How Valuable is Parity?

It's been two days since the dust has settled on the NBA's trade deadline, perhaps the busiest period of trade activity in the history of the league.  A number of players changed teams this week, and some of them were among the sport's biggest names; not only was Carmelo Anthony (finally) traded to New York, but Deron Williams moved from Utah to New Jersey, Washington picked up Mike Bibby from Atlanta and Gerald Wallace was dealt from Charlotte to Portland.  After all of the trades, Utah CEO Greg Miller spoke about the impending loss of parity in the NBA (via ESPN.com):

"I can only speak from the Jazz ownership perspective in saying that I'm not interested in seeing a congregation of star players on a handful of teams throughout the league. I don't think it does the teams any good. It doesn't do the fans any good. It doesn't do the sponsors any good."

I know that Miller isn't alone here; I very much feel the same way.  You can read my most recent thoughts about the bad taste in my mouth following the Knicks' acquisition of Anthony, and I felt even more frustrated after LeBron James and Chris Bosh decided to take their talents to South Beach.  While I guess Boston acquired their stars a bit more organically, I still don't love the fact that they received Kevin Garnet and Ray Allen from struggling franchises to go along with homegrown talent like Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo.  And what the Lakers did to Memphis with the Pau Gasol deal is the closest thing the NBA will ever see to armed trade robbery.  I'd rather be shot than have Kwame Brown on my roster; luckily, Memphis also acquired Javaris Crittenton in that trade, exactly the guy you need to do the shooting.

So yes, as a basketball fan (presumably like Miller) who would love to see all teams, both large- and small-market, stay competitive, it's not fun to have top players congregate on a select group of teams.  The question is: Is this bad for the sport of basketball?  I feel like many fans automatically answer "Yes" without really thinking through it.  As American sports fans, we are obsessed with trying to achieve parity.  As we continue to transition towards making football our new National Pastime, we credit parity for the main reason why fans love the NFL.  Is there any truth to this?

Take Major League Baseball, which is undoubtedly a) more popular than the NBA and b) more profitable.  MLB has created exactly the atmosphere that Greg Miller is worried about - a large number of top stars (or at least big names) play for a comparatively small number of teams including the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies and Mets.  While it's not exactly the same as the NBA situation - there are a lot more good players to go around in baseball, and long-term success is much tougher to predict - the principle is the same.  Small market teams are constantly losing their top talent to bigger, badder franchises (Kansas City is practically a Yankees farm team at this point).  To hammer the point home, consider how happy baseball fans were that a "small-market, low-budget" team like the Giants won the 2010 World Series.  Since when is San Francisco a small market?

And you know what?  It works!  Over time, the Yankees have converted fans all over the globe and convinced them to join the Evil Empire.  Boston has built up a giant Red Sox Nation, and the Phillies have developed a rabid fan base and national appeal.  As for the smaller teams?  Yes, they struggle, but the gains achieved by large-market teams may outweigh their losses on a net basis.  Who can monetize Adrian Gonzalez more effectively, the Red Sox or the San Diego Padres?  The answer is obvious.  MLB has a system in place where the big teams make most of the money and share enough revenues with the smaller teams for them to get by.  As a fan of a small market team you might not like it, but compare MLB's and the NBA's Income Statements and see which one seems to make more sense.

To Greg Miller, I say I'm sorry for your loss.  It's never easy to lose a franchise player, and Miller has now seen both Carlos Boozer and Deron Williams leave Salt Lake City in consecutive seasons.  But as a rational businessman, I ask him to step back for a second and try to understand why this might make sense.  In a sports ownership landscape where the line between business and pleasure is extremely blurry, it's hard to decide if a decrease in parity is good or bad for the NBA.   

Saying Goodbye to Old Friends

Well, the Carmelo Anthony saga has finally ended the way most people thought it would.  Anthony is a New York Knick, acquired in a trade for essentially half of the pre-All Star Game Knicks roster.  In comes Carmelo, Chauncey Billups, Anthony Carter, Renaldo Balkman, Sheldon Williams and Corey Brewer, and out go MSG mainstays Danilo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Timofey Mozgov, Anthony Randolph, Eddy Curry and Raymond Felton.  I've had 24-hours to process the trade and its ramifications, and I still can't decide how exactly I feel about it.

On one hand, this is the move that the Knicks needed to make.  With the "Big Three" congregating in Miami, Boston's squad still looking strong, Chicago emerging as an Eastern Conference power and Orlando anchored by Dwight Howard and Co., the Knicks needed to acquire another superstar to (eventually) vault them towards the top of the East.  While they're still a few players away, Amar'e and Carmelo give the Knicks two top-ten stars in their primes and a solid two-man nucleus to build around.  Add a Chris Paul and a quality big man (along with Landry Fields, of course), and the Knicks may be ready to contend in a few seasons. 

That being said, the trade bums me out a little bit.  It's not that I loved the guys they gave up - I do consider myself a Danilo fan and I've always been a supporter of Chandler, but I barely got to know Felton, Randolph or Mozgov (and I hate Curry, for obvious reasons).  I did, however, grow fond of them all, especially during this season.  The Knicks were finally starting to play good basketball, and Felton, Gallo and Chandler were all big parts of that.  While Carmelo is the guy who can take them to the next level, I hope Knicks fans remember the quality contributions made by Gallinari and Chandler over the past few difficult seasons, and appreciate the effort that those two and Felton made in making NBA hoops relevant in New York again.

Additionally, the whole notion of these "many-for-one" trades just rubs me the wrong way.  I understand that Donnie Walsh was brought in to gut the old roster and acquire stars, and he's now officially done that (and I'd bet another top-notch player is on his way in the next year or so).  Everything's also been done within the confines of the NBA's salary cap, so Walsh's moves were complicated, intricate and "fair," unlike moves the Yankees or Mets would make.  Still, though, it doesn't "feel" right.  While I can't wait for the Knicks to contend for the NBA title again, I sort of wish they could have done it with homegrown talent.  Even if Carmelo and Amar'e can bring a banner to Madison Square Garden, it will never be the same as if Gallo and Wilson could have been a part of it.

So, yes, I'm excited for the new Knicks and can't wait to see what Walsh and Mike D'Antoni can build around their two studs.  It'll still be weird, though, to see the old Knicks taking the court for the Nuggets (or Nets, or wherever they end up when the trading deadline comes).  I wish Gallinari and Chandler the best - now it's time to see what the new Knicks can do.

Los Angeles: Home of the Blakers*

After last year's All Star game in Dallas, I was pretty confident that I could accurately predict the script for the 2011 game in L.A.  The event would be a huge Hollywood-themed spectacle, complete with a red carpet entrance; I was right, although it was a magenta carpet, sponsored by T-Mobile, that covered the area surrounding the Staples Center.  Like the last two dunk contests, the 2011 edition would be an overly-theatrical, completely scripted performance; again I was correct, as the only thing needed to transform Saturday night into a WWE event was having Dr. J hit Darryl "Chocolate Thunder" Dawkins over the head with a folding chair.  And I also knew the whole thing would be dominated by a hometown, L.A.-based hero; again, I couldn't have been more spot on.

Now, I admit that a year ago I would have guessed that the hometown favorite would have been Kobe Bryant.  But while Kobe did win All Star Game MVP honors (deservedly so, too - I hadn't seen Kobe look that energetic in a long time), the star of the weekend was Clippers rookie Blake Griffin.  Not only did Griffin participate in all three nights - he played limited minutes for the Rookies in the Rookie Challenge game on Friday night, won the dunk contest on Saturday and came off the bench for the West in Sunday's game - but he was the player most people game out to see.  While I commented in my previous post that Lakers gear outnumbered Clippers gear at Jam Session by a ten-to-one margin, the ratio probably would have been fifty-to-one if not for the number 32 Griffin jerseys sprouting up all over downtown.

The Staples Center errupted when Griffin was announced on Saturday night.

It's obviously not unusual for a hometown guy to be the main attraction at an NBA All Star Game.  Two years ago in Phoenix, Shaquille O'Neal (or the Big Shaqtus as he was then known) and Amar'e Stoudemire were the toasts of the town.  Last year in Dallas Dirk Nowitzki was a big draw.  But nothing compares to the energy and wonder surrounding Blake Griffin this weekend.  I mean, everyone was talking about him, and it wasn't just "Will Blake do something awesome this weekend?"  Instead, people where asking "How many awesome things will Blake do this weekend?"  In the end, the answer was "a lot," as the rookie won the dunk contest with an impressive array of highly-orchestrated theatrics and acrobatics (though credit should go to DeMar DeRozan, Serge Ibaka and JaVale McGee for making it as interesting as a staged, fan-vote-determined popularity contest with a clear front-runner can be . . .), performed well in the All Star Game and showed a level of maturity and magnetism that transforms a star athlete into a star personality.

In the end, it was a good All Star weekend that wasn't substantially different (better or worse) than the others I've been too.  What was different, though, was the way the hype surrounding Blake Griffin took over the event.  Of course people were talking about LeBron and Wade, about the four Boston All Stars, about Carmelo's then-uncertain situation and, yes, about Kobe.  But Griffin gave the entire weekend a new slant that no one - not even yours truly - could have predicted a year ago.

*NOTE: This is Caught Looking's 100th post and, while I'm saving

any anniversary-type "celebration" for the blog's one-year mark in

the spring, I thought it deserved mention here.  As always, thanks to all my loyal readers!

NBA All Star Jam Session

While it's not exactly the World Cup (the event that motivated the creation of this blog), NBA All Star Weekend is still a significant sporting event. Thus, I thought it would be fun to do a little live blogging this weekend, something I haven't done since South Africa. Today I'm at Jam Session at the LA Convention Center - it's basically a basketball-themed carnival which doubles (serves?) as a way for the league's corporate sponsors to reach hoops fans. Even though it's essentially a giant commercial, it's still fun.

In past years, I've criticized Jam Session for being overly generic and lacking local flavor. The two I had previously attended, in Phoenix and Dallas, each had the same booths and attractions. This one is different, though; the league did a good job of adding a cool Hollywood vibe. For example, you can get your picture taken with full-sized cutouts of the entire Laker and Clipper teams. You can use spin-art to decorate an NBA-branded music record, which makes for a pretty sweet souvenir. There are also some ads and signage promoting some if the area's stars not named Kobe - Eric Gordon has a giant Adidas poster right by the entrance. It's also weird to see Lakers and Clippers fans congregated in one place, though the purple-and-gold outnumber the red-and-blue here by at least ten to one.

I've always been amazed by how much people love Jam Session. I find it a little overwhelming and pretty cheesy, but it is a great low cost way to get the local community engaged in the weekend. I'll try to post a photo or two later so you can get a visual feel of what it's all about. Now, I'm off to do what all good Jam Session visitors do - wait in line and fight a crowd of hundreds to get a free Taco Bell Quad Steak Taco that retails for $1.99. It seems that at All Star Weekend in LA, the only thing without a huge price tag is my dignity.

Storming on the Horizon

As we approach late February, we're getting to the exciting part of the college basketball season.  While the NCAA Tournament is obviously the college hoops highlight of the year, the second half of the year's second month has a lot going for it.  Even before conference tournaments begin (I personally love watching schools from obscure leagues battle for their one-and-only automatic bid to the field of 65 68 - Lehigh versus Bucknell for the Patriot League title, anyone?), we get to watch a ton of great in-conference upsets.  This week alone, we got to see two number 1-ranked teams go down: first Ohio State lost at Wisconsin, and then Kansas lost to in-state rival Kansas State.

Having no allegiance to either OSU or KU, I was pumped to see the Buckeyes and Jayhawks lose.  The upsets shake up the national rankings, provide additional intrigue heading into the conference tournaments, and help clarify the NCAA bubble picture.  What I didn't like, however, was how the Wisconsin and Kansas State fans stormed the court after their respective victories.  While, as a Princeton basketball fan, I can't even really imagine the joyous emotion that accompanies a victory over a top-ranked team, I feel like UW and KSU fans should be "better" than their gratuitous court storming would suggest.

In my opnion, court storming should be reserved for either a) championship victories or b) upsets of such epic proportion that they are unlikely to be repeated by that school within the next decade or so.  A couple of years ago when Georgia ran the table in the SEC tournament to earn an unlikely bid into the bracket, their fans deserved to celebrate their SEC tournament title to their hearts' content.  When Princeton upset defending national champion UCLA in the first round of the 1996 NCAAs, their fans earned the right to go nuts.  However, when Wisconsin and Kansas State win a regular season in-conference game, albeit against a top-ranked opponent, they shouldn't be storming the court.

Both UW and KSU are major programs that should, in any given season, have realistic national title aspirations.  While wins over top-teams should be appreciated, they're just one milestone on the way to what should be a much more significant goal for Wisconsin and K-State.  For the Badgers, a 14th-ranked team, to go crazy after upsetting a conference opponent at home actually blows the accomplishment out of proportion.  Badger fans should expect their team to take down the Buckeyes in Madison, and shouldn't settle for anything less.  As a fan, I'd rather see my team and fans handle the win professionally, as if it was a given; be happy for the win, move on and get ready for the next game.  Not until the season ends with a national championship should a power-conference school like Wisconsin be satisfied, and until that point Badger fans should stay off the hardwood.