This blog has moved! Yes, already!
As of Thursday, Feb. 12, this little blog has relocated to a new home on AJC.com. It’s the same newspaper, the same Web site and the same writer (feel free to groan) — there’s just a new URL.
New features: Bigger type, more graphics, comments that load 10 times faster and a larger and more recent photo that makes me look pretty doggone old. I think you’ll like it (the blog, not the photo). But I am, as we know too well, often wrong.
Home > Mark Bradley > Archives > 2008 > April
April 2008
Hawks an odd crew
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston -— A strange series saw a return to relative normalcy Wednesday night. The NBA’s best team played like the NBA’s best team. The Hawks acted as if they weren’t sure they deserved to be tied with the NBA’s best team after four playoff games, and now they aren’t.
Maybe asking the Hawks to beat Boston three times in five days was too much, but the underdogs did nothing to make Games 3 and 4 seem a new world order. In Game 5 they were outscored by 17 baskets and beaten by 25 points. They weren’t the fearless bunch we saw in Philips Arena; for reasons unclear, they seemed willing to counterpunch.
The Celtics played as if their professional lives were on the line, which they pretty much were. A column in the tabloid Boston Herald ran under this headline: “Celtics Face Gag Order: On Brink Of Biggest Collapse In Hub History.” (And this in the city of Bucky Dent and Bill Buckner.)
“They really got after us defensively tonight,” said Hawks coach Mike Woodson, and that should have come as no shock after the torch job Joe Johnson and Josh Smith did in the fourth quarter of Game 4. What was surprising was how pliant the Hawks were: They were outrebounded 19-9 over the first 18 minutes, and rebounds are a function of hustle.
“I felt like we were in it for most of the game,” Al Horford said, but they really weren’t. They trailed by 15 at the half, a deeper hole than they’d dug in Game 1 or 2 here. (Fun with numbers: After 12 postseason quarters in TD Banknorth Garden, the Hawks have yet to outscore their hosts once.)
“They got a lot of loose balls,” said Horford, and here the astute rookie was on to something. “That set the momentum early.”
The Celtics needed Game 5 and acted accordingly. The Hawks acted content to head home down 3-2, and they could well take Game 6 in Philips Arena. But to win the series they’ll have to win here, and given the state of Boston’s psyche, this might have been their best shot.
Then again, who really knows anything with this odd crew? At a time when a coach might be expected to accentuate the positive, Woodson went glum. In his pregame briefing, he told the assembled media: “At the end of the season, if I’m the coach …”
This led the assembled media to ask if events of the past few days mightn’t solidify his job. Said Woodson: “I don’t think this series has anything to do with it. You guys think this team should be the greatest thing since sliced bread, and I don’t see it this way. We’ve got some good pieces, but we’re young.”
The man can, as we know, say some strange things, but this was weird even by Woody standards. Shouldn’t a coach be talking up his Young Team at such a time? Shouldn’t he be saying something like, “We’re tied with these guys after four games, and we’re in it to win it”?
Instead he said this: “We’re a ways away, but we’re not far away. We want to get to 50 wins and 55 and move up in the standings, and maybe then we’ll have a chance at the homecourt [advantage].”
Well, maybe someday. But the lesson of Games 3 and 4 was that a roster gifted enough to face down the Celtics twice in three days shouldn’t have been 37-45 to begin with. Then the Hawks achieve something at blessed last, and their coach seizes on this merry occasion to say, “We’re a ways away.” Amazing.
Thus does the screwball series return to Atlanta, the Hawks facing elimination. “Our confidence level hasn’t broken down a bit,” Smith said. And then: “There’s still not any pressure on us.”
Maybe they’ll give themselves a chance Friday night, same as they did in Games 3 and 4. We saw what happened then. In Game 5 we saw nothing even close.
Permalink | Comments (93) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Hawks have a real shot … seriously
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Hawks can win this series. They really can. They’ll have to take a game in Boston to do it, but at the moment nothing seems beyond them. At the moment they look so good you can’t believe they’re the Hawks.
They have the NBA’s best team reeling. The Celtics, who pride themselves on their strength of will, couldn’t hold a 10-point lead with 12 minutes left Monday night. It was the second time in Game 4 that Boston seemed to have stunned the Hawks —
“They hit us in the mouth,” Joe Johnson said — and somehow the callow underdogs hit back harder. How’d that happen?
“We know we can play with these guys,” said Johnson, expressing a belief that absolutely no one — not even the Hawks — held 51 hours earlier. But two games here, two games that defied form and reason, have turned a perfunctory exercise into a pulsating entity.
“It’s a series now,” Al Horford said. “Before it was 2-0.”
Now it’s 2-2, and the Celtics find themselves where they were in the heyday of Bird and McHale, relying on their home floor when all else fails. And all else has. The team that considers itself a defensive carnivore couldn’t guard two Hawks when it mattered. Joe Johnson and Josh Smith scored all 32 of their team’s fourth-quarter points, and who knew this much-lampooned roster was housing a latter-day Jordan and Pippen?
“It was great to watch,” said Josh Childress, speaking specifically of Johnson’s 20-point period. “I was just sitting there, even though I was in the game.”
On the night’s biggest sequence, Childress did more than sit and watch. Inside the final minute, the Hawks up three. Smith hoists a trey and, for a change, misses. And Childress seizes his ninth rebound of the night, the biggest rebound this franchise has seen in … oh, 15 years. How’d that happen?
“I tried to track the flight of the ball,” Childress said. “I gave Ray [Allen] a little nudge — it wasn’t a foul or anything — and I went over his head.”
This was the same Ray Allen, one of Boston’s vaunted Three Amigos, who failed to stop or even slow Johnson in the fourth quarter. (The Celtics tried other guys, none to any effect.) The Hawks kept running an isolation, Mike Bibby screening for Johnson, and every time Johnson whirled into the lane pretty as you please.
“We could have probably gone [with a double-teamer] a little earlier,” Celtics coach Doc Rivers said. “But we’ve been relying on one guy [to guard his man] all year.”
And now it’s not working. The Hawks were too good to be guarded Monday night, the same Hawks who lost 45 games and made the playoffs only because the NBA requires eight qualifiers per conference. The same Hawks who aren’t the same Hawks at all but something new and shiny and brassy and sassy.
Are the Celtics starting to think they could lose this series? “I don’t know if they’re thinking that,” Smith said, “but I think they’re questioning themselves.”
Everything that worked for Boston in Games 1 and 2 — and pretty much everything did — has ceased working. The snooty C’s are the team that keeps getting rattled, from Paul Pierce’s “menacing gesture” (for which the NBA fined him $25,000) toward Horford in Game 3 to Kevin Garnett’s square-off with Zaza Pachulia last night. Yes, one of the world’s best players got into it with one of the worst, thereby illustrating how frazzled this No. 1 seed has become.
The Celtics were supposed to win in a breeze, and the only breeze they felt in Game 4 was the wind whipped up when Johnson flew past. “We’re so young and athletic,” Johnson said, “we can create a mismatch.”
That’s what this series was supposed to be, and what it is no longer. The Hawks can win this thing. Yes, the Hawks. Yes, really.
Permalink | Comments (100) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Believe in Dimitroff, believe in this draft
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Flowery Branch — It comes down to this: Do you believe in the guy doing the picking? If you do, you’re willing to extend the benefit of any and all doubt.
I believe in Thomas Dimitroff.
I believe he’s as smart as anyone who has ever worked for the Falcons.
Ergo, I believe in this draft.
I believe in Matt Ryan partly because I’ve seen him play with my own eyes, but mostly because Dimitroff believes in him. I believe in Sam Baker and Curtis Lofton and Harry Douglas and the rest for the same reason. You could call it blind faith. (You could, if you were of a cynical bent, call it rank naivete.) I prefer to think of it as faith born of observation.
Dimitroff has a scout’s eye — he spoke Sunday of Douglas’ “ability to stick his foot in the dirt and separate” and cornerback Chevis Jackson’s “ability to get his hands on balls” — but isn’t some data geek who sees nothing beyond 40 times. He grasps the bigger picture. He has what he described as “a clear vision” of what the Falcons could and should be, and that vision is this:
“A team that’s very focused, very passionate and hard-working. A team that perseveres. A team that believes in itself.”
If that sounds nebulous, consider what Dimitroff did and didn’t do in his first draft: He didn’t bow to public pressure and pick Glenn Dorsey in Round 1, and he didn’t hew to conventional wisdom by loading up on offensive linemen thereafter. (Of the Falcons’ 11 picks, only Sam Baker is an offensive lineman.) He didn’t take guys who might have looked good on paper and who would have fluffed up the Monday morning draft grades.
He took guys for a specific reason: “We would not have selected a player who we didn’t feel was a fit. … There might be a time when it’s right to go against the grain, but at this point we’re not at that spot.”
Dimitroff can justify each of the 11 choices, and his reasoning is varied and fascinating, but in the end it was always the same: We think this guy can help us do what it is we want to do, which is run the ball and stop the run and win on special teams and not beat ourselves. No, that’s not very sexy, but how pretty were the New York Giants in beating New England?
“I don’t want it to be a haphazard approach,” Dimitroff said, speaking of the draft but not just of the draft. “We want to develop a plan and a style of how we want to play.”
Matt Ryan fits that plan, which isn’t to say that Glenn Dorsey wouldn’t have. But Ryan was, Dimitroff said, the Falcons’ pick for these reasons: “A., the value of the position; B., our need, and C., the skills and the requisite traits. That was the tipping point.”
You can quibble with the pick, but you can’t argue against the logic. Quarterback is the most important position, and the Falcons, as we saw last season, need a quarterback in the worst way. Ryan mightn’t be Peyton Manning, but he’s too smart and too driven to be a bust. Indeed, when Mike Smith asked how he’d feel about serving the customary first-year quarterback’s apprenticeship, Ryan told the Falcons’ coach: “I want to be the starter.” And that, Smith said, “is the right answer.”
We won’t know for a while if the Falcons had the answers in the 2008 draft. Time is the ultimate judge. But we can say this much already: Nothing they did over the weekend was done without forethought. Nobody was drafted on a whim. Nobody was drafted who won’t fit what the new architect has in mind, and the new architect is a keeper.
Permalink | Comments (106) | Categories: Falcons/NFL
Rumble helps halt stumble
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Desperate for anything that would pass as inspiration, the Hawks, a team never confused with the NBA’s greatest, turned to The Greatest. The rookie Al Horford called Florida for help, and the Gators’ video man sent a DVD via overnight mail.
Ali-Foreman. The Rumble in the Jungle. The birth of the rope-a-dope. The utter culmination of the Ali Legend.
He screened the famous fight — actually, an abridged version of the documentary “When We Were Kings” — for teammates after Saturday’s shootaround. And 11 hours later, the Hawks an improbably emphatic Game 3 winner, the master motivator spoke of his ploy.
“I felt I’d be cheating my team if I didn’t do it,” Horford said. “If you watch that film and don’t get pumped up, there’s something wrong with you.”
For one giddy evening, there was nothing at all wrong with the Atlanta Hawks. They didn’t just beat the snooty Celtics; they handled them. They led by six points after the first quarter, by 10 after the third, by 15 with seven minutes left, by nine at the end. There will be no sweep. There will be a Game 5 back in Boston. This presumed rout might just turn into a series after all.
“I’m sure the Celtics thought we thought the series was over,” said Josh Smith, who rather obviously did not. He had the best game any player on either side has managed in this series: scoring 27 points, taking nine rebounds, making six assists, dunking four times and even nailing three treys.
The team that was believed to have few fans and no chance turned out to have more than a little of both. The expected invasion of Philips Arena by Celtics fans — the Green People, as Mike Fratello used to call them — never fully occurred. Green People were a distinct and mute minority. And the building itself, often as lively as a crypt, was positively frothing.
“Coming out of the tunnel, I haven’t seen a crowd that electric since I’ve been here,” said Joe Johnson, who scored 23 points and who made six assists.
Games 1 and 2 had tracked the same course. The Celtics got ahead and stayed there. The Celtics guarded the Hawks, and the Hawks offered no counter. This time the Hawks, who had made only 10 assists Wednesday night, made 28 on 36 baskets, an astonishing ratio. Mike Bibby steered his team the way a big-time point guard should, and the same team that Mike Woodson labeled “selfish” after Game 2 turned into the passing-est bunch since Air Coryell.
And this time the No. 1 seed was stumped for a response. Paul Pierce and Ray Allen missed 17 of 27 shots between them and looked noticeably older and slower than the Hawks they were trying to chase. It might have been a one-night aberration, but there was nothing fluky about the way they won.
Tied at 68 with 6:15 left in the third quarter, the Hawks limited Boston to one basket and four points over the next 8 1/2 minutes. By then it was 89-74, Smith having stretched the lead to 15 with a 3-pointer off Johnson’s feed. Three minutes later he would supply the killshot, another trey off a Johnson pass. And a night that had promised so little turned into a full-blown celebration: The first NBA playoff game in Philips had been won by the suddenly poised and powerful home side.
Afterward, the whiteboard in the Hawks’ locker room bore three words: “Don’t Be Satisfied.” And that could be an issue: The series has been joined, but will the elated underdogs see winning once as a place to stop?
“You have to celebrate, and a lot of us are,” Horford said. “It’s our first time. But we have to go back to work tomorrow.”
And what will be the next inspirational fistic video? Louis-Schmeling? Douglas-Tyson? “I’ll have to think about that,” said Horford, and then he smiled.
Permalink | Comments (87) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Marvin’s good, but needs to be great
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston - Think back to the summer of 2005. Think back to the time when the Hawks held their highest pick in three decades. Think back to their rationale for taking Marvin Williams over Chris Paul or Deron Williams - that M. Williams was the biggest talent in that draft.
Three years later, we see something rather less, and surely the Hawks do, too. We (and surely they) see a guy who can work more minutes and accomplish less than any Hawks starter. (Yes, this includes Mike Bibby - most nights.) We see a finesse player, a jump shooter who doesn’t shoot 3-pointers. We see, as was feared by this observer even before the pick was made, a player who’s skilled but not outrageously gifted.
In Games 1 and 2 here, we’ve seen Williams take 16 shots (missing 11) in 67 minutes. He has scored 22 points in two games, which puts him ahead of Josh Smith (19 points) and the unfortunate Bibby (17 points, two assists), but on nights when the Hawks clearly needed more from somebody, the No. 2 pick in the 2005 draft was his unobtrusive self. He has seven rebounds, five turnovers and no assists.
The trouble with Williams isn’t that he does so much wrong. It’s that he doesn’t do nearly enough. He’s as deferential as he was at North Carolina. He doesn’t seem to want the ball at key moments. (Not that there were many of those in Games 1 and 2.) His regular-season numbers weren’t terrible - he averaged 14.8 points and 5.7 rebounds - but he became, with the arrival of Bibby, the Hawks’ fifth-best starter.
Don’t misunderstand: Marvin Williams isn’t the single, or even the biggest, reason the Hawks have lost two games by an aggregate 42 points. But he remains the regrettable symbol of the Billy Knight era, which could well be in its final days. At a time when this franchise needed a great player, the Hawks could find only a pretty good one.
Permalink | Comments (68) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Bibby sounds off, then doesn’t show up
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston — Even if fans here are, as Mike Bibby indelicately phrased it, “bandwagon jumpers,” it’s a mighty snazzy wagon they’ve boarded. And if Bibby’s intent was, as Doc Rivers suggested, to brand himself “a villain,” it would be better for his team if he turned back into an actual player.
This is how bad it got: The crowd at TD Banknorth Garden was actually calling for the visiting point guard to be reinserted into the game with 11 minutes remaining. “Where is Bibby?” came the chant, and everyone knew the answer. He was seated on the bench, chased out of the game for the second time in four nights by young Rajon Rondo, deemed less essential by Mike Woodson for much of Game 2 than rookie Acie Law IV.
As expected, Bibby was panned in Boston. The way he’s playing, he might well get jeered by Hawks fans, assuming there are any left, at Philips Arena this weekend.
Bibby had two baskets and one assist in Game 1, two baskets and one assist in Game 2. If you’re going to challenge an entire opposing city on an off-day, you’d better be prepared to Step Up. Both figuratively and literally, Bibby sat down. He was spelled by the seldom-seen Law, who scored as many hoops in 21 minutes as Bibby has in the series.
“I’m not worried about [the Boston crowd],” Bibby said afterward. “I didn’t make anything happen for my team again.”
And maybe it doesn’t matter what Bibby does, or doesn’t do. Maybe the Celtics are going to sweep anyway. But the Hawks had no chance in two games here because their most seasoned player failed to light the way. He hasn’t been able to guard his counterpart — “Rondo’s better!” chanted the crowd Wednesday night — and he has given Boston no worries at the other end.
The pregame atmosphere had been comical. Asked to clarify his remarks, Bibby chose instead to respond to Celtics center Kendrick Perkins, who’d responded to Bibby by noting that the Hawks guard had missed eight of 10 shots in Game 1.
Said Bibby: “I don’t know where he got this tough streak from. His stat line was worse than mine. Anybody else, I might take a little [bit differently]. But for him not to show anything, it kind of upsets me.”
The assembled media dutifully rushed across the hall to the Celtics locker room, where Perkins was informed of Bibby’s latest salvo.
“I got no comment,” Perkins said. “I’m trying to win a game … I’m still going to go to sleep tonight. It doesn’t bother me either way … I’m not worried about him. Obviously he’s worried about what’s going on over here.”
After the game, Bibby spoke again of Perkins (who scored, it should be noted, as many Game 2 baskets as Bibby and shot a better percentage): “I thought he tried to hit me a couple of times, but I didn’t really feel it.”
In a series that promised little and has delivered less, this is what passes for drama. The Celtics have outscored the Hawks in all eight quarters and have looked every bit like the NBA’s best team. The Hawks, meanwhile, are making a case for themselves as the most underwhelming playoff qualifier ever.
“They hit us physically,” Woodson said. “They set us back tonight … We just didn’t move the ball again … If we call a play, we’ve got to attempt to execute it.”
That’s a failure of everyone, the point guard most of all. “I try to make things easy for my team,” said Bibby, who succeeded only in making things harder for everyone, himself most of all.
As for those bandwagon jumpers, he offered this: “They know who they are. If they took offense, they must be part of it.”
One Garden patron — perhaps a come-lately, perhaps not — seemed to offer the strongest rebuttal. He held up a sign that read: “Hey, Bibby! At least we have fans.”
Permalink | Comments (86) | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Hawks must hang tough early in Game 2
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston — The Hawks entered TD Banknorth Garden for Game 1 speaking of shocking the world, and they exited hugely shocked and a little awed. Just the pregame hoopla, Al Horford allowed, “was overwhelming — it got me hyped,” and then the real deluge began.
“It was hard to control my emotions,” said Josh Smith, who scored three baskets. “I was too excited.”
From boldly averring that they had nothing to lose in this series, the Hawks arrived at practice Tuesday saying nothing even the slightest bit bold. They’ve already begun to hedge their verbal bets. Said Smith: “It’s going to be hard for us to win if we don’t play at our highest level.”
Said Horford: “We honestly can’t think big on this series. We’ve got to concentrate on getting one game — the next game — if we’re to have any kind of chance.”
If they’re to have any kind of chance, the ground work must begin Wednesday night. The Hawks don’t have to win Game 2, but they have to hang close enough to prove to themselves and to the Celtics that the imbalance between teams isn’t as vast as it would appear. Another blowout would essentially confirm every doubt this callow bunch has clearly begun to harbor.
“They’re a talented team,” Smith said, “and they have an advantage. They have all this playoff experience. We’re young, and for most of us this is the first time.”
It showed Sunday. The Hawks’ stated mission was to hit the Celtics hard and make the home team burn the first timeout. Three minutes and 17 seconds in, the Celtics led 9-2 and Mike Woodson called time. He would signal another stoppage not four minutes later, the deficit having grown to 13 points. So much for Plan A.
Smith again: “It’s a learning experience. If we play hard, we’re able to play with these guys. If we don’t, they’ll destroy us every game. We need to get one [win] under our belt to give us confidence.”
Self-esteem is running low. Even the most seasoned Hawks did little in Game 1: Mike Bibby scored two baskets and made one assist, and Joe Johnson needed 22 shots to muster 19 points. By way of vivid contrast, the Celtics took the floor in a focused frenzy, feeding off a crowd that screamed so loud that even the home side pronounced itself surprised and impressed.
Asked if he’d ever worked in such an environment, Smith said: “No, I haven’t. But they’re die-hard fans. I don’t think there was a single Atlanta fan in the building other than our families. They’re big fans, and it showed in their intensity and their emotion.”
It might be nice, someone suggested, to play before such a home gathering. (The Hawks haven’t yet sold out Philips Arena for Games 3 and 4.) Said Smith: “You can’t blame the fans of Atlanta for not coming out — this is the only year we’ve been able to do anything. But I can’t wait to get home for [Game 3] Saturday night.”
But first: Game 2. The Hawks must match the expected early Boston flurry, must keep going when the substitutions begin — for a team with only one first-class reserve, this is the toughest part — and must give themselves a fighting chance come the fourth quarter. If they do all that, they’ll go home with something even if they don’t win. They’ll go home thinking they have a shot to extend this series beyond the minimum four games.
“I don’t necessarily think we’re overmatched,” said Horford, the one Hawk who played well in Game 1. “I feel like we can play with them.”
Nothing that occurred Sunday gave the Hawks any hope. Something better needs to happen Wednesday, or the rest of this series will be the merest of formalities.
Permalink | Comments (30) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Tale of two sports cities: Beantown trumps Atlanta
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston — Steve Mitchell stands on the corner of Lansdowne Street and Brookline Avenue. It is 9:45 a.m., and he has his Patriots Day planned. He’s about to enter Fenway Park to watch the Red Sox play Texas — first pitch is at 11:05 a.m. — and then he’ll make his way to Kenmore Square to watch the runners in the 112th Boston Marathon chug past.
“I have a lot of friends running,” he says.
And then he’ll head home — he’s from Dorchester, south of Boston proper — to top off the local holiday by watching the Bruins play Game 7 of their playoff series in Montreal. Smiling, Mitchell says: “It’s a pretty good city.”
Even if you believe there’s no arrogance quite like a Bostonian whose team is winning, you must admit it’s a high old time to be a Bostonian. The Red Sox are reigning world champs. The Celtics, who trashed our meek Hawks in Game 1 on Sunday night, could well win the NBA title. The Patriots nearly went undefeated. The Bruins have pushed top-seeded Montreal to the limit. And don’t forget the Marathon, which is both a civic tradition and a day-long party.
Please pardon a touring Atlantan for feeling the pangs of that green-eyed monster — envy. (Not to be confused with the Green Monster, which towers above Lans-downe Street.) After a fall and winter that saw Michael Vick go to jail and Bobby Petrino take a powder and the Braves finish third in their division and the Thrashers finish next-to-next-to-last in their league and the Hawks post a ninth consecutive losing season … what must it be like to live where teams not only win but feed off one another?
“To be an athlete in this city is something special,” says Jonathan Papelbon, the Sox closer. “The fans are passionate for sports. There’s an intensity in Boston that’s unlike any other city, and it makes us want to go out and kick [butt] every night.”
An example: The Sox trailed Texas 3-2 on Saturday night when a result — the Bruins had scored four third-period goals to beat Montreal in Game 6 at the TD Banknorth Garden — was flashed on the message board. The Fenway crowd went wild and, Papelbon said, “it electrified the entire game.”
On frenzied cue, the Sox rallied — Manny Ramirez hit the winning homer — in the bottom of the inning. Said Papelbon: “This is the city of champions. No other town can come close.”
On Sunday night, four famous Sox — David Ortiz, Mike Lowell, Kevin Youkilis and Dustin Pedroia — sat courtside at the Hawks-Celtics game. John Henry, who owns the Sox, hunkered down alongside Wyc Grousbeck, who owns the Celtics.
Speaking before his team opened its series, Celtics coach Doc Rivers said: “I’m not a hockey fan, but I watched that [Bruins-Canadiens] third period. That was phenomenal. It was great sports.”
In Boston, is there any other kind? Nowadays it isn’t enough to wear the regalia of only one team: The local fashion is to cross-dress, to mix a blue Sox sweatshirt with a green Celtics cap. Or, in Mitchell’s case, to wear a black Bruins sweater (with Ray Bourque’s No. 77 on the back) to a baseball game.
Does a Bostonian feel superior to someone, say, who must make do with following the middling Atlanta teams? Says Mitchell: “You can’t be fair-weather. I went to the Celtics opener last year, and I was so disgusted. They only won 24 games. But you have to keep being a fan.”
And maybe there’s hope for us Atlantans yet. The NFL draft is this weekend. The Falcons have the No. 3 pick. Their new general manager, imported from the regal Patriots, could well address a need by taking the highest-rated quarterback, who played for … Boston College.
Permalink | Comments (30) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Even brief playoff visit worth noting
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston — OK, so it wasn’t the thrill that came with the first World Series game in Atlanta or the sight of the Falcons in an actual Super Bowl. But when a franchise goes nine excruciating years without a playoff sniff, the novelty of that team taking the floor for an 83rd game carries enough of a jolt to make us sit up and take note.
So sit up. Take note. The Hawks are in the NBA playoffs at blessed last. At issue now: Will they stay long?
If Game 1 of this Eastern Conference first-round playoff series against Boston was any indication, they’ll stick around for three more games. Yes, that would be the minimum. And “minimal” is the only way to describe this return-to-the-postseason engagement.
The Hawks played Sunday night like a team unaccustomed to the pressurized pace. Boston was somewhat better. Given that the Celtics won 29 more games than these Hawks, this was no huge surprise. What was shocking was how little Mike Bibby, the Hawks player who has had the most postseasoning, offered.
Bibby was roundly outplayed by Rajon Rondo, one of Boston’s lesser lights. Bibby would finish with five points and one assist to Rondo’s 15 and nine. Said Bibby: “The stat line’s terrible. I didn’t help my team at all. I’ll take the blame for this.”
He also said this: “I don’t think there’ll be another game like this.”
He meant things will get better. Truth to tell, they could get worse. The Celtics didn’t play at peak capacity Sunday: Ray Allen had a quiet first half, and Paul Pierce accomplished little after an early flurry. And still Boston won by 23 points.
“We came out with the same mindset as they did,” Marvin Williams did. “At the end of the day, they just made more shots.”
Well, yeah. Part of that is because Boston has better shooters. Part of it is because Boston takes better shots. The biggest part, however, is that Boston makes it harder for the other team to shoot. Joe Johnson needed 22 shots to score 19 points. The Celtics aren’t great just because they have great talent; they’re great because they’ve managed to turn talent into a team.
With the Hawks, greatness remains several light years away. This is, after all, a bunch that finished six games under .500 and entered the postseason having lost four of five. For all the local giddiness over qualifying for the playoffs, it would have been really hard to do any less. And now we’ll see if this bunch has within itself the capability of surprising us even a little.
In the Hawks’ locker room afterward, a sign still bore the notice of a pregame chapel service. The topic: “Making what seemed impossible happen.” Right now it seems impossible that the Hawks will give Boston any sort of a run, but in the pressurized postseason things can change overnight.
“There’s a lot more series left,” Bibby said. “Somebody has to win four games.”
Off the strength — or, more precisely, the weakness — of their Game 1 showing, the Hawks will do well to win even once. “You always have a chance,” said Dominique Wilkins, whose greatest moment as a player came in that famous lost series against Boston in 1988. “What our guys have to do is absorb the first blow. We can’t panic.”
The Celtics landed a massive Sunday punch. The Hawks now have two off-days to muster some sort of counter. That could be even tougher than we thought it would be. In Game 1, mighty Boston gave every indication of being a team that knows all the answers, and their opponent didn’t appear to have understood a single question.
Permalink | Comments (82) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Tech fans exercise patience
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Roy Smith of Gainesville has been a Georgia Tech fan since 1948, and this was his first impression of the new coach’s new offense: “Nothing.”
Even after a first half that could have been the sorriest-looking display in the pockmarked history of spring games, Smith’s appraisal wasn’t meant as a condemnation. It was, on the contrary, accompanied by a shrug of understanding: “They’re not going to be doing a whole lot for a while.”
Said Gregg Griffin of Gillsville, standing alongside: “There’s a famous saying: ‘Patience is a virtue.’ You can quote me on that.”
Some of the same people who grew impatient with Chan Gailey almost from the beginning appear ready to extend Paul Johnson the benefit of a protracted doubt. Said Griffin: “You don’t see [Johnson, who stood in the middle of Grant Field for Saturday’s T-Day doings] getting upset out there. It’s way too early to judge.”
And it is. More than simply changing coaches, Tech changed systems of belief. Gailey sought to run a pro-style offense or thereabouts. Johnson wants to run the ball, period. His teams will throw only as a counterpoint. An option team moves on precision. Tech put itself on display Saturday having had just 14 practices to figure out what’s what and who stands where.
Little wonder, then, that the faux game’s first snap yielded a fumble. (Said Lynn Fairley of Peachtree City, a Tech fan since the first grade: “We need to get the ball from the quarterback to the center.”) Or that the first-team offense needed more than 14 minutes to notch a first down. Or that, late in the second quarter, PA announcer Chris Capo sounded the theme of the day by reporting: “Fumble on the play … flag on the play.”
Said Dr. David Minter, a Tech grad and an Augusta orthopedic surgeon: “I think [the offense] is going to be pretty good … But I can see why a couple of receivers transferred.”
Said Smith: “I expected a little better execution.”
Said Fairley: “I think it’ll get better — hopefully our defense [the first-string defenders limited the first-team offense to seven points] is all-ACC caliber.”
Said Dan Radakovich, the athletics director who gave Johnson a contract that will pay $11.2 million over seven seasons: “It’s really cheating. We’ve got a great defense, and we’re putting it against an offense that has had 14 practices … It’s going to take a little while. I was with the coaches at halftime, and they were saying, ‘If you watch the tape of the first practice, we’ve made marked improvement.’ “
(Memo to Tech’s coaches: Burn that tape.)
When the unsightly scrimmage was done, Johnson said he liked “the effort.” He also said: “I wouldn’t read too much into this game.”
And nobody did. Jim Ray of Fayetteville has a son who attended Navy, Johnson’s previous stop. “I don’t think people here can imagine how intense Paul Johnson can be,” Ray said. “He’ll be the best thing that ever happened to Tech.”
With the possible exception of Dave Braine, the AD who hired him, nobody ever said the same of Gailey. That Tech backers could walk away after a spring game that featured nine fumbles against 13 completed passes and not be grumbling says they’re willing to accentuate the positive with this coach in a way they never could with his predecessor.
Said Fairley, underscoring the point: “Hopefully, everything is correctable.”
Said Griffin, taking a clear swipe at Gailey: “We’re going to try to play to win now, instead of playing not to lose. What a novel concept.”
Permalink | Comments (87) | Post your comment | Categories: Tech/ACC
Falcons should draft Ryan, but likely won’t
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
I believe the Falcons have a clever general manager who will do well in this draft and every draft.
I believe Thomas Dimitroff and his chosen coach have history on their side when they speak of building a foundation. I believe they will, for that reason, draft a lineman with their first pick in Round 1.
Me, I’d take Matt Ryan.
Because, for all the Round 1 quarterbacks who’ve been Grade A busts, the quarterback remains the most important position in football. Just because Ryan Leaf and Tim Couch and Akili Smith and Alex Smith and Cade McNown failed doesn’t necessarily mean Matt Ryan will. I think he’ll be really good. I maintain he’s the best pure passer I’ve ever seen as a collegian, and I covered my first college game in 1976.
If the Falcons wind up with Glenn Dorsey or either of the Longs, I won’t pitch a fit. I’ll understand what they’re trying to do, and ordinarily what they’re trying to do would warrant the (not-exactly-coveted) Bradley Seal of Approval. But if Ryan’s available at No. 3, and he surely will be, that would change the dynamics, at least in my mind. He seems the sort of quarterback - big, strong, smart, gifted - who could one day win a Super Bowl. And the three most recent Super Bowls were won by …
Ben Roethlisberger, taken with the 11th pick of Round 1 in 2004;
Peyton Manning, taken with the 1st pick of the 1998 draft;
Eli Manning, taken with the 1st pick of the 2004 draft.
And, since no discussion of the Falcons and their quarterbacks can exclude you-know-who, I’ll just note that Michael Vick, for all his sins, nonetheless took this franchise to the NFC championship game four years after he was drafted No. 1 overall.
As the 2008 draft approaches, I hear people saying, “You can’t draft a quarterback that high.” Sure you can. If he’s the right quarterback, it’s the soundest investment possible.
At issue is whether Matt Ryan would be the right quarterback. I think he is, but I’m not Thomas Dimitroff, who makes his living passing such judgments. I await his decision on this weighty matter with great interest.
Permalink | Comments (240) | Post your comment | Categories: Falcons/NFL
Waddell loses games, not GM job
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Don Waddell is about to lose his job, but not the job many among us expected him to lose. He’s out as Thrashers coach because the general manager is actively seeking a replacement. The GM, surprisingly enough, remains Don Waddell.
In place since 1998, Waddell is proceeding as if he’ll be running the Thrashers in 2009 and beyond. “I’m going to continue as GM,” he said Wednesday, 11 days after the Thrashers ended their dud of a season. And then: “I’ve got full authority right now. I could hire a coach tomorrow.”
A bit of unsightly context: Waddell presides over a team that made the playoffs last year but finished 28th in the 30-team NHL this time; that fired coach Bob Hartley six games into its season; that traded its second-best player (Marian Hossa) in February because he wouldn’t re-up with a franchise he believed was going nowhere. None of this would seem an endorsement of the longtime GM, but the men who constitute Atlanta Spirit don’t always think the way you’d figure they’d think.
Bruce Levenson, considered the hockey guy among the many partners, issued a spirited defense of Waddell last month, and that apparently was the one Vote Of Confidence that actually is a Vote Of Confidence. Bucking the odds, Waddell is still in place. How’d that happen?
Waddell: “The owners have been very supportive. They’ve evaluated many different aspects. Obviously wins and losses are one, and they’re what the public tends to evaluate. But there are other issues. Bruce and [co-owner] Michael Gearon Jr. sat with me in many intense meetings — about firing Bob, on trading Hossa — and a lot more went into those than we want to share with the public.”
Given that running a professional sports team is the ultimate bottom-line business — either you win or you lose — what considerations might override wins and losses? Money, for one. The Thrashers operated nearly $10 million under the NHL salary cap this season, and we must note that the Spirit-owned Hawks just took on Mike Bibby and his $14 million contract. Said Waddell: “There are financial responsibilities, and I’ve always been able to meet them.”
Anything else? “I think we run a good program,” he said. “We’ve never had a problem with drugs or alcohol — obviously we had the one player [Dan Snyder] getting killed [in a car wrecked by teammate Dany Heatley, since traded]. I think you try to run a good program and surround yourself with good people and try to do a good job. When my head hits the pillow, I sleep very well.”
More than a few Thrashers fans might snooze less soundly knowing Waddell is still the GM, but he expresses hope that the league’s 28th-best team can be part of the 2009 postseason. “We’re a couple of players away,” he said, and when a team yields the most goals among NHL teams there’s no secret where the gaps are.
“We haven’t had a problem the last few years scoring goals, but we need to retool our defense. We’ve got two good players in [Toby] Enstrom and [Niclas] Havelid, but we need to shore up those third and fourth spots. … It’s a pretty critical summer. We need to add some good young players through free agency or the draft [the Thrashers own two first-round choices, including the No. 3 pick overall].”
There’s also the matter of filling one of his jobs. Hiring a coach, Waddell said, “is Priority No. 1,” but that doesn’t mean it will happen anytime soon. “A lot of the people we’d be interested in are involved in the playoffs. It wouldn’t be fair for me to interview somebody and say, ‘OK, now you’ve got to wait a month.’ It’s more important for me to get my ducks in line and then, when it’s time, to get something done in a week or 10 days.”
Can a team jump from 28th overall to the playoffs in one bound? Waddell points to Philadelphia, which was dead last a year ago but leads higher-seeded Washington in Round 1. The Flyers managed 56 points in 2006-2007; the Thrashers just finished with 76. “So we’re 20 points ahead of them,” he said, and a comment like that is why it’s impossible to dislike Don Waddell.
He’s relentlessly upbeat, and he has given much to a job that hasn’t been the easiest. (Re-introducing hockey to a jaded and transient Southern town: Good luck with that.) But, as he reaffirmed Wednesday: “I love this city and I love this team. Obviously I don’t own this team, but I want to stay here as long as they’ll let me.”
Apparently he gets to stay. There have been bigger hockey upsets — Montreal over Boston in 1971, the U.S. over the Soviets in 1980 — but not many.
Permalink | Comments (95) | Post your comment | Categories: Thrashers/NHL
Smith has something Mora and Petrino didn’t
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Flowery Branch — Between drills, Mike Smith would yell, “On the hop! On the hop!” That’s coach-talk for “move quickly to the next station,” and nobody hopped faster than Smitty himself.
Throughout his first on-field practice as a head coach, Smith scarcely stood in the same spot for consecutive snaps. (And it wasn’t just because, on a chilly spring day, he was moving to keep warm.) One minute he’d be in the middle of the defense, advising a linebacker to “open your hips.” The next he’d be watching from beyond the secondary, exhorting defenders to “make a [coverage] call, even if it’s the wrong call.”
Afterward the Falcons coach would sound almost apologetic, saying to the assembled media, “I hope I wasn’t too overbearing.” But obviously this was new stuff for Smitty, as he’s universally known, and it was likewise novel for the Falcons, who are coming off two head coaches who figured they knew everything coming in.
Mike Smith, who’s 48 and who could pass for 58, is still young enough to err on the side of enthusiasm. “I’m a very hyper guy,” he said, and it showed. He touched on the basics — “I wanted to make sure guys knew how to line up,” he said, and experience teaches us that no Falcons coach should assume even that much — but the overarching idea on Day 1 of mini-camp was (more coach-talk here) “to set a tempo.”
Every new coach seeks to set the same tempo — always faster, never slower. Some of these veterans had heard “on the hop,” or a variation thereof, from Bobby Petrino last spring and from Jim Mora before him. Said Keith Brooking, who goes all the way back to Dan Reeves: “Change isn’t always a bad thing; change can be a positive. After last year, which I don’t even want to talk about, we definitely needed a change.”
Smitty marks a clear departure from Mora, who was passionate but smug, and from Petrino, who was smart but autocratic. Said Brooking, speaking of Smith: “He’s used to dealing with NFL players on a day-to-day basis.” Then this: “His mannerisms didn’t change one bit the whole day. He’s very energetic, and this game is about having energy. You have to have fun. We lost a lot of games in the fourth quarter [last season].”
The 2008 Falcons will probably lose more games than they win, but they can’t be half as dysfunctional. Surely they won’t see this year’s quarterback — Chris Redman is the new No. 1 — indicted for dogfighting on the eve of training camp, and surely the front office will no longer house diverging agendas. Smith and Thomas Dimitroff, the new general manager, are simpatico regarding football as a concept. Said Smith, touching on an already-familiar theme: “We want to roll off the ball [on offense] and knock the line of scrimmage back [on defense].”
If Dimitroff is the new organizational key man, that doesn’t mean his chosen head coach is simply an affable cheerleader. At some point the Falcons will have to line up and play, and the GM can’t help them then. Smith isn’t as overt about his expertise as Petrino, but the new man knows his stuff. You can’t be a successful defensive coordinator without having a mind for technique.
The difference is this: Where Mora and Petrino were dreaming about being head coaches when they were in junior high, Smith gives the impression he could have another 10 years as a coordinator and still retired a happy man. We can’t know yet if the unassuming Smitty is one of those capable assistants who needed only the opportunity to prove he’s a big-picture guy or, as was the case with Marion Campbell, a capable assistant who kept proving he wasn’t.
One workout into his head-coaching life, Mike Smith knows already that some things are beyond scripting. Asked about Monday’s practice, he said: “I wish it was a little warmer — I anticipated we’d be able to get a good sweat going.”
The name’s Smith, and he wants sweat. As coaching credos go, that’s a pretty sound one.
Permalink | Comments (58) | Post your comment | Categories: Falcons/NFL
In Atlanta, Hawks best at losing
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
You probably weren’t aware of it, but the Hawks made history this week. With their loss in Indianapolis on Tuesday, they assured themselves of a ninth consecutive losing season. In the not-exactly-auspicious annals of Atlanta professional sports, no franchise has ever had such a futile run.
The Hawks’ last winning season came last millennium — in 1998-99. They’ve since worked under four coaches (Wilkens, Kruger, Stotts and Woodson), two general managers (Babcock and Knight), two presidents (Kasten and the guy from Liverpool) and two sets of owners (Time Warner and Atlanta Spirit) without generating even a 42-40 regular season. Even by tepid local standards, this is atrocious.
The expansion Thrashers had five losing seasons before nuzzling above .500. The Braves went seven years (from 1984 through 1990) without finishing with a winning record, at which point they hired John Schuerholz and forgot how to lose. The previous gold standard — or, to be more precise, the lead balloon — among Atlanta losers were the Falcons of 1983 through 1990, the inglorious era of Dan Henning and Marion Campbell (second tour), a eight-year skein of infamy snapped only by the huckster Jerry Glanville in 1991.
And now the Hawks have trumped, so to speak, all that. Informed of his club’s feckless feat, Michael Gearon Jr. was less than enthused. “It’s unfair to judge us on the condition of the franchise prior to our involvement,” said Gearon, one of the many men who took ownership from Time Warner in 2004. “The better question would be: ‘How do I feel about the team and the future?’ I would say this is certainly the best basketball team we’ve had since the demolition of the old Omni [in 1997].”
Of those nine losing seasons, this is by far the best. (That’s an odd sentence to type, but when writing about the organization that has seen owners sue another and end of games replayed you get used to such things.) With four regular-season games remaining, the Hawks almost certainly will make the playoffs for the first time since 1998-99. That would, as you know, snap the NBA’s longest ongoing run of postseason absence.
But even Gearon won’t try to sell one probable No. 8 seed as a breakthrough in and of itself. “More than making the playoffs, I want to see us getting to the point where we can win consistently and compete as one of the top teams in the East,” he said Thursday, speaking from Hong Kong (where technically it was almost Friday). “Over the past 15 games, we’ve played some pretty darn good basketball. What I want to know is, are we beating good teams and are we in position to compete on a regular basis?”
The Hawks have won 10 of 14, with four of those victories coming against teams at or above .500. Counting the scoreless-but-winning 51.9-second replay of the Miami game, they’re 15-14 since Mike Bibby arrived. Said Gearon: “Do we have a very good team and some very good pieces? Absolutely. … And how many Atlanta teams have had the player of the month [Joe Johnson] and the rookie of the month [Al Horford] this late in a season? Those are good trends.”
The greater trend, alas, is this: Nine consecutive losing seasons, something no Atlanta club had ever (mis)managed. Even the giddiness that will come with making the playoffs — surely even these Hawks can’t blow that — shouldn’t obscure the bigger picture, which is:
The Hawks have changed ownership and management and coaches and have had seven lottery picks over those nine seasons and have finally swung a trade for their long-sought point guard, and still they’re south of mediocrity. They’ve made progress, yes, but does progress get any more glacial than this?
Permalink | Comments (69) | Post your comment | Categories: Hawks/NBA
Think Calipari still believes ‘percentages don’t matter?’
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio- OK, give Kansas credit for hanging tough, for applying pressure when all seemed lost, for making shot after big shot in the wildest finish of any NCAA final ever. But this will not be remembered as the title Kansas won. It will be remembered forever as the one Memphis cast away.
“Tough-minded guys hit free throws,” John Calipari had said breezily Saturday, the night his Tigers blitzed UCLA and made their foul shots. “Percentages don’t matter.”
File those under Infamous Last Words. File the final two minutes of regulation under the worst ever played by a team that was already celebrating its title. File this as the game Calipari will never, ever live down.
The Tigers led by nine - nine! - inside those two minutes. They’d seized control of a game going the Jayhawks’ way behind a dizzying display from the freshman guard Derrick Rose, and when Robert Dozier of Lithonia sank two free throws with 2:12 left (in regulation, and at the time overtime didn’t seem possible) the Tigers were up 60-51 and their reserves were smiling and jostling one another and readying for the playing of “One Shining Moment.”
And then … Choke City.
Darrell Arthur hit from perimeter. Antonio Anderson threw the ball away, leading to a Sherron Collins trey that cut it to four. “One Shining Moment” had just morphed into two frazzled minutes.
Chris Douglas-Roberts (remember the name) made two free throws. Back to six. But Joey Dorsey, the senior center of whom Calipari had said, “He does some of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen,” fouled Mario Chalmers 40 feet from the basket, fouling out in the process. Chalmers made his pair. Back to four.
And now it was serious free-throw time for the team that had made only 61.3 percent of its foul shots (and that number had gone way up during the Big Dance). Dozier had said Sunday: “We can make them. We all have great form. It’s not like we’re shooting curveballs.”
But then Douglas-Roberts turned into Bert Blyleven. He missed the front end of a one-and-one. Arthur hit from the baseline. Two-point game. Douglas-Roberts missed on a drive, and Collins fled for the basket, all but certain to tie the game. But Rose blocked the shot - what a reprieve! - and CDR was fouled again, only 16.8 seconds left now, the game his to seal.
And he missed. Twice. But Dozier somehow seized the rebound in the corner, and Rose was fouled with 10.8 seconds to go, the title now his to clinch. And he missed the first.
True, he made the second, but Kansas had one final window. And Chalmers drained a 3-pointer with 2.1 seconds left - it was a decent look, and it looked good from the instant it left his fingertips - and now Memphis had to play five minutes more instead of standing on the podium and hearing “One Shining Moment.”
Crushed, the Tigers never led again. Kansas scored on its first three possessions of OT - a layup, a dunk and another layup - and the championship had, for all intents and purposes, changed hands. Memphis came closer than any team has ever come (and this includes Houston in 1983 and Syracuse in 1987) to winning the gold-and-wood plaque only to see it fall into other hands. Nine up, two minutes to go: How do you not win?
“I thought we were national champs,” Calipari said afterward. “As a coach, when you’re up five with whatever seconds to go, you’re supposed to win that game.” And Memphis didn’t. It lost. It lost when losing seemed unthinkable. It lost because the free throws Calipari insisted his men would make went unmade.
“I guess you can boil it down to the free throws,” Douglas-Roberts said, and you can. So, just maybe, percentages do matter.
Permalink | Comments (19) | Post your comment |
Think Calipari still believes ‘percentages don’t matter?’
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio- OK, give Kansas credit for hanging tough, for applying pressure when all seemed lost, for making shot after big shot in the wildest finish of any NCAA final ever. But this will not be remembered as the title Kansas won. It will be remembered forever as the one Memphis cast away.
“Tough-minded guys hit free throws,” John Calipari had said breezily Saturday, the night his Tigers blitzed UCLA and made their foul shots. “Percentages don’t matter.”
File those under Infamous Last Words. File the final two minutes of regulation under the worst ever played by a team that was already celebrating its title. File this as the game Calipari will never, ever live down.
The Tigers led by nine - nine! - inside those two minutes. They’d seized control of a game going the Jayhawks’ way behind a dizzying display from the freshman guard Derrick Rose, and when Robert Dozier of Lithonia sank two free throws with 2:12 left (in regulation, and at the time overtime didn’t seem possible) the Tigers were up 60-51 and their reserves were smiling and jostling one another and readying for the playing of “One Shining Moment.”
And then … Choke City.
Darrell Arthur hit from the perimeter. Antonio Anderson threw the ball away, leading to a Sherron Collins trey that cut it to four. “One Shining Moment” had just morphed into two frazzled minutes.
Chris Douglas-Roberts (remember the name) made two free throws. Back to six. But Joey Dorsey, the senior center of whom Calipari had said, “He does some of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen,” fouled Mario Chalmers 40 feet from the basket, fouling out in the process. Chalmers made his pair. Back to four.
And now it was serious free-throw time for the team that had made only 61.3 percent of its foul shots (and that number had gone way up during the Big Dance). Dozier had said Sunday: “We can make them. We all have great form. It’s not like we’re shooting curveballs.”
But then Douglas-Roberts turned into Bert Blyleven. He missed the front end of a one-and-one. Arthur hit from the baseline. Two-point game. Douglas-Roberts missed on a drive, and Collins fled for the basket, all but certain to tie the game. But Rose blocked the shot - what a reprieve! - and CDR was fouled again, only 16.8 seconds left now, the game his to seal.
And he missed. Twice. But Dozier somehow seized the rebound in the corner, and Rose was fouled with 10.8 seconds to go, the title now his to clinch. And he missed the first.
True, he made the second, but Kansas had one final window. And Chalmers drained a 3-pointer with 2.1 seconds left - it was a decent look, and it looked good from the instant it left his fingertips - and now Memphis had to play five minutes more instead of standing on the podium and hearing “One Shining Moment.”
Crushed, the Tigers never led again. Kansas scored on its first three possessions of OT - a layup, a dunk and another layup - and the championship had, for all intents and purposes, changed hands. Memphis came closer than any team has ever come (and this includes Houston in 1983 and Syracuse in 1987) to winning the gold-and-wood plaque only to see it fall into other hands. Nine up, two minutes to go: How do you not win?
“I thought we were national champs,” Calipari said afterward. “As a coach, when you’re up five with whatever seconds to go, you’re supposed to win that game.” And Memphis didn’t. It lost. It lost when losing seemed unthinkable. It lost because the free throws Calipari insisted his men would make went unmade.
“I guess you can boil it down to the free throws,” Douglas-Roberts said, and you can. So, just maybe, percentages do matter.
Permalink | Comments (32) | Post your comment |
Former UGA signee, Memphis on cusp of history
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio — Don’t misunderstand: Robert Dozier wants his team to win. But the 22-year-old from Lithonia cringes at the thought of what could happen if the Memphis Tigers beat Kansas tonight to become national champs.
“It’ll be crazy,” Dozier said Sunday. “It’s been crazy all year. … If we win, we won’t be able to go anywhere [back in Memphis].”
Given that the Tigers have been under severe curfew all year — “I can’t remember the last time I went out,” Joey Dorsey said Friday — that shouldn’t be such a burden. Should it?
“I’m talking about during the day,” said Dozier, shaking his head. “About just going to eat. People harass you because they love you. There’s nothing you can do. Last year we could get away with little things — nothing serious — but not now. Everybody knows who we are.”
The love directed toward the ascendant Tigers isn’t just flowing from their fans. The national media, a crabby and jaded body, is getting giddy over Memphis in a way not seen since the 1983 and Houston’s soaring fraternity of Phi Slama Jama. The same media types who kept harping on the Tigers’ inability to make free throws — I confess I’m among this group — are suddenly swooning over Derrick Rose and Chris Douglas-Roberts and this swift and fearless team.
Do the Tigers have any concept of the impression they’ve made these last two weeks? “We try not to pay attention,” said Dozier, a junior forward. “We don’t listen to what this reporter says or what that reporter says.”
Part of that is because they’re too busy listening to their coach. John Calipari spent much of Saturday’s semifinal against UCLA screaming at Dozier, who scored but six points and who, alone among Tigers, has had a quiet NCAA tournament. “He was on me the whole first half,” Dozier said, “but not as much as he was on Joey. He was on him the whole game, and I thought he played great. [Calipari] made it sound like he had a zero-points, two-rebound game.”
Dorsey had no points, true, but he took 15 rebounds and limited Kevin Love to 12 points, only two in the second half. But that’s the Coach Cal Way: He yells, he says, because he loves.
Not every Tiger grasps this, at least not at first. When Dozier arrived in Memphis, migrating from Lithonia High by way of Laurinburg Prep, he wanted badly to board that midnight train to Georgia. “When I first got here, I was like, ‘Mom, I want to come home. I’m sick of this dude — he’s crazy.’ “
But he stuck it out, and now he’s on the cusp of a national title. Originally Dozier signed with Georgia, but his SAT score was flagged and he wound up at Laurinburg instead. That’s where Calipari saw him. “It was a blessing in disguise,” Dozier said. “At Georgia I don’t think I would have had as much fun. Here I’ve had three Elite Eights, a Final Four and now a championship game — what more could I ask for?”
About the game: Memphis keeps shocking opponents — Michigan State and Texas and UCLA, to name the three most recent — with its size and speed. “They’re not used to seeing guys with long arms and quick feet,” Dozier said. “It’s like we’ve got six guys on the court.”
But Kansas is big and fast, too. “It’ll be crazy, up and down.” Here Dozier patted his chest. “Get the ol’ windpipes ready.”
The belief here is that Memphis will win — hey, nobody’s more fervent that the recent convert — because the Tigers have done what few teams ever do: They’ve hit the Big Dance squarely on the sweet spot. Said Dozier: “We’re definitely better than we’ve been all season. We’ve turned it up to a whole new level. We’re executing way better than we did during the season.”
The only concern is that sudden stardom has a tendency to singe the recipient. Even Dozier’s parents — Robert Sr., who repairs transmissions in Ellenwood, and Jackie, who works at Macy’s at Perimeter Mall, are here for the weekend — have joined in the furor.
“They harass me, too,” Robert Dozier said, smiling, and it might behoove the overnight sensations to find a little quiet time before tonight’s game. Lest we forget, Phi Slama Jama lost to N.C. State.
Permalink | Comments (31) | Post your comment | Categories: UGA/SEC
Heels, Williams hit right between the eyes
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio — Roy Williams says he rarely looks at the score. Maybe that explains how he could allow his North Carolina Tar Heels, the nation’s No. 1 ranked team, to fall 26 points behind — a deficit soon to grow to 28 — before deigning to call his first timeout.
But what explains a team that seizes a 28-point lead on the game’s biggest stage having to hang on to win? What explains the strangest game the Final Four has seen since … well, since Duke overrode a 22-point lead against Maryland in 2001?
“It was three different games,” said Bill Self, the Kansas coach. “In the first game we were great. In the second we weren’t very good, and they were great. And we were super down the stretch.”
For 14 minutes Kansas looked like the greatest team in the history of basketball. The Heels couldn’t complete a pass, let alone make a shot. (Carolina would finish the first half having made 10 turnovers against nine baskets.) The Jayhawks were everywhere, blocking layups and stealing interior feeds and making every shot of their own. And this wasn’t Davidson they were trashing — truth to tell, Kansas was lucky to beat that Carolina-based school — but the snooty crew from Chapel Hill.
But then you could see it start to happen. You could see the Jayhawks begin to think, “Hey, we’re playing so well we can do anything.” So they tried to do everything. They tried to win by 50. Having gone so fast, they sought to play even faster. And by halftime the lead was only 17, and midway through the second half it was down to …
Four.
Were you believing this?
We all know about the famed Carolina Comebacks — trailing Duke by eight with 17 seconds left; Dean Smith saving all those timeouts — but this would have been the mother of all comebacks. This would have made Kansas fans hate Ol’ Roy more than they already do, something heretofore thought impossible.
It was 54-50 with 10 minutes left and Kansas had gone 11 possessions without a point and Carolina’s Wayne Ellington was making like Walt Frazier. The Jayhawks were so rattled they were yelling at one another and shaking their heads when someone didn’t go where he was supposed to go, and everyone along press row was thinking, “Bill Self might as well resign after the game if his team blows this.”
And then we saw the flaw in all of Ol’ Roy’s teams, same as we’d seen in those first 14 minutes. His teams simply don’t defend the way they should for more than a few minutes at a time. (His one national title, with Carolina in 2005, was a case of overwhelming talent masking inherent defensive deficiencies.) When finally Kansas calmed down — and it took a long, long while — it found that it again could get any shot it wanted.
And that was the difference. The Jayhawks started going inside again, and soon everything was a lob-dunk or a layup, and soon it was Kansas breezing again, as if all those palpitations had never happened. The Jayhawks would win by 18 and wound up making 53.1 percent of their shots — a week ago, Louisville made 52.7 percent against Carolina — on a night when they trumped not just their own jitters but their old coach to boot.
“They hit us right between the eyes,” said Ol’ Roy, who looked as if he’d been hit right between the eyes. “They were really something … We had a marvelous run, but our dreams were bigger than this.”
Waiting in the final is Memphis, which put to rout the last questions about its legitimacy by dispatching UCLA with something approaching disdain in the first semifinal. Waiting is a team that can match Kansas for talent and speed and defensive commitment, and it seems unthinkable that either could steal a 28-point march on the other. But the more you come to this event, the more you realize: You never ever know.
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Tech/ACC
Calipari has final chuckle
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio — It was John Calipari’s little joke: Between UCLA and Memphis, he noted Friday, the programs have combined to win 11 NCAA titles.
This is no joke: If there’s to be a 12th national championship won by the Bruins and the Tigers, it won’t be going back to California. It’ll be paraded down Beale Street, borne by the team that spent three seasons winning nearly all its games but only in the past 10 days has won the unchallenged respect of a basketball-watching nation.
Memphis beat UCLA here Saturday by 15 points, and six minutes in, you knew the Tigers would win. You knew because they’d scored on nine consecutive possessions against the Bruins, who keep reaching the Final Four by virtue of their barbed-wire defense. You knew because the Bruins, who can guard anybody, couldn’t guard Memphis.
It’s possible nobody can guard Memphis, not with its dribble-drive motion offense and the players who keep dribble-driving every opponent to distraction. Russell Westbrook was voted the Pac-10’s best defender this season, but the problem was that the guys from Westwood had only one Westbrook.
Memphis had both Derrick Rose and Chris Douglas-Roberts, and Westbrook couldn’t guard both. (Or, to be blunt, either.) He tried, but whichever one he wasn’t defending did essentially as he wanted. The freshman Rose overpowered Darren Collison, regarded by many as the nation’s best point guard, to the extent that the Bruins leader decided, with 2:53 remaining and his team down 11, to commit his fifth foul at midcourt for no good reason. It was a gesture of surrender.
“We played like we played all year,” said Calipari, the Memphis coach. “We defended. We made it hard for them. The reality of it is: I’ve got a good team.”
How good? Well, UCLA lost in the 2006 and 2007 Final Fours to Florida, the greatest team of the past 30 years. From what Ben Howland saw of Memphis, would the Bruins coach put the Tigers in the same exalted class? “They both have strengths in all areas,” he said. “They can play at any pace … They’re similar in a lot of respects.”
UCLA’s best players are Collison and Kevin Love. The former made one basket and had more fouls and turnovers (five apiece) than assists (four). Love made one second-half basket and was outrebounded 15-9 by the Tigers’ Joey Dorsey.
“Going into the game, we knew we were going to win,” said Rose, who scored 25 points, took nine rebounds and made four assists. “There really isn’t too much to say.”
There really wasn’t. The massive freshman Love was winded in the first half, and the other Bruins weren’t exactly light on their feet. Rose again: “They were fatigued. It was like, ‘I’m not going to take another jump shot.’ That was crazy. I was going to go to the hole.”
And UCLA could do nothing to stop him or Douglas-Roberts, who scored 28. This, you should know, is the UCLA that was believed to be the better-coached side. Said Calipari: “Whoever the small man [Collison] was on, he was going to post up … Whoever had that guy on him, that’s who we went after.”
That, folks, is Coaching 101. John Robert Wooden — who steered UCLA to 10 of those 11 titles — could have done no better. And to think: A homespun column in Saturday’s Los Angeles Times characterized this game as “a coaching mismatch.”
When someone asked the Memphis players about the story, Calipari broke in: “C’mon, Ben’s not that bad.”
Another joke. Again, the assembled media laughed hard and long. But at this late date nobody’s giggling harder and longer than these Tigers.
“The negativity [toward his team, now 38-1] was silly the whole year,” Douglas-Roberts said. “When we hear that stuff, we just laugh.”
For Memphis, there’s one game to go. One more punchline waiting to be cracked. A first national championship there to be won.
Permalink | Comments (4) | Post your comment |
Memphis is most intriguing team at Final Four
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
San Antonio - If UCLA or North Carolina or Kansas wins the national championship, nobody will be surprised. If Memphis wins, more than a few folks will be. So we need to take this opportunity to prepare ourselves.
Because the Tigers are really, really good.
In a Final Four for heavyweights only, Memphis arrives having landed the biggest blows. It won its regional by beating Michigan State and Texas by 18 points apiece, having led at halftime in those two games by an aggregate 41 points. The No. 1 seed expected to lose first seems the most talented, most focused No. 1 on the board. Where’d that come from?
Not, as you might have been led to believe, from John Calipari’s espousal of the hoary Us-Against-The-World motivational tack. “We never talk about that,” guard Antonio Anderson said Friday.
Said Calipari, who during a previous Final Four run with UMass copyrighted the slogan, “Refuse To Lose”: “We haven’t had [that underdog mentality] all year. We won most of our games [37 of 38, to be precise]. But in the NCAA tournament most analysts picked us to lose — is that not true?”
It’s true. (I know I did.) But Memphis is the most intriguing team in this Final Four because it’s taken the least seriously. Calipari again: “The other programs are more highly thought of, and they should be. Between UCLA and Memphis, we’ve won 11 national titles.”
This generated the desired laugh — UCLA has, as we know, won 11 by itself — but the cold truth is that the regal Bruins will take the floor tonight at the Alamodome as the betting-line underdog. Apparently the boys in Vegas rate Memphis somewhat more highly than we grizzled college basketball observers.
Certainly the Tigers themselves, having lost only nine times (against 103 victories) the past three seasons, don’t discount their chances. “It’s not everybody who expects us to lose,” said Chris Douglas-Roberts, the team’s leading scorer. “It’s just some. And that’s how it’s supposed to be. Some people don’t think UCLA is going to win, or North Carolina or Kansas. It’s just a matter of opinion. We know we’re a pretty good basketball team.”
The Tigers were pretty good the past two seasons, when they lost in regional finals. They’re rather better now. As UCLA coach Ben Howland, whose Bruins beat Memphis in the Elite Eight in 2006, said: “Adding Jason Kidd [meaning freshman point guard Derrick Rose] to that lineup makes it doubly difficult.”
None of these teams lacks talent, but Memphis might well have the most. The Tigers made tough-minded Michigan State look slow and weak. (UCLA, as Howland noted, barely beat the Spartans in December.) Asked if Memphis resembles any Pac-10 opponent, the Bruins’ Darren Collison mentioned Oregon.
Said Kevin Love, the freshman center: “Oregon on steroids.”
Last spring, Memphis center Joey Dorsey raised a ruckus before the regional final by calling Ohio State’s Greg Oden “overrated.” (On cue, Oden outscored Dorsey 17-0.) This year’s Dorsey story line revolves around the stories Calipari demands that he write regarding the Tigers and their season and Dorsey’s role therein.
Calipari: “I said, ‘I want you to write a story about how you want your season to end. It’s your fairy tale, your dream — write it.’ … For my team, I keep saying, I want you to expect good things to happen because your only other option is to wait for bad things to happen. I want these young men to learn that it’s OK to expect good.”
A significant chapter in the Memphis story will be told tonight. Maybe the Tigers will trip over their moment. Maybe they’ll revert to missing the free throws they made against Michigan State and Texas. Maybe they’ll be revealed, as many have expected all along, as the least of these No. 1 seeds. Then again …
“We’re really not paying attention to what people are saying,” Douglas-Roberts said. “We’re creating our own happiness.”
Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment |
There’s nothing like the Final Four
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The first Final Four I covered was in 1983. It was my first really big event, and I was convinced I was the worst writer there.
And then the first semifinal began on Saturday, and the guy sitting next to me at the press table (from Iowa, as I recall) looked toward the teams playing and said, “Georgia - are they in the SEC?” And I thought to myself: “OK, second-worst.”
That game - Georgia versus North Carolina State - wasn’t very good. The second semifinal - the Houston-Louisville dunkathon - was spectacular. The final two nights later was historic. I’ve been to 18 Final Fours since, and nothing has surpassed my first.
But I’m always hoping. This one looks delicious on paper - four No. 1 seeds, four teams who together have lost only nine games - and I head for San Antonio with the wide-eyed optimism of a first-timer. Because, to be frank, the best continuing event in North American sports could stand a pick-me-up.
The last great Final Four - and by this I mean one including three fight-to-the-finish games - was in 1998. The last great pair of semifinals was in 2004: Georgia Tech over Oklahoma State and UConn over Duke. The last great championship game was UConn-Duke in 1999. (Syracuse-Kansas in 2003 and North Carolina-Illinois in 2005 got close at the end, but both saw the winner seize huge early leads.)
Throughout the ’80s and into the ’90s, the Final Four almost never disappointed. From Lorenzo Charles to Villanova shooting 78.6 percent to Pervis Ellison to Keith Smart to Chris Webber (oops!) to Scotty Thurman, the great event offered up a virtually unbroken run of Great Moments.
But I think back over the last half-dozen Final Fours and only two memories jump out: Hakim Warrick’s block-from-nowhere in the 2003 title game and Will Bynum’s twisting layup to beat OSU in the semis the next year.
I had great expectations last year, but Florida proved too good for everybody else. I really don’t see any of these four lapping the field because the field appears too strong, but you never know.
Still, I hold out hope. The Final Four is, as you probably know, my favorite event, and over the last quarter-century I’ve come to believe I might not be the worst writer in attendance. See, I’ve done my homework, and I know for a fact that North Carolina plays in the Atlantic 10.
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment | Categories: Tech/ACC, UGA/SEC
Final Four Fiasco winner a keen observer
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Winning the 21st Final Four Fiasco required a bracket of surpassing sagacity, and Joe Thomas of Atlanta surpassed the other 2,741 entrants. Thomas was one of 289 Fiascans — 10.5 percent of all who entered — who picked the four No. 1 seeds to reach the Final Four. (One of them lives under this roof, as we shall see.)
Thomas claimed the coveted sweatshirt on the final tiebreaker — first-round winners. He had 27 of the 32. For the record, he also tabbed seven of the Elite Eight and 12 of the Sweet 16, meaning he nailed 50 of the 60 games.
It wasn’t as if Thomas, who’s 46 and a director of production for a Norcross-based staging company, was flying blind. He has season tickets at Alexander Memorial Coliseum in Section 13, which gives him a fine view of the Georgia Tech bench and enables him to study Paul Hewitt closely as he calls all those extremely effective timeouts. (That’s my little joke, by the way, not our winner’s.)
Thomas attended Tech in the early ’80s “when there was nothing to watch and nobody to watch it,” he said. “Bobby Cremins came just as I was leaving. But I saw [Duke’s Mike] Gminski and [Virginia’s Ralph] Sampson come through. Brooke Steppe was our star back then.”
By virtue of this year’s Tech home schedule, Thomas saw two of his Final Four in person — Kansas in December and North Carolina on a snowy night in January. “I watched us lose both games on the last possession,” he said, and he also had something else working for him: Without the Jackets in the field, he said, “it was easier to pick” — no nagging pangs of loyalty.
“I’m a college basketball fan,” Thomas said, and he has entered Fiascos in the past. Never, however, had he picked the correct Final Four: “The closest I came was the year Tech went [2004].”
He picked the Tar Heels, he said, because “this is the best Carolina team I’ve seen in a long time.” This despite his antipathy toward Tyler Hansbrough: “I don’t really care for him — he whines like a Duke player. It’s hard to watch, especially live and in a close game.”
Thomas picks Carolina to win it all, beating UCLA in the championship game. He likes the Bruins over Memphis in the semifinals because “I’m still convinced free-throw shooting is going to matter.”
As for Davidson: Thomas had the Wildcats winning one game but losing to Georgetown in Round 2. Still, he couldn’t bring himself to pull against that team: “That’s why we watch.”
Had Davidson’s Jason Richards made his last-second 3-pointer Sunday, the Fiasco would surely have had a different winner, and it could well have been the Rev. Jim Aiken of Acworth. In one of those tantalizing “almosts” that have passed into Fiasco lore, Aiken had the Wildcats reaching the Final Four.
“I went to Furman, and I go back to the days when Lefty Driesell was recruiting for Davidson and sleeping in the back of his station wagon,” said Aiken, who is 66 and a Methodist minister. “I remember them playing North Carolina in the [1968 and 1969 East] Regional finals and losing [narrowly both times].”
As he watched the final seconds of the Davidson-Kansas game unfold, Aiken said he “felt good about our chances when [Stephen] Curry had the ball. But then it was taken out of his hands.”
Four decades later, tiny Davidson lost another regional final at the end. Such moments and such stirring stories are indeed why we watch this tournament and why we, hoping against hope, fill out brackets every blessed year. And it’s why I, who identified just three of this Final Four, can take some solace in having raised a brilliant bracketologist.
For the second year running, Elizabeth Bradley, who’s now 10, outpicked her dumb ol’ dad. In only her second try, she was smart enough to go with the four No. 1 seeds. As the Fiasco founder, I’m proud. As her fretting father, I fear the rest of her life will be an anticlimax.
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
