Megan Rapinoe: One of My New Favorite Athletes

July 8th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

United States' Megan Rapinoe celebrates after scoring the opening goal from the penalty spot during the Women's World Cup final soccer match between US and The Netherlands at the Stade de Lyon in Decines, outside Lyon, France, Sunday, July 7, 2019. (AP Photo/Francisco Seco) ORG XMIT: XAF175

United States’ Megan Rapinoe celebrates after scoring the opening goal from the penalty spot during the Women’s World Cup final soccer match between US and The Netherlands at the Stade de Lyon in Decines, outside Lyon, France, Sunday, July 7, 2019. (AP Photo/Francisco Seco) ORG XMIT: XAF175

I am not a soccer fan.

I could not explain the basic rules of the game, nor tell you much of the history, other than Brazil holding the most World Cups.

While I understand it to be the world’s most popular sport, I really cannot provide a comprehensive explanation as to why.

And yet with all my superficial understanding of the game, the one thing that I am crystal clear about is my admiration for Women’s American Soccer star Megan Rapinoe.

Who is Megan Rapinoe? She grew up gay in Redding, California, which is just north of my birth town of Sacramento. While I know nothing about growing up gay, I do know Northern California. Aside of the San Francisco Bay area, it is culturally California’s version of “Middle America” and the South. It is politically an oasis of red among a sea of California blue. It is unabashedly pro-Trump.

Rapinoe was also the first white athlete to follow Colin Kaepernick’s lead and kneel during the national anthem in 2016. Her stance made such an impact that the U.S. Soccer authorities implemented a rule that mandated standing. So she has continued her protest by refusing to sing the National Anthem.

It was not a one time, “follow the trend” stance. When recently asked about being invited to the White House if the women win the World Cup, Rapinoe responded, “I doubt we get invited and even if we do, I would not go ‘to the fucking White House’.”

Some will say she is one of many that have rejected such invitations under the current administration. What makes her stance so admirable? For me the answer is the potential greater Black LGBT alliance. This is important because one of the most reliable tools the empowered use against the masses is “divide and conquer”. We can certainly continue to struggle for Black liberation on our own. And we will. LGBT can do the same for their human rights. I am sure that it will. The same can be said of undocumented citizens, labor, and a number of other marginalized demographic groups. But we would be much stronger working in coalition with others as opposed to working in silos.

While I am sure there are racist factions among the LBGT community, I am far more familiar with anti-gay bias among Black folks. They fall into one of two categories: ideological bigots, which are divided between the Evangelical or Nationalist factions; and the simple garden variety bigots. The primary reasoning seems to be the notion that comparing the LGBT movement with the Civil Rights movement trivializes our struggle. It is true that no two movements are exactly interchangeable. It is also true that the mere option of non-revelation is a tool that most Black folks have never had to combat the terrorism that we have endured. LBGT have such a tool.

Rapinoe acknowledges the distinctions when she said, “I haven’t experienced racial profiling, police brutality, or the sight of a family member’s body lying dead in the street. But I cannot stand idly by while there are people in the country who have had to deal with that kind of heartache”.

That, in my mind, is what an ally sounds like, and her actions have been consistent with her words.

What remains a mystery to me is the basic question around homophobia, for which I have yet to get any rational answer: How does the relationship, love, or even just sex, between consenting adults adversely affect your life? On the movement level: How does rejecting willing allies advance our agenda?

From my experience, the answers to these questions have routinely been based primarily on bigotry masquerading as cultural nationalism or religious integrity.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall uprising in New York City. It is considered to be the moment when a culmination of police brutality led the LGBT community to say enough is enough. And therein lies the basis for alliances. The same state sponsored harassment that LBGT was subjected to at Stonewall harassed Black folks in Selma, Alabama in 1965 and undocumented immigrants today. Those who use homophobia as a tool to stigmatize and oppress, often do the same with racism. Those who use racism often do the same with xenophobia. Those who use xenophobia often do the same with misogyny. The tools of oppression are equal opportunists in protecting the interests of the empowered class. Thus we must have the same openness in accepting willing reciprocal alliances. We need not have the exact same experiences. We only need to recognize injustice because as Martin Luther King said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”.

It is against this backdrop that Megan Rapinoe and many others from the LGBT community have expressed a desire to align with other struggles for human rights. It is only reasonable that they expect reciprocal solidarity for their human rights. If you have an issue with that, their sexual orientation isn’t the problem. You are!

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

KD and Kawhi’s Revenge

June 28th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

kevin-durant-kawhi-leonard

He came out blazing!

For the opening minutes of Game 5 of the NBA Finals, you would have never known that Kevin Durant (KD) was dealing with what could be a career-ending injury.

He looked every bit the basketball phenom we have come to know. That is a combination of Bob McAdoo, George Gervin, and Dirk Nowitzki…only a better defender than either (did you see him at 7-foot stay in front of 6-foot guard Fred VanVleet?). Among non-centers, I consider KD to be the most difficult matchup for a defender in NBA history.

usa_today_12873577.0

Then Achilles arose and that is where we are today. This week, Durant declined his $31.5 million option to remain with the Warriors, which makes him an unrestricted free agent. While it is still in doubt whether or not Durant will ever be what he once was, make no mistake that multiple NBA teams will be willing to roll the dice that he will and offer him a super max contract.

KLLast year at this time, when Kawhi Leonard refused to play due to his injury, his basic interest in the game of basketball was being questioned. As a result, the San Antonio Spurs, which many consider to be among the most stable franchises in all of sports, traded him. Today, after leading the Raptors to an NBA title, he has a legitimate claim to be the best player in the game. He is also now an unrestricted free agent and will get a super max deal.

Overall, both KD and Kawhi get the last laugh…good for them. However, why do so many feel that it is their place to decide if someone is or is not hurt, and when a player should or should not play?

There are so many factors to be considered when it is determined if a professional athlete, less than 100%, should or should not play. Yet, rarely is there a narrative from us fans/media that considers all of those factors.

The most common line of thinking is something like this from a recent talk radio caller; “KD knew the risks and chose to play anyway. Professional athletes are obsessively competitive and always want to play, otherwise they likely would not have made it to this level. It is what they do. Those reading any more into this are over-analyzing. After all, one can walk outside and be struck by lightning”.

This vacuum analysis is based on the false premise that the decision to play was ultimately KD’s. That simply was not true. The ultimate decision maker is the organization. The vacuum of which I speak assumes that nothing external to KD’s line of thought drove the decision. The ridiculous and insulting notion that the Warriors are better without him was not a factor. Toxic masculinity, which exists in varying degrees on all male sports teams, that says, “You tough it out and play through injury”, was not a factor. The fact that the Warriors were down 3-1 and KD was their only viable hope of getting back into the series was not a factor. Finally, his pending free-agency option was not a factor.

Anyone that believes any of this is delusional beyond imagination.

Without going into the thinly-veiled homophobic tone of “he is soft”, there is the condescending arrogance that we know their bodies better than they do. Even the “ok” from team doctors is suspect because…he/she is the TEAM’S doctor and thus has an inherent conflict of interest. Also, just because people would have played hurt “back in the day” does not mean they should today. Once upon a time people worked without wages. That does not make it a valid consideration for labor today. Finally, there is the notion that because they make a lot of money, they should play short of being on a deathbed. In fact the opposite makes more sense. If we speak in terms of the professional athlete’s body being his most valuable commodity, then why would he risk compounding an injury by playing hurt?

One thing about the journey of KD and Kawhi is that they were both once considered low profile personalities. They were the humble, anti-showboat type of athletes that fans wanted to root for…that is until they did not provide the labor that was expected. Today, both are cautionary tales that despite all the fame and money, many fans, media, and especially owners see professional athletes as chattel.

Speaking of “owners”, this mindset is why NBA Commissioner Adam Silver, to his credit, is paying attention to the designation of “owner”. In a country where Black men were once literally property, and in a league where they make up nearly 75% of the players, referring to their “bosses” as owners should be more than a dog whistle. Of course, formal Chattel Slavery that once existed in America is no more. But as long as so many feel it their place to tell a grown man when he is and isn’t hurt, should or should not play, it will be a reminder that the slave owner’s mentality is in the present, alive and well.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

The Curious Obsession with the Black Athlete’s Smile

June 21st, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

ZW

(Originally published on June 20, 2019)

When Zion Williamson goes number one in the NBA draft tonight, many platitudes will be offered. Some will be completely basketball based, such as his explosiveness, his “handle” (dribbling ability) etc. Others will not have anything to do with basketball, such as his humble beginnings and the one that annoys the hell out of me most will be, “he has such a great smile!”

I have been a sports fan for my entire conscious life. I am now 52 years old and not once can I recall sports commentators swooning over the smile of a White athlete the way they do over that of a Black athlete.

The Black athlete’s smile is one of many “dog whistle” codes in sports used to discuss race while maintaining plausible deniability that one is in fact talking about race. Others are “how hard he works” and “how scrappy he is”. Translation: White. Then there is “God-given talent” and “head case”. Translation: Black

Surely, some will say that I am over-reacting and that it is really just a simple compliment that actually could lead to lucrative commercial endorsements for the Black athlete. There certainly is something to the endorsement angle. My contention is that the Black athlete’s smile is selling more than a product or service to America. It sells the assuaging of White guilt for America’s past AND present transgressions and oppression of Black people. The Black athlete’s smile reassures America that everything is all right and that Black people are content and have no interest in rising up and revolting.  There is no better platform for the delivery of this reassurance than one in which the highest profile Black men in America reside and that would be professional sports. Not only are they the most recognizable, but they are, relatively speaking, the biggest, fastest, and strongest. If they are reassuring, there is little reason to fear the rest of us.

In reality, it is just the opposite. The professional Black athlete’s life is so diametrically at odds with that of the masses of Black people from a material perspective, to the point of it being a total misrepresentative sample. The rebels of Ferguson and Baltimore should be what America pays more attention to than the smile of the Black athlete.

What is fascinating about this is the fact that it is not at all a conscious process. Even marketers, who correctly think that Zion Williamson would be a good pitchperson, do not fully understand the WHY. We have been so well schooled in the do’s and don’ts of racial etiquette and social mores to the point that we act and react on automatic pilot.

That etiquette has been interrupted by the current presidential administration which has unmasked and put away all of the previously agreed upon rules regarding race. At the same time, the president has made it blatantly clear how he feels about Black athletes, when he referred to NFL players who kneeled in protest to racial injustice, overwhelmingly Blacks, as “Sons of Bitches”.

Perhaps now, more people can understand why the great sportswriter William C. Rhoden called his book, “40 Million Dollar Slaves”. One of its central points is that regardless of the Black athlete’s wealth, his ultimate role is his usefulness to White America, be it from an entertainment standpoint, commercial standpoint, or psychological guilt relief.

The good news is that the Black athlete is perhaps more conscious of these factors than at any time since the 1960s. We have the various intersectional movements to thank for this to include Black Lives Matter.

If America is interested in moving forward on the issue of race, it must pay much more attention to the pain and experience of everyday Black folks. One way to do this would be to honestly assess, no matter how uncomfortable it may be, the legacy of Slavery and Jim Crow. The current reparations discussions in Congress is a place to start. If we have that honest assessment, we will come to understand that all of the combined wealth of the Black athlete to include Michael Jordan and LeBron James would be pennies on the dollar compared to the wealth created by slavery and inherited by White America, be it in terms of privilege and or capitol.  That reality cannot be dismissed with a smile.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Should Computers Call Balls and Strikes?

June 14th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

7c46d28d-8f47-4e7c-b943-3b81ab04a29a_750x422

About a month ago, much to my surprise, I received a notice in the mail from the State of Florida, for a speeding ticket. It had my correct license plate number and declared the vehicle was registered in the State of Maryland. This is certainly not a new experience for me. I am a “lead foot” and have earned many speeding tickets in my day.

There were two problems: 1) the car in the picture was not mine; and 2) I have never driven in the State of Florida in my entire life.

Therefore, I responded via the online link, explaining what I previously stated, and attached my work hours for that fateful July 30, 2018 day, as well as a picture of my actual car in a recent “legitimate” speeding ticket I received.

This past week, I received an email notification that my case was closed and thus I can save the $2 fine.

This experience reminds me of this ongoing debate in baseball to have computers take the place of umpires calling balls and strikes.

As you may guess, this debate is largely a generational one, with the opponents of this idea, who are disproportionately older, insisting that this would take away from the tradition of the game, and that mistakes in baseball…like life…are unavoidable.

The proponents, younger and much more comfortable with technology, insist that this would add consistency to the most common calls in the game, which are balls and strikes.

They are both wrong, albeit for different reasons.

Baseball traditionalist are among the most sanctimonious assholes in the sports fan world. They are all worked up over all proposed changes to the game, just on the tradition tip. They often have zero pragmatic objections. They are in the same category as the people who cried “Armageddon” because some wanted old movies colorized. They had a similar reaction to the notion of inter-league play. Today, we hardly even notice when the Yankees play the Padres. They are, by definition, conservative, and surely it is not necessary to highlight the record of such mindsets when in charge, be it baseball, or the country.

The proponents are wrong as well because they are grossly overestimating the improvement this technology will make. This notion that if you see the ball on TV go through the outlined strike zone that it is in fact a strike is ludicrous. Why? To put it simply, I paraphrase the words of the recently departed Bushwick Bill of the Geto Boys: “Your mind is playing tricks on you”.

The greatest weapon in the arsenal of a major league pitcher is not velocity/speed or big movement, as can be with a curveball. The greatest weapon is late movement. The sliders and especially the cut fastball or cutter can move 4-6 inches as it approaches the plate. So, though it may appear to have crossed the plate in the strike zone, that just is not necessarily so and the technology is not going to necessarily reveal such. The cutter in particular is the primary reason the great Mariano Rivera could get professional hitters to swing at pitches that looked as if they would be strikes or take pitches that looked as if they would be balls.

The experiment is being tried in the Independent Atlantic League as we speak but the sample results will not tell us much. Several modifications to the mound and distance to home plate have been made to the point that it simply will not be an apples to apples comparison.

I would like to be confident in an improved product should this be implemented but for all the reasons I have noted, there just is no basis to believe we will get that. Not even the fact that the technology is supposedly the same Doppler radar used for weather forecasts. Are we really suggesting that the weather man has never been wrong? This technology has actually already been used to evaluate umpires and according to one assessment, it missed 500 pitches in

April alone and that did not mean they called them wrong. They did not call them at all.

Therefore, while I have no objection to the concept of a computer calling balls and strikes, the reality is the technology is not as close to an improved product as its proponents would have you believe.

As was the case with my mystery speeding ticket from Florida, sometimes the technology just gets it flat out wrong.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Why LeBron James and Walmart Do Not Make a Winning Team

June 5th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

LBJ

I am a huge LeBron James fan, both for his on-court play and off-court efforts. I have long believed that most of the criticism of him has been spiked “hater-ade” with little substantive basis.

Having said that, if James’ haters have been waiting for something with a little more meat on which to chew, he has given it to them on a silver platter. I am speaking of his collaboration with Walmart to “combat hunger”.

On the surface, it looks like a laudable effort. It is certainly a public relations coup for Walmart. Folks are indeed hungry in the wealthiest country on Earth and they do not have the luxury to be picky about from where their next meal comes.

I get that.

We all should get that it is important to look at root causes and when we do that with Walmart and hunger in America, as the great sport writer Dave Zirin points out, “it is more of the problem than the solution”.

We should be clear about what Walmart is. The heir to the founder, Sam Walton, is worth about $145 billion. It is the largest private employer in the United States, with 1.3 million employees. Its 2018 revenue was over $500 billion and is projected to clear that number in 2019, in no small part due to the corporate tax rate being cut from 35% to 21%. We should also understand that thanks to other corporate loopholes, Walmart is unlikely to even pay the 21%.

We should be just as clear about what Walmart is. It is fanatically anti-union (Click HERE to view Walmart’s anti-union employee training video). It pays its average cashier about $8.48 per hour. These meager wages, in addition to the fact that some 600 thousand of its employees are part-time, are the principle reasons that about half of Walmart employees experience food insecurity. How insecure: a significant number of Walmart employees actually have to access public assistance in the way of food stamps just to get by.

Think about that the next time a “supply side” tax cut advocate promotes this nonsense: Walmart got a 14% tax cut and still will not raise wages to keep its employees from having to access food stamps.

This type of “corporate welfare” is the primary motivation behind the recent bill introduced by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, targeting some of America’s largest corporations. It is called the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing out Subsidies Act (or the “Stop BEZOS” Act). The bill would tax companies like Amazon and Walmart for money their employees receive in federal benefits.

So essentially, what LeBron is doing is aligning with the fox to guard the hen house.

Now, Walmart would respond by likely saying that they in fact are raising their floor for salaries.

That is true. It will be raising its minimum wage to $11 per hour this year.

The raises will be financed by the recent closing of 10% of their Sam’s Clubs, which amounted to about 11 thousand jobs. So essentially, it was a shell game or Ponzi scheme. Given its tax breaks and poverty wages to begin with, Walmart deserves no more credit for this than my mugger would for bringing me a get-well card in the hospital.

Walmart is certainly not alone. Such corporations facilitate yet another shell game when one looks at the unemployment number being at 4%. How? By suppressing wages and hours, it insures that a number of people must take a second and sometimes third job.

Some may be asking now, why this is your or my business how LeBron attempts to address a need as pressing as hunger.  He has a right to donate his time and money in any way he sees fit. To that, I say that the issue is not what he does or does not have a right to do with his money and time. It is clear he has such a right. The issue is how effective are such efforts when allied with an entity so culpable in exasperating the problem he is trying to address. That is to say, between its employees having to rely on public assistance and the sizeable tax cut, Walmart is essentially being subsidized by our tax dollars.

That is what makes it not only our business but also our obligation to call out all who allow their platform to be used to provide Walmart cover. Silence would be tacit approval.

Nevertheless, real solutions for these issues of systemic origins require systemic analysis. When one engages in such analysis, it becomes clear: be the issue hunger, homelessness, or student loan debt, there simply will not be a cadre of individual heroes that will come to the rescue. These systemic and structural issues are foreseeable in a capitalistic society. They will, therefore require systemic and structural solutions. These solutions can begin when we decide collectively as a society that food, education, housing, among other needs, are human rights and not mere privileges for those who can pay.

This is not about telling LeBron to “shut up and dribble”. It is about making it clear when he is dribbling out of bounds. Teaming with an entity like Walmart, which compounds hunger in America, is way off the court.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Laker Dysfunction and #MeToo

May 30th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

LOS ANGELES, CA - DECEMBER 18: (L-R) Magic Johnson, Rob Pelinka and Jeanie Buss attend Kobe Bryant's jersey retirement ceremony during a game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Golden State Warriors at Staples Center on December 18, 2017 in Los Angeles, California.  (Photo by Allen Berezovsky/Getty Images)

LOS ANGELES, CA – DECEMBER 18: (L-R) Magic Johnson, Rob Pelinka and Jeanie Buss attend Kobe Bryant’s jersey retirement ceremony during a game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Golden State Warriors at Staples Center on December 18, 2017 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Allen Berezovsky/Getty Images)

When my Lakers signed LeBron James last year, no one was happier about the occurrence than yours truly. I was straight up “Peacocking” the purple and gold! I even wrote a piece for War Room Sports on the subject:

PE

 

 

 

 

10 Reasons Why LeBron and the Lakers Make Sense

I was never under any illusions that they were ready to challenge the mighty Warriors, however, I at least expected respectability and it looked promising early.

Today it looks anything but promising.

My Lakers look like the New York Knicks west. In fact, over the past 6 years the two franchises have lost the exact same number of games.

So why was I so wrong?

I have concluded that the basic answer to this is that I assumed that my Lakers had a minimal level of organizational competence. It is clear now that this does not exist. Oh how I long for the days of the great Jerry West at the helm or even the Mitch Kupchak era.

In addition, let us be clear: the organization did not pick LeBron. LeBron picked the organization. So I am not sure if it deserves any credit for that either.

Meanwhile, the missteps are too many to list, but let us just list a few:

 

  • After missing the playoffs a grand total of only 5 times in its illustrious history, my Lakers have now missed 6 straight years;
  • Failure to replace Magic Johnson’s position, which either validates the dysfunction or proves it was little more than ceremonial public relations to begin with;
  • Offering NBA title-winning coach Tyronn Lue an embarrassing 3-year deal and dictating to him whom he should have on his staff, when 5 years, and allowing a coach to hire his own staff is the accepted professional way of doing business; and
  • The Anthony Davis trade debacle.

 

All of this has happened under the ownership of Jeanie Buss.

This is where the #MeToo angle comes in and it is delicate.

At least one commentator implied that she is not capable of running the team because she is female.

That is just garden-variety sexism. Unfortunately, there are, and perhaps always will be people who will exploit any available platform to make an “I told you so” pronouncement about the capacity of women to manage, especially in venues that have been dominated by men.

After ferreting out this mindset and candidly assessing her stewardship of the team, there is only one conclusion: YOU ARE WHAT YOUR RECORD SAYS YOU ARE!  In the 6 seasons since the death of the late Dr. Jerry Buss, her father, the team is 163-329.  That is terrible for a man, a woman, or a mongoose. I get the sense that in the current climate, there is some hesitancy on the part of male commentators to call Buss out for this record.

In fairness to her, she allowed her brother to run the team for a few of these years, and to her credit, admits she should have let him go long ago. Firing your brother cannot be easy for anyone. In addition, she inherited the team from one of the greatest owners in the history of sports.  That’s not an easy act to follow. Most who are given the keys to the castle know little about how the castle actually is run. They simply do not come up through the ranks, which is how they might learn.

With that said, we should not feel sorry for Jeanie Buss. The #MeToo movement is long overdue for women having to deal with sexual advances and even worse on the job. The overwhelming number of these women are working class, poor, immigrant, and/or of color. Jeanie Buss is none of those things and thus her performance, as Lakers owner, does not warrant the protection of the movement. If Magic and general manager Rob Pelinka are fair game for the current sorry state of my Lakers, so too is Jeanie Buss.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

The Death of “Small Ball” and Why Baseball Should Care

May 23rd, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 10: Washington Nationals shortstop Trea Turner (7) bunts during a MLB game between the Washington Nationals and the Philadelphia Phillies on September 10, 2017 at Nationals Park, in Washington DC. (Photo by Tony Quinn/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 10: Washington Nationals shortstop Trea Turner (7) bunts during a MLB game between the Washington Nationals and the Philadelphia Phillies on September 10, 2017 at Nationals Park, in Washington DC. (Photo by Tony Quinn/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

Nationals’ leadoff hitter Tre Turner is back in the lineup after injuring his finger while attempting to bunt. Though he is a non-traditional leadoff hitter with 19 homers and 73 RBI’s last year, he did steal 43 bases. What is baffling about his injury is that it was foreseeable. When one looks at how he was holding the bat while trying to bunt, it really was just a matter of time before just such an injury would happen. His finger was wholly exposed. I was taught to bunt by a great little league coach named Felix Duncan. I already had a good idea because it was much more a part of baseball in the 1970’s compared to today, especially for smaller players like myself with decent speed. You pinch the bat from the backside of the barrel, which both provides control and protects your fingers. Therefore, the only conclusion that I can think of is that either Turner was taught poorly or never taught at all how to bunt.

The fact that one of the better leadoff hitters in baseball is not adept at bunting is telling of where the game is today and baseball should care.

While home runs, even in the supposed post-steroid era, are up, bunts, singles, sacrifices, and stolen bases are down. The latter four were once considered the core of “Small Ball” or the strategy of winning without the 3-run home run. It was not a fringe tactic. The best two National League teams of the 1960’s, the Dodgers and the Cardinals, were not power hitting teams, but employed this offensive strategy. It worked well enough for them to make it to six World Series and win four. Neither team had a single player hit 30 homers the years that they made it to the Worlds Series. In fact, they each would only have one 30-homer season for the entire decade. Yes, this was the height of a dominant pitching era. So much so, that the mound was lowered after the 1969 season. Nevertheless, highly successful managers Billy Martin and Whitey Herzog continued to use “Small Ball” throughout the 1970’s and into the 1980’s.

Even today, if you look at the baseball team with the longest drought of seasons without a 30-home run player, you will also discover the same franchise has won three World Series over that time span. The bottom line is a team need not be prolific in hitting home runs to win the World Series. In fact, a case can be made to the contrary. Feast or famine/swing for the fences teams tend to fizzle out in the playoffs and it is no accident. The playoffs are stacked with the league’s best pitching staffs and a common trait for such staffs is their capacity to limit the home run in general, but especially with men on base. For example, the great Orioles Hall of Famer, Jim Palmer threw just under 4000 innings in his career and NEVER gave up a grand slam home run. The same great Orioles teams for which Palmer played would have likely won one or two more World Series titles if Hall of Fame manager Earl Weaver used the small ball approach more. Weaver had the luxury of having the power of Frank and Brooks Robinson, Boog Powell, Lee May, Reggie Jackson, Eddie Murray, and Cal Ripken. He hated the idea of the sacrifice. His position was that a team only gets 27 outs. Why give any away? This was always the wrong question. The question should be “how productive can one make those outs?”, and the undisputable answer is that a sacrifice to move a runner is much more productive than a strikeout.

The problem is that baseball does not seem to care to keep Small Ball as a part of the strategic buffet. There are several factors behind this:

 

  • Chicks and D*&#s dig the long ball: One of the most exciting aspects of the game has been embellished in ways beyond PEDs. Parks are rarely built to accommodate pitching anymore, with such things as contracted foul territory, which means hitters get extra chances, as opposed to being out:
  • Attendance is dropping but profits are at an all-time high
  • Why fix what (financially) isn’t broken?

 

However, if unsustainability is an indicator of brokenness, and it is, baseball should care. The current home run or bust trend is squeezing out smaller potential baseball players and in doing so, in effect, pushing the sport in the direction of football and basketball, in that there is an unofficial size requirement. It is precisely the lack of size requirement that made baseball the most democratic of the three major sports in terms of opportunity. Sure, there was an Allen Iverson in the NBA and a Darren Sproles in the NFL. But both are the exceptions and not the rule. The irony of this all is that now is the greatest window for baseball to bring back young fans and potential players. The concern of parents about head injuries in football and the ever-increasing lottery nature of becoming an NBA player, as well as the expense of AAU basketball, provide a vacuum in sports options that could benefit baseball.

What should baseball do?

 

  • Mandate a greater emphasis on “Small Ball” skills that have been clearly deemphasized in all MLB camps and developmental leagues;
  • Be sure that the next round of new parks are pitcher-friendly, which would force teams to build around an alternative to power;
  • Move the fences back around the league. If the NBA can recognize the need for this regarding the 3-point line, surely baseball can do the same regarding home runs.

 

As baseball’s core fan base gets older and whiter, the game risks missing the boat on the obvious demographic changes around the country. It cannot afford monolithic appeal. Bringing “Small Ball” back would go a long way to expand that appeal and sustain the game.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Kyrie Irving and the Less Green (Celtics) Grass

May 15th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

KI

On July 10, 2014, Kyrie Irving signed a contract extension with the Cleveland Cavaliers. In spite of the talented guard’s injury history, this would be “his team” for the near future.

 

That future lasted about 48 hours because on July 12, 2014, the Cavaliers brought back the region’s favorite son, LeBron James.

 

Despite bringing the city of Cleveland its first major sports championship in 52 years when the Cavs won the 2016 NBA title, the two never quite meshed the way the team envisioned. It is hard to tell whom wanted a change first: Kyrie demanding a trade or LeBron ordering a trade. My money says Kyrie wanted to be THE MAN!

 

Fast-forward to this year’s playoffs, which saw the Kyrie-led Celtics win their first five games. This included a sweep over the Pacers and taking game one on the road in Milwaukee, over the top-seeded Bucks. Over that stretch, Kyrie was great, averaging over 23 points and 8 assists. His game one against the Bucks was one of the most efficient for a point guard in recent playoff memory, with 26 points and 11 assists on 57% shooting.

 

Then the whole roof collapsed!

The Celtics would lose the next four, becoming the first team in NBA history to win its first 5 of a playoff and then be swept away. While Kyrie certainly was not the only culprit, he was, by any account, bad. His scoring fell off by 4 points, his assists fell off by 3, and he shot under 30%. He topped it off with a God-awful elimination game performance, during which he shot 6 of 21 with 1 assist, ZERO rebounds, and 3 turnovers. Then the questions about his future in Boston, already swirling, were elevated. Given the Celtics’ stockpile of draft picks and the development of its current young talent last year, in no small part due to Kyrie’s injuries, there is no reason to believe he will be back with the Celtics next year. If Kyrie’s objective was to be “THE MAN”, he got his wish and now must deal with the accompanying scrutiny that is the price of the party.

 

KILJWhat Kyrie is in the process of learning is that the difference between being a number 1 and number 2 extend beyond the court. On the court as the number 2 to LeBron, Kyrie would always have his way. He earned the nickname “Ankle Taker”. His first step and crossover make it virtually impossible for any defender in the NBA to stay in front of him. A team could theoretically take Kyrie away to make LeBron a scorer but when he drops 40 and you lose, that would be a lot of explaining to do for any coach. Off the court, when a team with LeBron loses, “The King” must answer the questions, even after his Herculean effort in the 2015 NBA finals. Is Kyrie built for that kind of life? The answer may be in a Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry line. “Man’s gotta know his limitations.” That is to say that not every player, regardless of talent, is intended to be a top dog.

 

The hopeful piece is that Kyrie is from a highly eclectic background.

 

He was born in Melbourne, Australia, a country that is in the midst of trying to deport Aboriginal (folks Native to the land) people without “citizenship”. His father is from the Bronx and his Native American mother was adopted. She passed away when he was four and it was not until years later that Kyrie would come to fully understand his heritage. Last August, he was invited to Standing Rock as a sort of homecoming. Yes, the same Standing Rock where the mighty Sioux and many others have been resisting the Dakota pipelines from going through their sacred ground. Yes, the same Sioux once led by the great freedom fighter Tatanka Iyotake or better known as Sitting Bull! Yes, the same Sitting Bull that gave General Custer “the business” at Little Bighorn. By all accounts, Kyrie has fully embraced this. The Sioux gave him the name “Hela”, which in the Lakota language means “Little Mountain”. Kyrie donated $100K to the Standing Rock resistance cause. He asked and was granted the privilege of shaking the hands of every one of the estimated 1000 in attendance that day. He even has a shoe out through Nike honoring Standing Rock (not sure how much of those proceeds go to the tribe). Given that basketball has long been the most popular sport on most Native American reservations, this was all a big deal.

 

So, does all this mean that Kyrie is indeed a number 1 Alpha, capable of leading a team to an NBA title? The jury is still out on that matter. Other than his “Earth is flat” comment, Kyrie strikes me as a thoughtful person. The answer will at least in part be contingent on which ego Kyrie decides to follow. Every professional athlete has two egos: one that is primarily self-serving and the other that is competitive. The champions allow the competitive ego to lead. If Kyrie does this, it will require him to modify his game. For example, his career numbers of 22.2 points and 5.7 assists are in line with the current trend of score first, distribute second, modern point guards. That will not get it done. However, 17-18 points with 8-10 assist may move him closer to a title…if he is willing to allow for a co-star.

 

My feeling is that he will allow the competitive ego to rule the day. If he does, do not bet against Kyrie Irving having his own Little Bighorn moment.

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Other Basketball Hall of Fame Cases

May 7th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

HOF

My position on Vlade Divac being a Hall of Famer generated a robust discussion. I stand against his Hall of Fame selection but appreciate the opposing perspectives. Let us look at five others who are NOT in the Basketball Hall of Fame (HOF) and make a determination.

BHOF

Before we began, let me clarify my thinking on the matter. The HOF, regardless of the sport, is an individual honor and not a team honor. I therefore give much more weight to what a player has done individually. I always feel if the first evidence presented for a player’s HOF credentials are team based, it is a good chance that he has a borderline to weak case.

Therefore, here are my reviews:

2001: Chris Webber#4 of the Sacramento Kings soars to the basket for a slam dunk against of the Portland Trail Blazers during the NBA Game at The Rose Garden in Portland, Oregon. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and/or using this Photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement.  Mandatory copyright notice:  Copyright 2001 NBAE   Mandatory Credit: Sam Forencich /NBAE/Getty Images

Mandatory copyright notice: Copyright 2001 NBAE
Mandatory Credit: Sam Forencich /NBAE/Getty Images

Chris Webber: YES! 20.7 points, 9.8 rebounds, and over 4 assists are numbers alone that warrant HOF induction. However, Webber’s impact is much bigger than stats. He grew up in Michigan watching 6’8” Magic Johnson at Michigan State prove that a big man need not be restricted to paint play. I believe that greatly influenced his game and notion of what was possible for a big man and would eventually make him a pioneer of what we call today the “stretch four”. While I do not like what the trend has taken away in the traditional back to the basket post player, its impact cannot be denied. Also, being the best player on the “FAB 5” at Michigan showed how quickly a college player can be pro-ready. Throw in fashion with the baggy shorts and Webber’s impact and contributions are easily HOF worthy.

RH

Robert Horry: NO! 7 points, 4.8 rebounds. Yes, he earned the nickname “Big Shot Rob” for his exploits in Houston and Los Angeles. No, he was not just along for the ride on seven NBA title teams. However, consider the big men whom he had the fortune to play with; Olajuwon in Houston, Shaq in L.A., and Duncan in San Antonio. Why is that important? Because they insured that no team had the luxury to game plan for Horry hitting a three. They also gave the team the flexibility to allow Horry to spread the floor. It is no coincidence that his least productive stop was in Phoenix, where they had no such interior presence. Furthermore, Horry, though listed as a power forward, never averaged over eight rebounds a game. He was one of the early stretch fours and a great accessory, but not a Hall of Famer. His individual body of work just does not measure up.

LH

Lou Hudson: YES! 20.2 points, a nearly 80% FT shooter, and nearly 49% FG. He had multiple seasons during which he shot over 50%, while averaging over 25 points. Of the 12 other non-post players to do this, only Mark Aguirre is not in the HOF. Hudson was amazingly efficient. In fact, those 20.2 points per game came on barely 17 shots per game, which is among the greatest efficiency rates ever. I am at a loss for why Hudson is not already in the HOF. My only guess is that he played in the NBA purgatory called Atlanta and after several early career playoff seasons, the team was not very good. He was a 6-time All-Star with the pre-Dominique Wilkins Hawks. He finished his career with the Lakers…a year before they drafted Magic and won the NBA title. He had multiple years averaging over six rebounds a game from the guard position.

TC

Tom Chambers: NO! 18.1 points and 6.1 rebounds. A four-time All-Star and All-Star Game MVP in 1987. He was a very good NBA scorer…and not much else.

Though listed as a power forward, he averaged over eight rebounds only once in his entire career. One cannot explain that away by calling him an early stretch four because he barely shot 30% from 3-point land. Chambers was a classic one trick pony…a good trick…but one trick nonetheless.

CB

Chauncey Billups: MAYBE! 15.2 points, 5.4 assists, nearly 90% FT. I must admit when I first chose Billups to review, my inkling was no. I thought of him much as I did Horry, which is to say a great situational support player that benefited from being on a great team.

I was wrong.

I did not realize how good he was in Denver after leaving Detroit. Nor did I realize that he was a five-time All-Star and two-time All-Defensive Team player. Finally, he was the 2004 Finals MVP. Though his overall numbers are not great, his case is stronger than I initially thought.

There are so many more to consider; Kevin Johnson, Bobby Dandridge, Rasheed and Ben Wallace as players, and how about Rick Adelman and George Karl as coaches?

So, have at it and tell me where AND WHY I am wrong or right?

I will come up with a list of baseball players to review in October during its postseason.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports

Bad Refs, Immigrants, and the Russians

April 30th, 2019

by Gus Griffin

gus

 

 

 

 

Image courtesy of ESPN.com

Image courtesy of ESPN.com

The Houston Rockets have conducted an “audit” of their game seven home loss to the Golden State Warriors in last year’s NBA Western Conference Finals. This just in: when an organization investigates its own outcomes, you can rest assured that it will not discover any wrong-doing on its part. See police investigating shootings of unarmed Black and Latino people.

I digress: The central “finding” was as follows: bad officiating in 81 separate instances produced about an 18-point swing. Since the Rockets lost by 9, it is their contention that, but for the bad refs, they would have beaten the Warriors and gone on to beat the Cavaliers to win the NBA title.

If you can stop laughing for just a minute, I would like to take an honest look at this.

There is actually a valid proposal in the Rockets’ memo to the league about this matter. That proposal is that seniority should not be the only factor in playoff assignments. The Rockets contend that call accuracy should also be considered.

They are right. Seniority and longevity alone are no more measures of credibility than J. Edgar Hoover running the FBI for nearly half-a-century is a measure of his commitment to justice.

This point is the only thing from this “audit” that should be taken seriously.

The remainder is flawed for two fundamental reasons:

 

  • There is no accounting for how much the bad officiating went in favor of the Rockets. Even if not 81 instances, surely no one believes ALL the bad calls went the Warriors way. So, what would be the net point difference? We don’t know because the Rockets apparently were only interested in what went against them. It’s as if an accountant reviewing books only looked at deductions and ignored credits. Would anyone consider that to be a serious “audit”?; and
  • The Rockets shot 7-44 from 3-point range, including missing 27 straight. That seems to me to be more of a case of violating the law of insanity, which is to continue doing the same thing and expecting different results.

SKSome have compared the Rockets’ fate to that of the 2002 Sacramento Kings, who lost the Western Conference Finals in seven games to my Lakers. I’ll cede that the Kings got the business in game 6 from the refs, if Kings fans and Lakers haters acknowledge that they loss game 1 and 7 at home and blew a 20-point lead in game 4. Bad refs had nothing to do with those facts.

What the Rockets are doing today and Kings fans have been doing for nearly 20 years now is really pretty common human behavior: the tendency to find an external cause of failure to avoid painful candid self-assessment.

This tendency goes well beyond the sports world.

The country’s current focus on immigration is an example. There are too many false narratives about the issue to address here but suffice it to say that a critical mass of Americans would rather blame their declining quality of life on external factors than the internal natural course of Capitalism.

Then there are the Russians and the 2016 elections. It is so much easier to blame them for the current White House occupant than it is to look at the Electoral College system, which is fundamentally undemocratic, or the simple fact that the Democrats ran a bad candidate.

Because the Democratic party gatekeepers refuse to engage in any serious candid self- assessment, they are in the process of propping up yet another Neo-Liberal centrist who has Trump chomping at the bit to face.

None of this is to say that there are not external roots in the failure of humans, both within and outside of sports. We would be naïve to believe that disgraced NBA referee Tim Donaghy was, or is, the only official that engaged in game-fixing. But such realities are factors to be considered in addition to candid self-assessment and not in lieu of candid self-assessment.

This is what the Rockets have failed to do, but they sure timed the release of their “audit” brilliantly, and I suspect the extra scrutiny just might benefit them to some degree.

But even if it does, if they fail to look in the mirror, neither bad refs nor the mighty Warriors are your primary problem.

 

Gus Griffin, for War Room Sports