Dickran's Blog

Just a few drops in the bucket

2 years later

Lebron James won a championship.  Are you really that surprised?  Are you disappointed?  Did you hope he would fail?  Were you hoping to be able to criticize him for another year?  Were you hoping to be able to say that he would never be good enough?

Well now what?  Now he has to win 3 in a row? He has to hit the game winning shot in game 7?  He goes for 4o points 19 rebounds and 9 assists, and he’s expected to do that every night or he’s a failure. Cleveland gave away championships because they didn’t put enough talent around him.  Lebron put winning in front of everything when he went to Miami.  There’s no reason to doubt that this will become a regular occurrence.  He can defend any position.  He can score in so many ways.  He makes everyone around him better.  He’s not perfect.  No one is.  He’s the best player in the game. His average game is better than most people’s good game.  His good game is better than most people’s best games.

He will only get better until his age or health catches up with him.  Even then his ability will allow him to remain at a level higher than most.  His ability to do more than score will allow him to contribute for a longer period of time than most.

 

July 28, 2012 at 8:23 PM Comments (0)

Kobe or Lebron

My gut tells me Lebron. It always has. But it’s tough to deny Kobe’s mental and physical talents. He’s good. He’s very good. But given the choice, I’d still take Lebron. Many people give me dumbfounded reactions. We debate, discuss, and end up getting nowhere fast.

So I thought I’d do a little research. I’m convinced now more than ever that Lebron is the better pick. Evaluation of talent is such an subjective discussion.  Let’s compare the results of previous seasons.

Kobe won his first title in his fourth season. It was his second season with Shaq, who at the time was a dominating post presence. They won 3 in a row. Then they lost in the playoffs with basically the same roster. The next year they lost in the finals with the addition of Gary Payton and Karl Malone.  In 2004-2005, Shaq left, Payton and Malone retired, and the Lakers went 34-48 with Lamar Odom on the team. The next season 45-37.  The next season 42-40.  Then in 2007-2008 here comes Pau Gasol, and the Lakers made it to the Finals.  The last two years, they have won it all.

The Cleveland Cavaliers have made it to the NBA Finals.  They have had the best regular season record for 2 years in a row.  Any guesses on the best player besides Lebron on the Cavs roster over those years?  Drew Gooden?  Anderson Varejao?  Mo Williams?  Antawn Jamison or Shaq (the oldest active player in the NBA)?  Anyone want to engage in this discussion or debate?

Consensus would be that none of these players are as good as Pau or Shaq (in his earlier years). These players might not be considered as good Lamar Odom or Derek Fisher who are the 3rd and 4th best players on the Laker’s current roster.  If you go back to the first three championships, you have names like Glen Rice, Robert Horry, Rick Fox, and Ron Harper on those rosters.  Are any of the current Cavs players as good as those players at that time?

It’s pretty likely if Kobe and Lebron switched places, the Lakers would still win.  The question is would the Cavs still have the best record in the league?  Would they be in the playoffs? They would likely make the playoffs, but I certainly can’t see them with the best record or winning a ring.

Lebron wants to win.  He went to the team with D-Wade, arguably the 3rd best player in the NBA.  Chris Bosh, another top 15 player in the league, is there.  He knows he’ll be measured by rings.  Everyone knows he can play.  He doesn’t need fame or money.  He needs to win.  If he can’t win with these two players and a few role players, then I’m wrong.  I’m taking my chances.

July 15, 2010 at 9:11 PM Comments (0)

Is UConn bad for women’s basketball?

There has been quite a bit of talk about the UConn women’s basketball 72 game winning streak. Some of it is positive and some is negative.  I don’t think you can talk negatively about a team winning 72 games.  The criticism is of the sport itself and I think it’s on target.  Right or wrong, the criticism is good for the sport. Number one is that it’s attention. And attention good or bad is attention and more people will watch because of it. Number two, maybe it will make some of these programs step up who consistently underachieve. I think the lack of parity can be partially attributed to coaches who aren’t doing their jobs. Many coaches are only concerned about their next job as opposed to making their student athletes better. We know that high school basketball leaves a lot to be desired. This stems from a lack of fundamental development at young ages because of AAU and high school coaches who have selfish interests. It could be said that the same issues exist in the men’s game but I digress.

The athleticism in men’s basketball makes it more appealing to watch to the average fan. Fans like dunks.  Fans like the high wire acts. It doesn’t mean it’s better basketball. In many cases it’s not. But that doesn’t change the fact that most fans don’t know what good basketball looks like. I’m not even sure about some of the coaches out there. But more fans means more money which is what today’s world all about.

Football is popular because it’s exciting.  It’s fast paced.  I’ve never understood why people like NASCAR racing, but it’s fast.  There’s a reason the smaller circuits don’t get as many fans.  The cars don’t go as fast.  The truck series?  Really?  It’s not even close.

There’s a reason there’s been a decline in the popularity of baseball. It’s boring. Kids don’t like it and they don’t play it. People can say what they want about performance enhancing drugs, but at the end of the day, baseball has made more money and had more fans as a result. Not saying it’s right or wrong.  It just is.  People would rather see somebody hit home runs as opposed to strike people out. Which is more exciting, 10-9 or 1-0? To a baseball purist, maybe 1-0, but to the average fan, 10-9.

Sorry for the tangent, but I think it’s relevant.  Bringing us back to women’s basketball.  People like competition. Close games are more fun to watch. How many times have you heard “they let them come back to keep people watching”? Not that it’s true, but if it’s a blow out, people change the channel, people leave early. People like rivalries. People like excitement. UConn is in Storrs, CT.  That’s not what I would call a big market.  And who wants to see a team win by 20 every night? The reason I don’t like the movies Titanic and Pearl Harbor…I already know what’s going to happen.

I like watching UConn, because I’m more than just a basketball fan. Maybe if I were a movie aficionado, I might have more appreciation for those movies.  In any case, this is a compliment to UConn and a challenge to the rest of women’s college basketball.  STEP UP!!!  Is there really that much of a disparity in talent between one team and all the rest?  Are the players on Geno’s team really that much better than everybody else?  Tina Charles and Maya Moore may be the best two players at their positions, but are the other three players dominant at their positions?  Can teams not figure out a way to at least keep a game close?  Can’t at least one other team at least compete?

When a team wins a basketball game, there’s always more than one reason.  Putting more points on the scoreboard, is more than just making more shots.  It could be shooting better shots, having less turnovers, getting more rebounds, and heck even getting lucky.  When a team wins 72 straight games, there’s more than one reason.  And it looks to me like the UConn program is hitting all the right buttons. From administration, to faculty, coaches, players, managers, and fans, they’ve got a recipe for success. (At least if they aren’t cheating and I seriously doubt that’s the case)

So let’s talk about parity.  If men’s players weren’t allowed to leave for the NBA, you’d have Carolina, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, and maybe 10-12 other programs dominating every year with Mid Majors having no chance. But even now, there’s not that much more parity. How many teams outside the power conferences make the Final Four in either men’s or women’s hoops? We might see one this year, but I wouldn’t bet on them going all the way. Last year, all 4 top seeds were in the final four.  Carolina ran through the tournament fairly easily.  If that team was around this year..parity?  No way.  Ok ok…forget hypothetical, but which 16 seed is going to win this weekend?  Yep, exactly.  Back when UCLA won 10 national championships in 12 years, things were extremely different.  The tournament was smaller.  Recruiting was different.  There weren’t as many teams.  There was no 3 point shot.  The list goes on and on.  What they accomplished was difficult.  They deserve credit.  But because of increased parity, that won’t happen again. The sport doesn’t want it to happen again.

And I certainly wouldn’t put any big surprises in the women’s Final Four.  UConn is setting the standard.  And they are setting it high.  There’s nothing wrong with that.  The rest of the teams will catch up…one day. And someone will look back and compare the teams of the future to this team.  And someone will say, well it was different then.  Because the rest of the world will catch up. And it won’t be when UConn loses a game, because they will eventually.  It will be years after when there are scores of teams competing for the top.

Women’s basketball hasn’t been around as long as men’s.  Women haven’t been playing as long.  I don’t know any statistics, but I bet the overwhelming majority of girls who play basketball when they are young do so in an organized setting. Girls don’t play on the playgrounds as much as boys do during their youth. That gap is closing, but there’s still a difference. Just like the 9 year old boy I met a couple weeks ago.  He was spouting off names and stats like they were his multiplication tables.  It’s only one example, but I would wager that there are more of him than there are girls at 9 years old. Many girls touch a basketball for the first time in a parks and recreational or AAU setting at 8 or 9 years old.  Many boys grow up with a basketball in their hand.  Many girls don’t. By 8 or 9 many boys have already played in 2 or 3 years worth of games. They know the rules.  They know where the baseline is.  Again, this doesn’t mean that boys learn to play the game better.  It just means that the men’s game is more advanced.

It’s the same with soccer.  Men’s soccer in America isn’t as good as it is in other countries.  There’s a reason that Canada won the most gold medals in the 2010 Winter Olympics.  People in different climates in different socio-economic backgrounds play different sports.  People with money are more likely to play golf than people without. Could someone out of a low income area be better than Tiger?  Of course, but we may never know. They grow up playing basketball not golf.  Imagine Tiger as a hoopstar.  UNGUARDABLE! Better than Jordan?  He may be “too short”, but his athleticism and mental game on a basketball court would be tough to combat.

Carolina women’s soccer program is another example of domination. They don’t get nearly the attention they deserve either, partly because it’s soccer.  But in the end, it’s been good for women’s soccer.  Other teams are stepping up to the challenge on the recruiting field which translates to the soccer field, but there’s still a ways to go.

History tells us that race and gender have had a big impact in all walks of life.   Racism and gender bias still exist.  If racism has been minimized, it’s been in sports. (One of the reasons sports is great)  Title IX may not have eliminated gender bias, but it has helped.  What it can’t do is change the past.  We’re still working towards overcoming those issues.  I prefer to admit the elephant is in the room and work to make things better.  If we believe things are equal, I believe we’re selling ourselves short.

I’m not a UConn groupie, but I hope they continue to pave the way towards better basketball.  I hope they keep winning until I’m on the sidelines as their opponent.

March 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM Comments (0)

Hypothesis: Mathematics and Basketball exhibit Similitude (Part IIIa)

Given information about basketball (what we know):

In its simplest form, basketball is a sport that consists of one team trying to put a sphere through a ring to score more points than their opponent while they also attempt to keep their opponent from scoring.

(pardon me while I state a few passionate thoughts about basketball)

While it shares similarities with other sports, basketball combines the best attributes of other sports into one.  It is fast paced, high scoring, and dynamic.  It requires the most unique combination of strength, speed, quickness, jumping ability, finesse, and mental fortitude along with the precise execution of all of the fundamental skills by all 5 players in unison. Other sports can boast they they have parts of these, but no sports can say they have them all.

(ok now back to breaking down basketball)

Basketball is played at many levels and by various ages whether in some organized form or on playgrounds and driveways across the world. The game is played according to various rules that can change from playground to playground or country to country. There are countless variations on the standard 5 on 5 game from individual competitive shooting games to 1 on 1 and 21.  Regardless, the fundamentals of the sport remain consistent no matter which version of the game might be played at any given time.

The ability to dribble, pass, and shoot the basketball, as well as the ability to defend are fundamental to the success of any basketball player or team.  There are a variety of techniques used in attempts to successfully execute these fundamentals.  Some techniques are generally accepted to be more successful than other, but the technique becomes irrelevant if the desired outcome is achieved.

The game of basketball starts with the position and movement of the feet, even though the ball is manipulated with the player’s hands.  When an athlete can learn how to move his or her feet quickly and correctly in order to achieve proper body position, the other skills can be executed much more easily.  Clearly, it is not enough to only teach footwork. Proper use of the hands must also be taught in order for a player and team to be successful.

Then coaches get to teach players about body position.  Teaching a player how to be in the right place at all times and how to get from one place to another in the most effective way possible is crucial to a player’s success.

Not to mention, it is important for players to get to those correct positions with and without the basketball. As a result, all of the footwork, hand movements, and body positioning must happen quickly, efficiently, and in the proper sequence in order for the player to be most successful.

It should be apparent that the best basketball players are highly skilled athletes.  Years and years of practice go into developing and perfecting the skills necessary to perform at the highest level.  Young children have not yet developed the strength or coordination to be highly proficient at these skills.  As a result, being able to make one lay-up might be an amazing achievement for them.  On the other hand, a professional basketball player should rarely miss a lay-up.

March 7, 2010 at 8:41 PM Comments (0)

Hypothesis: Mathematics and Basketball exhibit Similitude (Part IIb)

Mathematics is built off of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. These four basic arithmetic operations have led to countless innovations and discoveries in all parts of our world from math and science to business and psychology.  Poets and artists use math as do doctors, lawyers, writers and singers.

The simplest forms of mathematics are fundamental to our daily lives whether or not we realize it, know it, or admit it. Determining our grocery bill, doing our taxes, or separating dark clothes from light ones all involve mathematics.

Mathematics can also be quite diverse and complex.  Many students cringe when they hear differential equations, abstract algebra, or noneuclidean geometry. Whether it is derivatives, matrices, permutations, or trigonometry, mathematics has numerous flavors. From the simplest counting and arithmetic to the most complex and abstract concepts, math comes in many flavors. Regardless of the type of mathematics, all forms of it are rooted in addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.  Without a strong background in these fundamentals, success in mathematics cannot be achieved.

Mathematics has a diverse audience and widespread acceptance.  Math is practiced, studied, and researched all across the world.  Children and adults of all ages are involved with mathematics. Mathematics is done in solitude as well as in groups.  Researchers are racing to discover the next mathematical concepts that might explain certain phenomena or uncover other secrets.  As old as math is, it still works and it will always be a necessary part of human existence.

Mathematics is also very objective.  The answer to a math problem is either right or wrong.  A proof to a mathematical theorem is either valid or it is not.  There is little gray area in mathematics.  There may be multiple routes to achieving the correct answer, but there is only one correct answer.

July 25, 2009 at 3:44 PM Comments (0)

Hypothesis: Mathematics and Basketball exhibit Similitude (Part I)

Before I begin working on proving or disproving this hypothesis, I’d like to talk a little about why math and basketball are even in the same “coordinate plane”.  In other words, why am i even putting them in the same sentence?

This all started because much of my professional life revolves around both math and basketball. I spend hours each day working with young and middle aged adults in both topics.  My experiences tell me the similarities are more than astonishing.   Is it possible that two things that are usually considered diametrically opposed actually exhibit the Euclidean Geometric property of SIMILITUDE?  You don’t have to be sold on that fact yet.  In fact, I’m not completely sold yet either.  Hence evolves my quest to explore the hypothesis that they are “geometrically” similar.

Definition of similitude (similarity): In geometry, two polygons are similar if:
1.  They share the same number of sides.
2.  The corresponding angles are congruent.
3.  The corresponding sides are proportional to each other.

Another way of saying it is that the two figures can be scaled uniformly to be congruent to each other.

So can mathematics and basketball be scaled to be the same thing?  Can the parts be broken down in such a way that makes them proportional to each other?  Maybe other parts are congruent?  I know it seems odd.  Really odd in fact.  But I’m thinking it can be done.

Part II will outline the given information concerning mathematics.

Part III will outline the given information concerning basketball.

Part IV will evaluate the hypothesis and (attempt to) draw some sort of conculsion.

Or that’s at least how I’m planning things right now……

June 17, 2009 at 10:53 PM Comments (0)