So, the big story of today is, of course, that the Cleveland Cavs killed the NBA with the candlestick in the library...or that room whereever they hold the draft.
Above is Bill Simmons' reaction, which, as usual with his reactions (WOAH!), was priceless ("This is MURDER!" as Sage Steele was quick to point out). You have to love the man, volunteering his emotions for the benefit of all of us. Simmons had a wonderful must-read karma ranking article yesterday over at Grantland which was extremely sane, if you buy the basic premise: basically you deserve a good pick if your team worked hard, you have tried to run a pretty tight ship management-wise for the past few years, and you're due for something good happening to the team. Based on that, if everything went right, and luck went to who it should have gone to, Simmons concluded, then the chance at a top pick would go to the Suns, Celtics, Nuggets, Pistons, Bucks, Jazz, Lakers, Pelicans, Magic, Sixers, Kings, Wolves, and the Cavs--in that order. He ranked Boston too high--I would have put the Pistons higher--but one can see something of the logic that must have been behind it: if one of the factors in getting a high pick is that you have to be in a city who is hurting sports-wise and is in need a real basketball team--and has a demonstrated record of having a really excellent basketball fanbase--then Boston definitely qualifies as up there. Definitely much more than Cleveland. And it probably does even though they have the Bruins--something I Simmons didn't quite factor in. What makes up for that was simply the fact that Boston seemed like they tried this year, as he says, while it is a travesty what the 76ers did and what they ended up with (3rd)--they definitely don't deserve the karma they got. That said, everything turns on your idea of what "trying" is (if it is finding some way to keep Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, instead of trading them and sort of leaving the year to some mysterious rebuilding process--well then you may not think they deserve it); and, regardless, Philly also has an argument for being bereft of NBA action too long over Cleveland. Well, I can't keep using Cleveland here--pretty much everyone now deserves a shot over the city of Cleveland. I think he ranked the Bucks too low, but he factored in how they basically got to keep their franchise rather than getting it shipped over to Seattle, so that seems fair. It was a complicated system he worked out, really it was: the key for Simmons is he is also looking at what provides the best situation from a fan perspective--and the fun thing about this is it basically produces wacky, polarizing results which are, however, incredibly civic-minded and prize local connections. I think though with that taken seriously, ultimately Detroit was ranked too low too, along with perhaps Sacramento--two teams that have turned it around and tried really hard to do so (though the Kings pretty much have already been rewarded a little too much), and who have amazing fans. In the end though, the reality of the situation is that the actual results we got were much more dissatisfying than anything you could say about his list: Cavs, Bucks, Sixers, Magic, Jazz, Celtics, Lakers, Kings, Hornets (because the Pistons didn't get a high enough pick, so that their pick gets swapped with Charlotte), Nuggets, Wolves, Suns--this isn't too great. The Suns got screwed, the Sixers were undeservedly rewarded, and Denver also got screwed. Overall, though, the best thing about this, as some people are saying, may be that now, instead of the Harden trade, Simmons be crapping on just how freaking horrible the Cavs are for the next year, and how much their fans deserve better from their management rather than the NBA as a league (which they do). In the end, the article was too fascinating really for me to sum up here--I think I'll write something on it separately and on Simmons in general. But it is a must read.
Jim Cavan at Bleacherreport also has a must-read collection of player reactions to the draft. Highlights: Brandon Jennings in disbelief and befuddlement, with the quick retraction along the lines of, well, you can't hate the Cavs really once you think about it (which is true--you can only hate their management); Kendall Marshall with the outraged confusion, which produces eventually the speculation that the Cavs practice black magic; Demarcus Cousins with a cynicism it has been somewhat surprising and depressing to see him exhibit recently; Austin Rivers asking Kyrie Irving blatantly just how they do this--not to be snarky, just in a kind of wonderment and genuine desire to actually learn what on earth they do so that he himself might take it to management and prescribe it; Quincy Miller with the far-reaching storyline projection that this means LeBron will go back to Cleveland; and Dahntay Jones with the devastating reflection that "all that tanking was for nothing." For us Portland fans, Batum had simply this to say: "Again?!?!"
But it may have been the most apt comment, the most generally felt sentiment--though Simmons' reaction also ranks up there. It was certainly the reaction of everyone at the Lottery itself, it seems, as Zach Lowe reports in his great dispatch from the event. "People just kind of laughed when they won the no. 1 pick." What's most interesting is this tidbit: "I am almost frightened that Cohen might be a warlock, and I asked him after the lottery if it is tempting after all these wins to believe he can influence events that would appear beyond his control. 'I’ve always believed you create your own luck,' he said." This seems like a semi-reasonable response to such a question, which already is not entirely rational. But as soon as Cohen expanded upon it, things began to look quite odd: "'Luck just isn’t sitting there. You have to believe you are entitled to it. You have to see it, to visualize it. It doesn’t always work, but three years out of four, I mean, that’s pretty good.'" Cohen talks as if the result were a result of some kind of effort: "that's pretty good," is what you say if you've made some sort of attempt to win what is a random event, and not just this year, but EVERY YEAR. It focuses on the failure, as if that one time they didn't get it, they were doing something wrong, which they could correct. And that's just weird. That way lies madness, one has to console oneself in thinking. But that just seems also to be the attitude of each of the teams, really. The Sixers really sound like they think they deserved the number one pick, and that they were disappointed with number 3: Philly took the slide back to no. 3 in stride. 'I guess part of you wants the no. 1 pick, just to have the option,' O’Neil said. 'But having two lottery picks, plus Nerlens coming back to join the Rookie of the Year — I’ll take that every day and twice on Sunday.'" This somewhat makes sense--the expected number one pick, Joel Embiid, is a huge deal, and would instantly change the dynamic of a team for the better. And indeed there is much more that goes on in working towards success than just winning games: these are effectively media empires, these franchises, each one of them, and the work they do is noble, even if their team tanks in the actual contests. They are a part of the cities they play in, they are a part of the communities of fans that they build. At the same time, shouldn't these people just be thankful that they get a chance to be really close to the number one pick at all? As we found out, we really have no clue what will happen.
Finally, a very good article by Mike Mayer at the SBnation Cavs blog, Fearthesword.com, going through all the implications of the no. 1 pick. "The draft and the lottery are about hope: the hope that our team might get back to that place again, sooner rather than later. Hope is a powerful thing, especially for fans who have rooted for a team near the bottom of the conference for the last four seasons. Hope is all we've had. But it won't be enough anymore." This hits the nail on the head. Sports ultimately, as I said in another column, are about results, not hope. They model for us what excellence in productivity looks like, the translation of effort and practice into reality (pace Allen Iverson, who was absolutely right about this, as with many other things). They don't model hope for us, yearning, all of that. At least professional sports don't: college sports can do the dirty business of monetizing those types of things; the pros are cleaner than that, more transparent. And so a city and fanbase absolutely is more in the right in wanting results, always, than in wanting things more abstract: they therefore should, this year, absolutlely it from management, and be up in arms at every single moment in which the organization fails to live up to their expectations. If the Cavs don't turn things around this year, they need to take a cue from the Knicks fanbase, and start making signs and posters. This is a real opportunity: scrutiny will be on the organization--as Mayer points out--and in a way the fans now have the chance to, by way of changing expectations, change the type of product that they are getting. This is what I take him to be claiming when he says the following: "Plenty of people have said that this organization doesn't deserve all of the luck they've had. Maybe that's true. But I know this: Cavs fans absolutely do deserve it." Essentially, the fanbase simply has to get its confidence back and learn to demand the excellence that before i silently hoped for. Key to this--which Mayer doesn't mention, except in passing--is getting over the whole Lebron thing. I'm speaking of a Portland fan who is absolutely frustrated at all the talk of Oden and how that worked out. They need to envision a future where they build a team that can actually win against a Miami Heat team with Lebron still on it--not keep wishing for someone to come back. Get over it, people, and look towards the future and what can be done now that the situation is different, or simply not the same as it was.
