Kemp's Italian Tour Delayed

It's all there in horribly convulted English, "Shawn Kemp apologises with its fans."

While his teammates on Premiata Montegranaro were getting beat by mighty Scavolini Spar 96-76 in a "friendly," the Reign Man was still stateside, stymied by paperwork and his confusion regarding just how many Vienna Sausages he was allowed to pack into his carry-on bags.

But Kemp, ever gracious, did manage to offer up this: "[Kemp] apologise[s] to the fans Montegranaro and to all his fans for this setback that it did delay the date fixed for departure from the States, reiterates its intention to play in Italy and all his enthusiasm tied to this idea."

Or something like that, anyways.

Logo Talk

With Wednesday’s announcement of Oklahoma City’s team name and accompanying logo, it lead me to think about the logo universe, or, more specifically, the solar system of logos, if you will, of the NBA.

Which are the best? Which are the worst? And, what is the best way to go about ranking them? These are the questions, dear readers, which plague the mind of a man writing for a blog devoted to a team which no longer exists.

And so, I put pencil to paper and roughed out a plan. I thought of how I used to draw logos on my notebook as a kid, and what was it that made one logo better than another. With that in mind, I came up with four categories for rating the logos. They include:

1. Colors
2. Lettering
3. Image (e.g., the Wizard in the Wizards’ logo)
4. Uniqueness

Then, I graded each logo on a sliding scale (5 for excellent, 0 for horrible) in each category. After totaling the numbers, I split the logos up into four categories:

LOTTERY TEAMS – The worst of the worst
.500 CLUBS – Better, but not high art
CONTENDERS - Good, but not perfect
CHAMPIONS - Everything a logo should be

(If you’d like to play along, you can see a full page of NBA logos here, and the rankings here.)

LOTTERY TEAMS
Detroit, Lakers, Orlando, Sacramento, Charlotte, Miami, New Jersey, Phoenix, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Clippers.

The Clippers were the worst performer, rating only 4 points out of 20, and they were the only team to score a 0 in multiple categories (image and uniqueness). The only reason the Lakers fared any better than their neighbors was they at least at the idea first. Granted, the idea sucked, but they came up with it. Suffice it to say that writing your team name on the front of a basketball isn’t going to cut it in this system (I’m looking at you, Detroit). Sacramento’s logo is too purple for my tastes and a bit garish, Miami’s is boring, Phoenix’ looks like something from a European volleyball team circa 1985, San Antonio’s has possibilities but lacks excitement, and Charlotte’s is straight out of first-year graphic design. The less said about Oklahoma City’s logo the better. Did I forget to mention Orlando and New Jersey? That tells you how inspiring their logos are.

.500 CLUBS
Portland, Atlanta, Houston, Memphis, New York, Toronto, Utah.

These weren’t horrible, but they weren’t exciting, either. I love Utah’s lettering, but the lack of any image at all bores me. Portland’s colors are great, but does anything else about that logo stand out? The Hawks mediocre logo is saved by the Hawk design, which at least gives the viewer something to hold onto, unlike the Knicks, who sabotage their unique colors and strong lettering with a boring background. Houston gets points for the Asian-styled lettering, but not for much else. Some people really like the Grizzlies’ bear, but I think it looks like it came out of Microsoft Clip Art. Likewise, Toronto’s design gets more dated with each passing year.

CONTENDERS
Dallas, New Orleans, Washington, Chicago, Denver, Indiana, Philly, Cleveland, Minnesota.

Now we’re talking. The first five-pointers of the rankings begin to show up, including New Orleans and Washington (Who loves the Wiz? I do!) for their images and Denver for its lettering. In fact, I could be persuaded to move up the Hornets to the top tier if I looked at their logo long enough. I’m not as enamored of the wine and gold Cavaliers as others, but it’s still a nice piece of work. The Bulls strong colors keep them close to the top, and I’ve always been a sucker for that Indiana P: Stylish in its very simplicity and retaining the ABA flavor without getting too retro about it. Philly’s bold styling gets noticed here, and Minnesota’s combination of an average image and above-average lettering vaults them to the upper class. Dallas’, though, is the best of this grouping, because it manages to be strong and new, but not garish.

CHAMPIONS
Boston, Golden State, Milwaukee.

Many will disagree with me, but I love the Milwaukee Buck. The purple is annoying, but you don’t get as much of it in the logo as you did on the jerseys. Plus, the lettering is pretty solid. I’ll admit it, it’s not as great as their old logo, but it’s still better than 90% of the competition. Face it, when was the last time you saw a pro sports logo that looked like it belonged at a state park?

As for the Warriors, the blue man logo is solid, the colors are great, and the lettering for “Warriors” is fantastic – classic and modern all in one go. Yet another reason why I’m beginning to think that – were I to follow the NBA this year and abandon my plans to stalk David Stern – I would follow the Warriors.

The ultimate champion, though, has to be the Celtics. First of all, the leprechaun is completely unique and well designed and the colors are, well, they’re classic NBA colors, right? The Celtics are the Yankees and the Packers and the Dodgers – they transcend mere sporting art and are part of our national heritage. And that is why the Celtic logo is the preeminent logo for the NBA.

NBA Tube

Terrific video from half-time of a playoff game in 1987, which includes, among other nuggets:

- A young James Brown channeling his inner Billy Dee Williams

- A lengthy profile of Bernie Bickerstaff

- Update on the draft status of Derrick McKey and Vincent Askew

- Larry Brown's new contract with Kansas

- An ongoing cocaine/gambling investigation involving Dennis Johnson (!), Jack Sikma (!!), and Paul Mokeski (!!!)

Remember when half-time meant one guy giving highlights, and did NOT mean four people trying to speak as loudly as possible while still managing to not utter anything of importance?

Yeah, I miss those days, too.