|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Hickman's MVP vote has merit
Posted: Thursday May 11, 2000 06:00 PM
Who would have predicted that the name on everyone's lips this time of year wouldn't be Shaquille O'Neal or Scottie Pippen or Reggie Miller, but Fred Hickman? Everyone -- including a lot of contributors to the mailbag -- is jumping all over Hickman, my friend and colleague at CNN/SI, for voting for Allen Iverson for MVP (his was the only non-Shaq vote of the 122 that were cast). Fred has done a fine job of amiably defending his choice, not that he needs to. Haven't you ever been the only person in the room who liked strawberry more than chocolate, or the purple tie more than the blue one? The MVP vote is all about opinion, and an opinion can't be wrong, even when it's out of step with everyone else's. Obviously, I voted for Shaq, because I think it's harder to elevate a good team into a dominant one (which he's done) than it is to transform a lousy team into a decent one (which is what Iverson has done). But I don't think Hickman's way of looking at things is absurd by any means. In fact, I thought the voters who made Karl Malone the MVP over Michael Jordan a few years ago were farther off base. I applaud Hickman for making what he must have know would be an unpopular choice. But Fred, if you happen to run into Shaq in a dark alley somewhere, you're on your own. The first letter out of the 'bag comes from someone who probably wouldn't have voted for O'Neal either:
Who cares about Shaq? It's a disgrace to basketball when the MVP goes to a 300-pound man who never moves and just tosses up little shots from the paint. Sure, he's going to get 30 points a game when he takes 30 shots. His free throws have gotten better, but what about real talent? What ever happened to the MVP going to all-around players like Iverson, John Stockton, or even Michael Finley? Just because they don't score as much, shouldn't deprive them up the rewards they're deserving of. You're not giving the Diesel his due. I'd be the first to agree that Shaq isn't the most entertaining player in the league. There's a certain sameness to his game that makes it easy to underestimate how effective he is. The 10th or 20th time you see him overpower somebody for a dunk, it starts to get a little monotonous. But, if what he does is so simple, how come other big guys can't do it? How come Arvydas Sabonis, Greg Ostertag or Patrick Ewing or any of the other 7-footers who are close to his size don't dominate the way he does? It's because Shaq is the only guy with the combination of size, muscle, skills and quickness it takes to average 30 a game. He put a spin move on Luc Longley in Game 1 of the Phoenix series the other day that was as quick as most small forwards could do it. Shaq's not just a big lug. He's an athlete. It's also not fair to say he scores so much because he takes a lot of shots. The guy led the league in field goal percentage, so you can't exactly fault his shot selection. You may not be thrilled at how he gets the bulk of his points, but you can't deny that he's had a fabulous year.
I have read a lot of negative articles about Shawn Kemp's performance last season. Many are afraid to gamble on him and a lot feel he has lost his explosiveness. Do you think he can turn around his career during the coming season? If yes, do you think he can lead his team to the playoffs? It's all up to Kemp. He's still young enough (30) to become the kind of player he once was. But it's going to take a lot of off-season work to get his body back to where it used to be, and there's no way of telling whether he's really committed to doing it. The whispers around the league are that once Kemp got the big contract from the Cavs, he stopped working as hard as he used to. The one encouraging sign is that he seems to have stopped denying that he's gained weight and lost effectiveness. If he's out of the denial stage for good, maybe he's ready to get back to being the old Kemp. If that happens, the Cavs are a playoff team again. Not a title contender, but a playoff team.
Do you think it's ironic that the Sonics needed a shot at the end of regulation to tie the Jazz, and the best clutch shooter on the team (Vernon Maxwell) wasn't even on the playoff roster? Do you agree with me that Maxwell should have been on the playoff roster? He is a clutch shooter who has made many of those types of shots during his career. I do agree that Mad Max should have been on the playoff roster, but the main reason he wasn't there was Maxwell himself. Paul Westphal told Maxwell he would be the fourth guard for the playoffs, behind Gary Payton, Brent Barry and Shammond Williams, and Max was so insulted that he developed an "injury" that kept him off the roster. Essentially he refused to play. You can make the case that Westphal shouldn't have played Williams ahead of him, but if Maxwell had been a good soldier, he very well might have been on the floor at the end of Game 5, when the Sonics needed him. Remember, this isn't the first time Maxwell has acted unprofessionally. He got himself kicked off the Rockets' roster during their second championship run a few years back in a similar situation. He reminds me a lot of Rickey Henderson. They're both undeniably talented guys who can be amazingly selfish at times. Hey Phil, when you're done kissing Kobe's and Shaq's butt you should consider the facts a little more carefully. You're just like the rest by not giving the Blazers any chance to beating the Lakers. You refer back to Portland's "letdown" late in the season. Portland is a team that relies on everyone. Without a major piece like Damon Stoudamire, Sabonis and Grant it is difficult. May I remind you Portland had a good chance of winning that final game against the Lakers until Ron Harper injured Stoudamire. Will you please stop overlooking Portland? --Adam Sarkez, Springfield, Ore. I may be wrong, Adam, but I'm sensing just a tad of hostility from you. I've got nothing against Portland, but I don't give anyone much of a chance to beat the Lakers. You're saying that a couple of injuries are to blame for the Blazers' poor finish? I thought they were supposed to be so deep that injuries wouldn't affect them as much as other teams. Which is it? The fact of the matter is that the loss to the Lakers when both teams were 45-11 took so much spirit out of the Blazers that they're just now recovering. The good news for Portland is that they are recovering. The series against Minnesota seems to have built their confidence, and the Lakers have finally been showing some vulnerability lately. The gap between the two teams is narrower now than it has been in a long time. If Rasheed Wallace dominates A.C. Green and Robert Horry at power forward, the Blazers have a chance to make it a long series. But the key guy may be Sabonis. Nobody can neutralize Shaq, but Sabonis has to at least keep from getting schooled the way he has in the past. If he can make Shaq work defensively, it will help a great deal. But even if all that happens, the Lakers will win in 6 or 7.
If the Knicks don't win don't win a championship, what do you see them doing in the off-season? Do you see them going after someone like Tracy McGrady or Tim Duncan? Also, since you don't favor them to beat the Lakers, what do you think they need to do to be able to win it all? Finally, what's the deal with Van Gundy? Do you think he needs to go? The Knicks are pretty limited in what they can do, whether they win the championship or not. You can forget about Duncan, McGrady or any of the big-name free agents, because NY doesn't have the cap room. Duncan, especially, would never go to New York of his own free will. If the Knicks don't at least reach the Finals, you'll hear Sprewell-for- Gary Payton talk again -- which is something they talked about with the Sonics last summer -- but it won't happen. The only way the Knicks would deal Sprewell or Houston is if it was for a big man who could replace Patrick Ewing. Speaking of Ewing, he's going to be the Knicks' biggest decision. He has one more year on his contract after this one, and he's going to want an extension after this season. My guess is that the Knicks will offer him a one-year extension, and if that's not enough, they'll look to move him. I could definitely see Ewing finishing his career somewhere like Phoenix or Seattle a couple of years from now. As for Van Gundy, I think he's one of the top half-dozen coaches in the league. He is very intense and often very critical, and that act tends to wear thin with players after a while. I could see him wearing out his welcome with guys like Spree and Camby, and a couple of years from now, the Knicks might have to make a change, but that day isn't here yet. How will this all change if they somehow win the championship this year? Don't worry about it. It ain't gonna happen.
There have been rumors that Dr. J. will be coming to the Nets in some capacity. Do you believe this is the right move for New Jersey? Does he have the qualifications for the job? Or will he be another Elgin Baylor? Much as I hate to say it, since I've been a Doc fan since I was a Long Island kid going to Nassau Coliseum to watch him play for the Nets, I don't see anything in Erving's history to make me think he'll be successful in running a franchise. I can't see him doing the legwork, the phone work, the salary cap work, necessary to rebuild a team like the Nets. Hiring Dr. J would be largely a publicity move for the Nets, and hopefully they'd have the good sense to give him a player personnel guy to do the real work while Doc served as the organization's ambassador to the public and the media.
If the Heat fall to the Knicks, do you see Pat Riley staying in Miami for long? Is there any chance he'll move on? Though everyone praises him, what has he actually won since leaving LA? Bugs Bunny would have won a championship with Kareem, Worthy and Magic. Do you think his talents are overrated? Riley will be back on the sidelines next season no matter what happens. I think if they lose to New York, he'll take one last crack at remodeling the team. It will be another two or three years at least before he leaves the Miami bench, and then it will probably just be to concentrate exclusively on his front-office duties. I definitely don't think he's overrated just because he's failed to win a title since he left the Lakers. He took first the Knicks and now the Heat, both of whom were treading water before he arrived, and turned them into elite teams -- and he's done it with far less talent than he had in L.A. And remember, Riley not only coached New York and Miami, he helped build the franchises. He was the one who traded for Alonzo Mourning, who discovered John Starks and Anthony Mason. Maybe a lot of guys could have won with Kareem, Magic and Worthy, but not a lot of guys could have done what he's done since then.
Click here to send a question to Phil Taylor's NBA Mailbag, and check back each Thursday during the season to see his answers. On weeks there isn't a new 'Bag, Phil will join us for an online chat.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
