Photo via Pam's Pics- on Flickr

On Saturday, Denver Nuggets player Al Harrington took the Bugsy Challenge at Burger Joint at Flamingo Las Vegas. The Bugsy Challenge consists of a burger with six one-third-pound burger patties, six types of cheese (American, cheddar, pepper jack, fresh house-made mozzarella, Swiss and panko-crusted deep-fried provolone), chorizo, sautéed mushrooms, black and tan onion rings, three strips of applewood smoked bacon, three strips of cayenne peppered bacon and a fried egg, all oozing with Burger Joint’s special pink peppercorn aioli.

This massive burger is accompanied by a cast iron skillet packed with two whole potatoes cut in wedges and deep fried, then smothered in cheddar cheese sauce, three-cheese blend, crumbled bacon, sliced green onions and topped with two strips of cayenne peppered bacon.

The full Bugsy Challenge weighs in at 4.5 pounds and is on the house for anyone who can finish it. Harrington was given 45 minutes to complete the challenge and unfortunately did not succeed.

via NBA Player Al Harrington Attempts Bugsy Challenge at Burger Joint | Haute Living (via TBJ, PBT)

While it may be tempting to call Harrington a lightweight considering his relatively gargantuan size, successfully completing  food challenge has very little to do with physical size, and almost everything to do with strategy (and of course an unhealthy appetite). I’ve been in plenty of challenges among folks five times my size, and I’ve watched as they crumble before the meal is halfway done. Looking at the burger, it becomes clear that the challenge can’t be conquered without a game plan. And in the case that Al Harrington (or anyone, really) find themselves at Burger Joint in Las Vegas, here are my suggestions that might could be the difference between a last-second victory, and a (pants) blowout:

1. Identify the 2-3 Zone, and cut through it.

The burger’s towering stature makes it fairly clear that the burger will have to be deconstructed for any kind of progress to be achieved. I suggest removing the pick/skewer from the burger and creating a burger with both top and bottom bun with the two (2) deep-fried elements seen in the top portion of the burger, and  three (3) patties. The remaining patties, bacon, mushrooms, and whatever else is hiding should be left on the plate for later. This newly constructed burger is still fairly large, but it’s a much more manageable portion. The onion rings will add some crunch to break the monotony of texture in the burger, while the fried provolone along with the fried egg (which hopefully has a runny yolk) will provide some moisture to help you ease into the groove of consumption.

2. Keep an eye out on the perimeter. 

In the description, there are two whole potatoes that are smothered in terribly fattening substances in a cast iron skillet just waiting in the wings. Don’t lose sight of them — they might lead to your downfall if you do. By the time the makeshift 3-patty burger is finished, the potatoes should be cool enough that when you bite into it, you won’t be hit with a shot of steam and still-hot fryer oil. The last thing you need in a challenge like this is a damaged tongue. It’ll destroy your appetite, and once that’s out of the game, so are you. However, waiting to eat the potato last is also a bad idea. Not only is the entire thing full of starches that will make your already full stomach expand to uncomfortable levels, they’ll be cold by the last five minutes of the challenge. When warm, the potato will still hold enough of the moisture from the steam to glide down smoothly. Once it’s cold, the starch granules will become noticeably drier and grainier, and will quickly ruin your momentum.

3. Attack the interior, close out strong. 

This is the final stretch. Three beef patties, and the filler that surrounds it are all that’s left that stand in the way. Take out your knife and fork, and carve away. Proteins are a lot easier to eat cold than starches. And if it gets a little too dry, dousing the entire plate in Pepto Bismol should do the trick.

Happy eating. 

Photo by epSos.de via Flickr

But let’s isolate that salary strata and test out Hunter’s claim that we’re talking about a maximum of 10 players. We’ll use last season’s salary data (taken from Shamsports.com) because it covers every NBA player, including those who are set to be free agents and are technically not under contract. (As a side note, I’m well aware the old collective bargaining agreement guaranteed the players, in the aggregate, 57 percent of basketball-related income, meaning that sum of a shade more than $2 billion was heading to the players regardless of how much Eddy Curry made to do nothing. But the distribution of that money is a key issue at play here, and it’s worthwhile to fact-check both Hunter and Stern when they speak publicly).

via The Point Forward » Posts Hunter’s numbers are WAY off in salary talk «

That’s a whole lot of names in the middle-tier of NBA payroll who aren’t worth their weight in Maybach lease payments, and it doesn’t even include the richest mistakes in the filthiest sense of the word – the Vince Carter/Rashard Lewis/Gilbert Arenas-level contract. It’s also an interesting data set. While there isn’t much to definitively conclude by looking at the numbers (not least of which due to the subjective nature of the list to begin with), there are some trends that stand out.

• On the whole, front offices managed to hold themselves in check reasonably well. 21 of 30 teams had fewer than two Bad Mid-Tier Contracts (BMCs from here on out), and another four had two. The redheaded stepchildren were Indiana, Charlotte (each with 4), Golden State, New Jersey and Milwaukee (3 each). Those five totaled half of the BMCs in 2010-11. Oddly enough, four of the five were among the teams fighting for the last playoff spot in the East – another indication of just how awful the competition for that coveted spot was at the end of the year.

• The correlation between BMCs and winning wasn’t very strong at all, but there were a few telling signs. First, trying to take on more than one or two BMCs was entering the DAAAAANGER ZONE, Lana-style*. A club with 2 BMCs averaged just .4 fewer wins last year than one with 0 BMCs, 41.25 to 41.66. Having one BMC meant doing even better, on average – 43.9 wins. The Unfortunate Five who dared sign three or more players to awful mid-level contracts, however, fared much worse – 33.2 wins. Those teams that missed the playoffs in 2011 accounted for 61.8% of total BMCs. Second, the true contenders for the championship managed their money incredibly well. The eight semi-finalists in both conferences had only four BMCs among them, two of which belonged to the “Jason Collins shall lead us to the second round” Atlanta Hawks. Three of those eight made it to within whiffing distance of a championship (tip: it smells like a combination of champagne, one dollar bills, and Charles Oakley’s personal brand of smelling salts – the only smelling salts strong enough to wake you from an Oak-punch) without a max player, largely thanks to the beauty of rookie contracts (you’re welcome, Oklahoma City and Chicago!) and the power of friendship (plus the fact that Joel Anthony is a superhero, natch).

[A] study conducted by professors at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management and Stanford business school shows that, in the NBA, one of the deciding factors in team success is not just total money spent, but “pay dispersion.” That is to say, the teams that win are the ones that have a top tier of pay going to a small number of players, who are surrounded by lower-paid role players. Players then establish an instinctual hierarchical structure based on how much they’re paid.

While it is possible that payroll hierarchy reinforces status on the court, there may be a simpler factor at play here; better players get paid more (or are Joe Johnson). Teams like the Lakers, Heat, Spurs, and Knicks* – who all distribute more than 60% of their payroll to their top 3 players – are paying the best players on their team a large portion of their available salary cap. As a result, there is little room for bad, sizable contracts. And the first three of those teams saw great regular season success, I would argue, due to the aggregate skill of the players they pay the best. Said pay structure may help ensconce roles within each team – after all, the study cited an increase in stats that seemingly correspond to an increase in cooperation: “more assists, better field-goal percentage, more rebounds—the very actions on a court that require coordination among players.” But the simpler explanation, to me, is that better players get paid more, make their teams better and leave little room on the books for big mistakes.

*A fifth squad had its top 3 receive greater than 60% of its payroll: Cleveland. As crazy as it sounds, it makes some amount of sense looking at that roster – even if giving Baron Davis $14 million a year is part of that “sense.” The Cavs only doled out $55 million in salaries last year, and almost half of it went to Davis and Antawn Jamison. Jamison’s deal expires after next season for a significant chunk of change, and Davis is on the books for another two years – barring the use of his ETO in 2012-2013 or Cleveland using a possible amnesty clause on him. Anderson Varejao rounded out the Cavs top 3 at a reasonable $7.3 million last year. They have no bad contracts in this middle range (Boobie Gibson is the fourth-best paid player on the team at just north of $4 million) and look to be in good shape once the double albatross at the top of the payroll is dealt with in whatever way possible. While Jamison and Davis are undoubtedly overpaid, the top-heavy nature of Cleveland’s salary structure says more about their long-term flexibility than it does about the burden of those two contracts.

That money, ego and power can ruin just about anything. That past success does not always indicate future prosperity. That watching millionaires and billionaires squabble over riches is never pleasant, nor particularly interesting. That, despite this, both sides have every right in the world to want to secure the best deal they can manage.

That a simple “no real progress” after a 10 hour meeting can make you want to throw a window through another window. That joking about whatever might be going on in that meeting is the only real escape you have left. That “Stand United” can sound as irritating as it is cliche. That words like “hard cap” and “BRI” can actually cause you to have an unsettling, visceral reaction. That the phrase “shooting yourself in the foot” can feel uncomfortably literal at times.

That ranting on Twitter about David Stern can be as fun as it is negligent. That Stern’s ego often gets in the way of progress rather than fostering compromise. That “plantation-overseer” fits in many ways, and seems excessive in others. That wagging your finger and talking down to another human being isn’t an example of leadership. That had you been in that situation you might have felt like physically assaulting said person. That Dwyane Wade has a lot of self restraint.

That slam dunks, alley-oops, and cross-overs can feel empty. That without true competitive spirit and real defense, basketball seems surprisingly boring and trivial. That despite this, Rajon Rondo can still make you smile. That Kevin Durant’s shooting barrage at Rucker Park remains both entirely pointless and altogether captivating. That John Wall dunking over and over again gets boring eventually. That it doesn’t even take that long. That you can miss basketball to a point where it physically hurts. That you can’t be sure how healthy that actually is.

That it’s fun to make jokes about Carmelo Anthony’s weight. That by some act of God we haven’t heard from Andray Blatche. That it’s probably a terrible idea to borrow money from Kobe Bryant. That Roger Mason Jr. can start a twitter meme, how u. That at some point the meme gets old. That the idea of JR Smith playing in China is hilarious. That you can also be really sad to not have this in your life. That hearing Kevin Harlan call football games is some very perverse form of torture.

That anyone can and will lie to you. That talking about a “PR battle” is not nearly as stimulating as talking about the Miami Heat. That maybe The Decision wasn’t so bad after all. That Dan Gilbert needs to get a grip. That people who owns sports teams have a lot of money for a reason, and it’s generally not from being forgiving and conciliatory. That as fans we probably deserve better. That sadly, “deserve don’t got nothing to do with it”. That using Wire references is both entertaining and entirely played out.

That it’s very difficult to write during a lockout. That despite this there are some truly talented people writing inspiring material . That empathy for stadium workers can become a hot button issue .That you can’t honestly KNOW how someone feels unless they tell you. That guessing otherwise tends to offend people. That everyone is wrong sometimes. That no matter how smart, or how good a writer you believe yourself to be, you will inevitably write something that sucks. That “sucks” is subjective.

That losing a year of what’s left of Kobe Bryant’s career seems completely and totally wrong. That even a Blazers fan can feel this way. That you should appreciate Chris Paul, now. That no one really knows how good or valuable Blake Griffin is, and that’s what makes him so awesome. That Tim Duncan and Blake Griffin are nearly polar opposites. That we never truly understood Duncan. That his greatness was just a little beyond comprehension. That it is more than possible to miss Rasheed Wallace .That you should appreciate everyone now before it’s too late. That you still miss the real Tracy McGrady. That there are other people who miss him just as much. That life never has been nor will it ever be “fair”.

That the phrase “it’s just a game” is simultaneously completely true and wildly off base. That going to the game with your dad is one of purest forms of joy in life. That you miss the phone calls where you talk basketball for hours and hours.

That you fell in love with a beautiful game, and while it “all comes down to the bottom line” you don’t have to let that define the sport. That basketball will always be played and loved no matter what. That Steve Nash passes and Ray Allen jump shots supersede whatever happens during this lockout. That you can be happy again. That this will eventually end.

Photo by Blog Gallery from Flickr.

Over the past couple of months ESPN.com released its NBA player rankings, a process in which 91 basketball experts ranked 500 NBA players (including rookies and certain free agents) on a scale of 0 to 10 based off of the player’s current value.

To no surprise, many of the rankings started controversy on Twitter, Facebook and the ESPN comments section. However, a perturbing trend in the fan reaction to the rankings has been the overvaluing of offensive-minded players, an ode to these players’ apparent bond with fans.

Fans and writers alike can discuss and determine player rankings all they want, but for the most part there appears to be a clear-cut hierarchy in the NBA. There are superstars (LeBron James), stars (Amar’e Stoudemire), All-Stars (Kevin Love), sixth men (Lamar Odom), role players (Tyson Chandler), young players with potential (JaVale McGee), journeymen (Matt Barnes), benchwarmers (D.J. Mbenga) and … Mike Bibby.

Certain players don’t have palpable placements, though. Carmelo Anthony seems to border the superstar and star titles. Monta Ellis is a good scorer, but does that alone merit a top-30 rating (I mean, he doesn’t contribute much else)? Where do John Wall and Blake Griffin rank, based off of the fact that they’ve only played one season and still have ostensible flaws?

In the reaction to these player rankings, the public shows what they value most in a basketball player. Is it efficiency? Production? What about the good ole’ eye test? Locker room guys?

The intangibles that factor into player rankings are too difficult to quantify or explain; they’re different for everyone. But the one asset that always seems to factor into most fans’ voting – albeit, a flawed view – is offensive output, particularly scoring.

Look no further than the most controversial reactions to #NBArank. The rankings that caused the most quarrels (other than LeBron at #1) were Kobe Bryant (#7), Derrick Rose (#8), Carmelo Anthony (#11), and Monta Ellis (#41). To most fans – from their Twitter and Facebook reactions – Kobe and Rose should’ve been in the top-5, Anthony should be top-10, and Ellis should be top-30 at the worst.

The four players all ranked in the top eight in scoring and are unquestionably a few of the league’s most exciting players to watch. They warrant much of the opposing defenses’ attention, can create scoring opportunities from almost anywhere on the floor, and are capable of scoring 40 points on any given night. They must be all be underrated, right?

Wrong.

On the surface, these players should rank higher.

Rose was last season’s MVP, and led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals. He has engraved himself in the hearts of Bulls fans and is in the conversation for best point guard in the NBA.

Kobe is arguably a top-10 player of all-time. He’s the best player on the NBA’s most illustrious franchise (yes, even more so than the Heat or the Celtics), is the game’s “clutchest” player (perception-wise), and is arguably the game’s most popular player (along with LeBron).

Anthony is playing in one the league’s biggest markets (with one of its biggest and most loyal fan-bases), is widely considered to be one of — if not the most — complete scorers in the game, has a fan-friendly “thug” perception, and is clearly one of the game’s most popular players.

Ellis is the apple of most Warriors’ fans eyes (except Ethan Sherwood Strauss, and rightfully so), the offensive engine of one the league’s fast-pace, high scoring teams (eh, I’d say it’s more of Stephen Curry, but I’m going with perceptions here), and is an exciting and sometimes dominant scorer.

Honestly, what’s there to complain about?

Well, a lot. All four players have significant flaws that (theoretically) led to their drop in the rankings and coming up shorter than most expected.

Rose isn’t an efficient or effective offensive player, is an average outside shooter, and is an average defender. This was covered extensively during the MVP debates in March and April.

Bryant’s athletically ability and offensive dominance is quickly fading as time ticks away and his knees wear out. He’s still an elite player, but a shell of what he used to be.

Anthony doesn’t play much defense (and no, George Karl wasn’t the first to notice), and doesn’t create well for others (he’s basically above-average in only two categories – scoring and rebounding).

Ellis is one of the game’s least efficient offensive players, doesn’t play much defense, and is out of control (on- and off- the court).

But to fans, none of this matters. Most generic basketball fans only care about two things: winning and scoring.

Fans, naturally, love when their team wins. That’s the main goal in sports, isn’t it? [Insert cliché about how character and values matter.] If the team is winning, all is usually well. But fans also love offense. They love players that can score, especially in creative manners (no matter the inefficiency). They love seeing crossovers, 360 dunks, step-back jumpers and buzzer beaters. If a player can give them exciting, fast-paced, highlight-filled games, they will love him – no matter his weaknesses.

Regardless of what statistics, bar graphs or charts say or tell you, fans have loyalties to the players that excite them, take their breath away, and leave them wanting more. That is why they are so adamant in defending these offensive-minded players; by ranking them lower than where the general fans feels the player should be ranked, a fan takes it as a disrespect to something he or she likes. No one likes to be disrespected.

In this case, Bryant, Rose, Anthony and Ellis are those players. Is there a chance the more analytical, stat-based voters were a little too harsh on low-efficient scorers that sometimes hurt their team’s offense more than they help it?

Sure. There’s always room for error.

But either way, the fans can’t be swayed, as they’ve developed a bond and connection with the players they look up to and hope to emulate. Sometimes it seems most fans use too much emotion to judge players, while analysts stick by the numbers. Is one way better than the other?

At this point in time, it’s unclear. That’s a conversation for another day. I lean towards statistics in my arguments, but that’s just me. Both sides have their advantages. At least these rankings breed discussion, which sparks and maintains fan interest in the sport we all love.

In the time of a lockout, some basketball conversation is better than none.

via nba.com/clippers

“I was going to America to be a cowboy,” [Nater] recalled. “I wanted to be just like Roy Rogers. I thought everybody in the U.S. was a cowboy. I went from an orphanage to a Beverly Hills hotel in 22 hours. I had room service. I didn’t see any cowboys, though.”

Via “Where Are They Now? Swen Nater, former college and NBA center” by Dan Raley

Years Active: 1974 – 1984

Career Stats: 12.4 ppg, 11.6 rpg, 2.0 apg, 0.6 bpg, 0.5 spg,, 53.5% FG, 74.8% FT

Accolades: 1974 ABA Rookie of the Year, 2x All-ABA 2nd Team (1974-75), 1974 ABA Rookie 1st Team, 2x ABA All-Star (1974-75); 1975 ABA RPG Leader, 1980 NBA RPG Leader, 3rd All-Time in RB%

The journey of center Swen Nater to professional basketball is unlike any other. Born in the Netherlands, his mother departed Holland for the United States when he was 3-years old with Swen’s stepfather and one son. Swen, along with a sister, was left behind at an orphanage, waiting for the day their parents saved enough money to send for them. 6 years passed until finally an American television show, It Could Be You, organized the reunion of the Nater family.

(more…)

Photo by Rochink via Flickr

This is the 4th installment of the Amnesty Tango series, where I allow one player per team to wiggle out of his underpaying contract.

Previous Tangos: Northwest Division – Pacific Division – Southwest Division – Southeast Division

(Note: All salary information provided by Hoops Hype. Furthermore, it will be assumed all player and team options are in full effect.)

Boston Celtics

The Big Four are due a combined $56 million next year. The Corpse of Jermaine O’Neal has $6.2 million coming its way to help spruce up the mausoleum. And little Avery Bradley will make $1.5 million. Um, yeah, no one’s underpaid here. Did I also mention Jeff Green’s qualifying offer of  $6 million? Yep, no one’s underpaid here. Moving on…

New Jersey Nets

Brook Lopez makes $3m. Brook Lopez also stinks at rebounding. Brook Lopez is also a fine offensive center and shot blocker. He should be the first in line to get his renegotiating papers. By the way, Johan Petro makes $3.25m next year and Travis Outlaw will make $7m a year through eternity. That ain’t right.

New York Knickerbockers

Much like the Celtics and Nets, the Knicks are laden with with contracts that don’t come near to being described as bargains. There is one shining exception for New York, the $788,000 Man, Landry Fields. He’s a scrappy, hustling swingman who provides some desperately needed pellmell grit for the Knicks. By the way, he makes as much as Andy Rautins. That ain’t right, either.

Philadelphia 76ers

Despite the Elton Brand albatross strangling their neck, the Sixers actually have some bargain deals. Marreese Speights is getting $2.7m. Thaddeus Young’s qualifying offer will be for $4m. Jodie Meeks only strokes it from downtown, but he does it so well $900,000 is a steal and even Evan Turner may turn out to be underpaid with his 3 years and $17m deal. However, there can only be one player set free and it’s Jrue Holiday. I suspect he’ll never be more than a good starting PG, but good starting PGs make more than $1.7m.

Toronto Raptors

Truthfully, I don’t know what to make of the Raptors situation. Clearly, Jose Calderon and, at this point in his career, Leandrinho Barbosa are overpaid.  Linas Kleiza was a bust $4.5m bust. Andrea Bargnani teeters up, down and all around the categories of under-,over-, and rightly paid. Then there’s the stable of young talent like Sonny Weems, Ed Davis, DeMar DeRozan and Amir Johnson where you honestly just don’t know what the value really is yet. In case you’re wondering, this is the perfect example of why there is a rookie scale. Gives a decent window at a decent cost to observe a player’s value. Some like Blake Griffin put any questions to bed early, while others like the Raptors cavalcade leave you wondering.

At this point we’re all being taken for fools, except those who refuse to get up an iota of hope for the lockout negotiations to be ultimately productive. Oh sure, there were glimmers of progress and feint signs of promise for a season to begin in mere weeks. All of that was dashed by some reported hardball courtesy of Portland Trail Blazers owner Paul Allen and further reports of San Antonio Spurs owner Peter Holt getting Clubber Lang on the NBPA. Federal mediator David George Cohen washed his hands of the whole damn deal. David Stern watched it all from home with a bowl of chicken noodle soup. And NBA fans and bloggers, myself included, went apoplectic. Stunned that so much meeting time during the week had been squandered so quickly.

There were calls that the owners were greedy and/or merciless. Others continued to insist the players give in now while the deal proposed is merely bad and not worse. And yet another was only upset over the carnage because they had yet to be delivered NBA basketball. The end goal of a season taking precedence over what sort of CBA it would operate under. And as we lay all these criticisms down at the feet of owners and players, let’s remember it’s easy to play armchair general/point guard/entrepreneur.

About a month ago, I came to the conclusion that despite my priority of wanting to see games, I wouldn’t get upset at the players if they held out for terms they believed to be fair (although Kelly Dwyer thinks that ship has sailed). Likewise, I would remain receptive, though admittedly skeptical, to the owners’ pleas that the financial framework for the league was untenable. Much greater minds than myself (Ken Berger, Tom Ziller, David Aldridge, Zach Lowe, Larry Coon, etc.) have gone over the details and have assigned the appropriate validity to arguments and behavior in a slew of articles that I encourage you to read.

As of this writing, I’m siding with the players (heavy endorsement there) mainly because the owners have appeared to lack good faith and sincerity in their bargaining. But as Richard Pryor in the opening video says, that’s “easy for me to say.” Easy for me to say because I’m not privy to the negotiations. Privy to the financial information. Privy to the rigors of running a franchise or a business in any context. Maybe If I were run through all of these experiences, I’d come out on the owners’ side.

Even if it’s impossible for me to experience all of that, I still imagine it and attempt an understanding of their position. You can’t convince someone to change their mind if you can’t understand what direction their mind is coming from. Likewise, you may find your own mind persuaded by their arguments, something which is always a bit frightening and uneasy for us all. And in the middle there is the sober, compromising ground where an agreement that seeks to do the most for both parties can stand.

It’s easy to say players should acquiesce to a pay cut when you’re not a player or that a billionaire owner should just stomach business losses. Someone else’s lost money is always easier to justify and shrug shoulders over. The clarion cry of the disenchanted fan is, “GREED!” Just realize greed has often been disingenuously  bottled up or diverted by middling economic means and avariciously released when wealth and power has been acquired. For all the bluster of how “I would do it this way” or “You would do it that way” or “They’re doing it all wrong”, you never know how you’ll really act until presented the situation, given the means or denied a prospect.

 From Mike Tyson:

“Everybody’s got plans until they get hit”

to Abraham Lincoln:

“I never had a policy; I have just tried to do my very best each and every day.”

to Richard Pryor:

“And that’s easy for you to say, because you have none of these things.”

Great men through time have understood this.

You know Darvin Ham because he used to dunk very hard. You might not know that he’s an up-and-coming coach. After spending last season as the head coach of the D-League’s New Mexico Thunderbirds (now the Canton Charge), he has interviewed for a position on Mike Brown’s coaching staff and, although no deal has been finalized, he’s on a short list for the job. I’ve used this as an excuse to share everything I can find about the guy I fondly remember for his powerful dunking ability:

• His Sports Illustrated cover is legendary. On that backboard-shattering dunk in the NCAA tournament, he had this to say: “I just wanted to run around the court and do backflips.”
• He had a near-death experience at age 14, being shot by a stray bullet in his hometown of Saginaw, MI.
• His mother, Wilmer Jones Ham McZee, was Saginaw’s first female mayor.
• He was a late bloomer in basketball – he grew up playing football, didn’t start at Saginaw High, and went from Otero Junior College to Texas Tech. He went undrafted in 1996 but caught on with the Denver Nuggets in training camp.
• He had a very underrated dunk in the 1997 dunk contest. Also, it’s a damn shame there isn’t more good quality Darvin Ham footage on YouTube. If you don’t remember how incredible a dunker he was, watch this mix and bear with the quality.
• He and Lindsey Hunter were important “VETERAN LEADERSHIP!” types on Detroit’s 2004 championship-winning team. One of his favorite memories from his NBA career is Larry Brown saying, “every team needs a Darvin Ham” after winning the title.
• I will not call him “Darvin Ham Slamwich,” but while he was with the Pistons, George Blaha did just that.
• As mentioned in Rafe Bartholomew’s Pacific Rims, he made a very brief stop in the Philippines in January 2006. Bartholomew explains that Ham joined the Talk ‘N Text Phone Pals in the middle of the playoffs, where he was expected to dominate the competition while quadruple-teamed and picked on by officials. Talk ‘N Text lost in the quarterfinals, then he was killed in the press. He met Bartholomew for cocktails on his way out of the country, where he compared the press coverage to “the kind of propaganda one might see on a ‘bin Laden tape.’”
• According to Bartholomew, Ham drinks vodka pineapples and likes ultimate fighting.
• His last NBA training camp was with the Mavericks in 2007. There, he talked to Avery Johnson about coaching and, after being waived, became a player-assistant coach for the Thunderbirds. At the end of the season Ham would become a full-time assistant and, when Coffino stepped down, he took over as head coach.
• When he became the head coach, the Thunderbirds printed possibly the best promotional t-shirts ever. Yes, indeed, Ham does make us stronger.
• He had former teammate Rasheed Wallace help out at a Thunderbirds try-out. You should watch the video in that link.
• He and Ryan Bowen helped the Nuggets with their predraft workouts in June. I’d kind of hoped he’d end up an assistant with Denver because he and Kenneth Faried might be kindred spirits.
• He’s been an analyst on NBA TV and Fox Sports Southwest.
• He has a foundation called Urban Youth Development.
• His son, Darvin Ham Jr., was a star at Bridgeport High and now plays for Northwood University. Darvin coached his AAU team.

Photo by trojanguy on Flickr

Here’s my favorite NBA quote from this past week that didn’t involve Michael Beasley doing ballet:

John Wall: I didn’t have to shoot jumpshots when I was in high school; I just ran past everybody and just dunked and did whatever. So this whole summer that’s all I’m working on is my jumpshot. I wanna take the next step to being a superstar, to be an all-star, that’s my goal this year, so I’m working on my jumpshot and everything else.

Via John Wall Makes 2,000 Jump Shots A Day, Planning On Entering The Dunk Contest, 10/19/11

I’ve said before that John Wall is the player I’m most excited about watching when NBA basketball exists again. Since then, he’s declared that he’s looking forward to getting another shot at Westbrook and Rose at full health and he intends to be the best point guard ever. He’s also done things in exhibition games that have made me yell things I’m not supposed to print here.

I’m trying to figure out how you’re supposed to stop a guy with his athleticism, his court vision, his creativity, if you can’t let him shoot.

Oh yeah. You can’t. This’ll be fun.

Photo by emayoh on Flickr

I’m starting to come around on Mike Brown coaching the Lakers. Sure, the enormous pressure makes it a tough task, but he doesn’t sound intimidated:

“Maybe there will be a day where I’ll look back and say, ‘What did I do?’, or, ‘That was a lot harder than I thought,’ ” Brown said. “But I was excited about the Lakers and the opportunity. I know and understand how it can be daunting to people because of the comments that people have made to me during the course of it.

“I’m looking forward to this challenge. I think this is a very good team. I think this team is extremely hungry because of the way it ended for them last year in their minds and their hearts. They feel like they’re better than that. The motivation is there. They have a history of knowing how to win.”

Via Lakers’ Brown Not Afraid To Follow Jackson, 10/21/11

Brown’s right. The Lakers are should be much better than the team that embarrassed themselves against Dallas. My initial reaction — “Mike Brown, Lakers, WHAAA?!” — was mostly to do with the way it happened and a bit of doubt that the players, specifically Kobe Bryant, would buy into his system. If they weren’t listening to Phil Jackson, why would they listen to Brown?

Thinking about it, though, it would be insane if they didn’t buy in. It’d be more surprising and more disappointing than the playoff collapse. Kobe must hate that they aren’t the favorites coming into this season. Pau’s got to prove last year’s poor playoff performance was an anomaly. After that sweep, this team shouldn’t need Brown, or anyone, to rally them.

We all know the other question about Brown: his offense. Even if the Lakers routinely abandoned the triangle, it was unstoppable when run properly. When L.A. began its coaching search I hoped it’d turn to Rick Adelman or stick with the triangle under Brian Shaw. Brown’s offense was definitely underrated in Cleveland, but it’s fair to wonder what exactly this team’s playbook is going to look like. It’s encouraging, however, that he’s been saying for a while that feeding Gasol and Bynum in the post will be a priority. Also encouraging is that he’s been preparing for this job for 15 months:

“I was intrigued with this job,” noted Brown. “And you know, I’m not one to talk about [or] look at jobs that are already filled and so it was common knowledge that Phil was going to step down. Early on. Even if a job is filled, you may watch teams and say, ‘I would do this, I would do that.’

“But this one in particular, because you knew Phil was going to walk away at the end of the year. I really watched it and studied it and you’re excited about the team because of the different players and so on and so forth… I knew I wanted to coach this year and if I had an opportunity, which I felt that I would have during the year, that I was going to take what I felt was the best opportunity.”

Via Mike Brown Has Been Ready To Coach The Lakers Since 2010, 10/20/11

Apparently Brown and his assistants have completed their offensive playbook. You already know he’s obsessive about watching film and he’s going to take care of the defensive side of the ball. If I was a Lakers fan, I’d be worried about depth, the PG spot, and Kobe staying healthy far more than I’d be worried about coaching. If they’re going to redeem themselves for last year’s exit, buying in is just the start.