Misconseptions in Sports

I doubt it's a secret that one of my peeves in life is uninformed statements from announcers and other "experts" in sports. So, I thought I'd address a few of these today. Cuz I can.

Overtime against Xavier proved that Ohio State is better without Greg Oden

This is one I've heard so many times in the last week that it drives me crazy. There is a big, telling, obvious reason why Xavier was outperformed considerably in overtime by Ohio State. And it has little to do with Greg Oden.

The real reason is that Xavier was trying to recover from a stomach punch. They had the game won, and then it was snatched away from them by a desperation three-point shot. They gained a large lead, fought off a comeback attempt, and had a win in their grasps, and then watched it slip away on a one-in-a-hundred shot. That demoralizes a team, plain and simple. And when that happens, it really effects your play on the court.

Of course, the other reason would happen to be the talent level between the two teams. The longer two teams play, the more likely it is that the more talented team wins. It's why we see more upsets in single-elimination tournaments, than in best-of-seven series. Simple and plain.

Of course, Ohio State's play with Oden on the bench against Tennessee does little to help my argument, but his play against Memphis sure helps me.

The Cleveland Cavaliers cannot win an NBA title without a good "second banana" to LeBron James

There is a popular notion that a superstar needs a second superstar to win a title. Jordan had Scottie. Shaq had Kobe. D-Wade had Shaq. Duncan had Robinson and/or Parker.

Blah. Blah. Blah.

I call a foul.

I say with enough "third bananas" and a good second string line-up, a dominant superstar can win a ring. And I think the current Cavs are situated nicely in such a role.

Larry Hughes and Drew Gooden make pretty good "third bananas". Hughes might not have the dominant jump shot you want out of a #2 option, but he's got enough defense to give him minutes, and his court vision is pretty good, too. Gooden might not be consistent, but a guy that can honestly go on the floor on any given night and give you a 20-10 game is a good enough option. Add in other lesser players like Anderson Varajeo, Sasha Pavlovic, Daniel Gibson, and Zydrunas Ilgauskus, and you've got enough support around you to outrank a second banana.

And, besides that ... Scottie Pippen wasn't the real key to helping Jordan to his titles. It was Dennis Rodman, Horace Grant, Steve Kerr, and Luc Longley.

Four #1 seed in the Final Four would be bad for the NCAA Tournament

The crutch everyone leans on to support this: the NCAA Tournament is unpredictable, and that's what gives it such great appeal.

Great. I agree.

But you know what? As of now, everyone "knows" that all four top seeds will not make it to the Final Four. That's ... *gasp* ... something predictable. If it happened once ... just once ... it'd be enough to create doubt in your mind and remove the last ounce of predictability from the tournament.

The NBA MVP will be either Dirk or Nash

I honestly think this was true at the All-Star game, but is no longer true, no matter how many ESPN and TNT pundits tell me it still is. It's become a four-man race. And currently, my top four ballot looks like this:

1. Dirk
2. Kobe
3. LeBron
4. Nash




That's enough for now ... I'm gonna try to put together a full MLB preview later this week.