In a sports town where the Redskins and football are king, the other sports are just kind of an afterthought as far as publicity (not that the Wizards or Nats deserve any publicity right now). And while the Redskins are great and all, they don't really have a guy who defines Washington sports; a face of D.C. if you will.
In my opinion, almost every great sports town has a face to go with it. In Cleveland, it's LeBron James. In Boston, for the last few years it's been Tom Brady. Los Angeles has Kobe. In Seattle, it's Ichiro. Philly has Donovan McNabb (whether they like it or not). San Diego has LT. St. Louis has Albert Pujols. The list goes on. These guys are the image of their city's sports, the pride and joy of their towns.
While Washington is definately a good sports town, it lacks a hero who personifies what the city is all about. Gilbert Arenas seemed like a promising candidate for a while until his torn knee ligaments tore the hearts right out of his teammates and fans. The Redskins have a few characters like Clinton Portis, but Portis isn't quite the superstar type player that a city can build itself around. And the Nationals don't even deserve to be in this conversation; so they won't be.
I think we need to look further than football, basketball, and baseball to find the face of D.C. sports. Look at the Washington Capitals right now. They're one of the top teams in the Eastern Conference of the NHL, and they have the potential to make a serious run in the playoffs. With the football season virtually over, and the exciting portion of the basketball season still around the bend, it's the time of year (that small window of the year) to get excited about hockey; and more importantly, Alexander Ovechkin.
Ovechkin has taken the hockey world by storm over the past three years. The dude is 23 and has more hardware (3 All Star Selections, Sporting News Player of the Year, and an MVP) than most players will get in a career. And watching him at All Star weekend showed me that he has as much personality as he does talent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTNBRz94Nvg
For the most part, I'm as apathetic about hockey as the next mainstream sports fan, but I can appreciate a gem like this when I see one. Alex Ovechkin, despite the fact that he's missing a few teeth is the perfect face for Washington sports.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
Who do the Cardinals think they are, the Giants?
Kurt Warner is washed up. So is Edge James. They have no defense. No offensive line. Their style of play will never work in the playoffs. They can't win without Boldin. They're horrible on the road, especially the East Coast. They backed into the playoffs anyway, the NFC West was less competitive than the Pac 10. All of these things have been said a million times about the Arizona Cardinals in the past couple weeks. And at the time, they all seemed very reasonable. I'm not saying I didn't say any of that stuff either because I'm sure I did.
Warner and the boys have done nothing but prove us all wrong this postseason with convincing wins against two awesome teams from the NFC South, the best division in football in terms of number of wins. In fact, the Cardinals victory in Charlotte this weekend over the Panthers was Carolina's first loss at home all year (and who says they can't travel?). Of course there's no doubt as to who the hottest team still alive right is now; the lovable Red Birds. After a hot start, locking up the division title ridiculously early, they limped into the playoffs playing probably their worst football of the season. They lost three of their final five regular season games being outscored 41-130 in a trio of "Ram-like" contests.
Right now, Arizona is doing it just like the Giants did last year. Every game they win is "just a fluke; they'll lose for sure when they play (insert NFC juggernaut here)." And the playoff Cardinals are actually a spitting image of the '07 playoff Giants. Like Eli did last year, Warner has handled the ball well, limiting his turnovers and letting his playmakers do the heavylifting. Larry Fitzgerald has looked an awful lot like Plaxico Burress did last year, making huge plays whenever his is numbered called (which is alot. 14 catches in 2 postseason games). The offensive line has played way beyond their talent level, paving the way for the well-rested Edgerin James and rookie Tim Hightower en route to 115.5 yards per game on the ground which is up from just 73.6 a game during the regular season. And how about that defense? The lethal combination of Dockett and Berry is starting to look an awful lot like Strahan and Umenyiora.
I think the Cardinals have what it takes to do what the Giants did last year. They have all the tools; not to mention they're going up against Philadelphia, the "NFC Championship Choke Artists" as Cole Hamels would put it. So, why not the Cardinals? What's stopping them from beating Pittsburgh or Baltimore in the Super Bowl?
Warner and the boys have done nothing but prove us all wrong this postseason with convincing wins against two awesome teams from the NFC South, the best division in football in terms of number of wins. In fact, the Cardinals victory in Charlotte this weekend over the Panthers was Carolina's first loss at home all year (and who says they can't travel?). Of course there's no doubt as to who the hottest team still alive right is now; the lovable Red Birds. After a hot start, locking up the division title ridiculously early, they limped into the playoffs playing probably their worst football of the season. They lost three of their final five regular season games being outscored 41-130 in a trio of "Ram-like" contests.
Right now, Arizona is doing it just like the Giants did last year. Every game they win is "just a fluke; they'll lose for sure when they play (insert NFC juggernaut here)." And the playoff Cardinals are actually a spitting image of the '07 playoff Giants. Like Eli did last year, Warner has handled the ball well, limiting his turnovers and letting his playmakers do the heavylifting. Larry Fitzgerald has looked an awful lot like Plaxico Burress did last year, making huge plays whenever his is numbered called (which is alot. 14 catches in 2 postseason games). The offensive line has played way beyond their talent level, paving the way for the well-rested Edgerin James and rookie Tim Hightower en route to 115.5 yards per game on the ground which is up from just 73.6 a game during the regular season. And how about that defense? The lethal combination of Dockett and Berry is starting to look an awful lot like Strahan and Umenyiora.
I think the Cardinals have what it takes to do what the Giants did last year. They have all the tools; not to mention they're going up against Philadelphia, the "NFC Championship Choke Artists" as Cole Hamels would put it. So, why not the Cardinals? What's stopping them from beating Pittsburgh or Baltimore in the Super Bowl?
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Schmeltics
One of the few NBA games I was able to watch over winter break was the game in which the Lakers snapped the Celtics 19 game winning streak on Christmas day. (It was actually quite a Christmas day doubleheader for ESPN; San Antonio beat Phoenix with a three at the buzzer yet again in game one) Anyway, the Celtic-Laker game was by no means a blowout; in fact, both teams looked pretty good. To me it seemed like a heavyweight battle between arguably the two best teams in the NBA and the Lakers simply outplayed Boston in front of a stadium full of fans who wanted nothing for Christmas except a little revenge on Beantown.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I lost no respect for the Celtics after the loss; I mean, losing to the defending Western Conference champion by 9 on their home court is nothing to hang your head about. Even if you are the defending champ.
After the game, I thought about doing a post asking about when the next loss would be. I'm sure I would have been in the majority when I said like 8-10 games from then. Boy am I glad I didn't follow through with that post because I would have looked like a complete idiot. (Boston lost to Golden State the following night, 99-89)
Since the Laker game, the Celtics have only beaten two teams; Sacramento and Washington (which doesn't take much these days) And while they have lost to a couple of quality teams like the Rockets and the Cavs just last night, they have a couple horrific losses in that stretch as well in the Knicks and Bobcats (Ew).
Point is, the champs are struggling right now and there are a lot of 'explanations' out there, but no one can really figure out what is going wrong?
Some say the Big Three (or as Scott Van Pelt would say, "The Boston Three Party") are getting old, so they're burnt out right now. I say nay to that argument; I mean, these guys are pros, they've been doing this forever. They know how to take care of their bodies, and all three of them are notorious iron men. If anything, it's the young guys who are used to playing 35 games a year rather than 82+ that would be getting burnt out in my opinion. Pierce, Allen, and Garnett have 10+ years of experience each so I figure by now, they know how to get through an NBA season.
In my humble opinion, Rajon Rondo is the kiss of death for the Celtics; when he plays well, they hit on all cylinders; they have essentially a big four when he's on. But when he's off, he's simply a liability. He turns the ball over a lot, and is not a scorer by any stretch of the imagination. In the eight games since the loss to L.A, Rondo has scored less than five points in four of them; and he averaged over 30 minutes in those contests. Now, point guards don't have to do a lot of scoring, especially on a team like the Celtics but being that feeble a shooter allows defenses to leave him alone and simply key on the Big Three. That's why guys like Jason Kidd and Steve Nash are so great; they're always looking to distribute but if teams play off of them, they'll hit the open three until the opponent puts someone on them. Rondo just hasn't been able to do that; he has no jump shot, and he's shooting 64% from the free throw line which isn't very good for a guy his size.
To me, it's Rondo's struggles that have put a damper on the Celtics. Sure, KG and Pierce have been off their games too but who wouldn't struggle when you have two guys on you because your point guard can't hit an open jumper. I never thought I'd say this but Stephon Marbury wouldn't be a bad pickup; if he feels like playing that is.
Commenters of the Lasso sports blog, why has Boston gone from 20something-2 to losing six of eight games? Is it the Big Three getting old? Rondo? They're depressed because the Patriots didn't make the playoffs? Enlighten me.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I lost no respect for the Celtics after the loss; I mean, losing to the defending Western Conference champion by 9 on their home court is nothing to hang your head about. Even if you are the defending champ.
After the game, I thought about doing a post asking about when the next loss would be. I'm sure I would have been in the majority when I said like 8-10 games from then. Boy am I glad I didn't follow through with that post because I would have looked like a complete idiot. (Boston lost to Golden State the following night, 99-89)
Since the Laker game, the Celtics have only beaten two teams; Sacramento and Washington (which doesn't take much these days) And while they have lost to a couple of quality teams like the Rockets and the Cavs just last night, they have a couple horrific losses in that stretch as well in the Knicks and Bobcats (Ew).
Point is, the champs are struggling right now and there are a lot of 'explanations' out there, but no one can really figure out what is going wrong?
Some say the Big Three (or as Scott Van Pelt would say, "The Boston Three Party") are getting old, so they're burnt out right now. I say nay to that argument; I mean, these guys are pros, they've been doing this forever. They know how to take care of their bodies, and all three of them are notorious iron men. If anything, it's the young guys who are used to playing 35 games a year rather than 82+ that would be getting burnt out in my opinion. Pierce, Allen, and Garnett have 10+ years of experience each so I figure by now, they know how to get through an NBA season.
In my humble opinion, Rajon Rondo is the kiss of death for the Celtics; when he plays well, they hit on all cylinders; they have essentially a big four when he's on. But when he's off, he's simply a liability. He turns the ball over a lot, and is not a scorer by any stretch of the imagination. In the eight games since the loss to L.A, Rondo has scored less than five points in four of them; and he averaged over 30 minutes in those contests. Now, point guards don't have to do a lot of scoring, especially on a team like the Celtics but being that feeble a shooter allows defenses to leave him alone and simply key on the Big Three. That's why guys like Jason Kidd and Steve Nash are so great; they're always looking to distribute but if teams play off of them, they'll hit the open three until the opponent puts someone on them. Rondo just hasn't been able to do that; he has no jump shot, and he's shooting 64% from the free throw line which isn't very good for a guy his size.
To me, it's Rondo's struggles that have put a damper on the Celtics. Sure, KG and Pierce have been off their games too but who wouldn't struggle when you have two guys on you because your point guard can't hit an open jumper. I never thought I'd say this but Stephon Marbury wouldn't be a bad pickup; if he feels like playing that is.
Commenters of the Lasso sports blog, why has Boston gone from 20something-2 to losing six of eight games? Is it the Big Three getting old? Rondo? They're depressed because the Patriots didn't make the playoffs? Enlighten me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
