Initially, I wanted to delay this 'til tomorrow when I would probably be more sober. I'll be the first to admit that sober, I'm a much better writer. A couple of things have happened since then have helped me not to dissuade myself from drunken typing, though.
As usual I took the decision out of my hands and left it to my dog and the Duel of Fates. I cranked the song up NASCAR style and decided the decision was on him. If he barked I write. So...
I'll start by mentioning that I don't like statistics in modern sports. I also don't like how statistics now seem to determine qualities that I believe are unquantifiable. Tennis is a great example of this. One can look at errors, unforced or not, winners, aces, etc. but have concept no of how the match was played.
From the age of 5, I had a neighborhood friend who would always play basketball with me in Connecticut. Probably because I had the best hoop in the neighboorhood but he would always pretend he was Jordan and I would always be Pippen. This probably predisposed me somewhat in my predilection for Scotty Pippen. I always felt he was dis-proportionally under-represented compared to MJ. When MJ left he was the first player in history (no not Oscar Robinson) to lead his team in every stat category. An ironic feat as I claim stats don't matter, yes.
Fast-forwarding to the year 1999. I had been gearing up to watch the NBA playoffs while playing NBA Hangtime. The N64 -better- version of the widely acclaimed NBA Jam. At the time I felt the game was racist because two huge white players who I felt were inconsequential kept denying me. Arvydas Sabonis and Bryant "Big Country" Reeves specifically. I started to hate the Blazers...
However as the '99 playoffs continued a couple of other factors helped change my tune. Bill Walton was one. I'll admit I didn't know he was a Blazer at the time but I still miss his "announcing" which consisted of him screaming passionately about random Blazer plays - almost all of which were great passes or blocks.
No NBA team has ever came back from an 0-3 deficit, however the Trailblazers were one of a few to do attempt the feat this year against my second most hated team at the time. The team was the Mavericks and my most hated player of the era - Dirk Nowitzki.
Sabonis played limited minutes at this point as his knees were awful and this was the end of his NBA career. That withstanding, he had easily the largest impact on the series of any player, other than Nowitzki, begrudgingly. Not only did his insertion to the line-up facilitate the 0-3 come back, it totally disrupted Nowitzki. Arvydas blocked him out and passed around him like a rag-doll. One play in particular, was the best pass I've ever witnessed.
When this happened live... there was a break. The Blazers ended up losing and no matter how much I claimed Sabonis was dominant - claiming the best +/- and efficiency per 48 mins (in the entire playoffs + .513 FG%) by a large margin I was unheard.
After much blowback from a bunch of haters regarding any opinion I had regarding the NBA I concluded that the popular appeal of professional sports had corrupted what it truly meant to be a great player. Highlights trumped results. Numbers topped names. Marketing overruled emotion. As a "true romantic" I had been labeled as at the time - I decided it was time to change the entire culture of sports. I desired an accolade based on the emotionally charged moment combined with the universal balance of timing. It was bourne. The most emotionally charged, utterly subjective, biased and opinionated accolade the world wanted but would never admit it wanted - yet judged on a point system. You often hear "haters gonna hate." Well, the McGovern player of the Finals could be described as "hater gonna rate."
The rules are simple: they're whatever I decide. They're fair, yet fluid. Every player is eligible to become a Player of the Finals (except Mike Miller). Their play is judged both on their finals play and their relative play-level compared to their average performance. This makes the system uniquely rewarding. Players like Shane Battier for instance - would never be eligible for a Finals MVP award - even if they step up and play 513% of their realistic aptitude. Is it fair if LeBron gets the Heat the finals and under-performs? No - which is why Shane Battier is a former McGovern Player of the Finals during the Heats first championship tenure.
Accolades aside, I feel the true beauty of my point system is in its adaptability. I award players normally +1-2 points based on their performance throughout the game. The adaptability comes into play because I simultaneously detract points for lack of performance. LBJ doesn't score for 5 game minutes: -1 point. Ray Allen misses two consecutive free throws - 2. Clutch free throws missed - 3 maybe. Ray Allen's game 6 winning shot vs the Spurs last year? +400. I specifically like that example as it's utterly ridiculous, yet I haven't met anyone who disagrees with it.
To boot: there is a separation of games aspect. Ray Allen for instance, won the highest point total for the aforementioned game (and any game) - with +406. However, he didn't win the player of the Finals, but Parker did. Parker had a higher point total in the other combined games. The number of games won determines the winner - a tactic the world cup seems to have adopted during the group stage. Recently was actually the first time in McGovern Player of the Finals history the award didn't go to a player from the winning team.
There are two sides to every coin, unfortunately. The downsides to the McGovern player of the Finals are apparent - and the blow back from the sports community "heavy-weights" are what you'd expect. Angry anti-progressive Yankee fans seem to really dislike the system specifically. Some of them have even gone so far as to destroy the archives in what I would only describe as a gluten-fueled jealous rage. Unfortunately, they merely fueled yet another evolution of the system.
For light, there must be darkness. The second face and subsequent phase of the McGovern player of the Finals has risen, like a phoenix. The McGovern FAGGOT of the Finals. It annoys me that I have to make this distinction, but I'm using FAGGOT as a general pejorative, not some anti-homosexual term. And this is where things get complicated.
McGovern players of the Finals is limited to players on the actual teams at hand. McGovern FAGGOT of the Finals, however, has no limits. It can be a person on the sideline making a facial expression I don't care for, a coach or an entire fan-base. It's pertinent to know Heat fans are the first ever 2-year consecutive champions of this category. Bandwagon pieces of shit at their worst. Yet, the total point leader of FAGGOT still resides with an opponent of the Heat. A mister Jason Terry. The year the Mavs beat the Heat he was actually in position to win his second player of the game award - when his post-game interview went sour... fast. He went from +12 points to -5,000,000. He remains the all-time leader in that category by a large margin over Mike Miller, at a mere -468.
Given the overwhelming response from both sides: I'm going to try to document this year's entire process online. I figured I'd give my readers a heads up in case the lawyers want to get involved. Specifically a certain lawyer who doesn't want a ...
Reality Check.
As usual I took the decision out of my hands and left it to my dog and the Duel of Fates. I cranked the song up NASCAR style and decided the decision was on him. If he barked I write. So...
I'll start by mentioning that I don't like statistics in modern sports. I also don't like how statistics now seem to determine qualities that I believe are unquantifiable. Tennis is a great example of this. One can look at errors, unforced or not, winners, aces, etc. but have concept no of how the match was played.
From the age of 5, I had a neighborhood friend who would always play basketball with me in Connecticut. Probably because I had the best hoop in the neighboorhood but he would always pretend he was Jordan and I would always be Pippen. This probably predisposed me somewhat in my predilection for Scotty Pippen. I always felt he was dis-proportionally under-represented compared to MJ. When MJ left he was the first player in history (no not Oscar Robinson) to lead his team in every stat category. An ironic feat as I claim stats don't matter, yes.
Fast-forwarding to the year 1999. I had been gearing up to watch the NBA playoffs while playing NBA Hangtime. The N64 -better- version of the widely acclaimed NBA Jam. At the time I felt the game was racist because two huge white players who I felt were inconsequential kept denying me. Arvydas Sabonis and Bryant "Big Country" Reeves specifically. I started to hate the Blazers...
However as the '99 playoffs continued a couple of other factors helped change my tune. Bill Walton was one. I'll admit I didn't know he was a Blazer at the time but I still miss his "announcing" which consisted of him screaming passionately about random Blazer plays - almost all of which were great passes or blocks.
No NBA team has ever came back from an 0-3 deficit, however the Trailblazers were one of a few to do attempt the feat this year against my second most hated team at the time. The team was the Mavericks and my most hated player of the era - Dirk Nowitzki.
Sabonis played limited minutes at this point as his knees were awful and this was the end of his NBA career. That withstanding, he had easily the largest impact on the series of any player, other than Nowitzki, begrudgingly. Not only did his insertion to the line-up facilitate the 0-3 come back, it totally disrupted Nowitzki. Arvydas blocked him out and passed around him like a rag-doll. One play in particular, was the best pass I've ever witnessed.
When this happened live... there was a break. The Blazers ended up losing and no matter how much I claimed Sabonis was dominant - claiming the best +/- and efficiency per 48 mins (in the entire playoffs + .513 FG%) by a large margin I was unheard.
After much blowback from a bunch of haters regarding any opinion I had regarding the NBA I concluded that the popular appeal of professional sports had corrupted what it truly meant to be a great player. Highlights trumped results. Numbers topped names. Marketing overruled emotion. As a "true romantic" I had been labeled as at the time - I decided it was time to change the entire culture of sports. I desired an accolade based on the emotionally charged moment combined with the universal balance of timing. It was bourne. The most emotionally charged, utterly subjective, biased and opinionated accolade the world wanted but would never admit it wanted - yet judged on a point system. You often hear "haters gonna hate." Well, the McGovern player of the Finals could be described as "hater gonna rate."
The rules are simple: they're whatever I decide. They're fair, yet fluid. Every player is eligible to become a Player of the Finals (except Mike Miller). Their play is judged both on their finals play and their relative play-level compared to their average performance. This makes the system uniquely rewarding. Players like Shane Battier for instance - would never be eligible for a Finals MVP award - even if they step up and play 513% of their realistic aptitude. Is it fair if LeBron gets the Heat the finals and under-performs? No - which is why Shane Battier is a former McGovern Player of the Finals during the Heats first championship tenure.
Accolades aside, I feel the true beauty of my point system is in its adaptability. I award players normally +1-2 points based on their performance throughout the game. The adaptability comes into play because I simultaneously detract points for lack of performance. LBJ doesn't score for 5 game minutes: -1 point. Ray Allen misses two consecutive free throws - 2. Clutch free throws missed - 3 maybe. Ray Allen's game 6 winning shot vs the Spurs last year? +400. I specifically like that example as it's utterly ridiculous, yet I haven't met anyone who disagrees with it.
To boot: there is a separation of games aspect. Ray Allen for instance, won the highest point total for the aforementioned game (and any game) - with +406. However, he didn't win the player of the Finals, but Parker did. Parker had a higher point total in the other combined games. The number of games won determines the winner - a tactic the world cup seems to have adopted during the group stage. Recently was actually the first time in McGovern Player of the Finals history the award didn't go to a player from the winning team.
There are two sides to every coin, unfortunately. The downsides to the McGovern player of the Finals are apparent - and the blow back from the sports community "heavy-weights" are what you'd expect. Angry anti-progressive Yankee fans seem to really dislike the system specifically. Some of them have even gone so far as to destroy the archives in what I would only describe as a gluten-fueled jealous rage. Unfortunately, they merely fueled yet another evolution of the system.
For light, there must be darkness. The second face and subsequent phase of the McGovern player of the Finals has risen, like a phoenix. The McGovern FAGGOT of the Finals. It annoys me that I have to make this distinction, but I'm using FAGGOT as a general pejorative, not some anti-homosexual term. And this is where things get complicated.
McGovern players of the Finals is limited to players on the actual teams at hand. McGovern FAGGOT of the Finals, however, has no limits. It can be a person on the sideline making a facial expression I don't care for, a coach or an entire fan-base. It's pertinent to know Heat fans are the first ever 2-year consecutive champions of this category. Bandwagon pieces of shit at their worst. Yet, the total point leader of FAGGOT still resides with an opponent of the Heat. A mister Jason Terry. The year the Mavs beat the Heat he was actually in position to win his second player of the game award - when his post-game interview went sour... fast. He went from +12 points to -5,000,000. He remains the all-time leader in that category by a large margin over Mike Miller, at a mere -468.
Given the overwhelming response from both sides: I'm going to try to document this year's entire process online. I figured I'd give my readers a heads up in case the lawyers want to get involved. Specifically a certain lawyer who doesn't want a ...
Reality Check.
1 comment:
You misspelled "two"
Post a Comment