A Bob Ryan-like Picking Up the Pieces Column.  Unfortunately, a more depressing edition.

How uneventful is this David Stern retirement?

For as much pub as I thought it was going to get, it’s rather nothing more than the token tributes from journalists both print and online alike.

But it just hit me the other day: The guy who’s replacing Stern, Adam Silver, is nothing more than a carbon copy of David.  He rapidly rose through the ranks so fast at the NBA offices, bumping the astute and respectable Russ Granik out of the way along the way, because he was Stern’s yes-man and brown-noser extraordinaire.

This will be business as usual.  The communists going from Stalin to Khrushchev this is not.  Already Silver has discussed ‘extending the outreach of the game.’  That sounds all nice and dandy, but I’m pretty sure everyone on the planet knows what the game of basketball is.  We know that’s fluff.  The task Silver has set out for himself is: How do I force it down everyone’s throat and consume those even more who already have interest in the NBA?

Get ready.  Ads on jerseys, ads on the court, more games that look compromised – there will be no stopping Silver and league offices from pursuing the despicable marketing dollar.

***

And one more final thought on Stern: I’m tired of hearing how he did so much for the league by ‘expanding the NBA and the game of basketball.’

First off, the league was likely to expand anyways.  The NBA was already growing as Larry Bird and Magic Johnson brought back the American sports fan to the game as they helped wash away the dark ages of the drug use and violence that was rampant throughout the league in the late 1970s.  The NBA was well on its way to becoming a national fixture, and this would’ve happened with or without Stern.  That is unarguable.

All Stern did was accelerate the game’s growth, more so on a global level.  And considering this was done artificially, this hasn’t helped anyone except fill up the uber-rich associated with the NBA’s bank accounts even more.

As my favorite college professor told me: Make your politics selfish.  Well, in this case it’s: Make my interest in sports selfish.

What good has the rapid global expansion of the NBA over the last 25 years done for me? Sure, players are making more money, and executives and league investors are making way more money.  Hooray for them.  But this is not about them; it’s about me and the common fan.  Remember: Make your politics selfish.

Ticket prices are through the roof, cable bills are more expensive to pay for these enormous television deals, there’s the possibility that these games are compromised to create more appealing storylines (he almost assuredly fixed a lottery to get a superstar in New York), and the purity of the game has been washed away by selling out to squeeze every last penny from the marketing sponge.

So, yeah…exactly.  Unless you and your bank account has greatly benefited from ‘all of what David Stern has done for the game’ (and my guess is that’s highly unlikely) – don’t buy into this media love affair nonsense.

***

When a team stinks, usually it’s what happens off the court that develops into news rather that what happens on it (because an endless array of losses eventually stops becoming noteworthy.)

Such is the case with the Boston Celtics.

The big story for the week for the Celts? Gary Tanguay challenging Danny Ainge on the team’s flagship radio station, 98.5 FM, saying there is a conspiracy that Rajon Rondo isn’t trying his hardest so the Celtics can continue to lose more games and get a better chance at a higher draft pick.

I don’t know why I’m giving this the light of day, but since a lot of people are seriously having discussions over this imbecile’s ridiculous conspiracy theory, here goes:

1.)   Um, Rondo is coming off an ACL injury.  As discussed in last week’s column, the ACL injury has not been kind to basketball players.  The latest casualties being Derrick Rose and Danilo Gallinari who have re-injured themselves long term after attempting to come back from it.

2.)   Because of the ACL injury, he’s on a minutes restriction that has been advised by people with, you know, medical degrees.

3.)   Rondo has always been a guy who doesn’t give it 100% when he isn’t playing in the spotlight games.  Remember all the discussion, generated by people like Tanguay and his ilk, about how come Rondo gets all these triple doubles in national TV games, yet throws up goose eggs on Tuesday nights against the Clevelands of the world?

Gary, I understand asking the tough questions.  This writer has always been a supporter of that and has no problem shaming other talking heads who kiss up to the athletes and executives they are supposed to objectively cover in a quest to get scoops and interviews.

But this? With no evidence, or at the very least, reasonable arguments to back up this attention-seeking claim of yours? Especially when less than a week ago, you were claiming an entirely different conspiracy that Rondo was named captain by Danny Ainge to set the table for an eventual trade?

Trolling at its finest.  And faux journalism at its worst.

***

Chad Ford has reported that Kyrie Irving is unhappy and is privately telling his friends that he wants out of Cleveland.

Cue Knicks and Lakers fans wasting their time on the ESPN trade machine putting together ridiculous trades to land the young Cleveland point guard.

What the fascination is, I don’t know.  I mean, aren’t people, and more importantly team executives, aware that little guards have a shorter lifespan, and building your team around an elite little man generally doesn’t produce a championship, with the lone exception being Isiah Thomas?

Off the top of my head, only John Stockton and Steve Nash remained effective well into their 30s.  However, they made a career out of pick-and-rolls and pick-and-pops.

But these furiously-driving-the-line, crash-the-basket, do-whatever-it-takes-to-get-the-ball-in-the-hoop little guys?

Well, Isiah started declining from an individual standpoint when he was 27.  He was out of the league when he was 32.  Kevin Johnson, the player Irving is most popularly compared to, was no longer elite the moment he turned 30, and retired a year later.  Allen Iverson? We know that story.  Same for Tiny Archibald.  And so forth.

Humans generally begin to lose natural athleticism in their late 20s.  So when these little guys can’t beat their initial defender off the dribble as frequently as they used too, coupled with their small frames not having appropriate durability – you can see why smaller guards start to lose it so early.

So proceed with caution with Kyrie Irving.

(And Danny Ainge: Proceed with caution with an approaching-30-coming-off-an-ACL-injury Rajon Rondo.)

***

As Evan Turner hit a game winning shot in Boston, the Comcast feed of the Philadelphia Seventy-Sixers broadcast cut to a section of delirious Sixers fans after the game winning hoop.

I don’t mean to sound smug, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many 76ers fans in one place before.  And it was even more shocking that it came on a road venue.  It must’ve been some promotional giveaway (which would make sense as they were all wearing the same red t-shirts.)

Here’s the best-kept secret in the NBA, and it’s a shame why it isn’t brought up more: Philadelphia 76ers fans are awful.  Horrible.  And you can make a damn good case to me that they are the worst fans in the NBA.

Outside of a handful of seasons in the early 2000s with Allen Iverson – Philadelphia sports fans have NEVER supported that team.

In the late 1960s with Wilt Chamberlain, it was never a guarantee they’d sell out playoff games.

During the Julius Erving era in the late ‘70s-early ‘80s – owner Harold Katz repeatedly threatened to move the team. Why? Because no one went to their games despite having some of the greatest teams in NBA history.  In fact, during a broadcast during Game 6 of the 1982 Eastern Conference Finals, CBS announcer Dick Stockton mentioned how that if the Sixers were to lose another Game 7 in Boston (which they didn’t), a move out of Philadelphia would have been likely.

And recently as the Sixers have plunged into the abyss (save for a surprising season in 2012), Philadelphia fans have ranked at-or-near-the bottom in attendance since the Iverson trade in 2006.  Since 2007, the 76ers have ranked 28th, 26th, 24th, 29th, 30th (dead last), 18th (an outlier year, as the Sixers had a team that led the Atlantic Division for much of the season – which even still only got the Sixers to 18th in attendance), 22nd, and 29th.  In only one of these seasons have the Sixers been able to crack the 80% capacity mark.

So to journalists like Ashley Fox, for every puff piece I read on how wonderful Philadelphia fans are and how they get a bad rep for being classless (they are) all because they support their football team (winners of zero Super Bowls), it’d be nice if once and a while you could write an equally critical piece on how bad and apathetic Philadelphia fans are to their basketball team.

If you ask this writer, you ever talk about teams that should be relocated or even on the chopping block all together: the Philadelphia 76ers are right at the top of that list.

***

Lastly…

There are few things more uninteresting in life than the Winter Olympics.

Forget the hockey.  Obviously, watching a far more free-flowing, open brand of the game beats anything the NHL has to offer.  Miracles or not, Olympic hockey is a good product, and a nice treat during the sporting world’s “Dead Zone” (the lull between the Super Bowl and March Madness.)

But everything else? Glorified Winter X Games silliness.  Why not just have a video games tournament? Or a hotdog eating contest?

(Oh wait…we already have one of those?)

Nothing against the competitors, but from an entertainment standpoint, 98% of the stuff that the Winter Olympics has to offer is total crap.  Of course the networks (NBC) and advertisers have an easy sell to lure you in: They’re representing “your country” – so go drive up the television ratings and advertising hours by “supporting your country.”

And if you don’t? Oh, you’re somehow less of a patriot.  Which as we know, can’t be further from the truth.  Blindly and unconditionally supporting the flag of your country is nationalism.  Not patriotism.

I hearken back to what Michael Felger said in the run up to the debut of the ‘World Baseball Classic’ in the spring of 2006.  In defending his excitement of the new International tournament, Felger said that anytime athletes have the “U-S-A” across the chest – that he’s there.

How brainless is this? And more importantly, how do these athletes represent “my country?”

Hate to break it to you, but someone once told you Santa Claus doesn’t exist either: These competitors don’t represent “your country.”  They represent themselves.  What a slippery pass-off from the elected officials and the taxpayer-funded employees that do.

I’m sorry, but for every medal these athletes win (and for many of these silly events, can we even call some of these competitors “athletes”?) – does the United States get a discount on paying off the national debt? Do middle class Americans get a tax break? Do we get a share of their potential endorsement deals while they become famous for participating in these events?

If what transpires in the Winter Olympics amuses you, all the power to you.  We can all be happy for the competitors themselves, but please; don’t be drawn in all in the name of supporting the flag and the artificial emotions that are drummed up.

It’s just a sell-job to get you to watch this utterly unentertaining, uninteresting rubbish.

Boston Celtics GM Danny Ainge has done an outstanding job tearing down the Celtics.  The trade of Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett for three first round draft selections already qualifies as a work of art.  But the hard part lies ahead.

Back in mid-January when the Boston Celtics traded Jordan Crawford for a potential first round draft choice, the highly astute and well-respected Chris Mannix of Sports Illustrated appeared on Comcast Sports Net New England the night of the deal to give his thoughts on not just the latest Celtics’ trade, but the job Danny Ainge has done since last summer when he broke up the core of the team and traded away Doc Rivers, Paul Pierce, and Kevin Garnett.

By the tone of his voice, you would have been under the impression that he was giving an artistic review of the Sistine Chapel.  I mean, let’s remember, this was essentially reaction to a Jordan Crawford trade for a conditional draft pick.  It was another solid move by Ainge, but in the long run, how good could it get? Contain yourself a bit, Chris!

In reality, Mannix’s excitement – if that’s what you want to call it – originates from Ainge’s fleecing of the Brooklyn Nets.  No need to get too far into the details – Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Jason Terry for Kris Humphries, Gerald Wallace, the right to pay Keith Bogans five million dollars in 2014, MarShon Brooks, and most importantly, three unprotected first round draft choices (worst of Atlanta/Brooklyn in 2014, Nets in 2016 and ’18, and the right to swap with Brooklyn in ‘17.)

With Garnett and Pierce set to return to Boston for their homecomings tomorrow evening, the timing to quickly revisit this is perfect.  That way we can get a feel for this new general perception of Danny Ainge (which is a far cry from how the media was treating him back in 2003-2006, huh?)

Here’s what we know: At worst for Ainge, it was a good trade.  Prying any sort of draft picks away, let alone first rounders, from teams these days in the NBA is about as hard as a waiter getting anything more than a 15% tip from an Englishman.  Even some mid first rounders will give Ainge more necessary flexibility to build up his next contending team.

At best, the Nets bottom out in the near future (which is looking very likely with a capstrung, aging team), and Brooklyn starts sending over high, game-changing lottery picks Boston’s way.  At best, Danny has pulled off the basketball version, of, dare I say it – the Herschel Walker trade (HWT), and the deal will be the catalyst for setting off the next great sports dynasty.

The HWT if you recall, essentially built the Dallas Cowboys’ dynasty in the early 1990s.  With an abundance of valuable draft picks over the course of a few years, Dallas had the flexibility to wheel-and-deal, and combined with keen talent evaluation from the likes of Jimmy Johnson – came away with key championship pieces such as Emmitt Smith, Darren Woodson, Russell Maryland, Alvin Harper, and others.

So all in all, Ainge either wins his trade with Brooklyn, or he – geez, I don’t know – conquers? Whatever, he can’t lose that one.  He did something that many wanted him to do for the last few years (“blow up” the Celtics), and he did it about as well as anyone thought he could do.  And that’s why Celtics fans, and even some media members like Mannix, can’t seem to control their emotions when evaluating the job Ainge has done the past few months.

***

But the best point that Mannix brought up in his segment was something that he mentioned in passing: It’s easy to tear a team down; it’s hard to build a team up.  I mean, just go ask Joe Dumars.  Once considered the beacon of NBA GMs for methodically putting together the mid-2000s Pistons (one championship and six straight Conference Finals appearances) – he has since never come close to building a halfway respectable team.

Credit Ainge.  He made the right decision to break up the Celtics, and made an even better decision in remaining patient to do so.  He did not do it at first whim as some suggested he do.  As much credit as Ainge is getting right now for the last few deals he has made, not enough credit has been given to him for how patient he was over the last few years.

If you recall, many of the Firesale Fanatics and realGMers were writing 4,000 word columns back as early as February of 2010 in trading Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Kevin Garnett for expiring contracts, non-prospects, and fringe first round picks.  All in the name of the ridiculous fallacy of “you need to deliberately get bad in the NBA to get good.”

Instead, the Celtics were able to nearly squeeze another championship or two out of the core, as they still had many deep playoff runs left in them (had they made some better veteran free agent signings, they might have been able to get that second or third title.)

But more importantly, the winning culture was even further ingrained in the franchise.

That’s not to say Ainge himself wasn’t looking to move some of those guys as early back as 2010 – he was.  But the real credit to Ainge should go for his patience.  Rather than just throwing his hands up in the air and saying “Well, it’s doubtful we’ll win another championship with this group.  Firesale time!” – he never wavered.  He never gave in.  He never traded his core until he got what they were appropriately worth.

It was not until the summer of 2013 when that right deal came along.  And oh, what a deal it was, and will turn out to be.

But now it’s time to build the Celtics back up, and Ainge knows that.

The deal with Brooklyn, where the Celtics took such advantage of the Nets, puts the Celtics ahead of the curve.  With it being likely that the Nets will send the Celtics at least one lottery pick in the coming years, Boston is going to be getting far more than they originally expected.

Therefore the Celtics’ timeframe in which they are expected to compete again is sooner than they realized.  So now what do they do?

Well, one can’t look any further than Gerald Wallace.  When they took on Wallace’s utterly absurd thirty million dollars remaining on his contract, it wasn’t expected to be all too burdensome (besides to the owners’ wallets) because there were only three years left on the deal.  Boston was expected to be in the abyss for at least all three of those years as they would be in the early stages of a rebuild, and therefore an unattractive place for major free agents.

However, as stated, it looks as if Boston can get out of the pits by as early as the summer of 2015 (with Wallace having still a year to go on his deal.)  And with Gerald’s consistent outbursts, which are nothing more than indirect vents about his lack of playing time (it has nothing to do with the team’s wins and losses as he makes it out to be) – he has proven to be utterly poisonous to a young and fragile roster.  Quite simply, Wallace has no place on a rebuilding team.

Quick caveat: The original deal with Brooklyn was supposed to be Paul Pierce for Kris Humphries, MarShon Brooks, and a first round draft choice.  It was only expanded to include Wallace because he was necessary to match salary once Garnett was included in the deal (one first rounder for Pierce, one first rounder for Garnett, the right to swap in 2017 to make up for getting the worst of Atlanta and Brooklyn’s pick this year, and the Nets sending another first rounder to take on Wallace’s contract.)  But even THAT would have been a good deal as Humphries has proven to actually be the best player in the whole trade.  And as stated, squeezing first round picks out of teams has become utterly impossible.  Good Lord, as Magic Insider Josh Robbins of the Orlando Sentinel said on Celtics Beat – Orlando can’t even get a first rounder for Arron Afflalo!

The most important aspect however, is establishing and maintaining a serious culture despite the team likely to continue to pile up the losses over the next year-and-a-half.  (So, the Celtics simply cannot have the aforementioned Wallace and Bogans, as well as Courtney Lee, and whomever complaining about playing time to the media.)

This includes bringing in the right kinds of players who strive to achieve such a culture, and are positive influences amongst their peers in the locker room.

Such an example would be the Pacers signing David West right after the lockout ended in the winter of 2011.  While the development of players such as Paul George has been the primary reason for the Pacers’ ascension – his development was that much smoother as it was done so in a winning environment, on a team surrounded by veterans striving to win every basketball game they played and to make the post-season.  All despite having “no chance” to win an NBA championship in years such as 2011 and 2012.   Pacers President Larry Bird has stated that West is one of the primary reasons and influences for their culture.

So where does Ainge get these types of players?

Much to the chagrin of fans and media members alike – you have to overpay for them if you are to sign them as free agents.  To state the obvious: what free agent is going to choose to play for Boston while they are out of the championship picture? And to state the obvious once again: You also have to make sure they’re the right guys and they come with the goods, (hey, West is a free agent this summer!)

Also, Ainge can look at his own roster.  Are Brandon Bass or Kris Humphries any one of these types of players? I’m not entirely sure as I’m just here writing columns and not actually around the team daily.  But Bass and Humphries’ younger teammates have said numerous times the kind of positive influences they are.  So maybe keeping these guys around won’t be such a bad idea after all.  That is, if they truly are the kinds of teammates they’re said to be (again, I’m going along with what I’ve heard.)

At the very least, Ainge can’t just give either one of them away as the Celts approach the trade deadline.  That’s not to say that if Ainge can’t get something of true value for Bass or Humphries, he should pass.  He won’t.  We know that.

But to do something along the lines of what noted Firesale Fanatic Elrod Enchilada of realGM suggests – which is trading Kris Humphries along with others for conditional second round draft picks all in the name of “he won’t be here when the team is competing again” and “it would open up more playing time for the kids” – doing so would be detrimental to the rebuilding of the organization.  Such would be the same mistake Rick Pitino made when he let key veteran players David Wesley and Rick Fox walk for nothing.  Yes, all in the name of “they won’t be here when the team is competing again” and “we need to open up playing time for the kids.” (And oh yeah, so the Celtics could use their cap room to sign ‘young talent’ like Chris Mills and Travis Knight!)

However, as Ainge proved with how he handled Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett – he WON’T move valuable pieces for anything less than what they are worth.  I mean, the same reason as to why rebuilding-Orlando isn’t giving away Arron Afflalo even though he’s “blocking the playing time of the kids.”  So Elrod Enchilada and the rest of the Firesale Fanatics can back away from the Trade Machine.

***

And of course, lastly, Ainge has to use the plethora of draft selections wisely (no explanation needed) and manage the salary cap correctly (DUH!)

While Ainge has to find a way to cut the cords with both Wallace and fellow overpaid swingman Jeff Green – that becomes easier with each passing day (and even having the luxury of tossing in one of the Celts’ many assets to find a taker.)

But what Ainge can’t do is commit to the wrong guys.  Once again, to state the obvious (something this writer hates doing – I’d like to think my readers have a few shreds of intelligence): He can’t pull a Joe Dumars (who allotted huge salary slots to the likes of Charlie Villanueva, Ben Gordon, and Josh Smith over the years.)

That’s why the talk of the Celtics and Rajon Rondo wanting to extend their marriage should make anyone a little wary.

Personally, I don’t think Rondo can be a main piece on a contender.  I’ve written enough about it.

Back in those columns, both written in 2012, in short, I felt that Rondo couldn’t help the Celtics in any three of the most important areas necessary that is needed to win a championship: Defense, rebounding, and end-of-game execution.  For star players, I’d like them to at least do two of these three things very well.

Rondo can’t even do one.  Worse, as mentioned in said previous columns – Rondo has been horrible throughout his career at the end of close games.  What kind of go-to-guy is that?

Most importantly, I was concerned with how effective Rondo would be as he approached 30 and beyond.  Here’s what I wrote back in April of 2012:

Here’s where the trouble lies ahead. A player’s athletic prime is usually his early to mid 20s. Once he gets to his late 20s, even past the age of 26-27, their athletic capabilities begin to decline. You hear a lot how “Rondo is a 26 year old point guard who is just coming into his prime.” But I am a firm believer that Rondo is in his prime now and has been for quite some time. Why? Because much of what Rondo does is highly attributed to his athleticism – getting to the basket, running fast breaks, finishing around the rim, playing defense (when he wants to.) When some of that athleticism starts to go, and it will likely go soon, Rondo’s ability to blow by his defender off the dribble or outrun everyone down the court dwindles. And there are serious questions of how effective Rondo would be with diminished athleticism. There'd be fewer questions had he been able to add to his game over the years more. Had he done so – had he added that jump shot, he’d be able to keep defenses honest as he approaches his thirties. But he hasn’t, and this is great cause for concern as more and more time goes by.  

The eye test alone this season has made me question whether Rondo may already be playing at his absolute peak as a player. Just on his finishing ability alone, I started to begin wondering – you know, what happened to it? Rondo can still finish around the rim. He hasn’t gone Antoine Walker on us, yet. But this used to be a great strength for Rondo, as most Celtics fans remember those spin shots Rondo used to put high off the backboard whenever he got into the lane during the 2010 playoffs that used to go in with regularity (I saw one of these on Sunday as a matter of fact.) Sure enough, the statistics show it as well. His FG% around from shots around the basket has dropped from 64.4% to 57.4%. That’s seven full points. Rondo also has not had one ‘dunk’ all season. In 2010, 2% of his shot attempts were dunks, and he never missed one. Now he hasn’t even attempted a dunk all season. It really does make you think.

And this was, uh, BEFORE he tore his ACL.  An injury which is being so peculiarly dismissed because for whatever reason, it’s presumed that he’ll work his way back and regain the physical abilities he once had (which makes even less sense because natural athleticism usually starts to go as one approaches 30.)

Quick caveat: While plenty of NFL players have brushed off the ACL injury and returned to form, (I mean good God, Jerry Rice tore his ACL and MCL in Week 1 of the ’97 season – then returned at the tail end of that season and caught a touchdown in his first game back) – NBA players have had far, far less success doing so.  Just recently alone, as Derrick Rose and Danilo Gallinari have returned from ACL injuries – they’ve only gone on to sustain other injuries that are currently sidelining both indefinitely.

For NBA players, especially guards like Rondo, it is all in their first step and beating their guys off the dribble.  Basketball is a game of inches, and once they lose a lick of their quickness and that ability to get by their initial defender, it makes all the difference in the world.

But even Ainge himself has insinuated that going through an ACL injury is like a young child having to deal with the chicken pox stage:

"What I’ve seen throughout my professional basketball career is that the ACL injury is something that every player has to overcome and coming back mentally, not just physically. I anticipate some adjustments and just getting used to playing and feeling confident and returning to the player that he was. And I think he will get there, and I don’t know how long it will take, if that means a week or a month or what. He has to get back out on the court and he has to try it, and now is as good a time as any."

Hey, all I’m saying is Ainge better be careful.  Or else all the good he’s done in these last eight months could all be for naught.  All it takes is one crippling max contract to bastardize the franchise and prevent the team from ever returning to glory in the near future.  Just ask Joe Dumars, and our good friends from New York who sold their souls to Amare Stoudemire and five more seasons of perpetual mediocrity ensued.

***

So as the trade deadline comes and goes, and the Celtics likely make another move or two that will seem aimed at the future – the rave reviews from the Chris Mannixes of the world will keep coming in.  And if the deals are as good as the Brooklyn deal over the summer, replacing Doc Rivers with Brad Stevens (and getting a first rounder from the Los Angeles Clippers out of it), and even the ever-so-minor Jordan Crawford trade – then the good press would be deserved.

But all this writer is saying is that some perspective must be realized here.  As stated, a GM is almost in a no-lose situation for at least two years when they are tearing a team down.  The so-called ‘intelligent’ NBA fan wants it done, and they’ll almost always applaud every transaction that is dedicated to this cause because it will be perceived as “the best they could have done anyways.”

When Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett return to Boston tomorrow evening, it will once again serve as another reminder and give ample opportunity to shower the Boston Celtics’ ‘decider’ with praise.

But remember, as good of a job as Ainge has done, it’s still the easy part.

The hard part is fast approaching.

Boston Celtics would be replicating past mistakes by selling out for Gordon Hayward

The NBA’s silly season is amongst us, and with it comes certain things: Knicks fans turning their squad of unwanted, overpriced, and mediocre veterans into Dream Team IV, Elrod Enchilada writing articles on realGM blowing up every NBA roster except maybe Miami’s like it’s the Kingdome, and of course, Chris Broussard doing whatever he can to stay relevant.

Quick caveat: Broussard’s new one now is that teams are having ‘internal discussions.’  He’s not even reporting on trade possibilities being discussed between teams, but rather that members of the organization are having ‘internal discussions.’  Since when did this become worth reporting? And that’s even if it’s factual.  Because to me, ‘internal discussions’ is another phrase for a big, steaming pile of elephant dung.  Do you know what ‘internal discussions’ can qualify as? Two ballboys working for the Knicks saying “Dude, wouldn’t our team be sick if we got Blake from the Clips?!” Memo to LeBron’s mouthpiece: You are irrelevant now that you have been exposed as LeBron’s Joseph Goebbels.  No one takes you seriously anymore, so find something more productive to do.

Anyways, back on track here…

Celtics fans, on the other hand, have a sense of defeatism.  They don’t have the tendency to fantasize the way Knicks and Lakers fans do of lining their team up with Star X and/or Y that is perceived to be attainable on the trade market. 

Quite the contrary.

“We aren’t going to get those guys!” they say.  “No one wants to play in Boston because there are too many taxes and it gets cold here in the winter. Lets get ‘good to very good’ players.”

So over the years, this writer cannot tell you how many times the Celtics Internet community put the likes of Corey Maggette, Lamar Odom, Stromile Swift, and Shawn Marion in Celtics jerseys.

Now here comes the latest one: Gordon Hayward.  An acknowledged dream scenario all because of his relationship with current Boston Celtics head coach, Brad Stevens.

First of all, what is this fascination with these Gordon Hayward types? Particularly amongst Celtics fans? Have they not learned anything from Jeff Green?

Hayward is a good player.  But emphasis on the word good.

He’s good at just about everything, but isn’t great at anything.  Sound familiar? It should.  Here’s what I wrote about Jeff Green in September 2012, which was a time when Celtics fans were ready to hang Green’s #8 in the Garden rafters despite not playing for the Celtics for more than half-a-season:

[Green] has plenty of physical tools, but has never truly put it together and honed himself into a quality NBA player. He has the Antoine Walker syndrome. He does a lot of things ‘ok’ but nothing exceptionally well where it’s something he could count on game in and game out.

Can we not say the same about Gordon Hayward?

If all goes wrong for Hayward, what facet of his game can he rely on where he can still be a productive player on nights where he may not have it, or may be physically outmatched by his counterpart, or both?

For a wing, Hayward is an average-to-even-below average shooter (41.5 FG%, 31.7 3P%, 51.7 TS%.)

Hayward is a good rebounder (8.6 rebounding rate)…for a wing.  But it isn’t something that you’d count on from him night-in-and-night out.

Hayward is a decent playmaker, again, for a wing.  Same with his defense.  Quite simply, the guy does not have any hallmarks to his game.

If you’re a Celtics fan, or even a member of the Celtics front office, ask yourself this: How does adding Gordon Hayward address the pressing issues and needs the Celtics have?

In no order, the Celtics need rim protection, inside scoring (not exactly post-scoring, but someone who is efficient around the basket, and can draw fouls), rebounding, and possibly another outside marksman.

With the potential addition of the Utah Jazz swingman – please feel free to tell me how his presence would remedy any one of these issues?

And before you say, “One guy can’t do it alone!”  Well, when you’re going to be paid the big bucks, as in near max money, (which is apparently what Hayward wants) – you HAVE to be able to remedy these issues alone.  That’s what makes a guy like Jeff Green so overpaid.  We constantly hear that “He’s not a guy that can carry a team.”  Well, then, why is he making nine million a year? Why is he not being paid role player money?

More importantly, why do some fans want the Celtics to commit the same mistake as they did with Jeff Green with the former Butler standout?

To state the obvious, that’s why the big money guys get what they get, and the role player guys get what they get.

Eventually, the Celtics need to start building a team.  Eventually the Celtics need to start adding difference makers.  Acquiring a guy like Hayward in some sort of package from Utah and then signing him to a reasonable deal to be a piece makes sense.  Even if it were one of Danny’s patented gain-an-inch trade (credit: Zach Lowe for this phrase) that he became so noted for back in the mid-2000s, which in turn allowed him to create the right formula where he could go about and attain real game changers – then that would be reasonable.

But that isn’t what the general population of Celtics fans seems to be calling for here.  Which, to say the least, is befuddling.

Scour the Internet community, and fans are petrified over the Celtics descending into the purgatory they were in back in 1993-2007.  Many fans will say that the Celtics need to be bad to get good because if they don’t – they’ll be stuck in the middle and there will be nowhere to go.

Now, this fallacy has been exposed numerous times, particularly on this website.  Quite simply, if a team maintains roster and salary flexibility – they will always be in some kind of position to improve their team.  No matter where they fall in the draft pecking order (see: Indiana Pacers, San Antonio Spurs.)

But when you start handing out max, or near max deals to good-but-not-great players, to pay non-stars star money – you lose that flexibility.  You lose that opportunity to make your team better at some point in the near future because you start locking yourselves into players who don’t play up to their contract.  And who wants those guys, right?

And THAT’S how you really fall into the so-called basketball abyss.

Hey, just go ask the team that occupies the World’s Most Famous Arena.  See how that strategy has worked for them the past 40+ years.

Boston Celtics broadcaster Tom Heinsohn is aging while his audience evolves.  It bears the question: Should the Boston Celtics and Comcast replace the Hall of Famer?  

As America and the rest of the world continues to reap in the benefits and luxuries of the Information Age, we tend to forget just how much it is negatively impacting others.

Well, that is, if you are one of those standing in an unemployment line.

A lot of this is bad.  While manufacturing since the new millennium is up compared to the last 30 years of the 1900s – the amount of manufacturing jobs is way down.  The Internet and other devices continue their unintended and invisible march towards their destruction of the laborer.

But some of this is good.  The Information Age has opened the gates for many more people, particularly young people with limited capital to be recognized. Back in darker times, rising through the ranks in any company or entity used to require as much butt kissing to the suits on the 12th floor as it did of being capable.  While the Information Age may continue to harm the workingman and even many white-collared folks, it is also exposing those who hold their current positions due to brown-nosing, tenure, connections (not what-you-know-but-who-you-know types), or all of the above.

The Internet can shine a light on just about anyone, both good and bad.  People are being recognized because their work is on virtually an equal pedestal with anyone, something that was never the case before.  And through watchdog groups online – the unworthy get exposed.

Which brings me now to Boston Celtics basketball, as it always seems to in this space (what a coincidence!)

Current Celtics broadcaster Tom Heinsohn has been with the organization since 1957.  He’s been a player (1957-1965), a coach (1969-1978), a broadcaster (1966-1969, 1981-present), and most importantly to Celtics fans, a champion (eight titles as a player, and two as a coach.)

Over the last 30+ years as a broadcaster, Heinsohn’s unabashed homerism has helped him develop a cult of personality of sorts amongst the Boston fanbase.  Even though for some of the longest stretches of time, Heinsohn has been able to provide quality basketball analysis during live telecasts – analysis that was good enough to land him a national television gig in the mid 1980s – Heinsohn is still noted for being the torch-bearer for the late Johnny Most and “the world is out to screw the Celtics” mantra.  Even as Heinsohn has lost much of his fastball, and all that seems to remain are the ref rants; that still doesn’t matter to a good portion of New England viewers.  To the modern generation of Celtics fans, Heinsohn’s voice is synonymous with Celtics basketball.

Which now brings us back to the Internet, which has done more to educate and inform the modern day sports fan than any broadcaster in any sport put together.  And because the modern fan is far more knowledgeable about their own team and the rest of the sport than they were say in 1985; they want more information, more angles of the game, and more anything.  Just the facts, ma’am.

Anything that can increase what they already know about their team, the game they are playing, the league, the sport, and so forth. The more analysis and breakdown the better.  It doesn’t matter if it comes from Tom Heinsohn, Bill Russell, The Pope, or a former police reporter-turned NBA writer.

Some aspects of the sporting media have adapted to this.  The NFL Network seems to be leading the way.  Mike Mayock, the Network’s lead color commentator for NFL games, reinvented his own personal career following a fruitless professional football career.  Mayock can break down a play and make it seem so simple to the viewer.  The same goes for Brian Baldinger, one of their lead studio analysts.

Heinsohn used to be able to do this to an extent in basketball, but not quite as effective.  Especially nowadays as he gets older in age (which is understandable.)  But the personality still defines him.  It circumvents his true duties.

Generally, that isn’t what sports fans are looking for these days.  Maybe in the Walter Cronkite era, where the storyteller is just as big as the story, but nowadays it is about getting guys that are effective conveyors of information (like Mayock and Baldginer for the NFL.)

What could Comcast do to replace someone who is still revered amongst a good potion of its viewership?

Should Comcast get a younger and fresher mind who can be a far more effective conveyor of info and give its audience angles to which they haven’t been treated?

Should Comcast try something innovative such as what the NFL on FOX does with Tony Siragusa? While The Goose may be the wrong man for the job being a color commentator on the sideline – it is something that is well intended.  With the right man, it could and should work.

And what about catching up with the Analytical Revolution? Analytics has completely changed the way front offices think about building their teams.  How about using the media and live broadcasts as another means to educate the common fan while at the same time delivering something that the diehard fans are craving for?

Or, hey, maybe the status quo is just fine.

Maybe Heinsohn’s personality supercedes societal shifts.  Maybe the ranting and raving over poor NBA officiating still resonates with his audience and is something that remains more valuable to the broadcast than cutting edge and modern basketball analysis that can be easily digested by the viewer.

But viewers of Celtics broadcasts have not been able to experience any other alternative.  Personally, I’m not demanding the removal of Heinsohn in this space.  Just offering a few suggestions and solutions.

The Boston Celtics seem destined to be playing themselves out of the top of the lottery.  Are they screwed? Hardly.

The Boston Celtics are winning…sorta.  12-14, better than anyone expected.  Pleasantly surprising some, but infuriating many; the so-called tankers.

The tankers believe that the franchise is digging their own grave by competing in a season where a loaded NBA Draft is awaiting on the horizon.  Despite the fact that this draft doesn’t seem to have the true game-changer at the top, like a Tim Duncan, LeBron James, Patrick Ewing, or Magic Johnson (reiterated by coach Jim Boeheim, and the preeminent draft expert in the nation, Jeff Goodman) – automatic game-changing locks who were players that were truly worth tanking for; the tankers still want to the team deliberately taken down into the sewer anyways.  They are petrified of the dreaded NBA middle.

The following is a list of ‘arguments’ they generally make.  What transpires is a piece-by-piece takedown of why there arguments are simplistic and foolish.  And why they are dead wrong.

***

“Don’t believe me that great teams are built through the draft?  Look at the Thunder.”

This is the prime example that everyone uses.  Funny, you never hear anyone say, “Team X needs to build their team through the top of the draft like the Bobcats (lottery every year in its existence except for 2009) or Cavs (has picked in the top-4 four times in the last three years, including two #1 picks.)”

Odds are far more in favor of a franchise never shaking their losing culture as the losses continue to pile up.  And once that losing culture sticks, players tend to take advancing their own careers less seriously and/or it becomes too mentally grinding in their daily operations (ever been in a bad working environment and because you were in said bad environment – you don’t do your job nearly as well?)

In fact, if you look at past NBA champions since the turn of the century – none of them have done so by “building their team with a slew of lottery picks.”  Teams that have done so either continue to flop around in irrelevancy (the far more likely option) or their players actually do develop but then leave (remember that awesome 2003 Draft? Go look and see how many players are playing for their original teams.)

And aren’t we already hearing rumblings regarding Kevin Durant and 2016?

***

“Building a team through the middle is just not feasible.  You need to be bad to get a superstar so that way he can one day make you good.  Once you’re in the middle – you’re stuck in the middle with nowhere to go.”

As it stands, all of the current conference leaders in the NBA built their teams in the so-called dreaded NBA middle.  If you’re interested, I discuss how the Spurs did so a few weeks ago, and USA Today had a great breakdown of the Pacers last month.  The Portland Trail Blazers also haven’t had a top-five pick since 2007 (and that one didn’t turn out so well if you recall.)

One is only ‘stuck’ in the middle if a team clogs their cap long-term and minimizes their flexibility with assets.  For example, the New York Knicks are a hopeless mess and are absolutely stuck in the middle.  The Boston Celtics of the early 2000s, the same Boston Celtics that Danny Ainge took a plunger to over the course of the second half of the calendar year 2003, were stuck in the middle.

But as long you don’t cripple your team with long-term deals to mediocre players, and continue to draft reasonably well no matter where you pick – you’ll always have that opportunity to make the necessary moves to improve your team.

There’s also the inherent advantage of knowing your team’s weaknesses and what moves you need to make to get better.  When you’re in the lottery – not so much.  Because that generally means you need to improve virtually everywhere.

Sure, getting eliminated in the post-season by the Pacers and Heat isn’t the end goal, but you get to see first hand what you need to do to beat your closest competition, what specific moves you need to make, and what weaknesses you need to address more than others.

***

“Veteran players serve no purpose on this team.  They can only help this team gain unwanted wins and clog up playing time for the young players.  Ainge needs to trade all of them and get whatever he can for them.”

This is the straw man argument that Elrod Enchilada made in his latest realGM piece when he was talking about Brandon Bass.  Because Bass is north of 23, isn’t on a rookie contract, and is helping the team win games through steady offense, but more importantly, being the vocal leader on defense – Bass is a detriment to the long-term well being of the franchise, and must go at all costs.  Here’s what Elrod said:

Bass is playing the best basketball of his career; he has evolved from a rotation player to a legitimate NBA starting forward. He has become a superb defender who can take on the top scoring forwards on the opposing team. He has gone from a player with little positive trade value to a player who could contribute to a contender. Bass also plays the same position as Jared Sullinger and Kelly Olynyk. He really needs to go, to create space for the kids. At the same time to trade Bass will almost certainly make the team weaker in the short-term. That is exactly the right thing for the Celtics to do, but it will still be a difficult move for many to accept. It will take cojones.

Let’s get a small thing out of the way: Sullinger is averaging 26.4 minutes per game (fifth on the team), and Olynyk is averaging 22 (seventh.) This is not a repeat of a rookie Reggie Lewis being relegated to waterboy under K.C. Jones despite showing glimpses that he could be an impact player in whatever limited chance he got back in 1988.  Or a young Jermaine O’Neal racking up endless amounts of DNP-CDs with the Blazers in the late 90s-early 2000s.  These guys are playing…a lot. Bass isn’t blocking anyone from getting a ‘fair chance’ (I’m sorry, is this the NBA or the YMCA kids 7-under league?)  And coming off back surgery, I’m not sure Danny Ainge, Brad Stevens, Dr. Brian McKeon or any other sensible and rational basketball mind wants to thrust 40 minutes a game on Jared Sullinger.  I’m not even sure Sullinger himself wants it.

But to get back on track here, of course, if Bass brought back a package that was fair to what he should garner and could help the franchise, then a deal could make sense.  But dumping a vocal team leader (who a lot of the young players have credited for their improved defense) and getting whatever you can for him for the sake of “creating space for the kids” has always been a detrimental move.  A similar concept was applied by Rick Pitino, who renounced the rights to Rick Fox and David Wesley because he felt they would “stunt the development of the kids.”

Well, the kids never developed.  And the Celtics flushed five more years down the drain.  Which shouldn’t surprise anyone.  Young players have a far better chance of developing when they see firsthand what the veterans do that warrants playing time and how to become a better player in the NBA – that extra time after practice in the weight room, watching film during free time, committing to the little things on both ends of the floor.  When young players are just given playing time on a silver platter, there’s a strong possibility they can become complacent, as opposed to keeping them hungry.

Why do you think young teams ‘in the middle’ such as the 2011 Pacers overpay to make sure they secure a guy like David West for their team?

***

“And yes while the Celtics got KG with a bunch of mid-first round selections, they had to trade the fifth pick to get Ray!”

The fifth selection turned out to be Jeff Green.  While Jeff Green the prospect had a decent amount of value – there should be no reason that if you don’t continue to draft well and/or develop players in your system that you cannot put together a package that could amount to the value that Jeff Green had back in June of 2007.

Think say, a Jared Sullinger (picked 21st in what was regarded as a weak draft) packaged with a Jordan Crawford (nabbed off the scrap heap) isn’t equal-to-or-greater-than Jeff Green in June of ’07?

And here’s the little thing that everyone conveniently leaves out in the Ray trade: Wally Szczerbiak’s contract.  Wally was being paid near max dollars for that coming season AND the following season.  He was of negligent value, and it had to take packaging the fifth pick to get rid of him.  He wasn’t the expiring contract that Theo Ratliff was in the KG trade.  Which again goes back to the point: Maintain flexibility and trades to improve your team are easier to make.

***

“You’re never going to build a team through free agency in Boston.  They want warm weather and/or nightlife.  Boston has neither! Shaq went to LA and the Big Three formed in Miami.”

Players generally relocate to another organization because they feel it gives them the best opportunity to win, (providing they are being appropriately compensated financially.)

I’m sure the nightlife and warm weather made it even easier for LeBron to take his talents to South Beach, but Miami was the only team in the league in 2010 which could sign LeBron, Wade, and Bosh in a package.  And they were also coming off a playoff season in their own right.  The Big Three formed in Miami simply because it was the only organization that could put it together at the time.

Then the best one: Shaq to LA.  Yeah, he wanted to go there to be in movies…please.  Nice job, faux historians.  History lesson: You want to know the number one reason why Shaq went to LA?

(wait for it…)

…

They offered him the most money! Der!

There were also many far more important factors than ‘the weather,’ such as:

1.)   He never felt entirely respected in Orlando (he wanted Brian Hill fired as coach, the fans in Orlando in an online poll voted nearly unanimously not to give Shaq a 100M extension, once Anfernee Hardaway was due for an extension – Orlando was willing to make him the highest paid player on the team, etc.)

2.)   Despite being the second best player in the league at the time, he hated that Penny Hardaway was becoming the face of the team and one of the most marketable stars in the league – all on what Shaq felt, was his back.  Going to LA, Shaq felt he could have his own team.

3.)   And oh yeah…the Lakers were already a good team! In 1995 and 1996, the Lakers won 48 and 53 games.  The addition of Shaq was going to make them that much better.  You think Shaq would’ve signed with a 25-win Clipper team so he could make movies?

Just this past summer, Dwight Howard signed in Houston.  At this time a year-and-a-half ago, Howard had no interest in Houston, telling them he would not sign an extension had they traded for him.  Yet once they traded for James Harden, and Howard as a member of the Lakers played against the Rockets early in the 2012-13 campaign – Howard became enamored by the Rockets and what they were doing.  Sure enough, after the season he became a Rocket.

And lastly, Kevin Garnett, although not a free agent, reportedly shot down an original trade to Boston in May of 2007 saying he would not sign an extension in Boston.  As soon as this happened, the media and fans began screeching that today’s NBA players would never willingly come to Boston because it’s just too damn cold, and oh yeah, Boston is a racist city.  But Holy Ted Landsmark, one Ray Allen trade later and Garnett changed his tune completely.

If you win, they will come.  If you build a legitimate program, and impress other players around the league by what you are doing, they may consider playing for your team a viable option.

If you’re wallowing around in lottery land hoping and praying for the next big thing?

Not so much…

The New York Knicks come to Boston tonight in last place.  And sporting a 40-year title drought.  

What’s wrong with the Knicks? They’re a disgrace.  They’re an embarrassment.  Something must be done.  The NBA needs the New York Knicks! Who’s to blame?!?!

How often has that above phrase been uttered over the last forty, yes four-zero, years by anyone whose voice seemingly matters? A hundred thousand? Half-a-million? A million?

It is amazing that this feeling still seems to resonate.  Much of the general population of those who have even the smallest interest in NBA basketball feel there’s this imperative necessity for the relevance of New York Knicks basketball.

Here’s a reality check: The NBA has never ‘needed’ a good professional basketball team in New York.  During the 1960s, the NBA morphed from a fringe professional sports league that was lucky to even garner an overnight boxscore on the back page of the local sports section to establishing itself as one of the ‘majors,’ albeit a distant one, with a national television contract, steady attendance, and local and national news coverage.  The Knickerbockers were no part of this, as they were a perennial cellar dweller for nearly the entire decade.

The 1980s, considered by many (including this writer), to be the NBA’s “Golden Age” produced just one Knick highlight.  And that was Dave DeBusschere going along with the script and exhaling as the Knicks ‘won’ the 1985 NBA Draft Lottery.

And as the calendar turned to the new millennium, the NBA has exploded into an international cash cow.  The Knicks haven’t done much of their part during this time, winning a grand total of one playoff series since Bill Clinton stepped out of office.

But most ignore this.  They continue to ask what’s wrong; they’ve done so for 40 years, and begin the sexy blame game.  Be it the media, the fans, Knicks ownership – they all want to find someone or someones to point the finger at.

Guess what? They are the ones to blame.  New York, Knicks fans, the New York media, the national media, James Dolan, this whole mantra of immediate satisfaction of New York basketball relevancy – any of these entities all play some sort of role that contribute to the never-ending laughingstock that is New York Knicks basketball.

Each of them shares good chunks of the blame pie.  But how much is the real question.

***

Local New York Media

The local print media in New York is dominated by the tabloids (most noticeably, the New York Post.)  So naturally, the ‘tabloid mindset’ of reactionary analysis, rumor mongering, and other forms of sensationalism becomes the predominant mindset throughout the rest of the media in New York.

Thus the entire media, be it broadcast or print, mainstream or alternative gets into the act of flagrant arson.  The big picture becomes eradicated, and every Knick loss and every slight form of New York basketball misconduct is treated as it’s some form of historical travesty.  The masses become riled up over this artificial hysteria which is arguably the single reason for the creation of the monster that is the rabidly impatient New York sports fan.

Also, because of tabloids like the New York Post’s influence, and more importantly circulation and outreach, getting on the back page whether it be for good, bad, or no reason at all is just as important as winning basketball games.  Publicity creates intrigue, and directly or indirectly or not, intrigue can create revenue.  Thus, throughout Knicks history, and most certainly in recent years, long-term plans for the franchise have always been compromised due to the need to stay relevant on the holy sacred back pages.

It is hard to overlook this aspect, even though most do.

Final count: 25%

***

National Media

The national media pretty much piggybacks on the local New York media.  They join in on the grandstanding because yellow journalism sells.  More importantly, it is easy, and quite frankly, lazy, and takes little to no effort or mental strain.  Just let it fly.  Rather than critically think and provide objective and meaningful analysis, they just pound away with the sensationalism.  Seemingly every loss is a ‘disgrace’ and an ‘embarrassment to the city of New York’ (funny how when the Charlotte Bobcats get blown out to some subpar team, their play doesn’t become some affront to the city of Charlotte like it is with the Knicks and New York.)

Quick caveat: By the way, doesn’t the national media’s constant attention to the Knicks even when they are a run-of-the-mill NBA team prove that the world doesn’t ‘need’ the Knicks to be successful? They get coverage anyways.  In fact, many seem to revel in it more when they lose than when they are winning.

Anyways…

Final count: 4.9%

***

New York

One would think New York being the capital of the world would be of great benefit to the New York Knicks franchise.  In recent years however, that has proven not to be the case.

New York always seems to be on every pending free agent/disgruntled-star-under-contract’s wish list.  According to ‘sources’ of course.

Because of this, over the last few big class free agency cycles, the Knicks have began banking on bringing in an elite free agent to elevate their franchise back to a championship contender – even if it means sacrificing seasons (yes, plural) to do so.  They did this in the lead-up to 2010 (when all they came away with was Amare Stoudemire), and now it looks as if they’re already googly-eyed for Kevin Love all the way down the line in 2015.

Generally, the great players never reach free agency.  Only two game-changers have ever changed teams in the free agency era (LeBron James and Shaquille O’Neal, and three if you count Steve Nash.)  The Knicks never came close to either of them.  In the entire history of the Knicks franchise, their greatest summer splurge occurred back in the mid-1990s, when the Knicks brought in Allan Houston, Chris Childs, and Larry Johnson.  And the best the Knicks have done when it has come to acquiring a disgruntled star through trade has been Latrell Sprewell and then later, Carmelo Anthony, with a whole big mess that includes Stephon Marbury, Penny Hardaway, Steve Francis, Zach Randolph, and others in between.

Building your team through securing so-called star players should be an option if the opportunity presents itself.  Repeat: if the opportunity presents itself.  It shouldn’t be the be-all-end-all.  Because ‘hoping’ something happens is not a plan.  As has been proven, once the Knicks whiff (and they’ve done so at seemingly a 100% clip), they panic to appease their fans after spending previous years filling their minds with fairy tales and other fantasies. They then turn to the dreaded Plan B – which has proven to be deadly over the last 15 years.

More of the blame should go to ownership and management on this (and it will, more on that later) – but this has actually been a trend for quite a few of the New York teams.  It isn’t just the Knicks (ok, fair enough, it’s Dolan’s Rangers too.)  So, yes, New York, you’re a bit at fault for that sham of a professional basketball organization.

Final count: 10%

***

Sponsors/Corporate Interests

Every organization in sports has sponsors that they’d like to keep happy to generate more revenue for the franchise.  The better and more visible the team is, the more sponsors are willing to pay.  I’m not sure how much influence the Knicks’ sponsors have on certain personnel decisions that affect their team on the court.  I just used this space to put even the slightest blame on Corporate America – which I always like doing.

Final count: 0.1%

***

James Dolan

James Dolan is regarded as the face of the Knicks failure.  And for good reason: he’s the triggerman.  It is his team, therefore it is his mess.

Dolan is the one who gets caught up in the New York hype machine and artificial hysteria as much as anyone, and falls for it hook, line, and sinker.  Thus the organization almost never puts together a feasible blueprint for constructing a team that can sustain winning for an extended course of time.

Perhaps Dolan (with both his Knicks and Rangers) and certain other owners of professional sports franchises in New York should look at how Gene Michael built the last great Yankee dynasty during the early 1990s when George Steinbrenner was banned from baseball at the time.  Without a meddling owner, Michael turned a deaf ear to all the racket and calmly put together a team that would become the greatest dynasty professional sports has seen in post-Cold War America.

We forget the other surrounding abstract and concrete factors that contribute to the culture that is in and around the Knicks organization.  However, James Dolan is certainly hard to ignore.  But could there be another major entity?

Final count: 30%

***

The Fans

What about these freakin’ guys, huh?

Why do they get credit for being such good fans? Because they continue to keep feeding the beast with their wallets?

Newsflash: Spending money on tickets and merchandise of your favorite team, particularly when they stink, doesn’t make you a ‘good fan.’  It makes you…well…just another American because as we know, people love spending money on worthless steaming crappola in this country.  Besides, what the hell does being a ‘good fan’ get you in life anyways? A continually crummy product that turns a profit every year at your expense?

At the end of the day, the people control their own destiny.  But they keep buying the tickets.  They keep buying merchandise.  They keep having their gears spun by talking heads and knights of the keyboard.  They continue to get bamboozled by dream scenarios of the Knicks one-day fielding a super team.

Thus, the never-ending cycle for the New York Knicks continues.

And it won’t change…until they change.

Final count: 30%