I can't watch the NBA. Seriously. Don't get me wrong, you do have to have some talent to play in the NBA. That is definitely true. Unfortunately, that talent is given to you at birth. Are you really tall? Great. Can you shoot a basketball? No? Well, you can learn how to do that. Or, you can just push people out of your way and dunk every time.
Case in point: Shaq. This guy is ancient at this point and still has a job in the NBA. The guy can barely walk down the court, but teams still want this guy on their team. Why? Well, partly because people like him and he probably makes the team a decent amount in jersey sales... But also because he's massive. All he has to do is stand in the way on defense and dunk on offense. No one can do anything except avoid him and hope he misses layups. (You can also foul him and laugh as he tries to shoot free-throws. But you can only do that so many times before you pile up fouls.)
Do some of these guys have a good amount of talent? Sure. Guards generally need talent in order to do anything because they are significantly smaller and can't just push people around. They have to have a great jump-shot and good ball-handling skills to get around defenders or make good passes.
The worst part, however, is that the most popular players are the ones with the least talent. If I asked basketball fans who their top 10 players of all time were, they'd probably answer with 9 big dudes who push people around and Michael Jordan. (Although even he pushed people around a lot... But I would never say that MJ didn't have a lot of talent. Anyone who thinks that should be shot immediately for believing in something so ludicrous.) You think John Stockton would be on that list for most people? Maybe for some people... But he was probably one of the most talented ever to play the game. I guess Allen Iverson might make the list for some people... But a lot of people would pick Shaq, LeBron, Kobe, Chamberlain, Russell, Pippin, Malone, Abdul-Jabbar, Dr. J, etc. Again, these guys aren't talentless... But it seems the biggest reason they're "talented" is because they are huge.
Who's getting all of the spotlight this year, despite being on a horrible team? Blake Griffin. Fun to watch? Sure. Talented? Meh. He's big and can jump really high. I wouldn't call that extremely talented, just athletic.
For all of the NBA fans out there, try to guess the top 10 3-point shooters of all time. I know this is really an opinion, but let's just see how many of the most talented players people know... I'll wait...
Keep in mind the 3-point line didn't exist until the 79-80 season...
Ready? Alright, here's a list compiled by BleacherReport.com:
10- Eddie Jones
9- Glen Rice
8- Jason Terry
7- Rashard Lewis
6- Chauncey Billups
5- Peja Stojakovic
4- Dale Ellis
3- Jason Kidd
2- Reggie Miller
1- Ray Allen
How many did you get? Probably 2-4 for the average fan. Maybe 6 or 7 for the hardcore NBA fans, right?
Now, I will admit a couple of those guys were 3-point specialists, but even so, they all gathered minimal fame compared to the likes of the list of big guys I mentioned earlier. Certainly Ray Allen and Reggie Miller are fan favorites. Kidd gets a decent amount of fame as well. But the others? I'm sure their names are recognizable, but considering how good they were, they certainly are underrated.
Yes, your height and weight matters in most physical sports. But this is 90% of the NBA. Huge freaks that push each other around. I simply can't watch it. It's boring. I would rather watch tennis.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Speaking of other sports...
You know, I read a significant amount about sports daily. I am such a fan of sports that I recently decided to reach out and try to get into other sports that I previously would have little interest in.
Seeing as how the 2011 Cricket World Cup just finished recently, I thought I'd try to give it a chance. And I've got to say, I don't get it. Seriously. Look, I understand that it is incredibly popular around the world. I guess you can thank ESPN for the American disinterest in such a sport. Now, I understand the disinterest in some sports for Americans. We Americans (stereotypically, of course) need a lot of excitement. Soccer doesn't do it because it's "too low scoring". Well, cricket certainly takes the opposite route here. The final score of the final game was India 277/4-Sri Lanka 274/6. First of all, that's a lot of points, or runs, or wickets, or whatever the general term is for scoring. Second of all, what?
So, seeing as how the score alone confused me, I thought I would try to learn some more about the rules and scoring. It may seem ridiculous at first glance, but I should at least give this cricket thing a chance.
So, I looked around online. Wikipedia, Google, YouTube... The usual suspects. And let me tell you... After a few hours of watching and reading, I understand one thing about cricket... I still don't get it. It's like some weird combination of baseball and milk-bottle toppling at the carnival, except sometimes you can cheat and just knock over the milk bottles with your hands.
In all honesty, I've gotten a the main points down... I think. 2 batters are up at once, but only 1 batter hits at a time. The "bowler" (or in baseball terms, pitcher) throws (or bowls, whatever) the ball towards the batter who is hitting. The bowler is attempting to get the ball passed the batter and hit the wickets behind him. The batter is trying to hit the ball into play. If he does, the 2 batters run to the other side. If they make it before the other team gets the ball back to the middle of the field and hits a wicket, that team scores a point. They can continue to run back and forth if they so choose, but are risking being put out.
That's about all I get. I keep hearing how there are 2 different styles. One involves playing in a way that is similar to innings in a baseball game. The other can take multiple days to complete... Which makes me wonder how anyone can be a fan of that style. "Hey, I've got tickets to the game this Saturday... and maybe Sunday... and possibly until Wednesday... Want to go?"
Certainly the sport is interesting. It seems strange to me that a team's coach could be like "well, we're down to the end of the game, and we're down by 40, but there's still hope!" Also, how do fans get excited when their team scores? I find it hard enough in basketball to get excited about every basket, and they're only scoring up to 100 in most games. I feel like after the 200th point, my excitement level would drop off significantly. It seems more exciting to pay attention to the defense. It's one of the few games I have seen where the defense is more exciting, simply because scoring is too easy.
Regardless, I plan on watching a full game in the near future. Since I'm here in the good ol' United States, finding a game to watch isn't easy... But I'll get around to it. Expect a post in the future with my findings.
Seeing as how the 2011 Cricket World Cup just finished recently, I thought I'd try to give it a chance. And I've got to say, I don't get it. Seriously. Look, I understand that it is incredibly popular around the world. I guess you can thank ESPN for the American disinterest in such a sport. Now, I understand the disinterest in some sports for Americans. We Americans (stereotypically, of course) need a lot of excitement. Soccer doesn't do it because it's "too low scoring". Well, cricket certainly takes the opposite route here. The final score of the final game was India 277/4-Sri Lanka 274/6. First of all, that's a lot of points, or runs, or wickets, or whatever the general term is for scoring. Second of all, what?
So, seeing as how the score alone confused me, I thought I would try to learn some more about the rules and scoring. It may seem ridiculous at first glance, but I should at least give this cricket thing a chance.
So, I looked around online. Wikipedia, Google, YouTube... The usual suspects. And let me tell you... After a few hours of watching and reading, I understand one thing about cricket... I still don't get it. It's like some weird combination of baseball and milk-bottle toppling at the carnival, except sometimes you can cheat and just knock over the milk bottles with your hands.
In all honesty, I've gotten a the main points down... I think. 2 batters are up at once, but only 1 batter hits at a time. The "bowler" (or in baseball terms, pitcher) throws (or bowls, whatever) the ball towards the batter who is hitting. The bowler is attempting to get the ball passed the batter and hit the wickets behind him. The batter is trying to hit the ball into play. If he does, the 2 batters run to the other side. If they make it before the other team gets the ball back to the middle of the field and hits a wicket, that team scores a point. They can continue to run back and forth if they so choose, but are risking being put out.
That's about all I get. I keep hearing how there are 2 different styles. One involves playing in a way that is similar to innings in a baseball game. The other can take multiple days to complete... Which makes me wonder how anyone can be a fan of that style. "Hey, I've got tickets to the game this Saturday... and maybe Sunday... and possibly until Wednesday... Want to go?"
Certainly the sport is interesting. It seems strange to me that a team's coach could be like "well, we're down to the end of the game, and we're down by 40, but there's still hope!" Also, how do fans get excited when their team scores? I find it hard enough in basketball to get excited about every basket, and they're only scoring up to 100 in most games. I feel like after the 200th point, my excitement level would drop off significantly. It seems more exciting to pay attention to the defense. It's one of the few games I have seen where the defense is more exciting, simply because scoring is too easy.
Regardless, I plan on watching a full game in the near future. Since I'm here in the good ol' United States, finding a game to watch isn't easy... But I'll get around to it. Expect a post in the future with my findings.
Welcome
Welcome to Haaafs is a Bad Sport.
I am your blogger, Joe Haefele. Here, I will be ranting on the sports world. No sport is safe. While I'm sure my focus will be on the "big 4", expect many posts on other sports around the world as well.
Whether it's news, stats, or bashing analysts... This is where you'll find my opinion on everything sports related.
This will start as a bi-weekly blog, but I may expand in the future.
I am your blogger, Joe Haefele. Here, I will be ranting on the sports world. No sport is safe. While I'm sure my focus will be on the "big 4", expect many posts on other sports around the world as well.
Whether it's news, stats, or bashing analysts... This is where you'll find my opinion on everything sports related.
This will start as a bi-weekly blog, but I may expand in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)