Today's Games

Euroleague: Perfumerias 74, Schio 64: Perfumerias pulled ahead early in the first quarter and kept Schio behind them. Perfumerias moves up to 4-1 and in second place in Group B in Euroleague. Sancho Lyttle scored 14 points.

Eurocup: K. V. Imperial 62, Dynamo Kursk 53. In the first three games of Eurocup, Kursk falls to 1-2 in Group H while K. V. Imperial remains undefeated. Ahead 43-37 going into the fourth quarter, Dynamo Kursk only scored two points in the first 6:15 of the quarter. Michelle Snow had five points, but 17 rebounds.

Oh Marynell!

Davan Mani in his My Rants and Opinions blog writes that best finder of talent anywhere in pro basketball today is...Marynell Meadors?

Lot of scouts and GM's tend to get individual players but not try to build a team. In Marynell case, she gets players and builds teams. She likes players who believe in hard work but fair play. When she was Charlotte, she built a solid nucleus of players such as Vicky Bullett, Andrea Stinson, Dawn Staley, and Rhonda Mapp who had those characteristics. As a scouting directing for the Sol, she built a solid nucleus of Ruth Riley, Sheri Sam, Yelena Baranova, and Sandy Brondello. When they folded, these players continued to play at a high level with other teams the characteristics of hard work and fair play. Now in Atlanta, she has those type of players in Erika DeSouza, Shalee Lehning, Sancho Little, Michelle Snow, and Angel McCoughtry which brings success and continuity.

Mani hopes that if Meadors loses her job for whatever reason, that she would be come a director of scouting for some NBA team. I must say that Mani makes a persuasive case. If Nancy Lieberman can coach in the NBDL, then why can't Marynell Meadors scout men's basketball?

Monarchs Watch: Day 7

While President Donna Orender of the WNBA posts her Much to be Thankful For which can be linked from the WNBA front page, the link which states that the WNBA is trying to find a home for the Monarchs has finally disappeared. This doesn't mean that the WNBA isn't actively looking for a new owner for the Monarchs - and they're not going to be looking during the Holidays - but if the WNBA is planning to kill the Monarchs this is the right time to end any Monarchs talk, namely when everyone is looking at a turkey leg. (Or imitation tofurkery leg.)

nickv1025 over at Rebkell suggested that the WNBA's strategy is to quietly let the Monarchs die, but to offer a carrot with the stick. Namely, to state that they would increase the roster sizes of each team from 11 to 12, with the 12th player remaining inactive if the other 11 players are healthy - or likewise, to make it more simple for an injured player to stay on the roster. This also makes it more likely that the Monarchs players could find a safe landing spot.

Mechelle Voepel over at her blog page states:

All business owners have to think in business terms if they want to be successful. And yet it never fails to amaze me how so many people who reach power through successful businesses can sometimes fall so far short of the responsible way to deal with other people, particularly their employees.

Certainly, the Maloofs had the right to pull out of the WNBA if they felt it was financially too burdensome for them. But they could have said proper farewells to the players and those who worked for the Monarchs organization. They could have faced the music in that way.

I'm in complete agreement. It wasn't that the Maloofs dropped the Monarchs, it's the way that it was handled. The fomer Monarchs org didn't even have the common decency to inform their players individually - they were left to find out about it from other sources or to be surprised by the initial announcement.

Of course, I don't expect any news over the Thanksgiving holiday - but this is the first day in the national press since last Friday's announcement that there was no mention of the Monarchs at all, not even in an opinion article. Whether there will be an effort to save the Monarchs, or whether everyone will say "You know what? After the Shock, the Dream, and the Fever being in peril this year, we're just too tired to care anymore." And that would be a shame, particularly on Thanksgiving.

Euroleague 5/2009 - Ros Casares 63, Galatsaray 62

Jia Perkins of Galatsaray tries to get by Laia Palau of Ros Casares.

El Ros (4-1) had to go all the way to Istanbul, where they played against Turkish power Galatsaray (3-2) in front of a crowd of...400 spectators? Not four thousand, but four hundred. I guess either Ros Casares has reached a rough spot or those four hundred fans were cheering really loudly, as Galatsaray came close to knocking off Ros Casares 63-62.

The game report, the box score, play-by-play results and a small photo gallery can all be found right here.

Part of the reason the game was so close was that Ros Casares got off to a bad start. A basket by Yelena Leuchanka put Galatsaray up 15-5 with 2:07 in the first quarter. Ros Casares was held to eight points in the first quarter. At one point, Galatsaray was up by 11 points, 25-14 in the second but Ros Casares ended the second quarter with three consecutive three-pointers to close the gap to 33-29.

In the third quarter, Ros Casares continued their struggle and Galatsaray stayed ahead, but only by one or two baskets. With 1:04 left in the third quarter, Ros Casares finally regained the lead with 1:04 left in the third, 49-48 on a basket by Delisha Milton-Jones. Galatasaray retook the lead, but a pair of free throws by Anna Montañana gave Ros Casares the lead 51-50.

At one point in the fourth, Ros Casares led by six points, 63-57 with 3:45 to go...but Ros Casares would not score another point as Galatsaray's defense kicked in. A jump shot by Jia Perkins closed the gap to 63-61 in favor of Ros Casares with 2:02 left. Unfortunately, neither team could buy a shot after that. Galatsaray missed three shots. On the Ros Casares end of the court, Elisa Aguliar missed a jump shot and Laia Palau missed a pair of free throws with only six seconds on the clock. Galatsaray would have the ball, and they could score either a potential tying or winning shot.

With one second left, Jia Perkins of Galatsaray was fouled by Jana Vesela. This put the game in her hands with one second left. She made the first free throw. 63-62 Ros Casares, and Perkins could tie the game on the next shot....

....but...she missed. Delisha Milton-Jones got the rebound, and the game was over.

And now, a look at the Four Factors of the game:

Field goal percentage: Ros Casares 41 percent, Galatsaray 39 percent. Almost even. Ros Casares, however, hit more 3-pointers, going 7-for-20 from long range.
Turnovers: 13 turnovers for each team, no advantage.
Offensive rebound percentage: Galatsaray 38 percent, Ros Casares 29 percent. Yelena Leuchanka was a beast with six offensive rebounds and 13 total rebounds.
Free throws: Galatsaray 11-for-14, Ros Casares 8-for-11.

And now, the name performers from each club:

Galatsaray

Jia Perkins: 19 points, 5 rebounds. 7-for-14. A great game, but sadly, she missed that final free throw. Perkins plays for the Chicago Sky.
Yelena Leuchanka: 12 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists. Leuchanka last played for the Mystics. They keep saying that she'll play for the Dream...I think we have her rights, anyway.
Sophia Young: 12 points, 5 rebounds for the San Antonio player.

Ros Casares

Delisha Milton-Jones: 17 points, 9 rebounds, 4 assists. 6-for-12 shooting.
Erika de Souza: 8 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists.
Anna Montañana: 8 points, 4 rebounds, and 3 assists as well.
Belinda Snell: 8 points, 3 rebounds.
Becky Hammon: 5 points and 3 assists in 23 minutes of play. 1-for-6 from 3-point range.

Today's Euroleague Action

Ros Casares 63, Galatsaray 62: Ros Casares moves to 4-1 in Euroleague play as Jia Perkins needs two free throws to tie the game and send it into overtime with one second left on the clock, but she misses the second one. Galatsaray, a Turkish power, falls to 3-2.

Krakow 77, Gospic 75: Krakow comes within a basket of being upset by Gospic as Gospic still doesn't have a Euroleague win after five tries. Iziane Castro Marques gets the final basket with 29 seconds left and then gets a defensive rebound with 22 seconds left as Ivana Jercevic misses a 3-pointer that would have given Gospic the lead. It seems that Krakow was able to dribble out the clock - time outs have to be reported to the scorer's table. Krakow , substituting for CSKA, moves up to 5-0.

Kosice 70, Gorzow 65. Kosice jumps to 2-3 and Gorzow falls to 1-4. Kosice took the lead in the second quarter and Gorzow got within two points but it was Kosice 's game to lose. Angel McCoughtry had 25 points and eight rebounds.

I'll probably write about some of these selected games today or tomorrow.

Monarchs Watch: Day 6

The only good news is that Sacramento 's newspapers are expressing their pain at losing the Monarchs and keeping the Monarchs demise on the table, as it were. (If the Dream were folded, you'd never get an editorial out of the AJC - you might get a brief article or an "I told you so" opinion piece that the AJC runs instead of news.) Ailene Voisin writes that "The Monarchs demise leaves bitterness, memories" and an editorial at the Sacramento Bee states Fallen Monarchs Won't Be Forgotten".

According to the WNBA's front page, the W is still involved with talks. I wonder if that blurb will quietly disappear over the Thanksgiving holiday?

In the meantime, I was thinking about something that might have been able to help the Monarchs but which is completely taboo in sports. This is the idea of public ownership.

A better term would be public financing. As they say, "the devil is in the details". What this would mean is that instead of the Sacramento Monarchs having one owner, they would have had several owners. Since the most famous example of public ownership is the Green Bay Packers, let's use the Packers model as a hypothetical attempt to save the Monarchs.

Assume that the Monarchs went to the public ownership model of the Packers. Monarchs fans would have been given the chance to purchase "Sacramento Monarchs Stock". Anyone who has been charged with fraud in litigation, who has been convicted of a felony or who participates in sports gambling would probably be denied purchase rights. The shares would sold to the general public at some named price: the price doesn't matter because you could probably by as much stock as you wanted, up to some predetermined limit, say, you would not be allowed to hold more than 25 percent of all available shares.

Before you think of retiring by shoving the stock in your mattress, the stock would have some heavy restrictions. The stock would state, in bold enough letters, that it would never pay dividends. Any profits earned from the operation of "Sacramento Monarchs LLC" would be invested back into the company. Furthermore, the stock could not be transferred to other people and could be cashed in only under very specific circumstances. The papers would read that the stock is an extremely poor investment and should be considered a vanity purchase only, suitable for framing but not much else - however, it does make you a shareholder and grants you specific voting rights.

The shareholders would then elect seven members of the board of the directors: a president and six other officers, with the president the only officer receiving a salary, serving in the role that the owner formerly served. The other six officers serve in an unpaid advisory capacity. (Whether any such person wanted to serve the club in a non-salaried role, would be up to the board - for example, an officer could be the head of a Sacramento accounting firm, which might volunteer accounting services to the club.) If the fans want, diversity clauses could be enforced, namely that the officers must represent a cross section of age, gender, race, religion and sexual orientation of fans in the Sacramento area.

The roles of the shareholders would be limited to electing the board of directors and, like the Packers, probably meeting en masse once a year at ARCO to decide on specific matters as directed by the board. (The joy of such shareholder meetings is that shareholders have the right to speak at public meetings, even if they own only one share of stock.) The general rule of stock ownership is, "one share, one vote", meaning that if you had 250 shares of stock and your pal had 5 shares, you would have 250 votes compared to her five votes. The real power would rest in a clause that stated that if the shareholders decided to sell the club, the money would go to some local charity and not to the WNBA.

The latter clause would ensure that the club would, in effect, never be sold.

"Okay. But WNBA clubs don't turn a profit, in general. What will the stockholders do when the club runs out of money?" Either more shares of stock will have to be sold to raise enough money to run the club for another year, or the company will have to be dissolved or the club sold.

Could such a model actually *work* in the WNBA? You might not be able to find one person willing to lose the $1.5 million-$2 million a year which is the estimated net loss of running a WNBA club. However, you might be able to find 2000 people in Sacramento willing to spend $1,000 a year to keep the club alive. You might not be able to find one big philanthropist that will own the club - but you might find 2,000 little philanthropists that will. I think the odds of that are pretty high, speaking frankly.

It is certainly a model worth attempting. Why not give public ownership an opportunity, when it seems to be working elsewhere in the world? It worked for the Packers when the NFL was as weak as the WNBA (the Packers have made four such offerings of stock). It has worked for AAA baseball, it works for soccer teams in Europe . Really, what does the WNBA have to lose by trying this?

The primary objection will be "what if the shareholders can't raise the capital?" Well then, I guess we know that a team can't survive in Sacramento. But...what if they can raise the capital?

Public ownership - or public financing - is something the sports world doesn't want to talk about. It is so reluctant to talk about it that finding the actual operating details of financing schemes is almost impossible to find on the internet. The only mention of how models are working or could work are hidden in academic and legal journals, all behind pay-walls. It's as if the entire matter has been buried and all discussion about such schemes fall into two categories - the category of "weird historical aberration" and the category of "this thing that can never work".

The big three leagues - the NFL, the NBA and Major League Baseball - have explicitly banned public financing in their operating laws. The only exception is Green Bay, and Green Bay was grandfathered in to the NFL by-laws. There will never be another system like the Green Bay system in the NFL, not if the NFL has anything to say about it.

Why do sports teams not wish to pursue public financing? There are many reasons. First, the league doesn't like it. Companies that are not private businesses but owned by several individuals have to open their books - at some level, the public has to know what is going on behind the curtain. The WNBA is probably one of the most conservative leagues around, in terms of sharing virtually zero information with its fanbase. Most likely, the WNBA doesn't want anyone to know what goes on financially, not even at the franchise level.

Second, WNBA franchises aren't worth much now - but they might be worth something someday. If/when WNBA franchises have value, like anything that has value, the withdrawal of that value also means something. The hope that WNBA owners have is that ten, twenty, maybe fifty years from now they, too, can shake down cities for public money for facility improvement by threatening relocation. The WNBA would rather not have any surviving public financing models around if that day ever comes.

Why? Because of the third reason - it is very likely that a publicly-owned Monarchs team is going to be very parsimonious. There might be no halftime dancers, no smoke machine, no nothing - just basketball. (They might make players bring their own H20 to games.) The WNBA would like to say to prospective owners and to cities "it costs X to operate a team". A publicly owned Monarchs team might show that it only costs 25 percent of X. Furthermore, if Sacramento can run the Monarchs on the cheap, it would be much harder for future owners to plead poverty with the managers of their arenas - which are usually publicly owned.

Fourth, it smacks of the eeeeeeeeeevil socialism! No, seriously. A capitalist society casts a suspicious eye toward community-operated ventures. Because if a community-owned Monarchs can succeed but a privately-owned (team X) fails, then it becomes an indictment of private ownership. Owners are more sensitive about that than you think. Which leads to Reason 4a - a community-operated Monarchs would set a "bad example" for the other more major leagues.

(* * *)

So here's the point: it seems that the WNBA would like to save the Monarchs - but not if it means public financing. They won't even consider public financing. They won't even take the concept seriously. It's not even on the table.

For all I know, the WNBA might not even be an independent entity. Theoretically the WNBA exists apart from the NBA, but I don't know what the truth is. Does the NBA "own" the WNBA in any sense? Is the WNBA an official NBA side project? What is the actual truth?

Furthermore, the NBA owners that currently own WNBA teams - Indiana, Phoenix , New York , Minnesota , Washington, and maybe "part" of Tulsa - will never allow a community based model for the WNBA. Which means that the threat of a publicly financed team is almost dead in the cradle because the WNBA Board of Directors will never approve it.

Yes, the WNBA will be encouraged to find alternate sources of revenue, alternate ways of financing, new and bigger philanthropists, and will even be allowed to put company names on jerseys. But community financing? You'll never see that happen. They'll close the WNBA down before it gets to that.

Lauren Jackson Leaves Spartak, Will Play for Canberra

From ABC News in Australia:

The Canberra Capitals will sign Opals superstar Lauren Jackson tomorrow for the rest of the Women's National Basketball League season.

The Capitals are yet to raise the $220,000 for Jackson but will register her after she was released by her Russian Club in Moscow.

Two thoughts: 1) How much money was Jackson getting for Spartak? I suspect the $220K is a discount for living in the comforts of home.

2) What does this mean for Spartak when someone who might be the best player in the world - the argument could certainly be made, Taurasi fans - leaves them? Of course, Spartak gets $220K but is the widow of a billionaire really that hard up for money....?

Oh yeah. Jean Davidson. Never mind.

Kathy Betty Thinks Dream Can Succeed

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

“If we have a good marketplace and we have a good team that wins, to me there should be a business model that works,” [Betty] said. “As I get more and more experienced, I may come back and say, ‘You can’t,’ but I’m going into it thinking that you can.”

Good article, but I don't get why they asked Betty about the Atlanta Spirit and the owners of the Hawks and Thrashers. I suspect many Dream fans couldn't name any of the owners of either team if you paid them.

By the way: click the link above and show the AJC you care about the Dream.

Monarchs Watch: Day 5

By now, WNBA fans have known about the folding of the Sacramento franchise for about five days. News of the franchise's demise from the reactionary sports media has dwindled to nothing as something else has grabbed their attention - I suppose Shaquille O'Neal has released another rap album or something.

In the meantime, we haven't heard anything from the WNBA, but the square "WNBA in Talks to Move Monarchs to Bay Area" still resides proudly on the splash page at WNBA.com. Either the WNBA are bad liars, or the talks are still taking place.

This begs the question, "What exactly is the Bay Area?" The Bay Area, better known as the San Francisco Bay Area, is a nine-county area serving as the home of about seven million California residents. The area includes San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose. San Jose was formerly the home of the San Jose Lasers of the American Basketball League.

So could we see the Monarchs become the San Jose Lasers/Monarchs? Aside from the NHL's San Jose Sharks, I don't think that any other sports team - major or minor - uses the San Jose Arena, which is now called the HP Pavilion at San Jose. I'm sure that San Jose would be glad to have the business over the summer - you can't have a concert every day of the week.

The problems are two-fold. The first one is finding a purchaser in San Jose, which would really be the same problem in any city for any sports franchise in any sport anywhere. The second one is trying to determine if the WNBA could survive in San Jose. During the tenure of the Lasers in San Jose, the average attendance for the team was listed at 3,181 for the first season, 4,773 for the second season and 4,447 over the truncated third season. This attendance probably just includes tickets sold/distributed and not bodies in seats. And this was at the peak of interest in women's pro basketball in the late 1990s.

I would be very surprised to see a WNBA team land in San Jose. However, it's not out of the question.

WNBA Tulsa Looks for Marketing Director

From NBA Team Jobs:

WNBA Tulsa is currently seeking an individual for the position of Director Marketing. Specific areas of focus include: advertising, market research and analytics, promotions, database and e-marketing as well as overall brand development, public relations, community relations, event presentation/operations, graphic design, video production and interactive marketing. This position is responsible for overseeing all marketing functions for the team.

To those who are interested in this job, my plan of action would be two fold:

a) Gather the marketing plans that all other sports teams in Tulsa are using.
b) Lock those plans in a safe place so that they can't harm anyone in the Tulsa Front Office.

Erika de Souza: Q & A

The Atlanta Dream website has posted a question-and-answer session with Erika de Souza.

Excerpts from the page:

What do you miss most about Brazil?
My family, especially my grandmother. Brazilian food is not so difficult to find like it was 10 years ago, and Atlanta has so many great Brazilian restaurants. After so many years playing abroad, I can adjust to almost all cultural differences (but talking about the US is not so difficult because I love the American way of life). My family is always what I miss the most.

What do you think was the key thing to your transformation into the Beast from Brazil, as Coach Meadors called you, from your former level of play? You were amazing to watch this year and a decidedly more aggressive, formidable player.
Practice is the key to reach any goal and I have been giving my best since I started playing. I can say also that the key in my case is my self confidence. When you believe in yourself, people believe in you too and help you to bring out the best in yourself.

How long have you known Izi and how many teams have you played on together?
I have known Izi since I was 17, when we played together in Osasco, Brazil. We just played there together and in Atlanta and on the Brazilian selection teams too.


Definitely check it out.

Athlete Blogs, and The Potential Failures Of

I just took a look at a new blog entry by Chamique Holdsclaw. If these are her words, Holdsclaw can definitely write. It also looks like Armintie Price is starting a mini-blog on the Atlanta Dream web site. Price is off to a good start, mentioning the fact that she is working as an assistant coach for Mississippi during the off-season. A few athletes have blogs at the WNBA site itself.

The blogs are of varying degrees of quality. The best ones are the ones that give some insight into the team itself. The next best are the ones that give the best glimpses of the life of an athlete. What's practice like? How many times/hours does a team practice a day? What are the travel and living conditions?

Following that are blogs with an insight into the personality of the athlete. What are their favorite foods, movies, etc? Below that are when the athlete writes about unrelated topics, but some writes (like Chantelle Anderson) can make even that compelling.

I was directed to a blog entry by Becky Hammon, one of the most popular players around. What astonishes me is how little insight is provided. I'm more interested in Hammon than I used to be, primarily because she's on the Ros Casares team where Erika de Souza plays. Instead, the blog entry is more a treatise about positive thinking; Hammon's time at Ros Casares in mentioned briefly and almost off-handedly.

Athletes face a few problems in creating blogs, and WNBA athletes face particular problems. The first is that not every WNBA player is a writer, far from it. Like athletes in any sport, some players are adept with a pen or keyboard, and for others every character on the screen is a testimony to illiteracy. If you read the messages of some WNBA players on Twitter, it becomes obvious that some of them have problems with basic grammar. True, some are typing on tiny, tiny phones but for others I doubt it is the case.

The other problem is that WNBA athletes don't make a lot of money. If LeBron James wants to post a blog, he doesn't even have to type it if he doesn't want to. One of his entourage can do that, or someone at the NBA head office can do it - and I'd be surprised if the thoughts expressed were actually his own. Even if James wants to put pen to palimpsest himself, there will be at least an editor to clean up the text - he can definitely pay for not just a proofreader but for a web site manager. (For athletes making $10+ million a year, that might be a wise investment.) Whereas many athletes in the WNBA don't make much more per year than a low level clerk at the IRS. Web site management is an esoteric discipline, and the learning curve is too steep for many not to make a mess of it.

For some athletes (Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds) one point of having a website is to get around the restrictions of the press. Instead of a Boston sportwriter botching your message (or a San Francisco sportswriter letting out what a surly prick you are) you just go to your own soapbox on the web and let the fans hear the truth from your ears. This model doesn't seem to work for the WNBA, since the WNBA controls its message very closely and I doubt the league front office would let anyone go off the reservation. Kristen Mann accidentally strolled off message when she Twittered about how much she hated season ticket holder functions; you can bet the WNBA won't be making that mistake again.

The biggest problem, however, with athlete blogs is that posting isn't frequent enough. My contention is that there is only one thing that drives blog viewership - content. You can have the best Wordpress platform and the newest web gadgetry conceivable, but if you only post every six months, what's the point of having a blog in the first place? A blog is a conversation with the world, and if one party isn't speaking then there's not much of a reason to continue.

So here's my question to the readers: which WNBA athletes have the best blogs? A good blog should be at the very least interesting or should have frequent posts. Is there any WNBA athlete who is truly an excellent blogger? Chantelle Anderson comes to mind immediately, but are there others?

Monarchs Watch: Day 4

Right now, both Monarchs fans and WNBA fans are waiting for some rumbling somewhere - anywhere - in the Bay Area or from the WNBA that the Monarchs will be relocated/find an owner.

The first problem is that there is a deadline of sorts. The 2010 schedule has to be finalized and teams need to know if they're going to be playing the Monarchs or not. Flight and hotel arrangements have to be prepared. If there's a dispersal draft, teams need to know before they start talking seriously to the available free agents.

Aside from snide commentary: no news. Not even any rumors. Supposedly, President Donna Orender is hard at work, but one problem is the holiday season. You can bet in many locations this is an abbreviated and non-attentive week. What are the chances of finding any major philanthropist or CEO in his or her office during Thanksgiving week?

In the meantime, hope springs eternal that the 'Narchs can find a landing spot somewhere in the Bay Area. I don't think the arena is all that important. What is important is an owner who can handle the initial losses. We don't need another Hilton Koch situation.

Iziane 3, Bassul 0

Some surprising news from the Painel do Basquete Feminino blog. It looks like Paulo Bassul's days are numbered as the coach of the Brazilian women's basketball team.

My understanding is that it's leaking from the highest levels of Brazilian basketball that Bassul will be figuratively placed on an ice floe and set adrift at sea. Hortencia Marcari, playing the role of Donna Orender in Brazil, simply said "The issue is not the coach for now."

PBF thinks that Bassul is doomed. Not only is he doomed, this opens the door for Iziane Castro Marques to play for the Brazilian national team again. Everyone and his dog knew in Brazil that Bassul was the obstacle keeping Iziane from returning to the team. Iziane hates Bassul, and I suspect the feeling was mutual. Bassul wanted Iziane to at the very least make an act of contrition, but Iziane preferred not to play instead.

As PBF put it:

This bizarre situation has actually rewarding those who should be punished. The presence of Iziane is a matter of honor for Hortense, who has maintained frequent contacts with the wing and try to convince her to accept a new call. Without Bassul, it is certain that she will accept. It will be a three-pointer of indiscipline.

The Most Conservative Sport?

Essayist Chuck Klosterman writes about popular culture as a music critic and sometimes-sports commentator. In a recent article for ESPN, he writes about why he is a football fan. The gist of Klosterman's argument is that football is a sport with an amazing slight-of-hand : it passes itself off as a conservative sport in terms of its values but is actually the most liberal sport in terms of game innovation. As a socially conservative sport, it will always appeal to those who believe in paternalism and macho toughness - as well as what he calls a "reactionary" sports media. (*) However, as Klosterman puts it:

What the NFL has realized is that they have no better marketing tool than the game itself. Every other sport tries to fool us. Baseball sells itself as some kind of timeless, historical pastime that acts as the bridge to a better era of American life, an argument that now seems beyond preposterous. The NBA tries to create synergy with anything that might engage youth culture (hip-hop, abstract primordial competition, nostalgia for the 1980s, the word "amazing," Hurricane Katrina, etc.). NASCAR connects itself to red state contrarianism. Soccer aligns itself with forward-thinking globalists who enjoy fandom more than sports. But football only uses football. They are the product they sell. Unlike David Stern's failed vision for the NBA, the NFL Network does not try to expand its empire by pushing the sport toward nonchalant audiences with transitory interest; it never tries to trick anybody into watching something they don't already like.

Later on, Klosterman answers the question about why he thinks football is so compelling - why someone might like football, as opposed to something else. The important point, however, is that other sports attempt to sell something other than the game itself - nostalgia or some form of social contrarianism. Since the NFL only sells the game, as it were, the game is endlessly reinvented and tinkered with. If the schedule has to be expanded, why not? Instant replay? Why not? Radios in helmets? Why not? (**)

Despite the high-quality writing, what I found most appealing about Klosterman's essay was the dichotomy between the presentation and the actuality: football presents itself as conservative but is highly innovative. You could apply this dichotomy to other sports:

Sport-Presentation-Actuality

Football - conservative presentation, liberal actuality
Baseball - conservative presentation, conservative actuality
NBA Basketball - liberal presentation, slightly conservative actuality
Soccer - liberal presentation (in the United States), conservative actuality

Unfortunately, this implies that football and baseball are exactly conservative in the same way. Maybe we should use a continuum and give football a "10" on conservative presentation and baseball an "8".

Baseball is a little bit less conservative than football in its presentation - how could a sport that has figures like Jackie Robinson and Bill Lee be truly conservative? - but in terms of the rules it is very conservative. The fundamental rules are to be left untouched; interleague play caused a firestorm and they're still arguing about the designated hitter 30 years later.

Basketball would only get a "4" or a "5" on the presentation scale for conservatism. The sport has two contending social groups, those that think that Bob Cousy is the bee's knees and those that think that LeBron is Da Bomb. In terms of a sport, it hasn't changed that much at all. The 3-pointer is the only major innovation in several years in basketball. (***)

Soccer - in the United States anyway - is seen as a sport that threatens the long-standing reactionary order of sports and would probably get a "2 or 3" on the conservatism scale. In terms of the rules, however, the sport would get a hard "9" or maybe even a "10". I can't think of a major soccer rule change since the Dane's head was first kicked across a field in England.



The above led to wonder where women's basketball fits into these scheme. I came to a startling conclusion. Namely, that the WNBA is sort of the "anti-NFL". The NFL presents itself as a conservative sport but is actually a liberal one; the WNBA presents itself as a liberal sport, but might be the most conservative form of basketball there is.

In terms of the WNBA's presentation, it would be hard to think of a sport with a more liberal consciousness. The WNBA can't seem to decide whether to sell the game itself, or to sell "sisterhood is powerful" - so it sells both. The first campaign for the WNBA was "We Got Next" - "we" being "women" in this case - so in the very first ad campaigns, it wasn't so much the game being sold as the fact that women were playing it. Note that it's not the the NBAW but the WNBA - "women" comes before "basketball".

The sport has an active lesbian fanbase and in terms of the major sports, the individual teams probably do more to recognize their gay fanbase than just about any other sport. (Yes, it's a pitiful job, but when compared to the four major sports the WNBA is almost a consciousness-raising group.) The criticism from the reactionary sports media is that the WNBA - and its fans - are freaks, either too mannish or not mannish enough, choosing whichever cudgel they believe will draw the most blood.

However, the sport itself is very conservative, more conservative that football pretends to be. Hell, the WNBA is more conservative than the NBA! The WNBA doesn't have that weird charge arc in the lane. They haven't adapted the "three steps and dunk" traveling rule that the NBA is so eager to try out. For such liberal thinkers, the WNBA's hard core fans are martinet purists when it comes to their sport. Very few of the dimensions of the women's game are scaled down from the men's game. Maybe the 3-point arc is tweaked a little bit but the same court markings are there. The only major concession is the smaller ball, and some fans don't even like that much change.

There have been calls from sources to perhaps lower the size of the rim a few inches or to shrink the size of the court. Most of those calls have come from those who don't follow the sport. (****) These calls are almost unanimously rejected. There are two reasons why these arguments are rejected. The first is that women's basketball fans want the game not be dominated by athleticism and height, and lowering the rims would tilt the game in that direction. The second is that historically authorities have changed the rules of women's basketball in order to marginalize women's sports. As a result, many women want the game to be as much like the men's game as much as possible.

The problem is that the WNBA is very much like the men's game - the men's game of 1957, before the height of the players had caught up to the dimensions of the court. Furthermore, even though shrinking the size of the court would increasing scoring and not really change the passing game so beloved by WNBA fans, fans want the WNBA's court to remain the size of the men's. (*****)



All right. There are valid arguments for not lowering the rim. There might even be valid arguments for not changing the size of the court. But the reactionary attitude of the WNBA fans to any tinkering at all begs the question: would any change to the WNBA game be welcomed? Is the WNBA going to be like baseball, with its purists fighting off any suggested changes with a flurry of "yes-buts"? It seems that the only criticisms that the WNBA will accepts are ones from "within the academy" so to speak. After all, even your worst enemies might have some good ideas.

Maybe this explains why I like the WNBA so much. What was the sport I was following before I started following the WNBA? Baseball. Maybe, despite my attraction to what I think of as social liberalism, I have a longing for conservative sports.

_____

(*) - There is a ton of discussion - on this blog and others - as to why the WNBA is so slow to gain acceptance in the old media. Maybe the explanation is that "the gatekeepers in traditional sports are reactionary sexist pigs". Frankly, the explanation might need be no more complex than that.

(**) - However, there is something lost in liberalizing the rules of your sport - rule changes and tweaks make it much harder to compare players across eras. It's very easy to compare players across eras in baseball; it's much harder in football.

(***) - The impact of the new charge arc and traveling rules is yet to be seen.

(****) - It appears, unfortunately, that most critics of women's basketball come from the reactionary douchebag school. They'll come up with two or three ideas that might be worth considering, and then torpedo their entire effort with something like "and the players should also all play in lingerie". It's like they have a cognitive version of Tourette's Syndrome.

(*****) - A lot of the arguments that fans use to defend the rules of women's basketball come from cost effectiveness - "We can't change Rule X/Equipment Y because it would be too expensive." The initial arguments against the smaller ball came from the perspective of the bean counter, that it would cothat it would be an unfair costs to high schools and colleges who would now have to purchase separate balls for the women. It's sort of a conservative argument if you think about it.

The Vulture Culture, or "What Happens to Sacramento"

Let's assume for the sake of argument that Sacramento will not relocate, because if they do it makes the following exercise useful only as a thought exercises. Already, fans are asking, "what happens to Sacramento's players?" They've already asked on the Atlanta Dream Message Board; they will ask elsewhere.

It all seems a bit untoward. It undoubtedly reminds Sacramento fans of the scene in A Christmas Carol where Scrooge's former servants are covetously divvying up his personal effects before the body isn't even cold. And in the case of Sacramento, the body isn't even dead yet - it's on life support with the family perched about the bed and someone waiting for a miracle cure.

The problem with sports franchises is that they are not islands in themselves. If Sacramento expires, this means a "dispersal draft". This is how we got Sancho Lyttle in Atlanta. The former players of Sacramento are divvied up among the teams of the WNBA, in the order of worst finish to best finish. The order would go thusly:

1. New York
2. Minnesota
3. Connecticut
4. Chicago
5. San Antonio
6. Washington
7. Tulsa
8. Los Angeles
9. Atlanta
10. Seattle
11. Indiana
12. Phoenix

Note that Sacramento technically only has 11 players to distribute. That leaves Phoenix out.

Furthermore, three of Sacramento players - Hamchétou Maïga-Ba, Kara Lawson, and Ticha Penicheiro - are unrestricted free agents and immune to a dispersal draft. Which knocks out Indiana, Seattle...and Atlanta. Unless Atlanta decides to sign a free agent, Sacramento's loss will not be Atlanta's gain.

So where do the other eight players go? If we assume that teams will draft for the best players available and not draft for need, here's how I see it going:

1. New York: Rebekkah Brunson
2. Minnesota: Nicole Powell
3. Connecticut: Courtney Paris
4. Chicago: Laura Harper
5. San Antonio: DeMya Walker
6. Washington: Kristin Haynie
7. Tulsa: Chelsea Newton
8. Los Angeles: Scholanda Robinson
9. Atlanta: pass
10. Seattle: pass
11. Indiana: pass
12. Phoenix: pass

Catching Up

It's nothing short of amazing. You wait one week, and a lot can change in the WNBA, both for the Dream and elsewhere.

* The most important piece of news that struck was that the Sacramento Monarchs had folded. The Monarchs had been in the league all 13 years of its existence, leaving only four original teams that have been with the league from day one - New York, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Utah/San Antonio. Houston, Charlotte, Cleveland and now Sacramento have bitten the dust.

I felt that it was a shame that the Maloofs - the owners of the Sacramento Monarchs - decided to give so much little notice of their decision. Mechelle Voepel heard that there was going to be a change somewhere along the way in the WNBA about a week ago, but had no details. Now, the shoe has dropped.

The hope - and I think it's an outside hope at best - is that the Monarchs can relocate to Oakland. I mean, with all of the jokes aside, if the WNBA can't survive in San Francisco then it can't survive anywhere. The problem with such a relocation is the venue. The Cow Palace is a decrepit arena in a bad part of town. As for going to the Oracle Arena - where the Warriors play - the obstacle appears to be Chris Cohan, the owner of the Warriors. (I can't figure out why. Either he thinks that lesbian fans will give him the cooties, or he feels that a successful WNBA franchise would point out to one and all how sorry the Warriors are.)

Furthermore, basketball in San Francisco might not be a slam dunk. Frisco Del Rosario writes that "Professional women's basketball has never been more than a curiosity [in San Francisco]." The San Francisco Pioneers in the WBL couldn't draw. The San Jose Lasers in the ABL couldn't draw either. After coming back home after a visit to San Fran, I see Frisco's point. San Francisco is a bad sports town for the same reason that Los Angeles is one - there's just so much to do in those cities that basketball isn't going to capture anyone's attention, whereas if you live in Dallas.... (*)

I hope - I really hope - that the Monarchs can find a home in the Bay Area. I believe the prospects, however, are dim.

* Another surprise was Ros Casares's loss in Euroleague to Cras Basket Taranto in Italy. What was more suprising is how far El Ros fell behind. They were down 60-36 at one time in the third quarter, but somehow managed to crawl to within five points, 72-67 with 1:27 left in the game on a shot by Delisha Milton-Jones. That would be as close as Ros Casares came, as El Ros could only score two more points, losing 78-69 on the road.

This just goes to show you how tough Euroleague is. Anybody can beat anybody. Ros Casares's dream of being undefeated in both the Spanish League and Euroleague goes by the wayside. Me, I blame Becky Hammon. (**)

* Armintie Price got married as well. I believe that the Atlanta Dream's website is posting photos. Congratulations to Armintie Price, and here's to many years of married bliss.

* Georgia Tech lost to Oklahoma State on the road, and beat Florida Gulf Coast at home in the Women's National Invitation Tournament. Georgia Tech starts out 2-1 on the year.

I'll get back on track sooner or later. It was probably good for me to be away from the keyboard for a week, anyway.

____

(*) A joke for Ethan over at Actionless Activity.
(**) Another josh, this time to Becky Hammon's many fans.

En Vacance

Now currently enjoying about a week of vacation. So for those disappointed visitors, there are some great links on the left hand side of the page worth visiting. Hoping to be back around Saturday or (next) Sunday.

In Transit Tomorrow

...so blogging will be light on Saturday, to say the least. Off for some well-deserved down time.

BTW, Georgia Tech beat Winthrop in the first round of the Preseason WNIT. 21 points, 8 steals. Not bad, I say, not bad.