The Crying Game

As a kid who grew up playing soccer, basketball and baseball, I admit that I was often a pretty bad sport.  As a little leaguer I started by complaining about questionable called third strikes, and even now I've been known to give a rec league basketball referee an earful about a no-call on one of my patented out-of-control drives to the basket.  To me, the arguing comes naturally - I'm a verbose person who enjoys a good debate, and I've always been quick to engage an official in "conversation" after witnessing a call I don't agree with.  As I've been watching a ton of NBA basketball this season, however, I'm starting to truly see how annoying all of this bitching and moaning can be from an outsider's perspective.

After watching at least parts of the vast majority of Knicks games this season, I saw a TON of complaining to the officials.  While some of these seemed justified, seeing the same players complain after virtually every whistle eventually became, for lack of a better term, annoying.  When David Lee played for New York, he had a reputation for being a complainer, but I never really noticed it.  This year, however, all of the crying to the officials seemed to be contagious - it started with Tyson Chandler and eventually infected Raymond Felton, Carmelo Anthony, JR Smith and more.  By the playoffs, it was a full-blown outbreak of bitching.  Not only did it lead to numerous technical fouls and transition layups for the opposition, but as a Knicks fan it also became frustrating to watch.

Unfortunately, the complaining isn't contained inside Madison Square Garden.  Last night I watched Miami lose in Indiana to the Pacers and saw Chris Bosh, Ray Allen and even LeBron James whine relentlessly.  The NBA refs have received a lot of (often deserved) criticism over the last few weeks, but there's no way that every call they make could have been wrong.  Watching the reactions, body language and lips of the Heat players, however, you'd have thought that every single call (questionable or otherwise) had gone against them.  If I was rooting for Indiana before the series, I'm even more of a temporary Pacers fan after watching the first four games of the Eastern Conference Finals.  As a fan, watching players complain isn't much fun.

While my rec league basketball games don't have many fans to consider, realizing how annoying all of the complaining is has forced me to reconsider how I act towards referees and umpires.  While I've always had a short fuse and know that the refs are accustomed to it and can handle it, I imagine that my teammates, opponents and spectators find my behavior off-putting, just as I hate watching Chris Bosh whine about every call.  Unfortunately it's taken me almost 30 years to learn this valuable lesson, but I now recognize that, when it comes to crying to the refs, change is better late than never.

Playing the Lottery

Few seemingly-benign sports concepts are criticized more than the NBA Draft Lottery, the 2013 edition of which takes place tonight (8:30 PM ET on ESPN).  What on the surface seems like a pretty basic lottery system - a random drawing weighted by won-loss record in the previous season to determine which NBA teams get the draft's first three selections - is ripe with conspiracy theories and fans crying foul; SB Nation (admittedly not the most reputable of sports media publications) did a feature this morning entitled "An NBA Draft Lottery conspiracy theory for every team" rather than focusing its efforts on any legitimate analysis.  Whether or not you think the Lottery is rigged, it's likely that you have some complaint about the mechanics of the event.

Some people argue that the weighting is too heavily skewed towards the worst teams, giving teams incentive to tank at the end of the regular season to try and improve their odds of getting the top overall pick.  An equal number of people, however, argue the exact opposite, claiming that the worst teams don't win the lottery often enough to help them become competitive more quickly.  Even aside from debates about the lottery weighting, many people argue for a different system altogether.  Some want a tournament for non-playoff teams (or some subset thereof), with the winner taking the top overall selection. Others want the NBA to adopt the NFL model of giving the worst team (by record) the top pick, tanking be damned.  Advocates of the current system are few and far between, though the critics are far from agreeing on a next best alternative.

One criticism I do agree with is that the lottery drawing shouldn't be held behind closed doors.  While I fully believe the system to be legitimate, doing the drawing before the announcement and not in plain sight leads to much of the conspiracy theory development.  While this might be what the NBA is in fact going for - people are talking about the NBA Draft Lottery after all, aren't they? - doing the actually drawing of the ping pong balls (or equivalent) in public could simultaneously add legitimacy to the system and make the event more exciting.  Don't people love to watch the local lottery ball drawings during the six o'clock news on their local broadcast affiliate?  Couldn't the NBA make the Lottery some awesome Deal Or No Deal-style drawing that would be super compelling for the live audience?  I would be 10x more likely to watch this than the current system, which at best features an awkward moment from the team representative and at worst is just plain boring.

Truth be told, I will tune into the NBA Draft Lottery tonight regardless, even though this year's potential rookie field lacks major star power.  I think, all things considered, the current system does a solid job of finding a middle ground between promoting competitive balance and discouraging late-season tanking.  While we'll always have the conspiracy theorists ready to pounce, I don't have as many issues with the current system as many others do.  If the Sacramento Kings (currently with the 6th-best odds) somehow land the top pick tonight, however, I might have to rethink my viewpoint.   

Head to Head Competition

Despite NHL commissioner Gary Bettman's background as general counsel at the NBA, the two leagues are completely separate entities.  While the two organizations are loosely tied together by the fact that a number of American (and one Canadian) arenas house both NBA and NHL teams (and in some cases, like New York's Madison Square Garden, Toronto's Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment or Washington's Monumental Sports, the teams are owned by the same company), they are operated independently and, in many cases, actively compete with each other for viewers, game attendees and sponsors.  Nowhere is this more evident than during the playoffs, where many U.S. markets have basketball and hockey teams simultaneously competing for market- and mind-share.

New York is one of those markets, and I've been a fan caught in the middle.  Not only are the Knicks and Islanders both in the playoffs at the same time (hardly a common occurrence), but they're currently on the same game schedule.  On Wednesday, I had to choose between Knicks @ Celtics Game Five and Isles @ Penguins Game One (not to mention a nationally televised Braves game against NL East rival Washington).  Tonight, I'll be put in the same position as the Knicks try to close out their first round series in Boston while the Islanders try to even their series in Pittsburgh at the exact same time.  While I've been trying to flip back and forth between the two, I've been undoubtedly watching more basketball - mainly because I like basketball better as a sport, find the NBA playoffs more compelling than the NHL's, and have more positive memories associated with the Knicks postseason runs than I do the Islanders.  Plus, how can the NHL compete with the NBA's tradition of great nationally televised basketball?

While I'm all for open competition between the two leagues, I don't think it's too much to ask to have the NBA and NFL talk to each other about playoff scheduling, particularly in the first rounds when both leagues have eight series going on simultaneously.  I know there are a lot of factors to consider - television schedules, arena availability, etc. - but I find it difficult to believe that the Knicks / Isles schedule overlap couldn't have been avoided (especially considering that neither the Penguins nor the Islanders have an NBA team in their building to worry about).  Maybe there aren't a ton of fans of both the Knicks and the Isles - most Knicks fans are Rangers fans whereas Isles fans my be slowly gravitating towards the Nets, especially since the two will share Barclays Center in a few years - but there are enough to justify some rescheduling.

With the lack of playoff successes (and appearances) the Knicks and Isles have had over the last decade, perhaps I shouldn't be complaining - I feel lucky to have them both in the postseason this year, and flipping channels isn't the worst thing in the world.  Hell, it's even given me a legitimate excuse to use my picture-in-picture functionality.  But this week of playoff fun would undoubtedly be more enjoyable if I had one game to watch each night rather than two games scheduled simultaneously every other evening.  My fiance might disagree - we do have a lot of episodes of The Voice to catch up on, after all - but hopefully going forward the NBA and NHL scheduling departments will coordinate a bit more openly.

First Round Flame Out

It's Game Five of the first round of the NBA Playoffs.  Your team is down 3-1, but they're returning home for a critical match-up and the chance to get back into the series with a W.  Your home turf is not only in the middle of one of the world's greatest basketball markets, but your team plays in a brand new building in front of fans that, until last week, had never tasted NBA post-season action.  And, if you're the Brooklyn Nets fan base, you somehow manage to pack the Barclays Center to the brim but forget all of your energy and passion at home.

When I got the opportunity to attend my first Brooklyn Nets game for Game Five of their first round match-up against Chicago (somehow, I failed to make it to any of the team's 41 regular season games), I jumped on it.  Despite a 3-1 series deficit, I was anticipating a raucous crowd - a Game Five win (which the Nets ended up getting) would put them a road win away from a very winnable Game Seven back at Barclays.  I got to the arena around 20 minutes prior to tip and was impressed to see a mostly black-clad crowd - given the Nets newness in the market, I was expecting a lot more Bulls fans.  After taking in the fan wardrobe, however, the long list of disappointments sank in.

First, the arena was virtually empty at tip-off.  By the time the first quarter was winding down there were people in almost every seat - it was clearly a sell-out - but people were arriving super late. With transportation to the Barclays Center ultra-convenient and logistics at security and Will Call pretty sound, I have to blame the Nets fans on this one.  While I'm sure a lot of Brooklyn-dwelling Nets fans have the typical hipster "too cool for school" attitude (stereotype much?), this is the playoffs - you just have to show up on time.  Even when the fans did sit down, they were very quiet.  While the game was close and exciting throughout, the fans didn't get loud until the last few minutes of the fourth, when the game was all but won by the Nets.  What kind of fans aren't energetic until after a victory is secured?

The Barclays Center looked great - but sounded empty - on Monday night.

Some of this can be explained by the fact that the Nets are new to town - typically, a new team doesn't make the playoffs in its first year (either because it's an expansion franchise or because the relocated team is terrible, like Oklahoma City in its first season), so the fans have a few seasons to get into it before they head to the post-season.  But given how much hype there has been around Brooklyn basketball for years now, the Game Five showing was very disappointing.  If the Nets can manage to win Game Six in Chicago (no small task), their fans better come out a lot stronger for Game Seven if they want to create any kind of home court advantage.  

Covering the Cards

I'm honestly not trying to be an asshole in this post, but I do want to start out with a caveat: If you're the type of sappy sports fan who wishes that every game ended like a made for TV movie, this post might not be for you.  If you love the way the Olympics cuts away from live event coverage to bring you a story about how some cross-country skier from Slovenia spent a year living in his car, you might want to go back to reading a Rick Reilly article. After all, what I'm about to do is, in most people's minds, worse than criticizing Mother Theresa, Gandhi and Sesame Street combined.  I'm going to criticize the media's coverage of injured Louisville basketball player Kevin Ware.

Kevin Ware's injury was undoubtedly one of the more gruesome things I've witnessed in 20+ years as a sports fan, and I cringe every time I think about the freak accident - not to mention the long path to recovery that awaits Ware as he works to return to high-level college basketball.  That being said, I feel that the coverage of Ware's injury - and of the Louisville team's response to it - has been overblown.  Players suffer significant injuries that require them to miss games all the time.  While Ware's injury was clearly more severe, traumatic and unusual that your typical high ankle sprain, broken wrist or concussion, does the severity of the incident make it any more worthy of extensive press coverage than any of these others?

CBS cut to a shot of Kevin Ware approximately once every 10 seconds (hyperbolic estimate).

The media has talked a lot about how Louisville's national championship victory in Ware's absence signifies that the Cardinals are a "team" in the truest sense of the word.  In reality, though, don't teams in both college and professional sports win in the face of injuries all the time?  There's no doubt that Louisville's ability to roll past Duke, Wichita State and Michigan without the services of a key bench player is impressive - I'm the first to acknowledge that role players are much more critical to a team's success than most star-obsessed fans give them credit for.  But Louisville is far from the first team to have players step up for a fallen colleague.  Granted, most of those fallen colleagues didn't have their bones sticking inches out of their skin - but the fact remains that Ware's injury is different from so many others only in terms of its gruesomeness, not in terms of its significance.

Do I believe that the Louisville players truly like and care about each other?  Sure.  Do I think that's the reason they were able to overcome Ware's injury and defeat Michigan in Atlanta last night?  Not really.  At the end of the day, the Cardinals were 2013's best college basketball team, and a potent combination of guard play (Peyton Siva and Russ Smith), clutch shooting (Luke Hancock) and an inside presence (Gorgui Deng) propelled them to victory.  While I feel for Kevin Ware and wish him the best in his attempt to recover from an injury that I can't even really imagine, to say that the team "won it for Kevin" is a bit much.  Unlike the athletes who have been removed from their sports to battle life-threatening illnesses like cancer and AIDS, Ware will surely recover fully and resume his athletic career.  In an attempt to write a compelling personal story, the media failed to provide enough coverage of the players who actually made the 2013 national championship happen for the Cards - the ones that actually played.

March Badness

If you root for upsets, then the first second round of the 2013 NCAA tournament was for you.  Ten higher seeds won games on Thursday and Friday, including one 15, one 14, one 13 and three 12s, and trendy Final Four selections like New Mexico and Georgetown were sent home early.  Like most college hoops fans without a team to root for, I love to see all of the upsets - it's a large part of what makes this tournament so exciting.  And while it's true that parity in college basketball in increasing, I'd argue that it's not so much that teams like Harvard or LaSalle are much better this year than 13 and 14 seeds normally are.  Instead, this year's high-seeded victors seemed to take advantage of some ugly basketball by their heavily favored opponents, making this year's major upsets a little less satisfying than the Cornell-esque runs we've seen in the recent past.

That's not to take anything away from the likes of the Crimson, Explorers, the Oregon Ducks, the Ole Miss Rebels or the Cal Bears.  Each of these teams came into tournament weekend ready to play (and, is LaSalle's case, had to meet another tournament worthy team just to get a shot to play on Friday) and got the job done.  But as I watched at least part of each of these upsets, I wasn't particularly impressed with any of these supposed Cinderellas.  While Harvard played solid defense, it was really New Mexico's inability to hit a shot that lead to their demise.  Ole Miss managed to win despite a terrible game from their star guard Marshall Henderson because Wisconsin simply can't score consistently.  The only major upset team that actually looked aggressive, cohesive and threatening was, shockingly, Florida Gulf Coast, who used their athleticism and intensity to beat up on Georgetown.  For their part, though, the Hoyas and Big East Player of the Year Otto Porter Jr. looked dazed and confused from the opening tip to the final whistle.

The Big East sent eight teams to the 2013 NCAA Tournament and is supposedly the strongest conference in the country.  Of those eight, only Syracuse, Louisville and Marquette (barely) survived; in addition to Georgetown, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh and were knocked out by higher seeds the Cincinnati and Villanova were pushed around by beatable opponents.  We spent the year talking about how the Mountain West had the highest RPI of any conference, but of its five tournament teams only Colorado State and San Diego State made it through, while New Mexico and UNLV were upset badly.  Meanwhile, LaSalle had to beat the Mountain West's Boise State just to get a chance to play Kansas State, which suggests that the NCAA tournament selection process isn't as efficient as it needs to be.

If the NCAA is trying to create drama by matching overrated Big East and Mountain West teams against sneakily strong mid-major opponents, they're doing a great job.  In reality, however, this week's upsets are as much about overrated NCAA favorites getting matched up against feistier, psyched-up opponents with nothing to lose.  As much as I'd like to credit teams like Harvard for rising to the occasion, I find it hard to believe that a team that recently lost to Columbia and Princeton is all of a sudden evenly matched against the Lobos, the best team in the supposedly toughest conference in the nation, despite not playing particularly well.  Instead, the Crimson were the beneficiaries of some sloppy seeding by the NCAA and took advantage of it - like any group of smart Ivy Leaguers would do.

Make It Count

In just a few short hours, Selection Sunday will commence and we'll know the names of the 68 schools that will participate in the 2013 NCAA men's college basketball tournament.  The majority of the schools in the bubble, however, are from the NCAA's power six conferences - teams that, after a long regular season filled with RPI top-100 opponents, still have a chance at the Big Dance despite having flamed out of their conference tournaments earlier this weekend.  Living in Manhattan, the home of the Big East tournament, most of the talk and media coverage this weekend has revolved around schools live Georgetown, Notre Dame, Louisville and Syracuse, schools that are locks for the NCAA tournament.  But while most college basketball fans have spent the last couple of days watching the top teams in the country battle for the BCS conference crowns, I'm much more interested in watching the desperate teams fighting for the postseason lives in the smaller conference tourneys.

Don't get me wrong - I've caught parts of a number of BCS conference tournament games this week, and enjoyed some great college basketball from the likes of Georgetown vs. Syracuse, North Carolina vs. Miami and Kansas vs. Kansas State.  And while it's great to watch the best players in the country represent the nation's biggest schools, the downside for the losers of these major conference tournament games is pretty limited.  While there's no doubt that the players for North Carolina wanted to win today's ACC championship game, the Tar Heels ultimate goal for 2013 - as it is every year - is to take home an NCAA national title.  As soon as the final buzzer sounded in Greensboro today, UNC undoubtedly began to look ahead to a Thursday or Friday matchup in Round 2 of the newly-reformatted Big Dance.

As a result, these BCS conference tournament matchups lack the desperation and fight that you can find from the smaller conference playoffs.  Unlike North Carolina, tournament finals losers like Vermont (America East), UC Irvine (Big West) and Morgan State (MEAC) certainly won't be headed to the NCAA tournament next week.  Like most of the country's Division I teams, their chance at the NCAAs depended entirely on their ability to win their conference postseason tournaments - their failure to do so will result in, at best, a trip to the NIT and, at worst, an abrupt end to the 2013 basketball season.  While the quality of basketball in the America East might not be able to match what you find in the Big East, the added passion and emotion generated by the win-or-go-home mentality more than make up for the discrepancies in shooting ability or ball-handling skill.

By this time next week, virtually every mid-major basketball team will be eliminated from the NCAA tournament - most of the small conference schools that have made it this far will serve as little more than second round prey for the nation's traditional basketball powers.  Before we reach that point, I've enjoyed another opportunity to see schools for the Patriot League, the MAC and the SWAC compete on a national stage.  There will be plenty of time to watch Duke, UCLA and Michigan State play throughout the rest of March - hopefully you were able to enjoy some do-or-die mid major basketball before it was too late.

Power to the People

Unlike a baseball or a football game, where you really need to be sitting in the stands with the "real people" to properly experience the game, basketball games are typically awesome from inside a luxury suite.  The arenas are much smaller, so well-placed luxury seating (most relatively modern areas have their suites located in between the lower and upper bowls) combined an excellent vantage point with amenities including food, drinks, television and comfortable seats.  When I found out that my first visit to Boston's TD Garden would be in a luxury box for a mid-week game against the Golden State Warriors, I was excited and knew that I'd have a great view of the game (see below).

Boston's TD Garden isn't filled with the corporate-types you find at New York's MSG.

As a New Yorker, I've been trained to hate everything related to Boston sports.  That being said, I have to give it to the Celtics fans - despite the team's relative struggles on the court this season and the loss of the team's most-exciting player (Rajon Rondo) to injury, the TD Garden crowd was every bit as loud and passionate as any mid-week crowd for a Knicks game at MSG.  While the stands during a Knicks game are filled with tie-wearing corporate types coming straight from the office, the Celtics crowd was way more blue-collar.  Even on the suite level, it was hard to find people that looked like they have come to TD Garden directly from work, and I felt out of place in a suit and tie.

The vast majority of fans were wearing Celtics gear and were shockingly vocal, and when the Celtics made a push in the fourth quarter to put the game out of reach, the noise level was quite impressive.  Perhaps I shouldn't have been so surprised - given the tradition and greatness associated with Celtics basketball, it makes sense that the Boston faithful would turn out in droves no matter how well (or poorly) the Celts are playing.  Add in the fact that, even without Rondo, Boston's roster features two of the most popular players in the NBA (Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce), and all of the green-and-white jerseys make a lot more sense.

Overall, I liked TD Garden.  While it was a relatively generic NBA arena, it certainly does the job.  Like many newer NBA arenas, including Brooklyn's Barclays Center, it's very steep, so the upper level seats still feel right on top of the court.  I also liked the way the arena is located directly adjacent to a metro station (much like MSG), providing relatively easy access from anywhere in the city.  While there was nothing especially "Boston-ish" about the building or the luxury seating areas - most the the amenities and offerings seemed pretty generic - TD Garden seemed to be yet another example of a well-designed, highly functioning NBA venue.      

Can't We All Just Get Along?

I got up early this morning to catch an Amtrak train to Boston, so instead of my typical morning routine (a quick shower, shave and directly off to work) I got up extra-early to ensure that I wouldn't leave anything to chance timing-wise.  Naturally, I had some extra time before I had to head off to Penn Station and decided to flip on the local news.  I was shocked to see the local sports anchor transition to highlights of a regular season NBA game between Golden State and Indiana, and assumed that an incredible feat of athleticism must have occurred in order to justify such unexpected local media coverage.  I was disappointed to see, however, that the only reason the game made the local New York-area news was because of a fight that broke out between David Lee of the Warriors and Roy Hibbert of the Pacers.

The fight, which threatened to spill into the crowd and potentially put courtside ticket holders in harm's way, is thankfully a rare occurrence in the modern NBA, so based on its rareness you can argue that the additional media coverage is justified.  And while you'd think that the NBA likes the idea of New York residents getting exposed to highlights from a Pacers game - expanding its reach from the SportsCenter crowd and touching a broader audience that potentially includes casual basketball fans - it's not clear if footage of an almost-brawl is good or bad for the league.  While on one hand the increased exposure is great, promoting the fight potentially cheapens the league's brand and might imply that Lee and Hibbert's antics were more entertaining than the game itself.

  The fight between the Warriors and Pacers threatened to spill into the Bankers Life Fieldhouse stands.

As a fan of the NBA and a lover of professional basketball, I'd rather not have seen any highlights from this game than see it covered because of the fight.  The scuffle marred what was otherwise an entertaining game between two of the NBA's better teams (coming into the game both were 10+ games over .500), and takes away from the season-long accomplishments of Hibbert and Lee, two of the league's better big men.  Part of the blame certainly lies with the players, who allowed their emotions to get the best of them and shifted the focus from playing to brawling.  I believe that more of the culpability, however, lies with the fans for showing more interest in video of the fight than in video of the rest of the game.  While I can't blame the media for giving the people what they want, I can blame the people for wanting it.

Part of the Action

Though I've been to Cameron Indoor Stadium previously, this Saturday was my first chance to attend a game at what is arguably college basketball's mots famous venue.  After more than two seasons of unsuccessfully trying to get to a Duke home game, I finally got my chance to see the Blue Devils take on current ACC rival (and future Big Ten afterthought) Maryland for a Saturday matinee.  Heading into the game, my expectations for the experience were sky high - there was seemingly no way that the contest could possibly live up to the lofty expectations that I had developed over the past few seasons of watching Duke basketball.  And yet, somehow, it did.  I can honestly say that my first experience at Cameron Indoor was one of the more memorable sports experiences of my lifetime - something I suggest that all sports fans put towards the top of their Bucket Lists.

When you get to an NBA arena about 30 minutes before tip-off, even if it's Miami at Los Angeles, the building is virtually guaranteed to be empty.  At Cameron Indoor, however, the energy level was high well before the game started.  The student section - or Cameron Crazies as they are affectionately known - were in full force from the moment we walked in, and remained engaged in the game throughout.  Even as Duke began to pull away in the second half, the fans never got bored.  No one left even a minute early, despite the fact that the Blue Devils built a 20-point second half lead and emptied the bench in the final minutes.  It was really quite different from the NBA and college basketball experiences that I'm used to, almost as if the fans were there for more than just a basketball game.

For one of the last times as a member of the ACC, Maryland visited Cameron Indoor Stadium.

If there was an overarching theme that emerged from my first Cameron experience, it was the sense that the Duke fans feel like they are truly part of each individual piece of the game.  Whereas the fans at an NBA contest are there to watch their favorite stars, the Cameron Crazies (and, by extention, the rest of the fans in attendance) are themselves part of the show, working hard to affect every single play.  From their in-game rituals to their clever signs and chants, the Crazies work hard to make an impact on the outcome of the game.  Combine the student section with the band and the mascot and you get a multi-sensory game experience that was unlike any basketball game I had ever been a part of.  As you can see from the picture above, I had a great seat - but even if you're sitting in the last row, I bet you'd feel connected to the rest of the fans such that it wouldn't really matter.  At a Duke game, it's more about feeling than it is about watching. 

View from my seat just beyond the outstretched arms of the Cameron Crazies.

Aside from a small pool of Maryland red located just beyond the Terps bench (see above), the entire arena was a sea of Duke blue and (unfortunately, for the uniform purist in me) black.  Perhaps it was the fact that I had a great view of the game, or maybe it was because the Dukies were coming off of a terrible road loss at Miami, but never before had I seen so much emotion from athletes playing in a regular season game.  After being there, though, it makes a ton of sense - the roar of the crowd, the tightness of the arena and the magnitude of the game (a CBS-televised weekend afternoon game against a conference rival) had clearly rubbed off on the Duke players, propelling them to a higher level.  Take a look at Duke's results this year and you'll notice that they lost convincingly to both NC State and Miami - both on the road.  When the Wolfpack and Hurricanes have to come to Cameron Indoor Stadium later this season, however, I'm betting it'll be a much different story.

Me, Tobey and Leo

For me, the 2012-13 NBA season started out with a bang - if you recall, I sat just a few rows behind the court for the Knicks home opener versus the Miami Heat, just feet from Justin Tuck, Mary J. Blige and a host of other New York-area celebrities.  On Thursday evening I once again got to see LeBron James and Dwyane Wade play on the road, this time at Staples Center against the Los Angeles Lakers.  Much like my opening night experience at Madison Square Garden, Thursday night's game was filled with celebrity sightings and top-notch service - this time with an added dash of Hollywood flair.

My idea of "dinner" at a sporting event is grabbing a couple of hot dogs and sodas and eating them at your seats while you watch pregame warmups.  On Thursday night, however, I started my Lakers game experience with a full sit-down dinner at the Lexus Club, Staples Center's exclusive arena club featuring both a full buffet and an extensive menu of a la carte choices.  The sashimi and cocktails I ate were a far cry from the franks and Cokes that I've become accustomed to - sort of a welcome "when in Rome" situation that really got the evening off on the right foot.  From the Lexus Club I made my way to my seat in Row A in Section 111, just feet from the TNT broadcasters and the celebrities sitting courtside.  That's when the real excitement began.

When I got to my seat just after tip-off (normally not one to miss the official start of a game, the Lexus Club dinner ran just a bit long), the four chairs to my right were unoccupied.  Within minutes, a group of men came walking down the aisle approaching the seats.  I didn't recognize two of the four guys, but the other two just happened to be Tobey Maguire and Leonardo DiCaprio.  For the rest of the game, I sat inches from two of Hollywood's biggest stars, blatantly eavesdropping on their conversations and glancing at them out of the corner of my eye.  From my seat, I also had clear (albeit farther away) looks at Mark Wahlberg, Jack Nicholson (of course), Hillary Duff and Penny Marshall, among others.  The people-watching was so distracting that LeBron's final stat line of 39 points came as a shock to me - while spending so much time trying to take in my surroundings, I somehow lost sight of what was going on in the game.

Yours truly was sitting to the left of the guy in the Dodgers hat.

The other particularly cool part of the Lakers vs. Heat experience was the access to the Chairman's Room, a lounge located in the tunnels of the Staples Center where celebrities hang out during halftime and after the game.  Physically, the Chairman's Room is just a small room with a bar and a few bowls of nuts and popcorn lying around - one of the least spectacular places in the otherwise-impressive arena.  Given the fact that the Room is the place where the "Who's Who" of Lakers fans hangs out during games, there was something special about grabbing a postgame beer there.  During a night that was more about the people watching the game than the athletes playing in it, the Chairman's Room access was the perfect way to end an entertaining Heat victory.  

Never Had A Chance

Merry Christmas, readers!  I'll be spending the holiday watching the excellent schedule of NBA games on ESPN and ABC, a relatively new Christmas Day tradition that I'm a huge fan of.  Just like the NFL has left its mark on Thanksgiving and NCAA football (and, when there's a season, the NHL) have taken over New Year's Day, the NBA has done a great job of branding itself as Christmas's sport.  And unlike the NFL, the NBA has stacked its holiday game lineup with its best matchups and most popular teams, so I can catch Boston at Brooklyn, Oklahoma City at Miami and, most importantly, New York at the Los Angeles Lakers.  To get in the NBA holiday spirit, I spent Friday night at Madison Square Garden for Knicks versus Bulls, a highly anticipated matchup between two of the Eastern Conference's better teams.  Unfortunately, some questionable refereeing and sloppy early play from the Knicks effectively ended the game before it even started.

After the National Anthem ended, the game was effectively over.

Madison Square garden is known for having a fantastic atmosphere.  From Celebrity Row to the upper levels, Knicks fans are loud and energetic even when the team is struggling.  With the team on a roll early in 2012-13, the crowd has been particularly passionate; gone are the days of the mid-2000s when a Knicks vs. Bulls game would bring thousands of red-jersey-clad Chicago fans into MSG.  This season, there's only one way to knock Knicks fans out of a game - by putting them in a ~20 point first half hole.  The Knicks started out Friday's game ice cold from the floor, missing virtually every shot in the first quarter and falling behind 14-2 just minutes into the game.  But despite their offensive woes and a number of questionable calls / no-calls, the team trailed by only seven after the first quarter.  That's when the refs decided to take over the game.

I don't like to criticize officials - recall that, before I eventually ripped them apart, I stood by the NFL's replacement referees long after most people turned on them.  Refereeing a professional football or basketball game must be incredibly difficult - the game moves very quickly, there are a ton of calls to memorize and any hesitation leads to instant criticism from players, coaches, fans and commentators.  Despite these challenges, a professional referee has two critical jobs that stand above all others - to call the game evenly and consistently on both sides and to maintain control of the game.  While it's hard to tell if the refs accomplished the former on Friday night (Knicks players, coaches and fans would argue that virtually every call went to Chicago, but obviously their opinions are biased), after 50 personal fouls, nine technicals and four ejections it became clear that the officials took the game away from the fans.

It's been said before: Fans come to games to watch players play, not to watch referees ref.  By allowing the players to reach the boiling point where the game becomes more about complaining than about playing, the officials failed to do their job.  Knicks fans came to MSG expecting an exciting and entertaining game, but were forced to watch three of the team's best players (J.R. Smith, Carmelo Anthony and Tyson Chandler) get kicked out of the game.  Despite a furious comeback led by Jason Kidd, Raymond Felton and Chris Copeland (among a host of other bench players), the fans never really got into the game.  Thanks to the refs, they never really had the chance to enjoy what should have been an entertaining holiday weekend matchup.    

Brooklyn's Barclays Center

A few weeks ago, I had a charity meeting at Jay-Z's 40/40 Club in Manhattan.  As you might have been able to guess - I do write a "sports fan experience blog," after all - I'm not much of the clubbing type, and had never been to Jay-Z's establishment before.  I have to say, it was a pretty awesome spot - giant HDTVs everywhere showing (mainly) basketball games, tons of rare sports memorabilia on the walls and cool lighting that gave the club a very unique feel.  Surprisingly, I enjoyed my time in the 40/40 Club.  But while I can now officially say that I visited Jay-Z's club, in a way I wasn't really there.  Sure, I was physically inside the building, but the lack of a true club atmosphere makes it impossible for me to say whether or not I'd like the place at midnight on a Saturday.  Places like the 40/40 Club can't be judged solely on looks.  They need to be felt, and I can't say I've ever really felt what it's like to party with the 40/40 crowd (I imagine I'd hate it).

The reason I bring up this anecdote is because on Saturday afternoon I made my first trip to New York City's latest Jay-Z-inspired establishment, Brooklyn's Barclays Center.  I visited Barclays over the summer before construcution was finished, but this was my first visit to the arena for a real event.  Overall, I was extremely impressed with the building even before I walked inside.  The subway ride from the east side of Manhattan was incredibly convenient - a ~25 minute ride (tops) dropped us literally just steps from the building's main entrance - and upon exiting the subway we were immediately greeted by the Barclays Center's impressive and unique facade.  The staff was especially friendly - everyone we spoke to, from the people at Will Call to the security guards to the ushers in our section, was really sociable - and the building looks new, fresh and clean (as you'd expect from an arena that opened just weeks ago).

Thanks to a connection at the area, we had particularly good seats in the fifth row of the lower level (see the picture, below).  The arena is pretty small, both in terms of capacity and footprint, so virtually every seat is right on top of the court.  The upper level seats are stacked tightly, so that they seem simultaneously very close to the court (horizontally) but extremely high up (vertically).  Just like Jay-Z's 40/40 Club, Barclays has a modern, dark, sleek look - it's not bright and friendly like Indiana's Bankers Life Fieldhouse, but is instead chic and dark, like a bar. Our seats also came with access to one of the arena's eleven "Vault Suites," which are basically ultra-luxury boxes located under the arena with no view of the court.  We didn't hang out in ours for long - there were no other people there and there was no food, so we didn't have much of a reason to spend more time there - but it was apparent that the Vault Suites could be an awesome place for someone rich and/or important to host guests before the game or during halftime.

Check out the empty seats in the background - it looked like that in every single section.

While I loved the building, it's still hard for me to picture what it's really like to attend a big-time sporting event at Barclays.  I went for a Princeton basketball game versus Fordham, and at opening tip there weren't more than 1,000 people in the place (it might have been closer to a few hundred, realistically).  Never once did the crowd get up on it's feet, you could hear every sneaker squeak on the court, and I had dozens of empty seats on either side onto which I could stretch out, lay my coats, etc.  I'm guessing that, for a Knicks vs. Nets game or even the A-10 Tournament finals (coming to Brooklyn in March), the place could get loud and exciting, but I really can't say for sure.  In fact, the crowd was so sparse that I got selected for an on-court promotion (a shooting contest that I'm sad to say I lost) because I was virtually the only person in the entire lower bowl who was a) in my seat right after the opening tip, b) wearing a Princeton shirt and c) young enough to avoid having a heart attack under the basket.  The new Barclays Center has a ton of potential - I can't wait to see, hear and feel what it's like to be there for a "real" event.

      Replace "Ian Hummer" with "Deron Williams" and Barclays Center might feel a lot different.

There's an "I" in "Lin," But Not In "Team"

After last night's thrilling come-from-behind victory in Brooklyn I'll admit that I'm a little Knicks-crazy this week, so forgive me if this post comes off as a bit more biased than what you're used to.  Since the 2012-13 NBA season started, the Knicks have been grabbing sports media headlines with their consistently solid play, pair of 20-point victories over defending champion Miami and the emergence of Carmelo Anthony as a legitimate MVP candidate.  With Amar'e Stoudemire set to return before the end of the calendar year and join an already-deep rotation that features Anthony, reigning Defensive MVP Tyson Chandler, All Star-worthy PG Raymond Felton and a cast of other veteran role players (not to mention second year guard Iman Shumpert, also set to return from injury later this season), the Knicks seem poised to improve on last year's first round playoff exit at the hands of the Heat.  There's a positive energy around New York basketball that the Nets' move to Brooklyn has done nothing to slow down, and it seems like the Knicks are once again the talk of the town.

Last year's playoff run was, of course, largely thanks to the admittedly superb play of Jeremy Lin, once an obscure point guard out of Harvard who transformed into a household name (and a brand) virtually overnight.  Since New York refused to match Houston's offer to Lin over the summer, the Knicks and Lin have headed in completely opposite directions.  While the Knicks, at 16-5, sit atop the Eastern Conference with Lin's backup, Felton, leading the offense, Linsanity has struggled in his first year with the Rockets. His stats are way down from the ones he was putting up with the Knicks last January, and as a result the new look Rockets have struggled and currently sit at  9-11, 10th place in the West and currently outside the playoff bubble.  When Lin went off for a Linsanity-esque 38 points and 7 assists against San Antonio on Monday, the sports world barely took notice.  More importantly, Houston still lost to the Spurs at home.

When the Knicks let Lin walk in July, everyone was talking about how New York was making a huge mistake.  After all, Lin had become the new face of the Knicks franchise, and Lin supporters argued that the point guard's value to the team far exceeded what the Knicks would have to pay to retain him (even after including the Luxury Tax implications).  What are those supporters saying now?  Clearly hindsight is 20/20, and there was so way to know for sure that Lin would regress dramatically in 2012-13 and that a guy like Felton would drastically outperform him - in the article I linked to above, ESPN's Ian O'Connor wrote in July that "there's no good reason to believe that Lin, a better player than Felton last year, won't be a better player than Felton next year and beyond."  But even if O'Connor was right - maybe the Knicks did luck into the Felton over Lin decision when the former became too expensive - the fact remains that the Knicks can always make another Jeremy Lin, but Jeremy Lin doesn't make the Knicks.

Fast forward to today and take note of the fact that Knicks fans are falling for the 2012-13 roster, including Lin's replacements (Felton, Jason Kidd and Pablo Prigioni).  While the excitement around those three doesn't match last season's Linsanity craze, you won't find a Knicks fan who wants to talk about how much he misses Jeremy Lin or about how badly the Knicks need to bring Lin back.  If the Knicks are winning, New York basketball fans will rally around the players helping to grab the victories.  Last year, it was Lin (and admittedly it all happened in an unprecedented way).  This year it's Carmelo, Felton, Chandler and guys like Kidd, Steve Novak and Rasheed Wallace.  At the same time Lin is struggling in Houston, both on the court and with fans who have fallen in love with the newly-acquired James Harden and view the Lin signing as more of an afterthought.  I still wish Lin the best and hope things turn out well for him over his next three years in Houston, but as of now we can say that no player - not even Lin - is more important to the Knicks than the Knicks are to that player. 

Battle 4 Atlantis: Part II

While I don't typically love watching sporting events at bars, I do appreciate the camraderie and the opportunity to spend time alongside fans of teams other than my own.  When I used to watch the Giants games every Sunday at a bar in Palo Alto, CA, I learned to appreciate the atmosphere and grew to enjoy being seated next to other diehard NFL fans (assuming they weren't rooting for the Eagles, Redskins or Cowboys, that is).  Now that I'm back in New York, sometimes I wish that I could take in a differentiated fan perspective a bit more often - I've returned to watching most games at home this fall and, when I do go out, I'm usually surrounded by other Knicks or Giants fans.  Along those lines, the Battle 4 Atlantis was the perfect remedy for my suddenly-insulated sports lifestyle.  Not only did I get to watch some great basketball games alongside energetic and passionate fans from VCU, Duke, Louisville, Missouri, Minnesota, Northern Iowa and of course Stanford (I never saw Memphis play), I also had a great time talking to many of these people while at the resort's many restaurants, beaches and water slides.

Even before we reached the Bahamas, we ran into countless college basketball fans.  On our connecting flight to Nassau from Orlando, I struck up a conversation with a couple of retirees from Jacksonville who were heading the the Atlantis to cheer on Memphis; they both attended the university back when it was still known as Memphis State.  The shuttle bus that we took from the airport to the hotel was filled with fans from each of the tournament's eight schools, and we spent the 45-minute-long ride mocking a couple of Minnesota Golden Gophers fans for snapping pictures of everything from the bus window, as if they had never left their cul-de-sac in St. Paul before.  While sitting in an inner tube, riding a conveyor belt built to take people to the top of a water slide, I got into a conversation with a guy from Missouri about their game against Stanford from the day before.  The entire weekend was filled with random conversations with college basketball fans about the tournament and occassional run-ins with the players and coaches themselves.  While playing blackjack in the casino we spotted Coach K and his Blue Devils, we saw Stanford and assistant coach Mark Madsen on the way to dinner, and passed the rest of the teams while walking in and around the Imperial Arena.

Stanford prepares for its first game of the tournament versus Missouri.


Often, when we think about college basketball fans, we think about college students - the Cameron Crazies at Duke, for example.  Interestingly, there were virtually zero college students at the Battle 4 Atlantis, likely spending their Thanksgiving holidays at home with family and friends or at a more wallet-friendly vacation destination.  Instead, the Battle 4 Atlantis fans fit into a few main categories.  Of course, there were lots of young and middle-aged alums, including myself.  There were also lots of retirees, eager to find an excuse not to cook Thanksgiving dinner and find some warm weather in the process - I was constantly running into a giant pack of elderly Minnesota fans wearing matching t-shirts made specifically for the trip.  Then, there were the super-fans -some of whom might've also have been alums - who never miss a game regardless of what country it's played in.  Last, there were a few locals sprinkled in here and there - Bahamas residents excited enough about the sport of basketball to spend money to watch kids from colleges they've almost certainly never been to (or, in the case of Northern Iowa, heard of) before.

Neutral site tournaments are always fun, from college basketball's March Madness to the FIFA World Cup, and the Battle 4 Atlantis was certainly no exception.  With only the most diehard fans willing to pass on a traditional Thanksgiving in favor of non-conference college basketball, I spent five days in a beautiful setting talking about sports with some of the country's most intelligent and passionate college hoops fans.  While I would have loved to have seen a larger Stanford contingent with which to talk about Dwight Powell's inside game or Aaron Bright's injury - as usual, the Stanford fans left much to be desired in the attendance department - it was kind of fun to be part of an underrepresented fan minority.  After two straight months of being surrounded by fellow Giants and Knicks fans, it was great to get away from New York for a few days and be the token cardinal red-clad Stanford fan in the Bahamas.

Battle 4 Atlantis: Part I

In the sports world, Thanksgiving is seen as a holiday for NFL football.  But while most turkey-eating Americans were watching Houston and Detroit go to overtime, New England destroy the lowly Jets and RGIII tear up the

Cowboys secondary, I was at the Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas for the Battle 4 Atlantis, a college basketball tournament made up of eight of the nation's top programs (including the eventual champion, Coach K-led Duke).  Over the three days of the tournament I went to four full games and saw parts of four others (out of 12 total) - not to mention interacted with a ton of college hoops fans of Louisville, Missouri, Northern Iowa and more while exploring the resort grounds - so my coverage of the tournament will spill over into a second post to come later this week.  Today, let's talk about what has to be one of the most unique sports venues I've ever been to - a basketball arena erected inside a hotel ballroom.

Last season, Harvard took the first ever Battle 4 Atlantis championship, defeating Central Florida in the finals while highly ranked UConn and Florida State played in the consolation game.  While following that tournament, all anyone could talk about was how difficult it was to shoot at Atlantis' Imperial Arena, and now I can see why.  The resort converted its largest ballroom into an arena, laying the hardwood in the center and surrounding it with 15-20 rows of temporary seating which holds ~2,500 fans.  Rather than looking up into a sea of people while shooting, the players see only a few rows of seats and a black curtain behind them, as well as two old-school scoreboards hanging in the corners of the room (see below).  If you watched any of the games on NBC Sports Network, you'd have seen that the seats were covered in purplish-blue lighting, making the shooter's background especially dark.  It's unlike any other venue I've ever seen, and the first day's games were low scoring (and somewhat ugly) as players adjusted to the conditions.

Duke vs. VCU in the semis, with the famous black curtain and scoreboard in the background.

For the fans, though, the conditions really couldn't be better.  We had seats in the fourt row right at center court - which obviously would have been great seats at any arena - but at the Imperial Arena all that stood between us and the court was a narrow aisle and the media table.  The only way to get to your seats is to walk right around the court (while rounding the corners, you actually had to step onto the hardwood), so you're always right on top of the action.  With the seats only extending ~15 rows deep, even the worst seats in the house would be in the middle of a lower level section at a typical NBA or large college arena.  And, despite the black curtain surrounding the entire venue, the Imperial Arena held in the noise really well, making it sound like there were more people there than there really were.  This was particularly helpful during some of the consolation bracket games (like Stanford vs. Northern Iowa on Day 2), when the stands were mostly empty as people stayed at the beach and pools during the afternoons and saved their basketball consumption for the big games in the evenings.

The Atlantis also did a great job in converting the conference area of its Coral Towers into a makeshift basketball venue.  The convention center lobby and hallways were turned into a temporary entry gate and concourse, and the surrounding ballrooms were converted to concession stands and merchandise stands.  Unlike typical stadiums, all of the bathrooms and hallways were clean and open, and the area wasn't cluttered with a ton of advertisements (other than the courtside signage, there was virtually no corporate branding at all).  As for in-game entertainment, the tournament did a great job of adding local flavor to the event, as each game had some form of Bahamiam entertainment at halftime - from a steel drum band to a sea lion that dances to "Gangnam Style."  From the moment that I walked out from behind the bleachers and got my first look at the court to the championship trophy presentation (featuring indoor fireworks and streamers shot from air-powered guns, below), the Battle 4 Atlantis was incredibly unique.  And the uniqueness of the tournament extended far beyond the arena itself - stay turned to Part II, to come.  

Why Basketball Is An Indoor Sport

Last night, I watched the second game of the State Farm Champions Classic, which pitted Duke against Kentucky in Atlanta, GA.  The game, which followed Michigan State's thrilling victory over Kansas, was an exciting contrast of styles - a well-played, high-profile non-conference matchup that we don't get enough of prior to March Madness.  If there was a downside to the first game between the Blue Devils and the Wildcats since 2001, it was the fact that the Champions Classic organizers held the event in the cavernous Georgia Dome rather than (at worst) an NBA building like Atlanta's Phillips Arena or (at best) a classic college venue like Cameron Indoor Stadium or Rupp Arena.  While playing the game in a football stadium undoubtedly increases paid attendance, allowing more people to see the contest live (reported attendance was 22,847) and generating more revenue for the event organizers and the participating schools, it diminishes one of the best parts of college basketball - the in-arena atmosphere.  Buildings like Cameron, Rupp and Butler's Hinkle Fieldhouse are what distinguish college games from the most-homogenous NBA variety, and moving Duke vs. Kentucky to the Georgia Dome definitely took away from what could have been an even more intriguing matchup.

Clearly, the Georgia Dome was not meant to host a basketball game.

While Duke vs. UK would have been a lot more awesome if it was played on a college campus, it could have been worse - at least the game wasn't scheduled to be played on an aircraft carrier.  Since North Carolina played Michigan State onboard the USS Carl Vinson last November, the NCAA and its schools have become obsessed with scheduling non-conference games where planes should be landing.  Despite the fact that, last year, a Michigan State player injured his knee when he slipped on a wet spot on the floor (who would have thought that a court built atop a floating vehicle might have moisture issues?), three additional aircraft carrier games were scheduled for this past week.  Mercifully for the players, two were cancelled - Florida vs. Georgetown on the USS Bataan in Jacksonville, FL and Ohio State vs. Marquette on the USS Yorktown in Mt. Pleasant, SC.  Florida and Georgetown actually played a hideous first half, after which the game was called for moisture with the Gators leading the Hoyas 27-23.  Syracuse and San Diego State got their game in on the USS Midway in San Diego, but the game was postponed two days from Friday to Sunday because of weather.  Even when it was played on Sunday, though, "the gusty winds on the deck of the USS Midway were so strong that the outside shooting in Syracuse's 62-49 victory wasn't quite so pretty" - San Diego State shot 1 of 18 on three pointers and 14 of 33 on free throws. 

Long sleeves!  Pants!  It's Syracuse vs. San Diego State on the USS Midway!

In my mind, there are three main reasons to hate these suddenly-en-vogue aircraft carrier games.  One, there's a real injury risk here - playing on a moist wooden surface is extremely dangerous, and these outdoor matchups put all of the players at risk.  Second, the quality of play during these games is bound to be consistently terrible - between the wind, the cold and the sun, players can't calibrate their shots and the games are sloppy and low scoring as a result.  Third, and perhaps most unfortunately, these games come at the expense of battles that could be among the highlights of the non-conference college basketball season.  The teams invited to play in these nationally televised aircraft carrier games are all top-tier schools; matchups like Florida vs. Georgetown or Ohio State vs. Marquette would be intriguing regardless of where they are played.  The best case scenario here is that the game will be ruined by the outdoor elements and an otherwise great matchup turns into an ugly one, like in the Syracuse win over San Diego State.  The worst case scenario is what happened with the other two aircraft carrier games - they get cancelled because of weather, they don't get rescheduled and the fans lose out on the opportunity to see two big time programs play each other during a mostly uninteresting November of college hoops.  Going forward, I hope the NCAA and its schools get smart and move these games to indoor venues, both for the sake of the players and the fans.  

What Changed for Mike Brown?

On Friday, the Los Angeles Lakers fired head coach Mike Brown after the team's 1-4 start to the 2012-13 season.  The Lakers were all over the NBA headlines this offseason, from the acquisitions of high-profile superstars Dwight Howard and Steve Nash to the instillation of a new Princeton offense.  Of course, its nothing new for head coaches to be fired in the midst of a disappointing season - the Knicks 2011-12 season, for example, was partially marked by the firing of Mike D'Antoni (currently a candidate for the Lakers vacancy) and the promotion of assistant coach Mike Woodson.  From that perspective, I have no problems with the Lakers dumping Brown.  My question, however, is: Why now?

I'm confused too, Mike Brown.

Mike Brown has been an NBA coach since 2005-06, when he took the Cleveland Cavaliers to the Eastern Conference semifinals.  Since then, his career has been marked by a series of "almosts" and "could have beens."  His Cavs teams finished either first or second in the Central Division in each of his five years with the team, but only once reached the NBA Finals and never won the title despite having a roster that included arguably the best player in the NBA.  Last year with the Lakers, Brown took Kobe and Co. to the Western Conference semis, but couldn't get past the Oklahoma City Thunder.  Basically, after getting half a dozen seasons to prove himself, Mike Brown is who we thought he was (as Dennis Green might say) - a coach good enough to get you to the playoffs, but no further.  I'm pretty sure that Mike Brown is the same coach today as he was this past summer, when the Lakers decided to bring him back for this season to lead the newly revamped Lake Show.

If Brown was good enough for the Lakers a month ago, what's changed in the last few weeks that lead the Buss family to change their minds about Brown?  I find it almost impossible to believe that it was the team's 1-4 start - firing a head coach based on a five game sample size would be an extremely shortsighted panic move that I refuse the believe a franchise like the Lakers are capable of committing.  Yes, the Lakers are 1-4, but so what?  The Denver Nuggets - a team many expect to contend in the Western Conference this year - started the year with three consecutive disappointing losses.  Since then, they've won four straight and have people talking about them as a force to be reckoned with.  The NBA season is long, and the Buss family has been around long enough to know that a rough five game stretch - especially for a team bringing in a bunch of new players and instilling a new offense - means very little.  So no, I don't buy the team's slow start as a rationale for Brown's firing.

So assuming Los Angeles knew what Brown was about way before this season started, and assuming that they're not overreacting to a slow first two weeks, why did the team make this move on Friday?  Some are arguing that its so they could pursue either Phil Jackson or Jerry Sloan, but those two legendary coaches are no more available now than they were over the summer.  I don't think Mike Brown is a particularly good coach and don't think he was ever a great fit for the Lakers, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how that's more true now than it was just a few weeks ago.  I think the Lakers will be competitive with whomever they bring in to run the ship (yes, even with D'Antoni), but it's a shame to think about what they could have been if they used the offseason to integrate a new coach instead of making a strange move in mid-November.

Enjoy It While You Can

Yesterday, I came across a great NBA-related article on Grantland entitled "The 5 Percent Theory: Why NBA teams shouldn't time their rise to avoid a juggernaut. Plus, 10 great things about the season so far."  The article, written by columnist Zach Lowe, argues that "If you have some pieces, you're almost there, and if you're almost there, you go for it — even if the chances of toppling a superpower are slim."  He backs his assertion up with comments from (among others) highly-respected Houston GM Daryl Morey and Dallas owner Mark Cuban, the latter of which compiled a championship-winning roster in 2011 even though everyone said that the Mavericks had no chance of toppling the Lakers, Celtics or Heat.  Given how much luck and injuries play into the run to an NBA title, I strongly agree with Lowe - just because the Heat seem dominant and the Lakers and Thunder could be scary doesn't mean that the next set of teams should be treading water until LeBron and Wade are pulled apart and Kobe retires.

I thought about this article a lot in the context of the start that my beloved New York Knicks have had to the 2012-13 NBA season.  While many fans are (perhaps overly) thrilled with the team's 3-0 record and, in particular, its impressive and inspired opening night victory over Miami, I've heard a ton of naysayers out there arguing that the Knicks are wasting their time and money on veterans like Kurt Thomas, Marcus Camby and Jason Kidd when they should be building towards a future that doesn't include Heat and Lakers rosters headlined by any sort of "Big Three."  These people argue that the Knicks are fooling themselves by thinking they have any chance to compete this year, and as such shouldn't try to do so.  This argument relies on the logic that the only goal a team should have going into an NBA season is to win a championship.  Is that the right way to look at it, though?

As a fan of the Braves - a team that consistently stays competitive but rarely wins it all - I might be biased here, but I don't believe in a championship-or-bust philosophy.  True, there's nothing better than seeing your team take home the trophy - I still remember the Braves 1995 World Series victory like it was yesterday, and the two Super Bowls that the Giants have captured this decade sit at the top of my Best Sports Moments list.  But as good as those highs are, the lows associated with following a truly uncompetitive team can be extremely painful - particularly when you feel like your team's ownership and management are willing to tolerate the losing.  I agree with Zach Lowe - even if your team has just a 5% chance to capturing a title this season, you owe it to your fans and players to go for it.

Do I think the Knicks are going to win the NBA title this season?  No, I don't.  But do I think that, with a core of Carmelo Anthony, Tyson Chandler and Amar'e Stoudemire and a surrounding cast comprised of useful veterans, the Knicks are at least in the conversation?  Sure, why not!  And as such, I applaud their moves to go get some veterans with playoff experience who can add leadership and play key roles this season without mortgaging the team's future.  Just as I'll never understand why the Washington Nationals shut down Stephen Strasburg to preserve their chance at future World Series titles when they could have won a World Series with him this year, I don't understand the argument that the Knicks should lay low and let the Heat and Lakers battle for the 2013 title.  I advise all Knicks fans to give this new roster (and coach Mike Woodson) a chance, and enjoy the good start while you can.

Opening Night on Celebrity Row

Thanks to a generous last-minute invite from a friend I had fantastic third row seats to the New York Knicks home opener, 104-84 drubbing of the defending NBA champion Miami Heat.  Over the years I've sat all over Madison Square Garden, but had never been this close to the court for an NBA game before (I once sat courtside for a New York Liberty WNBA game, back when the team was still playing at MSG).  In addition to providing an excellent view of the game, the first few rows at the Garden afford fans the opportunity to people-watch, get your face on TV and stare at celebrities.  While the surrounding atmosphere can be somewhat distracting - sometimes you forget that you're at a basketball game - it's a unique way to take in a sporting event.

As I looked around MSG's Section 2, I assumed that everyone I saw was either super-rich, someone famous that I just couldn't recognize out of context, or both.  After some not-so-discrete staring, I was able to point out hip-hop artist Mary J. Blige (sitting two rows directly in front of us) and New York Giants defensive end Justin Tuck.  Everyone in our section, though - not just the celebrities - stuck out from the typical basketball fan in one way or another.  Rather than Knicks jerseys and hoodies, the guys were wearing blazers and ties while their dates wore leather pants, stilettos and, in one instance, a see-through black tank top.  The people holding beers were heavily outnumbered by those holding cocktails, and people stared at me when I got out of my seat to cheer after a big Raymond Felton three-pointer.

When you sit in the cheap seats, you spend a lot of time starting at the Jumbotron watching other people shown on the big screen.  When you sit in the third row, you are one of those people.  At one point in the second quarter I was featured prominently on the Jumbotron - another friend at the game texted me to let me know he recognized me - and toward the end of the game I was spotted on TV during the MSG broadcast (see if you can spot me Where's Waldo-style in the photo below).  Along with all of the media exposure comes a downside, however - camera men constantly blocking your view and Knicks staffers camped out in the aisles ready to pounce on the next available photo opportunity.

    Can you find me?  Hint: Look all the way to the right.

Overall, I really enjoyed my experience rubbing elbows with the one percent in MSG's floor seats.  What better way to take in the Knicks season opener against the star-studded Heat than sitting alongside the likes of Mary J. Blige and Justin Tuck?  Going forward, I'll have no problem heading back up to the higher levels to cheer with the "real" fans - but for Friday night there was no place that I'd rather have been.