Oklahoma City Attendance
Game 1, vs. Milwaukee: 19,136
Game 2, vs Minnesota: 18,163
Game 3, vs Boston: 19,136
You remember the Oklahoma City faithful, right? They were the ones who spent the past year deriding Sonic fans for not supporting their team enough, insulting us for not showing the respect inherently due to the great and glorious NBA, mocking us for having our heads so deep in our granola bowls and espresso cups we couldn’t appreciate the wonderfulness of David Stern’s universe.
Yeah, those people.
Well, less than one week into their lifetimes as NBA hosts, they couldn’t bother to sell out a Sunday night game.
I’ll say that again: Game 2 of the NBA Experience-Dust Bowl Version was not a sellout.
Hey, I get it, it was the Wolves. And, who knows, maybe the AP made a mistake and entered the numbers incorrectly for the attendance.
Um, yeah, that's likely.
But, for crying out loud, if you’re going to mock us every step of the way for being “fair-weather” fans, if you’re going to spend every last ounce of your energy insulting Seattle for lacking the balls to be a great NBA city, don’t you think you ought to step up when you get your chance?
Thursday, November 6
Tuesday, November 4
SSS Xmas List: X-Man Pin
Okay, granted, it's the NYC version of the X-Man, but I still think it would pretty darn nice pinned to my Members' Only jacket.Just curious, was this a Knick-only item, or are there brass-backed pins of, say, Armon Gilliam out there as well?
Answers
The NBA world is certainly focused on Allen Iverson today, with everyone weighing in on the demise of his career, and how he ranks as an all-time great.
Bob Ryan, the nattering nabob of negativity of the Boston Globe, had this to say about AI (via TrueHoop):
"'The Answer' is what his adoring public calls him. Well, today's question is, 'Can you win a championship with Allen Iverson as your best player?' Thus far, the answer is no, and AI is now 33."
Ryan is nothing if not confrontational in his writing, and you can't take what he says too much to heart. The man, after all, is paid to write paragraphs that get people talking.
Still, his point is dubious, at best. After all, could you not say the same thing about Paul Pierce prior to last season? Not only had he not won a championship entering last November, Pierce had failed to make the playoffs in more than half of his NBA seasons.
What changed? Was it Pierce, or was it the addition of Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen? Were Pierce and Iverson to have swapped teams last season, who would have finished with a better record? Does the idea of a Pierce-Anthony-Camby trio sound more playoff-ready than an Iverson-Allen-Garnett trio? Is Pierce somehow now a "champion" and Iverson is a "loser," simply because Danny Ainge was able to take advantage of his relationship with Kevin McHale?
No, the 'answer' to all of these questions is not that Iverson has been lacking, it's that he's played on some lousy teams. It is nearly impossible for a guard to take an NBA team to the finals without help, and for Ryan to castigate Iverson for doing so is foolish.
Allen Iverson is one of the toughest competitors in the history of professional sports. He is also, simultaneously, one of the biggest ball-hogs in the history of the NBA. Regardless, to say that he is responsible for his teams failing to win a championship is just plain wrong.
Bob Ryan, the nattering nabob of negativity of the Boston Globe, had this to say about AI (via TrueHoop):
"'The Answer' is what his adoring public calls him. Well, today's question is, 'Can you win a championship with Allen Iverson as your best player?' Thus far, the answer is no, and AI is now 33."
Ryan is nothing if not confrontational in his writing, and you can't take what he says too much to heart. The man, after all, is paid to write paragraphs that get people talking.
Still, his point is dubious, at best. After all, could you not say the same thing about Paul Pierce prior to last season? Not only had he not won a championship entering last November, Pierce had failed to make the playoffs in more than half of his NBA seasons.
What changed? Was it Pierce, or was it the addition of Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen? Were Pierce and Iverson to have swapped teams last season, who would have finished with a better record? Does the idea of a Pierce-Anthony-Camby trio sound more playoff-ready than an Iverson-Allen-Garnett trio? Is Pierce somehow now a "champion" and Iverson is a "loser," simply because Danny Ainge was able to take advantage of his relationship with Kevin McHale?
No, the 'answer' to all of these questions is not that Iverson has been lacking, it's that he's played on some lousy teams. It is nearly impossible for a guard to take an NBA team to the finals without help, and for Ryan to castigate Iverson for doing so is foolish.
Allen Iverson is one of the toughest competitors in the history of professional sports. He is also, simultaneously, one of the biggest ball-hogs in the history of the NBA. Regardless, to say that he is responsible for his teams failing to win a championship is just plain wrong.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)