as the player is willing to hoist up enough shots.

There are some well known players in the NBA who have reputations as very good players but flat out can’t shoot. And some of their names may come as a surprise:

Allen Iverson – Baseball players have hit for a higher average than “Me, Myself and Iverson” has shot in a season. His worst years have been .387 and .398. He is a career .425 shooter who averages 27.4 points. Averaging 31 points a game in a season is impressive but it becomes less of an accomplishment when you have to chuck up nearly 28 shots a game to do it.

Tracy McGrady – He has never shot over .457 in a season. His career field goal percentage is .437 and his worst years have seen him shoot a sorrowful .417, .406 and .419. Granted, T-Mac’s game is not limited to his shooting. He rebounds at a career 6.1 clip and generally doles out an average of between five and six assists per game. But for $20 million a year, would it kill him to be a bit more mindful of his shot selection?

Jason Kidd – If anyone on the list deserves a pass for poor shooting it’s Jason Kidd. When you can pull a triple double out of your anus, you merit some slack in at least one area. Kidd’s weakness has always been his shooting, at which he is a hideous .402 in his career. He has shot below .400 in six of his fourteen seasons.

Fortunately, he only averages 12.6 shot attempts per game. It’s hard to knock a player the caliber of Kidd but he could pad those assist stats even more if he would skip the open jumper in favor of a pass a few more times a game.

Baron Davis – Another point guard who deserves a degree slack due to his passing ability. He averages 7.3 career assists to Kidd’s 9.2 and also shoots more often than Kidd at 15.0 a game. And he is not nearly the rebounder that Jason is. So his .413 career field goal percentage is less acceptable. Of course his salary is about half of Kidd’s but nevertheless needs to realize that being dissed by the rim doesn’t necessitate retaliation by firing random drive-by shots in its direction.

Jamal Crawford – A shooting guard who can’t shoot is the equivalent of a designated hitter who can’t hit. And Jamal Crawford fits this bill to perfection. He averaged 17.3 PPG in his final season with the Bulls – while shooting an egregious .386. Although Isaiah Thomas never seemed to notice, he didn’t fare much better with the Knicks who wasted no time in trading him once the new administration came to town. He is a career .403 clanker whose shots are beyond bricks. They are more of the cinder block variety.

Derek Fisher – The strange thing about Derek Fisher is not only is he a point guard who can’t shoot, he is a point guard who can’t pass either. His lifetime average of a mere 3.2 assists per game is masked only by his inability to shoot. He is a career .401 from the field. But at least he’s slow.

Honorable Mention:

Larry Hughes – a career .409 shooter who happens to play good defense.

Stephen Jackson – tends too fall in love with the 3 and that has hurt his field goal percentage he's currently at .418 clip.

Antoine Walker – was last seen somewhere in Memphis. His ability to rebound doesn’t quite make up for his career .414 shooting and average of 16.5 shots per game.

Chicago White Sox's 2008 Recap and Look Ahead to 2009

Alan Thomson — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:10:11 -0500

If nothing else, the 2008 season was full of surprises for the Southsiders.

Before the season began, if someone had said that the Sox would win the division, the Tigers would come in last, and the Indians would crash, burn, go into rebuilding mode and then mount a respectable comeback to finish the season at .500, I would have recommended a good therapist to them.

And if any of us had been told that John Danks would be the ace of the staff and Gavin Floyd would throw a couple of almost no-nos and win 17 games, we would have requested that person to submit to a urine test. Or asked for a shot of the kool-aid that Kenny Williams seemed to have been nipping on.

I have to admit that by opening day I had found myself lost somewhere in the boonies, far south of optimistic. Starting pitching was my main concern, with the athletically bi-polar hurlers Jose Contreras and Javy Vasquez as two of the staples of the rotation.

Not to mention a 22 year-old Danks, packing a 5.50 ERA coming off of a 6-13 year and Floyd with his 6.32 career ERA over parts of four seasons.

I had my doubts about the offense as well, after a year in which they had all but lost interest in scoring runs. And could they possibly be any slower on the basepaths? There was a rumor that Ron Santo challenged the team to a 40-yard dash and came in third.

And who was this Carlos Quentin guy and why was he starting in left field? Alexei Ramirez with zero experience in professional baseball playing second? Yeah, it was gonna be another banner year on the south side. There wasn’t even “dollar dog” night to look forward to anymore.

I started to grow a mullet. If I want to pay to get into a circus, I’ll wait until Cirque du Soleil comes to town.

But with Kenny Williams apparently doing some type of voodoo dance, the team began to click. Danks and Floyd, Quentin and Ramirez, even old codgers Dye and Thome got involved. And of course Buehrle was vintage Buehrle.

Yeah, Konerko reintroduced his disappearing act from 2003, and Nick Swisher never quite got it together, but the combination of old and new talent put enough wins on the board to do the trick.

They fizzled against a better and hotter team in the playoffs, but the most important measure of success for Sox fans in '08? The playoff game victory score: Sox 1 Cubs 0. They gone! Sox win!!!

And for that matter, in 2007 the Sox won just as many playoff games as the Cubs, so on the South Side the consensus has been to concede that season as being a draw.

So what about 2009? Well, there are a few question marks and a couple of variables.

Despite good overall performance in ’08, the pitching staff is in question. Danks is rock solid and the Buehrlesque show will go on as scheduled. Floyd didn’t pitch nearly as well in the second half as the first but I think he’ll be a solid number three.

Jeff Marquez, a 24-year-old minor leaguer acquired from the Yankees in the Nick Swisher deal is expected to compete for a slot in the rotation. Marquez was 6-7 with a 4.69 ERA last year in triple-A.

Clayton Richard and Lance Broadway should also vie for a spot.

Jose Contreras is out until at least May. And I don’t think K-Dub (Kenny Williams for the squares in attendance) is counting on much from the (at least) 37 year-old when he returns.

Javy Vasquez has been traded to the Braves in exchange for three minor leagers: Class A first baseman Tyler Flowers, Class-AAA infielder Brent Lillibridge, Class-A third baseman Jon Gilmore and 20 year-old Rookie League pitcher Santos Rodriquez.

With the trade, the Sox dump $23 from their payroll over the next two years. Hopefully K-Dub can locate a quality starting pitcher to spend that on.

But at this point, barring a new arm or two rolling into town via the trade market or free-agency, the back of the rotation may end up being vetted at amateur night.

The bullpen is much less of a concern. Bobby Jenks is a legitimate first-rate closer. Although wasn’t he much more enjoyable to watch when he was just blasting guys out with heat and occasionally making them look like girl scouts when he dropped the hook on them?

Dotel and Linebrink were solid for the most part with occasional blips and Matt Thornton was stellar.

The offense is going to get a tweaking.

K-Dub is planning on making his team younger and faster over the winter. The biggest issue the team faced last season was the inability to manufacture runs. They too often resembled old men running the bases with invisible pianos in tow.

It’s amazing that a guy like Paul Konerko has the bat speed to turn on any pitcher in the league’s fastball but would lose a footrace to an average power walker.

They will do well to sacrifice a little bit of power for the ability to get on base and run. The latest rumors have the Sox dangling Jermaine Dye in hopes of luring some younger talent, possibly a pitcher. Chicks may dig the long ball but GMs certainly don’t.

What’s the deal with Josh Fields? He looked like a certain 30 and 100 guy in filling in for Crede in 2007. Then he gets demoted, has a horrible year in triple-A and craps out in very limited action after he is called up.

He ends up on the bench, playing behind Juan Uribe. Let’s hope he can return to form in ’09. Crede and his aching back are history and they’ll need Fields to step up.

Wilson Betemit, also acquired in the Swisher trade, appears to be the new utility infielder in place of Uribe. His numbers are reminiscent of Uribe’s, and he comes with a cheaper salary. I guess you could call him a poor man’s Juan Uribe, if such a thing were possible. And at 6’2’ and 155 pounds, maybe Alexei Ramirez will now have someone he can push around.

They most interesting of the new acquisitions to this point is 19-year-old Cuban phenom Dayan Viciedo, who made the Cuban all-star team at age 16. He plays third base but is likely to start his professional career in the minors.

There are also two main variables which are yet to be determined:

One is obviously from the competition, which underperformed in ’08. Will Detroit be able to turn it around and contend? Will the Twins improve? How about Cleveland? They went on a nice run late in the season and always seem to be a threat in recent years.

The White Sox won the division with 88 wins. How much will they need to improve on that in order to stay on top?

The other variable is the kind of deals K-Dub can pull off. He is ready to wheel and deal and when he does anything is possible. No one knows what to expect, but as he heads out west for the winter meetings with his spurs-a-jangling, you can be sure that something is gonna go down. Maybe something big.