 |
| |
|
 |
 |
Steep fines won't quiet Cuban Posted: Friday January 11, 2002 5:15 PMUpdated: Saturday January 12, 2002 9:46 PM
Sports Illustrated senior writer Jack McCallum will answer your NBA questions every week during the season. Click here to send him a question. In light of Mark Cuban's recent $500,000 fine, don't you think David Stern and
the NBA are coming off a little harsh? Cuban's supposed to be the bad guy here,
but I think Stern is on a power trip and is really going too far. Your
thoughts?
I absolutely agree with you. Part of the commissioner's power over the years has come as a result of his friendly relationship with most of the owners. They like him and respect him and, honestly, he's done a lot to win that trust. Cuban, however, is the first owner to come along who simply will not accept this kind of cozy relationship with Stern. Cuban is a bit of a spoiled brat and a showoff. But my personal opinion is that the commissioner is attracting more attention to Cuban through these outlandish fines than Cuban is attracting with his comments. I'll tell you this: Cuban isn't going anywhere. He'll to continue to be outspoken. You mention
that the only person able to stand in John Stockton's shadow statistically is
Magic Johnson. Do you think that one day Jason Kidd will be able to match the
numbers Stockton has compiled? I view Kidd as an even better point guard than
Stockton -- Kidd averages more points, almost as many assists, and more rebounds
per game than Stockton, while being one of the best defensive players in the
NBA, something Stockton could never claim. But I agree, it will be a dark day
when we no longer hear the words "Stockton to
Malone."
Statistically, I don't think Kidd will catch Stockton, but you're not talking stats. If Kidd has, say, five or six more seasons like this one, he will be mentioned among the all-time greats. I can't disagree with anything you've said. Kidd's size gives him an obvious advantage over Stockton -- Kidd is already one of the great all-time rebounding guards -- but I'm not sure he's quite as good defensively as you say. (Gary Payton over the years has probably been the best defender from the point position.) But it's going to be fun seeing if Kidd can lift the lowly Nets to an exalted position. In your Jan.
9 column on Karl Malone possibly becoming the all-time scoring leader, you
mention John Stockton as the all-time assists leader. You also state that the
fact that Stockton has 45% more assists than Magic is "mind-boggling."
Did you forget that Magic voluntarily retired at the age of 32? Magic would have
added at least 2,800 more assists to his resume, assuming he would have played
five more years. Still
"mind-boggling"?
Yes, it's still mind-boggling. I loved the movie, by the way. I know it's early in the season, but let's talk about the MVP for 2001-02. In
my opinion, if the Wizards continue to win, Michael Jordan should receive the
award. If the season were to end today, who would be your pick for MVP, and
why?
Well, Zeke, see above. My two candidates would be Kidd, for how he's lifted the Nets, and the consistently underrated Tim Duncan. Duncan is so good night in and night out that it's hard for him to get attention. But if I had to pick right now I'd say: 1. Kidd; 2. Duncan; 3. Jordan. Don Nelson has unquestionably screwed up every NBA franchise he's been with
in some way (the Warriors, the Knicks, etc.). Do you think he's finally turned
the corner in Dallas or is he still in the honeymoon phase? Nelson is a good
coach, but his relationships with players have sometimes done more harm than
good to
franchises.
On the other hand, Marcus, some players praise the hell out of him, Tim Hardaway being one. But I agree with you that Nelson's track record is spotty. I'm on record, though, as absolutely loving this Dallas team and saying that it has as much a chance as Sacramento and San Antonio to catch the Lakers. I'm not going to back off that statement. The Orlando Magic have lacked a strong inside presence this season. They
drafted Steven Hunter and Brendan Haywood, but traded Haywood to Washington.
Hunter played for a while but, because of his slender build, couldn't match up
with many centers in the NBA. Arguably, Haywood has contributed more to his team
this year. Do you think GM John Gabriel got rid of the wrong
guy?
Every year there's a player or two who emerges as quite obviously better than most people thought. Haywood, as much as any rookie, is that guy in the '01 class. Gabriel wasn't the only GM to underrate Haywood -- he was picked 20th overall -- and I didn't hear many draft geniuses say he slipped too low. (I must confess, I didn't say it either.) But your point is well taken: At this point, yes, it appears Gabriel did get rid of the wrong guy, unless Haywood is somehow playing over his head due to some strange Carolina mysticism that comes from being on the same team as Jordan. What is going on with Kenyon Martin? He was a very good citizen in Cincinnati
and most people like him here. He seems to have gone off the deep end this year,
though. Most people are shocked by this sudden change. Do you have any
input?
Tom, don't ask me to render a medical opinion about someone "going off the deep end." I do think that some of Martin's cheap shots this year, most recently the one to Tracy McGrady, have been horrible, and I'm glad he was fined. My best theory is this: Players like to have an identity. I'm a scorer, I'm a stopper, I'm an off-the-bench spark. Martin seems to have decided that the Nets, who are climbing, need an enforcer, someone to kick ass for Kidd & Co. But he'd better watch it because, as you indicate, his reputation is changing for the worse. I'm a little mystified by your comment that Larry Bird "led
the world in bad shots taken" and your comparison of him to Allen Iverson.
Bird's career shooting percentage was .496, including .376 on 3-pointers.
Iverson's shooting percentage through Thursday is .423, and .318 from 3-point
land. Seems pretty different to me. And how can a guy who made almost half his
shots, despite taking (and making) a lot of 3-pointers, be called a bad
shooter?
When I covered the NBA in the '80s and early '90s I was accused of being pro-Bird many, many times (particularly by fans in L.A.). And part of that claim was justified: I loved Bird as a player and liked him as a human being. But, Garry, I assure you: The man took some horrific shots, as all great scorers do. I was comparing him to Iverson on that basis and that basis alone. Bird is on my all-time team. Do you think we are seeing how important Glenn Robinson is to the Bucks now
that they have lost four straight games (through Thursday) since his injury?
I've always thought people underestimated Robinson and this is proving my point.
What do you
think?
I'm with you, Scott. This is about the fourth time I've written this -- and maybe it will come back to haunt me -- but I liked Milwaukee's team as it was last season, without Anthony Mason. Sports Illustrated senior writer Jack McCallum will answer your NBA questions every week during the season. Click here to send him a question. |
