Let Shaq's Legacy Stand on Its Own



GREAT photo: via InsideHoops (and somewhere else)

Shaq retires and within nanoseconds, the sports world goes into a tizzy for good, comical, awful and amazingly predictable reasons.

·    The good: fans of all likes come up with their favorite Shaq moments. The smack talking through the media rings for some while the absurd backboard breaking dunks and his All-Star, run-the-point plays stick out.

·    The comical: though he’ll be missed on the parquet floors around the NBA, it was a chance to revisit some of his great and not-so-great offerings to the entertainment world. (You still can’t stop the reign, though.)

·    The awful: Shaq appeared to have split temperaments – the jolly court jester that was revered the world over and the surly, insecure (and apparently, philandering) side of him earned some ire over the years.

·    The amazingly predictable: as soon as he made the announcement, immediately, people asked the questions about his legacy.

It’s the latter that catches my attention more than the rest.

Why do we even need to rank him?

Shaquille O’Neal is one of the best players of all time. You know it, your mother and father know it, your siblings know it, your neighbors know it…. Heck, everyone who ever held a basketball in their hands for two seconds knows it. His combination of offensive awareness and imposing size was unheard of until he arrived in the NBA; even against the likes of Wilt Chamberlain, who was a physical force in the smaller and seemingly grounded floor game of the 1950s and 1960s. Four championships, Rookie of the Year, 1999 MVP and Finals MVP honors, perennial All-Star appearances, 14-time All-NBA selection, three-time All-Defense… he’s a legend in his own right.

Yet, this idea that he has to be ranked among the all-time greats perturbs me a bit. Let’s be for real, it’s not as if extra cleaning is guaranteed for his Hall of Fame plaque when we do such a thing.

Shaq’s style blended brute force with a shockingly soft touch around the rim. His size at 7-foot-1 and 325 pounds at his absolute prime with the Lakers made it a chore to battle him on the boards, despite not being lauded as a great rebounding center. Defensively, he could have been an absolute monster if he cared – save for the Lakers three-peat where Phil Jackson made him give a hoot – but who in their right minds wanted to challenge him on a layup? He never really had to display a full array of offensive skills like other men in the pivot, but he was highly capable of knocking down a few jumpers and was an underrated passer for someone who demanded the ball as often as he did.

And that’s sort of what stands out to me about O’Neal’s career. He was DOMINANT for someone who didn’t show the full repertoire or maximize his total potential. Then again, he was DOMINANT for someone who never had to display every basketball move conceivable. In his formative years with Orlando, while he put up absurd numbers, he was still being schooled by veteran centers that gave him clinics on brutality. His petulance aside, it’s hard to imagine that he didn’t pick up a few pointers from each of the players he combated with, respectfully or not.

O’Neal was an uncanny player not only for his offensive greatness, but offensive greatness despite flaws. We always said,”imagine if he hit his free throws”. Well, he won four titles, received numerous individual accolades and made over $200 million on the court while compiling an awful career free throw percentage (52.7%). Unlike baseball, that one flaw isn’t going to keep him away from the Hall of Fame for years and years.

He played with power in a league that tried its best to emphasize finesse; the physicality of the 80s and 90s stripped the Association of easy-to-market, but unrealistic to achieve beauty. When he claimed himself to be the LCL – Last Center Left – he was right in more ways than one. The NBA for most of its history was ruled by the pivot from George Mikan to Shaq himself; spanning six decades of letting the big man go to work when it counts. Even the Jordan years were run by the bigs in most other cities; whether it was at the center or power forward position as most teams ran their offenses through them.

He played in the second half of the careers of other legendary centers in Patrick Ewing, Hakeem Olajuwon and David Robinson while also adjusting to a changing league. In fact, he was catalyst to the single greatest change in the NBA since the three-point line; the restricted zone. Even among those phenomenal players – throw all the greats in the league’s sixty-five year history – how many forced the league to change the rule book and court parameters? A handful.

The story is all there. He was a unique player who bridged across two staunchly different eras of the NBA. His impact to the game was so strong that some in the media still believed that he was the final piece to title hopes for Cleveland last year. They believed that even for ten minutes a game for Boston this year, Shaq could have helped raised Banner #18. Those last two seasons of his career are a testament to how much of a legend he is. His stature on the game allowed for the iconic past to be larger than reality.

For some reason, when a player with a substantial career in a team sport retires, we immediately go into debate mode about her or his credentials and standing. We’re supposed to give Shaq some sort of place atop other greats at his position while likely overhyping or underwhelming the contributions of his contemporaries. We’ve already had enough people overreact and cry foul about the potential of another likely Hall of Famer. Do we have to do go through this again?

He stands on his own without any posturing from us. He doesn’t need #TwitterSports debates that are full of manipulated stats and name dropping. Nor does he need the damning articles that bring up his more sinister side. He doesn’t need validation among anyone, not even his peers. All he needs to know is when to show up to the Basketball Hall of Fame in Springfield, Massachusetts and what time will his induction speech will be.

Say What?!?!: I posted this on what’s an important day. It’s been ten years. As mentioned on ‘The Exchange’ on Tuesday, there’s been no greater influence in my life than my parents and no greater champion of the cause than my dad. Instead of writing something new, I figured this would be a good time to take you back. Proud to be your son, Bobby.

Telestrate

It’s amazing how a guy who did his job consistently and devoid of controversy can actually be reviled.

There are a lot of comments such as “thank (insert deity here)”, “about time already” and other less-sanitary thoughts around the internet and in person about the retirement of John Madden from the broadcast booth.

It’s not surprising that Madden decided to park his mammoth bus for good, but what set me back a bit was how quickly a good bit of NFL fans (likely those of Generation X and Y) were to cast him aside.

As budget as it seems to post a comment made on Scribe-favorite, TV by the Numbers, this is what I felt was what Madden was all about:

I always appreciated that besides showing favor towards a certain retired quarterback, he was fairly objective towards both teams on the field. You can tell with some analysts that there’s some favoritism or disdain, even if it’s not outright said. Among all the love and hate comments about Madden, I feel that everyone overlooks that. It’s going to be different and I hope that (Cris) Collinsworth can provide at least an ounce of that levity.

Madden loved the game and it showed in every broadcast. He may have not been as sharp in his last years, but considering the knowledge that all fans have gained over the years independent of broadcasts (enough scouting reports and YouTube clips could make all of us seem like experts), is it that much of a shock that he seemed to make these ‘obvious observations’?

Those of us that are fans and/or involved in the media should appreciate what he’s done.

I say this because unlike many who say “I put the game on mute because of the announcers”, I can appreciate what the (wo)men in the booth are trying to do. There’s a balancing act between speaking to the obsessed fans and speaking to those we hope become fans. Most of us who consume sports were born as these leagues, teams and players were already established in the American psyche. The rules may have not been innate, but with millions upon millions sharing their stories and passions with family members and friends, the concepts of these games were naturally absorbed. However, for those of us who are still trying to gain familiarity with the action on the screen, the broadcasters are bestowed a responsibility to explain, if not teach, the purpose and details of the executed plays.

Madden’s signatures may have been scribbling on the telestrator and dropping a few ‘Booms’ during the game, but he did those things because simplicity was essential to explain a complicated game. Adding snarky and jaded commentary, in his eyes, would have deterred him from speaking about the game’s essentials.

That’s the fear I have with Collinsworth. While he has the technical strengths and the experience with multiple networks (FOX, NBC, HBO and Showtime), you can say he may have spent too much time with some of the most opinionated (read: sarcastic, negative and strong on the ego) personalities in the business. Maybe he picked up something from Bob Papa for his NFL Network about only pulling out the opinions when absolutely necessary, but what can transpire between him and Al Michaels will be interesting as the 2009 season progresses.

Now, enjoy this for old times' sake (thanks to the uploader for this bit of sheer excellence).

Follow

Before anything else, let it be known that while it's been a rather challenging two-week period, it has been worthwhile in many aspects.

Without going too deep into a non-sports topic, I have walked away from my recent civil service with a greater respect and understanding of the judicial system. Jury duty is a nuisance as it is a forced interruption into twelve independent and relatively unconnected lives.

It requires that each participant does more than just show up and collect a check, though there have been people who have done just that.

It requires that each participant consider more than the physical and verbal evidence (read back of testimony, for example), but to consider the intangible evidence such as body language and the words left unsaid.

Most importantly, it requires that no matter what prejudices and experiences each juror has with the legal system, (s)he must be as open-minded and fair towards both sides of a conflict.

Trying to meet all of those tasks is easier for some than others. It is admittedly a challenge that is far easier in theory than in practice, yet I can say that regardless of the outcome, myself and my fellow jurors made the best efforts. That’s all anyone – the judge, prosecution, defense or the citizens themselves – can ask for.

And now, for the topic du jour.

It’s supposed to have been an important (albeit, rainy) day in New York baseball history as both new stadiums will be unveiled to the public for the first time with their primary tenants. After batting practice, testing the dirt and signing some autographs last night at the new Yankee Stadium, Derek Jeter talked to the media about his first impressions about the park. He also talked a bit about the anticipation of the Stadium’s first, being that he was the first to get a hit – a home run, apparently – in the building.

Yet, as asked by my editor, an article for this week’s New York Beacon (75 cents at select newsstands in New York City) discusses when he might get his last hit in pinstripes.

The likelihood that Jeter will be anything other than a Yankee – at least to this writer – is nil, unless one of two things happen. Either the team decides to show financial restraint and somehow decides to offer him an incentive-laden deal or the team believes that they can use a stronger arm on the left side of the infield. Yet, considering that Jeter is the Joe DiMaggio of this Yankee era both on and off the diamond, a divorce such as this could be far more embarrassing and heart-attack inducing to the fans than the Joe Torre debacle of 2007, the Billy Martin firings and George Steinbrenner’s feud with Dave Winfield combined.

Or maybe everyone will come to grips with the inevitable; there’s going to be a new guy between second and third some day. The question isn’t who so much as it is a question of when.

The Jeter Watch started recently as he will be a free agent after next season; a 35-year old shortstop whose defensive abilities have been criticized nonstop for a number of years, while his Hall of Fame offense will compel some team outside of the northeast corridor to make an obscenely rich contract offer.

While writing the Beacon piece, I couldn’t help but to think of how hard it’s going to be for the first After Jeter shortstop.

In fact, I couldn’t help but to conjure up the name Pete Myers.

If you can’t remember that name, Chicago Bulls fans might help you. He was the starting shooting guard after Michael Jordan retired in 1993. Myers wasn’t a bad player at all, he just wasn’t Mike.

Now, this isn’t saying that Jeter, whose marketability has grown over the past few seasons, is in the realm of Mike. Yet, at least within a team has storied as the Yankees, his eventual departure will cast a rather large shadow over those who will follow him.

This isn’t anything new. You can’t expect a franchise to suddenly fold when one of its most revered players (if not the most) calls it a career. However, when certain players walk away from the games, you can only hope that the fan base and management they leave behind are rather patient and welcoming.

Otherwise, you have an unsettling period as endured last spring and summer in Green Bay.

Irascible

Jeff Kent called it a career today and no matter how much he ticked teammates and media off, it’s hard to not consider him for a bust in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

What are interesting though were comments found in Richard Justice’s SportsJustice blog for the Houston Chronicle:

“Kent can be a jerk sometimes,to say the least,but I'll take a roster full of Jeff Kents on my team any day for his work ethic alone.”

“I think we have all worked with a Jeff Kent. To each his own and the bottom line is-do your stinking job!!! That's what Kent did, and I'm happy he gets to retire. We should all be so lucky!!!”

Really?

Here’s the thing about that vein of thinking; from far away, it’s easy to believe that people can forgive someone’s irascible personality as long as (s)he brings sheer talent and credentials to the job. Yet, when that very person is actually in your office, there is a challenge of will, character, patience and morale.

This is not to say that Kent was a good or bad guy since all any of us could go by were a few soundbites, beat reporters’ articles and Barry Bonds’ wrist strength test back in 2002. Many accounts say that the former NL MVP was mix of old-school (curmudgeon), unique (wacko), opinionated (controversial), demanding (son of a …) and occasionally inviting (surly and racist). Yet, all that mattered was that he was a great hitter, right?

The second commenter suggests that it’s all about getting the job done and Kent certainly did that in his various stops. In reality, though, (s)he and the rest of us did not spend time in the clubhouse with him, travel with him on the road, try to get familiar with him during spring training or sit next to him in the dugout; all for 200+ days of the year.

In our places of work, school, play, worship, etc., we did all have that alpha male type who seemed to tick off neighbors as easy as breathing or the temperamental diva type who treated those around her like disposable diapers. That person might have been very good at the technical requirements of the job. Yet, whether some of us believe that the workplace is hypersensitive or if people are just sheer pansies, this irascible person becomes the soul-sucking, morale-sapping, life-draining force that can lead to a company-wide decrease in productivity. No one wants to be around “that guy” when you have to see him every workday and pray that you don’t have a run-in.

Sports is a unique world, without a doubt. The participants are one of the few, if only, people on Earth who use their complete being – mental and emotional to go with the physical – to make a living. The absolute best of the best can become at least productive professionals who can make a great living for their families while lining the pockets of others.

The principles of the sports workplace, however, are not completely different from what anyone else does. Respect your colleagues and clients, conduct business in a professional manner and represent the company in the best possible light. It’s believed that you don’t have to be buddy-buddy with your co-workers to survive and succeed. Yet, it’s hard to gain a great level of success when your colleagues hate your guts.

If it doesn’t always work well in sports, it’s hard to believe it would work in ‘the real world’.

Say What?!?!: It’s a damn shame that not only is the apparent inner turmoil in Valley Ranch is trumping the actual Super Bowl participants, but despite the sister relationship with ABC, ESPN decided to discuss this in the live SportsCenter… AGAINST OBAMA’S INAUGURATION! It’s not even about trying to bask and bathe (or loathe and look away) from the historical moments so much as it’s one of those really, really bad ideas. Not many people outside of the Dallas Cowboys fan base cares too much and likely their fans are tired of hearing about ‘the drama’ that the media are soaking up. However, if you want folks to actually care, it would have been a pretty good idea to wait until Obamamania has died down a bit. After all, Tony Romo’s leadership isn’t supposed to kick in for a while.

Sunset

If there is a perfect moniker for the 2008 sports calendar, it is The Year of the Retirement.

It’s not as if all the professional athletes in the world had a convention somewhere to schedule their sunsets ahead of time, but there have been a few more farewell press conferences and phone calls than normal. It’s come to the point where Sports Illustrated’s website features a slideshow of the “twenty biggest retirements” thus far; those that have already happened and those that will start after the end of their seasons.

Some athletes who called it a career are without a doubt more recognizable than others. Some were newsworthy as they left fans scratching their heads. However, there are a few announcements that, for various reasons, have gone relatively unnoticed. Instead of ranking the importance or the overall careers of these athletes, tonight’s Scribe post looks into those various reasons that go outside of “it was just time”.


Dan Morgan and David Pollack: Most of the retirements that have been announced have been related to the National Football League. Yet, the circumstances of these goodbyes differ vastly from those of more famed retirees such as Steve McNair and Brett Favre. Both Morgan (top right; six seasons with Carolina) and Pollack (second right; three in Cincinnati) came to the League with a lot of promise, but debilitating injuries jeopardized their careers early.

Morgan, a hard-hitting linebacker who first made his name like many of the league’s best defensive players of the past three decades; in Football U, also known as the University of Miami. After being drafted with the eleventh pick by the Panthers, he started 11 games in 2001, helped solidify the league’s second best defense en route to the franchise’s lone Super Bowl appearance the following year and made the Pro Bowl in 2003. Yet, he only played 66 of Carolina’s 119 games (including all seven of the playoff games) in seven seasons. A series of concussions, an ankle injury and a partially torn Achilles tendon took their toll on him as he felt that he could not contribute to what is supposed to be a revamped New Orleans Saints defense in the upcoming season.

Pollack was a stud defensive end out of Georgia, collecting several major college football awards on his way to the NFL. In 2005, the Bengals selected him with the 17th pick in the first round and converted him to outside linebacker. He played fourteen games in his rookie season and despite just notching 28 tackles (22 solo), he picked up 4 ½ sacks for a team that found itself in the postseason for the first time in 15 years. Yet, in the first quarter of an early 2006 season game versus Cleveland, Pollack broke his sixth cervical vertebrae on a tackle. Though not paralyzed, he was unable to suit up again that year. His injury was initially considered career-threatening, but even with the improved prognosis in January 2007, he didn’t play that season either. Bengals coach Marvin Lewis said a few weeks ago that Pollack is going to retire, though the exact words have not been uttered by the player himself.

Football is a very high-risk, high-reward sport. It may have the country in a daze for twenty weekends a year, but for many of its players, it can cause a lifetime of pain. Morgan (29) and Pollack (26) would have been at both ends of an NFLer’s prime, but no matter how much their hearts wanted to get on the field, their bodies were unable to match that desire. Their retirements serve as another reminder for those of us who believe that it’s always about the Almighty Dollar in pro sports; no matter how much we are aware of the fortune and fame that come with success, the physical body doesn’t know how much money you make.


Maurice Greene: There seem to be more controversies than track and field competitions, if you are like me and rarely keep up with the sport outside of the Olympics. It’s as if every athlete is connected to some performance-enhancing drug ring and check fraud (notice the and, not or). What makes Greene stick out above names as Trevor Graham, Justin Gatlin, Marion Jones or Tim Montgomery? It’s that until he officially retired in February, he avoided any questions of his professional integrity due to PEDs. Then in a New York Times article published in April, Greene responded to claims made by a former drug adviser that he used PEDs.

Greene had a longer career in track than many of the sport’s elite could manage. He notched two gold medals in the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, along with a silver and bronze in 2004 (Athens). He held the world 100-meter record at 9.79 seconds back in 1999, a race he had dominated for two years going back to the 1997 World Championships. With the clouds hanging over the sport, his name may be more aligned with a $10,000 check that he wrote to this former adviser than his former records and medals.

When someone retires with a record of excellence, ideally, (s)he is not supposed to leave much doubt about the contributions made throughout her or his career. Yet, in the case of Greene – who has never failed a drug test, even if that leaves you skeptical – he left more questions than answers. With the Beijing Olympics on the horizon, this story may pick up some steam as the International Association of Athletics Federation (IAAF) is seeking an explanation for his actions.

So why did he retire? His reason could be as legit as they come: in training for Beijing, he could not physically keep up due to injuries over the years. He wants to make room for new stars, he said in his farewell. For some, however, this recent news makes it hard to believe that Greene walked away for purely altruistic reasons.


Larry Allen: Another NFL retirement, this time with a player who set a high standard in his position in the way that many of the heralded quarterbacks and running backs did for many of the league’s current stars. Allen – considered by football people as the strongest player in the league’s 88-year history – retired after fourteen years in the league; having spent twelve with the Dallas Cowboys and his final two with San Francisco.

When kids growing up in the 1990s debated if Emmitt Smith or Barry Sanders was the better running back, the difference always lied with the superior offensive line Dallas possessed for nearly the entire decade. Allen’s brute strength and deceptive quickness blasted holes in the defensive line for Smith to run through. He made eleven (yeah, that’s right, eleven) Pro Bowls at three different offensive line positions: left guard, right guard and left tackle. He blocked for Hall-of-Famers and Pro Bowlers: running backs Smith and Frank Gore along with quarterbacks Troy Aikman and Drew Bledsoe. He won his lone Super Bowl ring in his second season with the ‘Boys and remained with the organization for twelve years.

Likely, he will join the other ten Cowboys who are enshrined in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Since offensive linemen are typically low-key and still unsung, Allen didn’t get a pomp-and-circumstance press conference or video package on the sports channels. It was certainly the case for the perennial Oiler/Titan Bruce Matthews until he joined the Hall last year. The same will go for other all-time greats such as Jonathan Ogden and Orlando Pace.

Until Canton…