Rationalizing the Shumpert Pick at #17

When this pick happened, I overreacted. A lot. And to be completely honest, I’m still not happy with it. But I fall in rank behind Spike. This is what the Knicks did, and despite the holes that I believe Shumpert has in his game, it’s not completely fair to call this pick a complete bust, because believe it or not, there are reasons that the Knicks have earned “B” and “B-“ grades from well-respected NBA writers this morning.

Why I didn’t like it:

Because I watched Shumpert play several times, and he wasn’t that good. It sounds brutally honest, and it is. The same way that Singleton stood out because of his physicality and command of the court, Shumpert kind of blended into the background.

Looking at the only numbers that are available, he’s an offensive liability, and his weaknesses are magnified in D’Antoni’s offense. At Tech, his best season shooting the three was 2009, and it was at an unsatisfactory 33% clip. Last year, he dropped below the 30% line, which is the point where coaches need to go up to you and just say “Hey, you should just stop shooting.”

The reason he was drafted is akin to a kid who performed poorly in high school but scored extremely highly on the SAT. I do not like the combine, and I do not like individual workouts. As far as I am concerned, they should be among the last things considered when figuring out a draft board.

Plenty of people at the combine can run fast and jump high, and most can even can their shots, but it doesn’t correlate favorably with how they’ll perform in the NBA. Everything is a drill, the gyms are full of scouts who are paid to be vigilant and jot down notes, not to create a game atmosphere. The level of competition that the players face from their fellow draftees is well below that of which they will face on 90% of nights during the season.  

Every year some team is seduced by a combine warrior, the most recent example of which came from my alma mater (Darrius Heyward-Bey), and I would estimate that 90% of the time that player fails to live up to their lofty draft status, or flames out completely at the sight of a live game and is out of the game within a few years. 

            From the comments I’ve heard so far, Shumpert will be groomed at the point, where he split time in college. As opposed to drafting a point guard with better instincts than Douglas, the Knicks drafted another 2, except this time he’s not trapped in a 1’s body. Shumpert only averaged 3.7 assists per game, with an exceedingly average 1.5 A/TO ratio. Out of the top 10 guards in the ACC in Assists per game, that assist to turnover ratio was only better than Malcolm Delaney’s pathetic 1.30.

            Lastly, Shumpert will need to beat out Fields for the starting SG spot to justify his relevance on this team. If he comes off the bench to occasionally spell Fields, then the pick could and should have been used on Singleton. Singleton is a better and more versatile defender, with a more refined offensive game. So unless the Knicks are able to fill major minutes with him, the pick can be deemed a tactical mistake.

How it could work:

            My biggest gripe with the pick was that I thought the Knicks could have very easily traded back at least 5-10 spots, and still made the very same selection. Apparently I wasn’t correct. Shumpert was a consensus 13-20 pick in this draft, which is amazing considering his college resume was less than stellar. Realistically, people exponentially smarter and more well connected than myself believe Shumpert had several suitors in the middle of the first round. However misguided I believe those assessments are, there’s no denying the truth: Shumpert was a legitimate first round pick in this draft.

            I still do believe that the Knicks overdrafted Shumpert, and from the sound of it everyone (the crowd, Spike Lee, the ESPN booth) agreed with me. But, the case for Shumpert is that he was considered by many to be the best athlete in this draft. Assist to turnover ratio and shooting percentage aside, Shumpert hits every point on the checklist for physical traits you want from a professional basketball player.  

He’s a rangy 6’6”, which enables him to play both guard spots. He’s a muscular 225 pounds, so he won’t have to waste time bulking up or slimming down. And his all of his measureables put him in rarified air among not only his peers in the draft (his standing vertical leap of 36” was the highest at the combine), but also with anyone else in the league (his insane 42” running vertical leap is just .5 inch shy of what Vince Carter’s was at the combine). The cherry on top is the 6’10” wingspan which is what allowed him to be a menace in the passing lanes (8^th in the NCAA in steals per game last year). If you were create an ideal frame for a basketball player, Shumpert would be pretty damn close to what you came up with.

I don’t put all of the blame on Shumpert for his low shooting percentage and high turnover rate. Except for the one year where he had the benefit of a Lawal-Favors frontcourt, he played on some very bad Georgia Tech teams for a coach (Paul Hewitt) who hasn’t been even league-average since 2003.

Some of those bad shots he took were out of necessity because the other scoring options were Zach Peacock, and Glen Rice Jr. (there is a reason there aren’t YouTube highlights of these guys). Hewitt has always been a questionable tactician, who has had three winning seasons since 2003 despite a bevy of NBA talent.

Articles on Shumpert are heavy on unappealing terms like “upside” and “prospect”, and those definitions are unfortunately accurate. He certainly carries a lot of “if’s” with him, as in “If he can fix his jumper, then…” or “if he can learn the offense, then…” The one that covers everything is that “If Shumpert can be the exception to the rule of great combine guys who flame out, then…”.

THEN we can start talking about his ceiling, which is only constrained by how smart he is from tip-off to buzzer. Judging by those outstanding measurements, there is nothing that he physically won’t be able to do on a basketball court. Because this team already has two volume scorers, it means that Shumpert doesn’t need to be the second coming of Kobe Bryant offensively.

He just needs to improve his jumper to somewhere near league average, and be a good custodian for the offense when Chauncey takes his breaks. I don’t believe the front office would have taken this chance if he didn’t a) interview very well and b) respond well to the coaching they administered at workouts.

If everything comes up Milhouse for the Knicks, Shumpert will shoulder the same scoring load that Fields did, while providing significantly superior perimeter defense. If I were to idealize Shumpert, his build and resume are reminiscent of Rajon Rondo coming out of college, and their talents are very similar. At worst, he’ll be a spot defender off the bench capable of frustrating a team’s first or second option, and good for a “WOW” play every two games because of those hops. Kind of like Trevor Ariza back when he played for the Knicks.

Obviously, I want Shumpert to be good, and if he shows up for the season (whenever it starts) with a better jumper and improved judgment on his passes, that’s what I want to see. Amar’e is behind him 100%, while Melo seemed to show some more trepidation (he wanted Shelby), hopefully they can help him reach his very high ceiling from his exceedingly average floor. 

Who I like if the Knicks trade back, and who I don't

Really quick, who I like later if the Knicks move back or snag a 2^nd pick via a trade.

Darius Morris, G, Michigan: A 6’5” pure point guard with outstanding court vision. He could provide the steady hand running the offense which Douglas has only shown sporadically, and the ability to run the break which Chauncey no longer has.

Josh Selby G, Kansas: At 17? Hell no. Later in the first round is where the boom or bust potential of Selby becomes more seductive. Terrible year for a usually great coach at Kansas, but it’s difficult to deny his talent coming out of high school, and with the right coach and team, he could eventually be a top 5-10 player from this year’s draft.

Andrew Goudelock G, College of Charleston: REM-type sleeper here, but good god is this kid a talented scorer. I watched him singlehandedly torch Maryland last year, and for all of their faults they were actually an above average defensive team. ESPN has him going 60 to Sacramento which is entirely too low for a player who could be an explosive scoring force off the bench.

And a few who I don’t

The Morris Twins F, Kansas: Just no. I don’t see where they fit in the NBA, moreso with Marcus than Markieff. Surprisingly average rebounders, with very average athleticism. Marcus is a decidedly more high post player, while Markieff can grab some boards, but they might as well get matching “tweener” tattoos to go with all of their others.

Nikola Vucevic C USC: Speaking of unathletic, ESPN described him as being able to jump over a phonebook. Really whetting my appetite there, and it got better when I realized that he’s a center that likes to shoot the three. New York doesn’t need the European Sam Perkins/ Rodney Rogers, they need a traditional back to the basket center who can play some D. Vucevic does neither of those.

Kyle Singler F Duke, Nolan Smith G Duke: This looks like a definite homer pick. Do I believe either of these guys could be successful in other locales where they’re a better fit? If you define successful as solid bench player. Despite reputations to the contrary, both of these guys are not great shooters, in fact they’re very average (Singler .321 3 PT % last year, and a very streaky .399 in 2009). They’re both very smart players, and that can’t be discounted. Singler is better as a crafty mid-range scorer than a three shooter, but he doesn’t have the athleticism to take his man off the dribble at the next level. Smith is not an NBA point guard, and may be too small to start at the 2 in the NBA.

Lastly, I would love to have Kemba in New York. Despite all of his shortfalls, watching him run a break with Amar’e and Melo is just something that is impossible to pass up. I would not love to have Jimmer, because despite the fact that I think he may be one of the rare can’t miss shooters, he has absolutely no defensive aptitude. Let’s draft. 

Scenario #2: If the Knicks trade up

I literally just changed my mind on this. For the past few days, I thought Klay Thompson was the clear-cut choice in terms of somebody to move up for. Although the Knicks don’t necessarily NEED to add to their offense, this would give them the third piece of a big three ala the Celtics. By no means am I comparing the talent level, but instead using the Celtics blueprint for player types ideal for big three.  

It starts with a solid low post threat with a consistent J out to 15 feet (Garnett). Next, there is a true isolation scorer with a deadly midrange game and the ability to knock down threes at an above average clip (Pierce). And lastly, a deep ball shooter with such bulls eye accuracy that the defense is forced to give the first two pieces space to work, or else risk getting buried by a quick 9-0 run (Allen). I was firmly convinced that Thompson could be that last piece for the Knicks. Obviously not at the clip that Allen is for the Celtics, but effective enough to inspire the fear of that run in defenses, giving Melo and STAT free reign.   

But the one thing that made me change my mind was Mike Nugent. You see, just like kickers, I believe that you don’t want to draft your shooters. The Jets drafted Nugent in 2007, a can’t miss college kicker from OSU and, well, he missed… a lot. Enough that they eventually brought in veteran Jay Feely to challenge for the job, and eventually replace him. I’d be much more willing to sacrifice leg power (or in a shooters case athleticism) for accuracy and poise in the big moment (applicable to both positions).

Sure, every once in a while there’s an outlier like Steph Curry who shows no ill effects of adjusting to the league, namely NBA defenses and the extended three point line. But plenty of other outstanding 3 point shooters – like JJ Redick, Salim Stoudamire, and Steve Novak – saw their percentages fall noticeably from their senior year in college to their rookie year in the NBA. Only one of those three (Redick) has regained his reputation as someone that has to be accounted for from 30 feet in.  

Assuming that a truly elite NBA 3 point shooter shoots 40%, last year there were no elite rookie 3-point shooters (Gary Neal went undrafted out of Towson in 2007). There were six elite 2^nd year shooters (Curry: 44.2 %, Reggie Williams 42.3 %, Wesley Matthews 40.7 %, Ty Lawson 40.4 %, Austin Daye: 40.1 %, and Jodie Meeks 39.7%), and three elite third year shooters (Anthony Morrow 41.9 %, Kevin Love 41.7 %, Courtney Lee 40.8 %).

Now, to wrap this up, almost half of the players mentioned above were undrafted. Drafting a great shooter is a very inexact science, kind of like drafting a quarterback. You know that rebounding transfers to the NBA, same with elite athleticism, and solid defense, mainly because all of these tools are defined heavily by effort.

A shooter needs deft touch from a distance well beyond where the line dictates, fearlessness – not just in the waning moments but also in the face of a charging defender – and enough confidence that it radiates to their teammates, who then never question giving them the ball in a big moment. All against significantly stiffer competition than in college, and without the benefit of preheating the oven with 3 or 4 warm up threes. To conclude, would I take Thompson if he inexplicably fell to 17? Yes. But what I want to trade up for is more athleticism and defense, so the pick is…

I watched him play in college every time the Seminoles played the Terps, and every time came away wowed at just how physically impressive he was in person. More than with any other player I saw in 4 years, besides Derrick Favors, Chris Singleton had an NBA ready body.

What Singleton is, is the draft’s best defender, and he might lap the field in that department. The minute he ties off the Nikes, he will immediately be the most effective defender in New York at three different positions.

Naturally, he profiles as a small forward, which is the spot he played for the Seminoles. But his height and length mean that he’s capable of guarding the majority of the 4’s in the league, and his outstanding foot speed means that pick and roll switches with a shooting guard would present a challenge only in exemplary circumstances (like a lightning quick Monta Ellis).

With all of the firepower that the Knicks have, what they need is the ability to erase one player off the floor from the opposing team. If they could turn a great player into an above average one, or were capable of turning a Big 3 (whether it be Miami or Boston) into a Medium 2.25, they could win an extra 5-6 games per year. Right now, Singleton can guard 90% of players that he’ll be matched up with at the NBA level.

In terms of his offense, he’s not raw, but certainly much closer to rare than medium, as evidenced by the fact that last year the Noles built a condo complex with all the bricks they laid. How much of this is this fault has been debated by scouts. There are those that say that he’s looked exponentially more effective in summer camps than he did in Leonard Hamilton’s plodding system.

Last year doesn’t provide much help in terms of judging where his offensive game stands. Somewhere between 9/16 for 28 points against national runner u Butler, and 2/11 for 6 points against ACC cellar dweller Wake Forest. Could he develop into a decent shooter (.368% from 3 last year)? Like I just said, it’s difficult to predict from college to the pro’s, but it would just be gravy.

There are a handful of players in the past 20 years (Rodman, Artest, LeBron) who have been blessed with the unique athletic gifts that Singleton possesses. With a little coaching, and some time to pick up player tendencies and judge the officials foul calls, he presents the tantalizing option of being able to shut down anybody from 6’5” – 6’10”, no matter their skill level.

My theme for this year is a player who would allow Amar’e or Melo to maximize their offensive attributes by alleviating them of primary defensive responsibilities. Singleton is the one player in this draft that would be able to cover either Amar’e or Carmelo’s man not just effectively, but better than either of the stars could.  

Shit the NBA Draft is in 2 days. Scenario #1: If the Knicks keep the 17th pick

Take a deep breath with me Knicks fans. Unlike back in '85 when the Knicks won the lottery with Ewing, we're not in desperate need of a franchise altering player. This year, for the first time since Spree and Houston played the wings, the draft will not be an all or nothing affair. When you read season previews this year, no matter where they are written, or how biased they may be, they will all have one thing in common: the Knicks finishing with a winning record, and thus the promise of playoff basketball at the Garden. And what luck, we can finally see the Knicks name slotted into a spot in the first round!

So for the 2011 draft, the team should not necessarily be looking to upgrade their already explosive scoring ability. There are three concrete scenarios that could happen with the Knicks pick in the draft at 17^th overall: they stand pat, they move up, or they trade down. I will present who I think they will take in all three scenarios, and considering my column on the Jets draft, you should probably deem all of these players irrelevant.

If the Knicks stay put: 

            If there’s one stat that usually holds true from the college ranks to the NBA, it’s rebounding. The defenses in the pros are significantly more stingy, so players that appeared to be offensive maestros in March, turn into one note bench scorers in this league. However, for some reason, people who can rebound in college can rebound in the NBA. Kevin Love was an outstanding rebounder at UCLA (10.6 RPG), which translated to only a small dip in his rookie year (9.1) before becoming the leading rebounder in the league this year.

Well Kenneth Faried, by almost all of the numbers, could quite possibly have been the most prolific rebounder in the history of college basketball. Single season numbers (14.5 RPG in 2011, 1^st all time), career numbers (1673 rebounds, 1^st all time), any way you cut it, Faried’s name is peppered all over the college basketball rebounding leader boards. What this guy can do is a huge need for the Knicks, a team that ranked 20^th in rebounds per game in 2011. Their two best rebounders are also their best scorers, which is never an ideal situation unless you have a monstrous center in the mold of a Dwight Howard.

The biggest worries about Faried are that he is undersized (6’8”), and that he played against less than stellar competition in college. The latter doubt can be assuaged immediately by taking a look at his game logs from last year. Early in the season, Morehead State played Florida and Ohio State. Both teams were national title contenders all year, and both had large and talented front line players (Sullinger, Lauderdale, Mack, Tyus, Parsons).

Faried emerged from the Swamp with a 20 point 18 rebound game in a five point loss. By comparison, Florida’s frontcourt of Parsons, Tyus, and Mack finished with 24 points and 22 rebounds COMBINED. At the :38 mark, Billy Donovan admitted that his normally towering front court got dominated by Faried ALONE. Faried also similarly outplayed the highly touted OSU front court of Lauderdale and Sullinger by outrebounding them 12 to 10, outscoring them 15 to 10, taking less shots and shooting a higher percentage. Oh, and he also chalked up 5 steals against the most well organized offense in college basketball. Did I mention that he’s the only center who ranked in the top 25 in blocks and the top 40 in steals last year?

The undersized knock is slightly more worrisome, but not completely damning. He is only 6’7” or 6’8”, but the NBA has had their share of outstanding undersized rebounders, but to be realistic, Faried doesn’t possess the offensive tools of Sir Charles, and is probably a better defender right off the bat. 

No, a more apt comparison for Faried would be an outstandingly productive rebounder from a small college. A guy who was capable of guarding almost every SF or PF in the NBA at his peak, and who proved a vital cog on five different championship teams. That’s more like it. Those five rings (the one’s on his fingers) show that every championship team has a place for a Rodman, and with a little bit of time in the gym, Faried could be that physical, gritty, annoying player that every championship team has in some capacity.

Needless to say, this guy brings a lot of dirty work-type intangibles to the table, he’s an explosive (if not necessarily fluid) athlete with a raw offensive game mostly reliant on dunks. . If he can translate his rebounding to the next level, and take Amar’e’s place guarding the post scoring threat on the opposition, then he’s certainly a fit. I would much rather have a more rested, less physically taxed Stoudemire expending most of his energy getting buckets, and not having to guard the Bosh’s, Boozer’s, and Bogut’s of the world. Faried would give us that luxury. 

# 9: New England Patriots vs. New York Jets

Why this is on the list:

If there is any rivalry where the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt” is most applicable, it’s this one. Bill Belichick hastily scribbling his resignation as Jets head coach on a cocktail napkin, and then proceeding to become one of the best coaches in NFL history in New England. Eric Mangini turning the Jets into “I Can’t Believe it’s Not Patriots!”, and then proceeding to lose to his mentor in five out of his seven meetings. Ty Law anchoring the Patriots secondary and playing a starring role in all three of their Super Bowls, and then turning in a Pro Bowl year with the Jets in 2005, and another year with them in 2008. Curtis Martin being named to the Patriots all 1990’s team, and then becoming the Jets all time leading rusher. Intermingling between the teams has proved to be just another spark in what has been an escalating feud since 2001.

The rivalry in the 2000s started on September 23, 2001, a day that created a seismic shift in the AFC East and football as a whole. The Jets had thoroughly dominated the Patriots recently, winning 6 of the previous 7. They would even win on that day, 10-3, but the score of that game was secondary to one play on a QB roll out. Early in the fourth quarter of the game, Drew Bledsoe dragged his heavy immobile feet of the pocket and rolled right in an attempt to pick up a first down and keep the Patriots hopes alive. Mo Lewis had other ideas, and laid a crushing hit to Bledsoe’s sternum, which caused internal bleeding in Bledsoe’s lungs.  

The hit appeared to put the kibosh on the Patriots season hopes. Bledsoe was their three-time Pro Bowl quarterback, who they had just locked up for the next ten years at roughly the cost of two arms and a leg ($103 million). However many caveats there may be, one thing is definitely for sure. That hit greatly hastened the arrival of this guy. With every touchdown pass he throws, Tom Brady continues to make his ascension to being the greatest QB of all time (if he hasn’t already reached to the mountain top). He’s capable of making every throw on the field with pinpoint accuracy, and when he has protection, there’s no better QB inside the pocket. He’s made Deion Branch and Troy Brown look very good, and has given Randy Moss and Wes Welker (the poor man’s Wayne Chrebet to fans of my persuasion) solid hall of fame arguments.  

But that is just what makes him very good. By the standards that measure greatness, Brady is unmatched. In the 4^th quarter, if he has the ball with two minutes left and a chance to win, the opposition might as well cue up “Taps” on the sideline. His accuracy and touch go from All-Pro to All-Midas at the pivotal moments, and when the calendars switch, he IS the reason the Patriots win games. His emergence under center coincided with a period of Patriots dominance where they won 12 of the next 14 matchups in the series. And to think, it all could have been avoided if Mo Lewis (an outstanding linebacker in his own right who was stuck on bad Jets teams for the majority of his career) had just applied the brakes before guiding Drew Bledsoe to the sideline. 

Despite all of the team switching, icy handshakes, and probing video cameras, this rivalry would not be on the list without one man: Rex Ryan. Before he held the press conference on his noted aversion to ring kissing, the series stood at 13-4 Patriots since 2001, including a 37-16 playoff beat down in 2006, and an 0-8 record for Gang Green at the Meadowlands. Since that day, Ryan has piloted the Jets to home wins in both years, and a shocking upset of the heavily favored Pats at Foxboro in the 2010 AFC Divisional Round.

The series has now been characterized by adjustments on both sides of the ball, instead of just the Jets trying to withstand beatings. After Ryan used his trademark heavy pressure, blitzing defense to earn the Jets a 28-14 win in Week 2, Belichick adjusted. In a heavily anticipated Week 13 matchup between two 9-2 teams, he drew up some flawless schematics (plenty of max protect, and short quick routes), and the Patriots executed them to perfection in a 45-3 embarrassment of the Jets in what was probably the most proficient game of football played by any team in 2010.

When the playoffs rolled around, Ryan dialed back his “cut the head off the snake strategy”, and opted to prepare for Brady’s rain of passes by opening up the umbrella. With 7 defensive backs dressing, including the very abstract tactic of Marquice Cole playing defensive end, Brady and the Pats offense were thoroughly flummoxed for the first time since their Week 2 matchup, and the Jets shocked the world (most of all Las Vegas) by pulling off the huge upset.

This rivalry simmered through most of the decade, heated up briefly with the Mangini hiring, and has now definitely reached a boiling point since 2009. The assumption can be made that, if both teams can keep their star players out of the infirmary, they will be two of the top 4 teams in the AFC this coming year.

Why this Isn’t Higher:

            I’m very aware that I’m going to catch a lot of flak for this. Although I am a rabid follower of Gang Green, I would be remiss not to mention that from 2003-2007, the Jets provided occasionally stiff competition, but only one win. In order for a rivalry to exist, there needs to be a give and take on both sides. New England sees the Bills twice a year, but they have been the main culprit in the extinction of Buffalo for many years now.

            The Patriots have been a model franchise since the turn of the century, and quite honestly very few teams have been able to provide legitimate competition for them in a lot of the years since then (including only one in the 2007 season as my dad, uncles, and cousins regularly remind me). Plenty of people can make the argument that the Colts – Patriots matchup has provided some of the most compelling football of not just the past 10 years, but possibly the past 25. I can’t argue there. The teams both possess exceptional talents on either side of the ball, and might as well start the year with a January bye. But just as I’ve stated before, it’s simply too sanitized for me. Just take quick look; better A or B? Better 1 or 2? It’s football at its highest level, but I can almost guarantee you that in the mind of Patriots fans, that loss to the Jets in this year’s playoffs supersedes any loss they’ve had to the Colts in recent memory. Just the same as the 45-3 debacle ate at me for weeks until that very game.

            In conclusion, this is a potentially great burgeoning rivalry that, despite brief lapses in competitiveness from one team, maintained its steam throughout the decade. Along with the blowout losses, there have been epic battles (the playoffs this year, the Favre vs. Cassel game) and outstanding rivalries (Ryan vs. Belichick, Revis vs. Moss). To those who say that this doesn’t qualify in your top 10, I have more than considered your point of view.

However, the case for the Jets is that they were a very good team in their own right, going up against a squad that dominated professional football for almost the entire 10-year span. Since 2001, The Jets have participated in postseason football six times, tied with the Ravens for 4^th most in the AFC (the top 3 teams are exactly who you think they are). I’ll be the first to admit that the Jets have had their down years (happens sometimes when you’re down to your third string quarterback by the second half of your first game), but they maintained a surprising level of consistency during the 2000’s.  

When the two teams have played games, it has mattered not because of the proximity of the cities, but because of the success both teams have enjoyed. 13-2 Patriots vs. 10-5 Jets in 2004, 6-3 Jets vs. 5-4 Patriots in 2008, 9-2 vs. 9-2 last year. They have split two playoff matchups, the most recent of which was the highest rated divisional playoff game since 1997.

Lastly, take into consideration that another rivalry on this list was extremely one sided (in terms of championship and postseason success) for a much longer period of time, and yet it has been widely considered the pre-eminent sports rivalry of the past 100 years.  To say that the Yankees and the Red Sox would not have made a top 10 rivalries list in every decade before this one would be ludicrous. And as the Sox can tell you, all it takes is one.

#10: Manny Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Marquez

Anybody who knows me at all knows that I’m a huge boxing fan. Just like football, it’s probably because boxing is a sport that my malnourished Blue Monstar frame won't allow me to play. During the past decade, boxing has enjoyed a rebirth in the featherweight-light heavyweight divisions, which has fortunately diverted attention from the albatross that is the heavyweight division. If a boxing rivalry is going to be truly great, it has to have at least two chapters. When Jermain Taylor still had a career, he and Bernard Hopkins produced two memorable back-to-back fights (1:19). Arturo Gatti and Micky Ward produced three fights that were worthy of a movie, and then when the movie finally was made, none of them were included (If the sequel doesn’t’ happen, I will never forgive Mark Wahlberg for this.)

            But this post is dedicated to the draw and 12 round split decision that Juan Manuel Marquez and Manny Pacquiao have had, and the third one upcoming in November.

Why this is on the list:

As Jim Lampley will be happy to tell you, fights are made on styles. If the adage is true, then this might be the best boxing rivalry of the past 10 years, active or not. In these two fights, Pacquiao was a prototype of the boxer that he is today. In terms of raw boxing talent and athletic ability, it’s evident from early on that Pacquiao should be the runaway winner. The quick, active feet, blinding hand speed (1:50), and overwhelming power from every geometric angle are all there. But what Pacquiao didn’t have at this point in his career was the mental game, which came courtesy of Freddie Roach. For the duration of both fights, Roach completely dictated Pacquiao’s in ring, round to round strategy. Listen for the double jab suggestion at 3:58, and watch how much Pac relies on it in the 3rd. When Pacquiao started taking on water in the middle of rounds, he was incapable of fixing the problem himself, or even creating a stopgap. Quite simply, he had difficulty boxing and thinking at the same time.

            While Marquez may have lagged behind in both age and athleticism, his ability to think his way through rounds was light years ahead of Manny's. Pacquiao was definitely the more visually exciting fighter, but he was also recklessly impetuous at times. At certain points when he got hit with a solid punch, he reacted less like a professional boxer, and more like (4:00) a guy who got sucker punched outside of a bar. Mistakes like these from Pacquiao were the reason Marquez was able to strategize his way back into both fights. In stark contrast to Pacquiao, Marquez is a brilliant in ring tactician, who covered his own weaknesses while spotting his opponent’s all with live ammunition flying by and sometimes into his head.

In the rounds that he wins, such as Round 5 of the second fight, he noticeably tempers Pacquiao’s frenetic pace, and counter punches so effectively that you would think he’s flipping through Freddie Roach’s playbook between rounds. When he landed his first big right hand in Pacquiao-Marquez I, he did so by first feinting with a left to the body (9:33), and then shooting over the top of Pacquiao's lowered defenses. After the initial success, he beat that strategy into the Pacquiao's head, faking with a left, waiting for Pacquiao’s hands to drop, and then hammering him with overhand rights all through the middle rounds. 

  Marquez had the unenviable task of of climbing out of an early points hole against the best boxer in the world both times they fought, (after a third round knockdown in the second fight, and after an absurd three first round knockdowns in the first). If he was simply able to stay on his feet, the middle rounds provide compelling evidence that he could have won both matches, and maybe Freddie Roach wouldn't have his own TV show today.
As his shirts say, Manny does know "BOOM", and he brings a fistful of left handed bombs to every fight. But Marquez is the only guy who has consistently found a way of diffusing them by the middle rounds, which makes the third fight so compelling. Pacquiao has knocked Marquez down plenty, he's never really hurt him badly except on the scorecards. Roach admits that Marquez has given "them" problems in the past, something that the normally brash trainer doesn't usually concede to opponents. If Marquez is only off his feet between rounds in this fight, instead of in the middle of them, there is a possibility that he knows Manny just well enough to outbox the champ for 12 rounds.

In terms of the rivalry aspect, exhibit A would be the first round of the first fight. Not only does Pacquiao knock Marquez down three times, HE BREAKS MARQUEZ’S NOSE (8:15). That’s right, Marquez mounts a furious 11 round comeback to force a draw with a bleeding and broken nose.  Both fighters developed nasty looking cuts over the course of the fights, including Marquez’s particularly grotesque gash (4:25) over his right eye in the middle and late rounds of the second.

As much as these guys do respect each other, I take it any time some guy punches you in the face enough times to draw blood, there’s a healthy amount of dislike. I’d be right. Marquez believes he was robbed in the first two fights, and that’s not necessarily far from the truth. I scored the first fight 114-112 Pacquiao, and the second 114-113 Pacquiao, and I had a number of rounds in each fight that I had to re-watch 2 or 3 times to determine a winner. 

Why this isn’t higher:

Two reasons. The first being that there have only been three fights, including the November date. Both fights were high quality, but if you compare this to say a Nadal-Federer rivalry, it doesn’t stack up. Tennis and boxing are both one on one sports, and both matchups have produced riveting moments, but Pacquiao has fought Marquez twice, while Federer and Nadal have clashed 25 times.

             The primary reason is that the November fight is a huge question mark, not just to live up to the standard of the first two fights, but to even be a competitive fight at all. Since the second fight in 2008, Pacquiao has attained legendary status. With the exception of his last fight with Mosley (which was so unpalatable that I didn’t buy it), he has dismantled and embarrassed everyone put in front of him. In 3 years, Roach has removed all of the impurities in Pacquiao’s form, and molded him into an almost flawless boxer. He has improved his defense in all areas, including most importantly no longer leaving himself open to big counters when he throws his powerful straight left. In terms of his offense, opponents now actually need to be conscious of his right hand in order to remain in that state (ask Miguel Cotto at 1:05).

            While Pacquiao has aged and improved, Marquez seems to have borrowed more from the former camp than the latter. It's not his fault, he’s 37 now, and unlike Bernard Hopkins, his weight class relies heavily on footwork on quickness which are the first things to go. He has a unanimous loss to Floyd Mayweather at the same weight that he’ll be fighting at on November 12. Pacquiao has a way of making aging Mexican fighters accelerate their retirement planning (first Erik Morales, and then memorably Oscar de la Hoya). As smart of a fighter as Marquez is, he’s definitely on the down-slope of the athletic bell curve, while Pacquiao might be just slightly past his peak. If Pacquiao runs roughshod over Marquez in the third fight, then this fight falls off the list. If Marquez can dodge Pacquiao’s heat seeking left’s for 12 rounds, and can outbox him like he’s done in 75% of the rounds they’ve met, then it moves up. Until then, it’s #10. 

Top 10 Rivalries of the past 10 years: Am I missing anything?

After witnessing another great round of the Federer – Nadal rivalry on Sunday, I got to thinking about what the top 10 sports rivalries are right now, extending back the past 10 years. Historical significance is a very important factor, but clearly not paramount when it comes to creating the ideal atmosphere of hate and mutual respect necessary for a rivalry. What matters right now?

For example, the Cubs and the Cardinals have supposedly been the Hatfield’s and the McCoy’s of the Midwest since the mound was raised. But while the Cardinals have enjoyed a healthy amount of success since the turn of the millennium, the Cubs have treated their fans to a Rollercoaster-like combination of high hopes, precipitous lows, and an ultimately predictable abridged ending. In the last two years, the Reds have produced more bad blood moments with the Cardinals than the Cubs did in the past 8, so in my mind there’s no question what the real rivalry is.

             Still, in most sports, the big rivalries of the past still hold all the clout today. The Yankees and the Red Sox have shared two all-time great playoff series over the past 10 years, trading celebratory and agonizing results in back to back years. The Lakers and the Celtics treated NBA fans to two outstanding NBA finals, and David Stern to stratospheric ratings. Kevin Garnett and Kobe Bryant re-injected some much needed vitriol into the long dormant alpha rivalry in the NBA. Although boxing has had several great rivalries in the past 10 years (Pacquiao v. Morales, Morales v. Barrera, and the immortal Gatti v. Ward), the only one still active is Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez.

            The three rivalries listed above are the obvious ones in major sports, aka the one’s that aren’t as fun to write about. However, I’m still very much up in the air in three major categories: NFL, College Football, and College Basketball. I don’t watch nearly enough hockey to even pretend to have an educated opinion of where the boiling blood can melt the ice there. The same can be said for soccer. There are certain qualifiers I have for prospective rivalries to be included.

·        The team have to play in the same division: 

      The teams need to play within a reasonable proximity of each other, and that almost guarantees that they must play within the same division. This disqualifies the Patriots vs. Colts, and Texas vs. Ohio St arguments. When the teams do meet, it’s almost always the pinnacle of football perfection on the field. Cream of the crop players and legendary coaches are almost always a given. The games take on the feel of watching two chess grand masters seamlessly executing their game plans, and manipulating the pieces almost flawlessly.

But where these games fall short is the emotional gravitas resembles…a game of chess. One team wins, and one teams loses. The coaches practically fall all over each other praising the genius of their counterpart. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning shoot the shit like a couple of best friends who had to be split up during a game of pick up basketball because of how dominant they both are, and everyone goes on their merry way.

This is not a rivalry. Ray Lewis welcoming Rashard Mendenhall to the NFL with a sling is a rivalry. Wes Welker sounding like a doctor of podiatry, and “I don’t watch that show, I hate the Jets” also fits. Rivalries aren’t just separated with state lines, and different colored shirts. They’re separated with Red Rivers, and Tobacco Roads. The bowls aren’t Super, they’re Iron, and blood, tears, and sweat should be produced in that order. If the word respect doesn’t have the prefix of begrudging, then you need not apply.

As a fan, I’ve created a very simple litmus test for this. The THEM test. As in, “we didn’t just lose, we lost to THEM.” If both teams and fanbases don’t have a solid argument for the THEM test, it’s not worth mentioning.

      It needs to mean something today: 

      Not as much of a determining factor, but still very important. This is a 10 year span, but weighed more heavily the closer the games get to the present. Redskins – Cowboys had it’s stint where both teams were good, but going into next year there’s nothing to see. Michigan – Ohio St is almost undoubtedly the all time king of College Football, but both programs will start 2011 rebuilding and undetermined respectively. When the teams in question step on the field/court in 2011, will it matter?

Harrison Barnes and Austin Rivers matching supreme athletic prowess to determine North Carolina supremacy. The Eagles trying to induce another agonizing second half of the season in East Rutherford when their human pyrotechnic show comes to East Rutherford Week 11. Or maybe Tony Romo and company trying to sweep both of those teams in the penultimate and final games of the year to prevent a Jerry Jones spring cleaning.

So let me know if I’m missing anything. I’ve already got my list of rivalries in my head that I’ll be paring down from the NFL, College Basketball, and College Football. I may be missing a few but right now I’ve got:

NFL:

Jets vs. Patriots

Ravens vs. Steelers

Giants vs. Cowboys

Giants vs. Eagles

Eagles vs. Cowboys

Packers vs. Bears

College Basketball:

Duke vs. UNC

UConn vs. Syracuse

Kentucky vs. Louisville (Calipari and Pitino and in state rivalry allow for breaking of first rule)

Kansas vs. Texas

College Football:

Texas vs. Oklahoma

Auburn vs. Alabama

Florida vs. Alabama

Shaq: Very Good, but not the best Center I've ever seen.

Considering my sports teams haven’t given me to much fodder to blog about recently, I'm switching my attention to Shaquille O’Neal’s retirement. When I was a kid, I worshipped at the church of Shaq. As a Knicks fan who rooted for a team almost completely devoid of personality and charisma, Shaq represented a sports figure that kids gravitated to.

He had action figures (I had them), a video game (I rented it, it was awful), and movies (Steel over Kazaam). And just like all of his products, I feel that as incredibly entertaining as they were at the time, they’re a bit overrated. Not as much as his merchandise, but one particular idea has stuck in my craw when it comes to historical comparisons for the Big Aristotle.

Just about every respected basketball writer I’ve seen has given the nod to O’Neal over Hakeem Olajuwon in the all time center rankings. This is important to me because of the other four big men considered for the top five centers (Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul Jabbar, and Mikan/Malone), those two were the only two I saw play. Needless to say, as much of an affable guy as Shaq is, and as hilarious as his press conference is right now, there was one more name he should have said after Bill Russell, Kareem, and Wilt Chamberlain when mentioning the names above him on the list.

The biggest difficulty about comparing the two is that they narrowly missed playing each other in their respective primes. The 1995 Finals saw Hakeem at the peak of his Dream Shake powers, while Shaq was still just flicking on the signal to turn the corner. Both of these players are all time greats, first ballot hall of famers, and dominators of an era of basketball when talented big men were a dime a dozen. They each had their superhuman strengths and wealths of talent

What Shaq represented on the surface was brute strength. The ability to overpower people like nothing seen in sports outside of Andre the Giant. I don’t think there’s one center at any point in their career that could have been put in front of the Diesel and stood up to the physical pounding they’d be subjected to for 48 minutes without yielding at least a double-double.

But there was definitely more to Shaq’s game. When he started seeing the far reaches of where his game could extend to, he started sneaking in touches of finesse. What was once a charging elephant now had a pretty baseline spin move, which was borderline un-guardable due to the fear of getting trampled.

After years of getting double-teamed, Shaq also developed into a very good passer. Not on level of Walton, but certainly in the elite among centers. In Game 1 of the 1995 NBA finals, he flirted with a triple-double but just missed closing the deal with 9 assists.

Hakeem represented a completely different type of player. There was definitely a powerful aspect to him on his dunks, but if you were looking at the top half of him you were missing the show. His footwork at the center position hasn’t been equaled, and I don’t believe it ever will be. The array of post moves in his arsenal was dizzying, and they took their toll on some of the best centers of all time. He outplayed Ewing in the 94 finals. He outplayed Shaq in the 95 finals. And David Robinson still breaks into cold sweats any time he’s presented with an award.

Hakeem was also quite possibly the best two way center to ever play the game. Because for all of the work he did on the offensive end, his defensive statistics jump out even more. He’s still the NBA’s all time leader in blocks. He’s 12^th in total rebounds, and an unheard of 8^th in steals. He had 2162 steals in his career, to put it in perspective, the next highest center on that list is Robinson at 48^th with 1388.

I believe that Olajuwon separates himself from the Man who has many names when you look at their weaknesses.

The glaring one for Shaq was his free throw shooting. Reportedly he refused to heed the ever “personable” Rick Barry’s words to shoot his FT’s underhanded, and instead he was a 60% free throw shooter once in his career, and a 40% free throw shooter 6 times. The hack a Shaq strategy was embarrassing to watch, especially when Poppovich so brutally exploited it when Shaq was playing for the Suns in the playoffs.  Hakeem never had that trouble, shooting 71 % for his career, and routinely in the mid 70’s during his prime.

However, I knock Shaq more for his malaise on the other end of the floor. Shaq fit the phrase that I hate most in the NBA which is a “disinterested” defender. When he wanted to be, he could be a shot blocking menace and a handle for 95% of centers in the league to get past.

But he didn’t always want to be, in fact, he regularly wasn’t. If you watch the Shaq and Hakeem highlights of Game 1 of the 1995 finals, Hakeem guards Shaq on nearly every play. On the other hand, there are plenty of times where Shaq is on the floor as a spectator as Hakeem decimates Horace Grant, especially late in the game.

Shaq made three All-Defense teams in his career, all three of which were second teams. He finished second to Zo, Dikembe, and most unforgivably, Ben Wallace. Not to take anything away from Big Ben, but Shaq was light years ahead of him in athleticism and talent, and yet Ben got the first team nod because he simply hustled more.

Shaq’s clashes with teammates at almost every stop in his career are obviously well documented. First Penny, then Kobe, D-Wade, and finally Steve Nash after reportedly stealing Nash’s TV show idea. The most memorable of all of these was Kobe, mainly because of what they gave up. Kobe may have started it by mentioning O’Neal’s groupie history, but Shaq was 31 to Kobe’s 25, and should have handled the feud in a manner befitting of the situation.

When you have the opportunity to turn your trophy room into a jewelry store, you patch up your differences, and continue the domination. It was only after he forced a trade from Miami, that people figured out that Shaq may very well have been an egotistical handle in the locker room.

Shaq was blessed to have played with two top 20 players nearing or at their prime, and another brief shooting star in Penny Hardaway. Hakeem had little to no help early in his career after Ralph Sampson was traded, before receiving Clyde Drexler and then Charles Barkley in the last few years of their career. Had the situations been flipped, I think Hakeem would have at minimum equaled O’Neal’s championship output, and Shaq would have had two rings at most, including the one in his ear.

To wrap it up, Shaq at his best was the most dominant force I’ve seen play basketball. A bulldozer on the court, and a marketing dream off of it. He’ll go down as one of the top 15 players of all time, and one of the top 5 sports personalities. But only in his dreams was he a better player than the real Nigerian Nightmare.