One-and-Dumb

  

Andrew Wiggins at Kansas

          Think of the NBA and NCAA basketball. Think of the connections between the two. Eventually, you should come to the one-and-done rule. It basically says that a player must be out of high school for at least one year before entering the NBA draft (or the NBA in general in some form). This usually means the player ends up going to college for a year (or more), and then turning pro. Many current players have gone this route, and it has made almost a mockery of the NCAA basketball process.
          In fact, if you do some research into the matter, there seems to be more opinions opposed to the one-and-done rule than in favor. Adam Silver seems to be not only in favor or the rule, he wants to actually raise the NBA age minimum. I recognize how older players coming in would possibly lead to more mature players, but you are working against a player's earning potential.
          Let's parallel this to some of the other major sports. In baseball, a player can be drafted straight out of high school. Some international talent actually can sign at 16 or 17 years old. In golf, players can turn pro as teenagers. The same goes for tennis. Football is really the case where multiple years are required before going pro. However, I see a major difference between basketball and football: the physicality needed. For basketball, there is certainly a physical demand. It's a contact sport. However, a lot of what goes into it is pure athleticism. Look at Andrew Wiggins up above. Is he going to outmuscle LeBron James? No, no one is really. But can he possibly outmaneuver James? Probably not, but at least there's some semblance of a chance. Put him against any other player in the NBA, and Wiggins would have had a real shot at it because of his athleticism. He did not need a year in college for that. In fact, it only made him a year older and by extension, a year closer to losing that athleticism.
          By putting players one step closer to the end of their professional careers before they can enter the draft, you are seriously hurting earning potential. In addition, what about kids that have major injuries in that year of college ball? Joel Embiid, for example, got hurt near the end of his freshman year at Kansas. Would he have gotten hurt in the NBA? Maybe, but maybe not. If a player seriously gets hurt in that year of forced college ball, they're just plain screwed.
          And don't try saying it's for the sake of an education. Going to school for just one year makes a mockery of that idea. Heck, not even everyone goes to college for the one year. Emmanuel Mudiay ended up playing in China for a year, albeit due to eligibility concerns.
          Many pundits and respected authority figures have come out against the one-and-done rule, and you can count me among them. Before the rule, we got such talent as Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, and LeBron James straight out of high school. They were ready, just as I believe Wiggins was ready when he graduated high school. Just as I believe Ben Simmons has been ready. Let the kids play, because the one-and-done rule is one-and-dumb.

Tip of the hat to my buddy James for suggesting this blog topic. Check out his blog at naiveblogattempt.blogspot.com. Also, please let a comment below with any questions/comments you have about this post. Think it was awful? Let me know! I welcome all opinions, so long as they don't blatantly attack people.
         

A Win's a Win, Until It Isn't

http://a2.fssta.com/content/dam/fsdigital/RSN/Arizona/2015/5/18/pi-nba-warriors-luke-walton-steve-kerr-051815.vadapt.620.high.17.jpg

          Just a few days ago, Luke Walton, interim coach of the still-perfect Golden State Warriors, was named an NBA Coach of the Month. It makes sense, right? I mean, the Warriors have maintained a perfect record; they're blowing everyone else away right now. However, Walton has an 0-0 official coaching record. So what gives?
          Walton was not supposed to be the coach of the Warriors this season. Steve Kerr, who coached the Warriors to the NBA Title last season, was meant to step into his second season at the helm. However, complications from a spinal surgery have knocked him out of action in the meantime. So, the Warriors turned to Walton, and the team has continued to flourish. Walton coaches the team on the court, and Kerr gets credit for the wins. Wait, what?
          That's how the NBA is currently constructed. As mentioned in the article from the first link, written by Benjamin Hoffman of the New York Times, interim coaches that are not permanently replacing someone do not get credit for team wins. It doesn't tend to matter all that much, as it is a rare situation. Basically, a coach needs to be having serious health issues typically, and in his place an interim coach continues to win. As Hoffman again pointed out, it has happened with the Colts in the NFL (who have the same rules as the NBA) and previously with the all-time coaching wins leader, Don Nelson. The irony is not lost on me that both Nelson and the Walton/Kerr situation happened a bit with the Warriors.
          Does this all seem right though? To me, it doesn't, but that's mainly because I see it as someone not getting credit for doing his job. Walton has downplayed the situation, but Kerr has come out and voiced much displeasure with it.
          Others have mentioned that the cause for not allowing interims to get credit for wins is because of limited control of the team. That may be so, but are they doing enough to help their teams win?
          Another point brought up by Hoffman was that changing the rules to give interim coaches credit for wins would chance the rule books. Don Nelson would no longer be the all-time coaching win leader if that were the case. To that I respond: is the NBA so afraid of changing the rule book that it would work against a case where someone is not being treated fairly just to keep it with the status quo? Commissioner Adam Silver has done a great job so far being progressive with the league. It's time to let the wins go where they belong, and right now the Warriors wins belong on Walton's record.

Comments or questions? Post below!

Johnny Football!

        

Great photoshopping

          Josh McCown recently went down with a season-ending injury. Do you know what that means? We are so close to Johnny Football Time again! However, there is a player in the way: Austin Davis. Due to Johnny Manziel's partying ways and subsequent lying, he has been demoted to the end of the quarterback depth chart for the Cleveland Browns. Manziel has generally performed at best decent, and at worst horribly for the Browns. Of course, it can't all be blamed on him; this is the Browns we are talking about. However, due to all of his issues, many have come out and discussed where Manziel could end up next season, assuming the Browns finally do part ways with him. However, because that may not necessarily be the case, I wanted to get an idea for Manziel's possible destination without assuming he leaves town. Thus, I'll run down my top 5 directions for Johnny Football next season.

1. Dallas Cowboys
          Why not? Actually, there are a few things here. First, owner/GM Jerry Jones tried to draft Manziel last year, and was overruled at the last second. Also, with Tony Romo dealing with major injuries this season, the Cowboys have had to go with Brandon Weeden (another failed Browns 1st-rounder) and Matt Cassel (who couldn't stick it out with the Bills). Suffice to say, it hasn't gone well-neither Weeden nor Cassel has won any games with the Cowboys. How could Jones get this deal to work though? Maybe just offer Jimmy Haslam a stake in an actually successful team? Or offer the Browns Greg Hardy. Seriously, just imaging a trade where Manziel is traded for Hardy. Trades like that are what Twitter was made for.
          I should note that many people have suggested this, and Jones actually commented on it all recently. So, this part is a bit less original.

2. Washington football team
          Yes, I refuse to use its current name. However, why would Washington go with this when Kirk Cousins has been performing so well? Well, for one, it's Kirk Cousins we're talking about. On the road versus at home, he's basically a different person. Up until this season, he was very underwhelming as well. Also, what else would Manziel need to fight against to start for Washington? Oh, just another under-performing, mobile former Heisman winner. 

3.  Philadelphia Eagles
          I'm an Eagles fan, and frankly this is only here because I'm seem to like the anguish that comes from thinking about this possibility. The Eagles could trade Mark Sanchez for him. The Browns get a competent signal-caller (sort of), and the Eagles get excitement..? Actually, something tells me Chip Kelly is currently planning on trading all of the Eagles' main skills players for Manziel right this second. *Read, sarcasm*

4. Canadian Football League
          If it's good enough for Tajh Boyd, it's good enough for Manziel. It wouldn't even be unprecedented; former Heisman winner Troy Smith played a few years in the CFL as well. So go forth, Manziel! We send you to Canada as punishment for them giving us Justin Bieber.


5. Cleveland Browns
          The only way this happens is if coach Mike Pettine gets canned. That'll probably happen anyway. So, really, Manziel will more likely than not be back with the Browns next season. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually feel a little bad for Johnny Football. And...now the feeling's gone. Back to partying!


Do you have any questions/comments about this or any other blogs? Do you want to tell me I'm an idiot? Did you not understand the tongue-in-cheek tone to this blog, or not understand the sarcasm? Leave a comment below!

Posting Gone Wrong

         

Byung Ho Park

          Major League Baseball is a bit different from other major sports in America because of a few different factors. First, there are far more players throughout an MLB organization than in the NFL or NBA. NFL comes relatively close, but baseball players still outnumber. Second, MLB does not have a hard salary cap. There is a luxury tax threshold, as the Dodgers are currently dealing with, but it doesn't always curb spending for the largest of markets. MLB also has limitations on how much can be spent on foreign players, particularly with regards to Central and South America. These limitations work in sort of a slot system, and charges work against the tax and additional taxes can be levied by going over the international allotment, as the Dodgers are yet again ignoring. Negotiations with Japanese and Korean players, however, do not factor into the international allotment because those players are not really considered "prospects." In fact, many tend to be in their late 20s, and sometimes 30s.
          There is a flip side. MLB has an agreement with the Korean Baseball Organization, as well as Nippon Professional Baseball (Japanese Baseball). With both leagues, MLB teams can not just poach players at will like they sort of can in other countries. Of course, that is simplifying some of the struggles Cuban players in particular have to go through defecting in order to play in MLB, but teams can still at least pick a player and sign him. Rather, in KBO and NPB, teams must post their player for MLB teams to bid on. It's slightly different rules for each; in KBO, there is a blind bid system where the winning team gets 30 days to negotiate with the player, and the bid goes to the surrendering team if an agreement is reached. That's actually how it used to be in NPB too, but now it is a system where the NPB team must set a requirement up to $20,000,000, and any team willing to cough up that amount gains the ability to negotiate with the player and pay the posting fee if an agreement is reached. This was instituted to move away from such situations as Daisuke Matsuzaka agreement that saw $51,110,000 go to the Seibu Lions, and $52,000,000 over 6 years go to Matsuzaka himself.
          Is this all fair to the player though? While players in Cuba can defect (relatively speaking) and by extension reach a sort of free agency, players in the KBO and NPB can't actually become international free agents until a certain number of years in their respective leagues (9 for NPB). This limits their overall market value dramatically. A player the likes of Matsuzaka would have likely earned at least double what he was able to keep himself if he had just been born in America.
          Veteran agent Alan Nero gave some insight into why the system is the way it is for KBO, and honestly he does make some good points. The posting system allows surrendering teams to gain money to help offset other costs. However, should that offsetting come at the costs of their players? In fact, in the recent case of Byung Ho Park of the now Minnesota Twins, the posting fee submitted was more than the entirety of the 4-year contract Park signed in MLB. Something about that seems wrong.
          I appreciate MLB's attempts to get a more even platform with the NPB. However, until it moves to either the same system with the KBO, or develops something new entirely, players will continue to miss out on potential earnings while their former teams reap the benefits. Big name players will keep coming from the KBO. Can MLB look out for them?

          Please let me know if you had any questions or comments about my post. Comment below!

Barry Bonds Belongs in MLB

        

Photo Credit: http://media.philly.com/images/020413-bonds-barry-600.jpg

          Yesterday, December 3rd, the Miami Marlins formally introduced Barry Bonds as its new hitting coach. Yes, that would be the Barry Bonds that was convicted of obstruction of justice, that has dealt with rumors of steroid use for years, and who is the all-time MLB home run king.
          With the aforementioned descriptors, it seems a decent portion of MLB fans are opposed to Bonds' hiring. How could someone that "cheated" be allowed to work with young players? Would everyone in the clubhouse all of a sudden start juicing?
          I find it hard to believe that could be the case, and not just because such a high level of efficiency to get all the players juicing would be utterly beyond Miami's hapless management.
          However, I'll admit at first even I was skeptical. I have largely been a Bonds detractor in my relatively short life; I just don't like cheating. Sure, there isn't a whole lot of hard evidence that Bonds knowingly took steroids in his playing career, and I do stick to the "eye-ball test." However, the test tells me Bonds doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame along with McGwire, Ramirez, and some others. But that's not really what I'm here to argue. In fact, for this post, I'll argue in favor of Bonds for the hitting coach position.
          Why would I argue in favor of a player I've routinely rooted against, both in play and legally? Bonds is not the first potentially former steroid user to move into a coaching role, and he could help.
          Back in 2010, Mark McGwire became hitting coach for the St. Louis Cardinals. He also admitted to using steroids that year. In fact, this is part of what separates McGwire and Bonds; McGwire has owned up to his past. I should note that there is a possibility Bonds did not take steroids, and of course individuals are innocent until proven guilty (except for in the court of public opinion, as I discussed in a past blog). But what makes these two similar, aside from the steroid connection? They were incredible hitters, especially with the mental side of hitting.
          You can have all the power in the world, but if you can't see the ball and know how to react, it won't do you any good. Pedro Alvarez is learning that the hard way right now. Even aside from the power, McGwire and Bonds were exceptional at the mental side of hitting. Let's ignore doubles and home runs here for a second, as they speak to a lot of the power side. McGwire had a career OBP of .394 and a walk/strikeout rate of 0.83. Those are great numbers, and you don't attain those without fundamental abilities to put the ball in play. Sure, intentional walks factor in there, and hitting the ball hard helps with OBP, but the numbers speak beyond power. As for Bonds? I'll speak just to the .444 OBP, because his ratio had a whole lot of intentional walks built in. That's an insane number, one of the tops all time, and speaks to his understanding of what pitchers would try to get him out.
          Bonds has been working with hitters for the last few years as an instructor at San Fransisco Giants spring training, and the results have been pretty solid. Players talked positively about him, as did coaching staffs. If an admitted steroid user like McGwire can get a chance to teach young players the mental side of baseball, why shouldn't Bonds? Because of his potential to teach younger players and really help them improve, Barry Bonds belongs in MLB.

          Do you have any questions or comments regarding this post? Want to disagree or agree with me? Want to call me an idiot? Go ahead and leave a comment below, and I'll be happy to chat with you. Thanks for reading, and have a great day.