The Lab Is Inside You

Back from Chicago, and instead of feeling refreshed and renewed, I'm pissed that we're being denied an off-season. Long playoffs, suspenseful draft, free agency intrigue galore, global tremors, the Olympics. . . it makes me wish for those summer days that were like a wasteland, with nothing but MLB and starved, raving NFL fans in sight. Or perhaps I am ungrateful, or God is testing me, or this is a "be careful what you wish for" scenario.

I'm still trying to work out this notion of redundancy which, ironically, the Recluse claims is a staple of the college game. I guess the difference is that I'm imagining it in terms of positions ordinarily expected to off-set, or complete, each other. Not whole teams preaching one single trait—that's just a more refined, or simplistic, or disciplined version of a running team. It seems like the issue here is something apart from all matters of the positional revolution, which re-define the team's entire system, or system of relationships. The redundancy principle wouldn't necessarily mean "get a team of shooting guards"—though, SML, there was that quote about D'Antoni's ideal being five 6'8" guys who could pass. This is more about isolating the backcourt, or 3/4, or 4/5. The rise of the swingman would seem to indicate that, beyond individual cases, there is some use for this in NBA play.

Those two other theories (apositional nirvana, new roles) would still at least make some passing attempt to get the traditional responsibilities taken care of. They might emerge piecemeal, or spontaneously, and not even work—decentralized rebounding makes me laugh out loud, which is why I don't resent Brand on the Sixers—but that's why Marion's burden, however tragi-comic, was key to understanding the various incarnations of the Suns. And why we need to give the Warriors swarming defense its propers, and why the Two Joshes weren't about to be low-balled.

The redundancy theory is a lot more local, and even more counter-intuitive. Why did Hughes/Arenas sort of work? They couldn't man up to save their lives, but they created a ton of turnovers by playing off each in passing lanes. Something that, incidentally, neither has matched since 2004-05. Now, it's not like they were the same player: Hughes is a better rebounder and has a mid-range game, Arenas is deadlier off the dribble and bombs from anywhere. But the point is, their differences were incidental. What allowed them to work together well was their similarities. That's the same kind of vibe I get from a possible Roy/Bayless tandem. No one would ever get them confused, style-wise, but on paper, they do similar things. It probably doesn't really matter that Wright and Randolph are different, because the team's not looking to make up for one with the other. What's important is the surfeit of springy skill.

But in at least one area, instead of combining players to address negatives, weaknesses, and potential holes, there principle of excess triumphs. Thus, an overload that creates mismatches, dominates the discussion, and disrupts the usual chess match. It's a gamble, to be sure, but who's to say that being twice as good at one thing and lacking at another can't pay off? Yes, I know, that's the philosophy behind teams that just plain try to outscore their opponents, which never works. That's why I'm proposing this only in diads whose units have come to mirror each other in conventional basketball thinking. Perhaps this is meant to—apologies in advance—complement a complementary system. The two players become one unit, whose overall identity has to be taken into account when planning out the rest of the team.

Open question: Would this describe Beasley/Marion, or does it all depend on how much Marion has to completely cover for Beasley on defense? That would render their similarities incidental, wouldn't it?

More interesting:

We'll have some more USA Basketball stuff later this week, but for now, one thought. You've probably heard that LeBron's giving lots of money to Obama, this from a player whose silence on Darfur was taken as evidence of corporate drone-dom. I know, one is genocide overseas, the other a Presidential election. Ball players aren't supposed to be activists, while they often contribute to campaigns. But does anyone remember last summer's series of photos with James and company in fatigued and saluting? And how they got pep talks from wounded soldiers? Or how about a brief rundown the USA Basketball head and coach's political affiliations? Look, I'm all for supporting the troops, but that whole thing reeked of reinforced symbolism and connecting basketball with war.

There's no way that LeBron gets benched, or anything ridiculous like that. But if James is a very public, very generous supporter of Obama, and the face of USA team. . . you have to wonder if this doesn't hurt the Republicans just a little, including those who attempted to use USA ball last year for their own agenda.

Labels: , , ,


At 7/28/2008 5:40 PM, Blogger Dr. Lawyer IndianChief said...

firsties: just gonna set shit off by saying that lebron's obama endorsement is as safe/corporate/calculated as anything he's ever done. barack is the only dude in the country with a higher q value than lebron. align the stars.

At 7/28/2008 6:28 PM, Blogger Ghost Deini said...

If Lebron was throwing money at Mccain, that'd be news.

At 7/28/2008 6:51 PM, Blogger themarkpike said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 7/28/2008 7:36 PM, Blogger themarkpike said...

Just wanted to briefly mention that I was a vociferous opponent to Coach K's politicization of basketball during the 2004 election. Even dropped a sophomoric letter to the editor.

Between Coach K's "Devils for Dole" ploy, conflating the success of the Duke Athletic Department with neo-con policies, and bringing in Tom Ridge to his Leadership Program at Fuqua School of Business, he has a history of leveraging his position for political gain. Last year's Olympic stuff wasn't even that drastic.

Then again, he probably helped hook up Reggie Love with that Obama gig, so maybe not.

This is all to say that I think he's a great college coach, but there's a way to be political without being overt. It's part of that Free Darko expression of style and substance that allows the game to transform into politics without being obvious. Compare Coach K's record on this with Dean Smith's. One is clearly more FD than the other.

Oh, and new Re-Up. 527, PAC.

At 7/28/2008 7:44 PM, Blogger John Sharkey, Esq. said...

To kinda-sorta bring the two halves of this post together: this idea of redundant skills carries a lot of weight re: how to choose a vice president. Namely, instead of picking someone to fill a perceived hole, a candidate goes and doubles down on the core message. See: Clinton, a young white southerner, picking another young white southerner. In both cases, you're dominating the discussion and disrupting the usual chess match.

Implication: Obama/Arenas '08?

At 7/28/2008 10:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Obama wanted redundancy at his position in a running mate, maybe he could pick Harry T. Lennix (Commander Locke from The Matrix. "If I could put a gun in the hand of every man, woman, and child in Zion..."). It'd be like

Obama/Obama 30 Seconds Later '08

Beats the 'unified' ticket, which to me seems like trying to pair Monta Ellis (rising star with skills so obvious that other galaxies detect them with radio telescopes but some questions of experience as The Man at a new position?) with someone with the baggage of say...Zach Randolph (but factory workers and white women voters love him, you can't win without the "and you take Mardy Collins too" voters!?).

At 7/28/2008 10:40 PM, Blogger Brown Recluse, Esq. said...

I don't think a son of the working class governor of Arkansas is really the same thing as a son of a senator from Tennessee, even if they were roughly the same age and southern. Being white men hardly counts as redundant in American politics.

At 7/28/2008 11:16 PM, Blogger John Sharkey, Esq. said...

That's a fair point, but I was thinking geographically, which is how a lot of those conversations go down: saying that a candidate from, say, the south needs to grab a guy from the northeast. Or a young guy needs an old hand (see: Cheney). Or an old guy needs some youth (see, possibly: Pawlenty).

At 7/29/2008 12:02 AM, Blogger Joey said...

the all-time perfect "running" team: Steve Nash (or Magic)on the floor with four Shawn Marions(or James Worthys).

redundancy indeed.

At 7/29/2008 12:20 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

In keeping with the idea of redundancy: Kwame to Detroit. Now they have a mayor and a 4/5 with the same first name.

At 7/29/2008 2:25 AM, Blogger The Other Van Gundy said...

@jawaan: How are the mayor's hands?

The fact that Kwame Brown can score an 8 million dollar payday when he should be working for sandwiches (either a sub per double double, or maybe he could actually work at Potbelly's) is the surest sign yet that our economy is deeply troubled.

At 7/29/2008 4:43 AM, Blogger Dude N Plenty said...

Redundancy seems a poor ticket in the NBA or politics. Thats why Marion covering the deficiencies of Beasley might work while Beasley with Durrant would be sure to set both players back. Thats why I suggest a Obama (1st half of 08) should pick Obama (second half of 08) for his ticket or the other way around. The man who could never turn his back on Wright, anymore then he could his grandmother, is covered by the man who has turned his back on Wright. One candidate said he would protect American jobs while the prospective running mate assured Canada that he would uphold NAFTA. One candidate stated that wearing a pin is not necessarily an indicator of true patriotism while he is balanced by the candidate who wears the pin at every meeting and speech. The one Senator who said his policy for Iraq is aligned with Bush's policy in Iraq is balanced by the running mate who said he opposed the War back when he was a state Senator and thought the Surge was a mistake and now thinks the Surge accomplished nothing. The deficiencies of Obama from Jan-June 08 covers for the weaknesses of Obama since then. This is indeed the moment when the seas stopped rising, when a new face began to represent America to the World, when the son of slave traders can be claimed as their own by the children of freed slaves, and when consistency officially became disassociated from America. Obama-Obama 08.

At 7/29/2008 8:14 AM, Blogger oliver said...

You are right, R. Lobstah. We have lost all trace of consistency in American politics. Screw Obama; what we need is more Bush. THE MAN BELIEVES THE SAME THING TODAY AS HE DID EIGHT YEARS AGO, NO MATTER WHAT THE F#CK HAPPENS IN-BETWEEN. Consistency now, consistency always, consistency forever!

So, Lobstah... you care that Obama distanced himself from Wright? You actually care? Or is it just something for you to bitch about? And now Obama wears a flag pin... please, let's go on caring about stuff like this. A pin. A three-inch piece of metal. This is what we're basing our decisions on. That's just fucking great.

Whatever. If Obama loses, I'm moving to Quebec. Je me souviens!

Screw you guys; I'm going home.

At 7/29/2008 9:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From sandwiches to political catfighting in one post. Nice.

The reupping of Okafor (6y, 72M) pretty much assures that the already unlikely pairing of GW and Josh Smith isn't going to happen. Maybe in a perfect world.

On a side note, I think this was a good signing for the Bobcats, but Okafor is probably the least FD player in the league right now. Game based on solid, fundamental defense and the personality of a cinder block.

At 7/29/2008 10:21 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

@ gpietras: I haven't seen the graph that Tom Ziller is undoubtedly producing for the book, but I'm pretty sure the FD range starts at Tim Duncan Lane, and goes all the way to the intersection of Gilbert Arenas and Baron Davis. The midway point is Dirk Nowitzki's MVP year.

And just like there exists imaginery numbers, there exists imaginery FDs... like the aforementioned Josh Smith/Gerald Wallace combo ("sure to get/give a concussion), or the Pistol Pete-Jason Williams backcourt.

In the redundacy discussion: had the Josh Smith to the 76ers rumors played out, that would be the ideal test case for redundant players. Unless you think Iggy and Osh struggling to combined for 20% shooting from downtown, while getting 20 steals and 15 blocks in one game at least twice a season, isn't the ultimate test case for the theory. Redundancy only works with SG/SFs; it doesn't work with combo PG/SG (see the Knicks under Isiah Thomas), and it doesn't work with PF/C (unless you believe Dalembert/Chandler tandem could be the anchors of a winning team).

At 7/29/2008 11:13 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

redundant subs: James Posey and Bonzi Wells (if Wells re-ups with the Hornets)

At 7/29/2008 11:18 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

couple more--

Stanford-twin centers


At 7/29/2008 11:52 AM, Blogger Trey said...

Aren't this year's Warriors the definition of redundancy? Outside of Biedrins and Monta, isn't every other player on their roster replicated somehow? I can't even tell Wright and Randolph apart.

At 7/29/2008 11:55 AM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

Not to be a dick, but this and the last three posts I've done have been about Wright/Randolph.

At 7/29/2008 12:11 PM, Blogger Trey said...

Right. I'm more concerned with guys like Magette and Azubuike and Jackson and Croshere and Harrington. It's just that Wright and Randolph are actually similar looking.

At 7/29/2008 12:26 PM, Blogger Joey said...

Dearest Shoals,

please do a definitive post on the LEAST FD players in the league. that would be rich

my only earmark, beware of the players that are so non-FD that they are........... Tim Duncan's bank off the high glass, from the corner is totally FD!

At 7/29/2008 12:36 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

It's funny, I always kind of liked Emeka because of a story I read on him and Gordon practicing together. He would have Gordon drive every way possible, from every angle, and at each juncture stop to explain what he was thinking. Basically he thinks the key to blocking shots is to know the mind of the would-be scorer. That always impressed me, but I couldn't tell if it was highly intelligent or dorky. That seems like a key distinction if you want to talk about who's FD and who isn't.

At 7/29/2008 1:09 PM, Blogger bernard snowy said...

didn't Okafor finish his degree in 3 years? I'm gonna go with "highly intelligent", and save "dorky" for shit like Tim Duncan's tattoos.

At 7/29/2008 2:21 PM, Blogger Thomas M. said...

A further similarity with Wright/Randolph -- they're both lefties.

Randolph will probably wind up being a 3 than a 4, he has more handles and should develop a better outside shot than Wright, who seems more like an ultra-athletic under-sized 4.

I'm hoping that we see a Randolph/Wright/Biedrins frontcourt at some point -- the Stringbean Machine. Williams and Hendrix can share fluffernutters on the bench.

wv: rigdd -- rigid/rigged

At 7/29/2008 2:31 PM, Blogger Sweat of Ewing said...

'08-'09 Clippers starting 5:

Point Guard: Baron Davis
Shooting Guard: Ricky Davis
Small Center: Paul Davis
Power Center: Chris Kaman
Point Center: Marcus Camby
6th Man: Fats Gordon

I am so FUCKING excited.

At 7/29/2008 3:00 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

I don't really know if the Clippers are likely to go with the Three Davis starting lineup.

Mofo Clippers should get Antonio and Dale Davis out of retirement to play the 4/5, and hire Grizzlies assistant coach Johnny Davis to coach.

I'm sure those transactions would fit within Don Sterling's budget.

At 7/29/2008 4:16 PM, Blogger ronald james davis said...


i know im not the only one who saw that during the canada game.

At 7/29/2008 4:22 PM, Blogger Dude N Plenty said...

This is rightfully not the acceptable forum for our disagreement. If you care to read a response to your comments, it will be posted at


At 7/29/2008 5:18 PM, Blogger Michael D said...

On the Bayless/Roy similarities: I don't really see it.

Roy is a superb passer, defender and increasingly has shown a scoring touch via drives and mid range jumpers.

Bayless on the other hand, on very early appearences: excels getting to the rim and driving in general, has speed with the ball in his hands and has shown a good feel for finding openings in the defense.

As a Blazers fan, I am happy to see Roy have a teammate who can drive to the rim without abandon and allow Roy more time to set up the offense and play defense. Roy was hurt too many times trying to create offense. Errmmm, I just recanted my entire previous point and reiterated yours. Damn.

At 7/29/2008 5:42 PM, Blogger Justin Tenuto said...

Shoals: You've been the frosting on my cookies for almost a week with the Wright/Randolph hallucinations. I'm forever inundated with Warrior fans who bitch about Nellie, moan about small-ball, and pine for a magical, perfect PF to take the team to the promise land. These men have short memories.

There was a time when our Dubs wagered hundreds of million of dollars on the Adonal Foyle/Troy Murphy/Mike Dunleavy triumverate, a miscalculation on par with Hop 'n' Gator. In only a couple years, 2/3rds of that detritus was jetsammed for the immently lovable Stephen Jackson and the always underappreciated Al Harrington. Now, what we're left with is straight up weirdness: a team without a real point guard, three Reggie-Miller skinny, southpaw bigs, the fastest player in the league, and, on top of it all, Ronny Turiaf, who is joy personified. I'm thrilled. And if anyone's mad enough to make it work, it's Nellie, the greatest bullshitter in all of sports.

The point? How could you NOT be excited as a Warrior fan? In an NBA filled with Grizzlies and Bobcats, it's serendipity to be rooting for something as aggressively weird as the Warriors next year. Imagine Monta, Al Harrington, Wright/Biedrins/Randolph on the court, simultaneously if you need prompting. Unleash the hounds.

At 7/29/2008 5:50 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

-Finally read this, and have decided it has a lot to do with FreeDarko. No, I am not calling myself a genius, or even correct.

-Is there a comprehensive list of left-handers anywhere? That might hold the key to everything.

-Something else vaguely Randolph-related coming this evening.

At 7/29/2008 6:37 PM, Blogger Justin Tenuto said...

"-Is there a comprehensive list of left-handers anywhere? That might hold the key to everything."

Behold: the key to everything

At 7/29/2008 6:41 PM, Blogger Justin Tenuto said...

On second look, it's certainly not definitive nor up to date. But it does include Wang Zhi Zhi, which is worth something, I would think.

At 7/29/2008 7:24 PM, Blogger Robett Silverman said...

Doesn't the attempted Marbury/Francis backcourt in NY circa 2006 sort of refute the redundancy theory? Or is/was Larry Brown ar to set in his ways to contemplate unleashing the true might of Franbury on opponents.

In any case, It's going to be fascinating to see what lineups D'ant throws on the court. The Knicks still have redundancies galore (Curry/Randolph [bigs who can score and not defend], Crawford/Nate/Marbury [shoot first, turnover-prone pgs,]) so there's certainly an opportunity to test this theory in NYC

At 7/29/2008 8:00 PM, Blogger Melvin Dumar said...

Liberated fandom as liberated physics? The lefties list as E8 has to be a bad joke. It's a half-step from phrenology.

I thought freedarko was the scattershot incursion of academic-leaning social theory into sports journalism, with the occasionally fresh experiments in style one might expect as such (facilitated by a newly "free" media infrastructure).

Is Shoals' graduate school Lisi's wilderness isolation?

Is the "macro" in fd's book title earnest?

At 7/29/2008 8:09 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

I'd say that article is more relevant to some of my more out-there theories of what might work on a basketball court. It (and those posts) are supposed to be a little fun, a little self-mocking, and possibly onto something.

The left-leaning social theory stuff is in earnest, unless we get into revolutionary politics, probably because those feedback into the whole "revolution of style" thing.

How is my grad school his wilderness? Wouldn't my exit from grad school be his wilderness isolation?

One straight answer: We have no idea what "macrophenomenal" means.

At 7/29/2008 8:52 PM, Blogger Melvin Dumar said...

The difference between lisi and fd seemed precisely that Lisi does not feel he is "a little bit onto something" but that he is seriously and exceptionally onto something. Hence the consonance with the romantic wilderness narrative presented half-cynically in the nyer article.
Regardless, Lisi seems much more the cartesian gambler.

I said that grad school was your wilderness because his return is to academia, wonky outsider perspective in hand, whereas FD is a return from academia to the sportspages of your youth, wonky outsider perspective in hand.

This is no kind of critique of FD, but I just didn't get the parallel with Lisi beyond what seemed to be some casual, mostly misleading correspondences

Also, I assumed as much about the macro, but the point was that Lisi's "Macro" would be earnest. Like he would never respond that he has "no idea what "theory of everything" means. you know?

i do think its interesting that lisi has that kind of subjectivist appeal beyond an objectivist field (mostly via the wilderness myth) - but as the profile argues, Lisi is seen, by himself and others, as a bulwark against the crumbling of physics into aesthetics, politics, etc.

At 7/29/2008 8:56 PM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

Okay, all that makes sense.

String theory has always baffled me, so the Lisi article—even if the guy is supposed to be taking a stand against aestheticized math as governing the world—was a lot easier for me to process in just that way.

At 7/29/2008 9:31 PM, Blogger Alex W.A. said...

I'm down with mathed-out aesthetics but not aestheticized math.
Shoals, what are you in grad school for?

At 7/29/2008 9:52 PM, Blogger oliver said...

Ugh. No, I do not care to continue the Obama discussion. I'm already pretty settled about in my own head. Criticising people on the left or right is one thing, but pointlessly regurgitating the talking points of others... well, that's not very FD, now is it, assuming that we take the essence of FD to in some way relate to free-styling, or some approximation therein. Bash Obama all you like, but come up with an interesting, funny, or creative way to do it. Please don't give me crap like: Flag pins! Reverend Wright! Things other people mention on the news!

I forgot to make this comment relate to basketball, though. Therefore: Ricky Davis!

At 7/29/2008 9:56 PM, Blogger Danny said...

is ricky davis freedarko?

At 7/29/2008 10:11 PM, Blogger oliver said...

A better question, and one that probably has already been talked about here... Now that Darko has been "freed," and isn't very good... is Darko himself disqualified from Free Darko-ness?

And if that is the case, then it "Free Darko" itself founded, micro and macrocomisically... upon the void?*

Heavy shit, no?

(*to paraphrase James Joyce)

At 7/29/2008 10:36 PM, Blogger Danny said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 7/29/2008 10:38 PM, Blogger Danny said...

wiki says ricky's real name is tyree ricardo davis. which i hold as pretty free darko as well.

and can you really say darko's free? dude's like serbian kwame. man packed his bags left dc went to hollywood go west young man a new life ahead for you sir and he did but the miles don't erase the memories. tell the brand you reach i teach and that business follows you.

so darkos not dumars little pet proj anymore but hes still numero dos siempre. between bron and melo dude picked before wade.

man breaks the chains and gets free by realizing potential. everyones expectations you meet them and shit on them. then tomorrow's your call and the world is yours.

darko aint free bron's free. melo's on his way to chinese freedom in a couple weeks. just cus you change zip codes doesn't make you free i dont think.

freedarko lives on I do believe

At 7/29/2008 11:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Firstly: going way back, I can see how Emeka playing the angles (and his academic record) might be indicative of an above-average intelligence; does that make him any more or less FD? (FD here, I guess, being: Huh guys do you like him huh do you?)

I know plenty of intelligent people that are boring and I wouldn't want to cheer for if they threw a ball through a hoop. Are Emeka's brains appealing because it makes him an outsider?

Personally, I wouldn't like Stephen Hawking without his cartoon appearances and predilection for strippers. I'll take self-awareness and unique identity over intelligence any day of the week.

In a little broader note, how would the Diop-Dampier two-headed beast from a few years back (and the future?!?!) fit in with this conversation. They don't see action on the court at the same time, but bring very similar things to the table. It's got a significant advantage over playing the two on the court at the same time; let's the team have a little consistency in the rotation.

Then again, who gives a shit because those two are boring.

At 7/30/2008 12:33 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

@Oliver - Between your inept reactions to Lobstah's astute and thoughtful opinions and then your retort that exposed you as being underprepared for such an argument, I'm beginning to lean towards McCain. My word, if the whackos simply would keep their mouths shut and stop regurgitating the same old empty Look-at-me-I'm-a-liberal-so-I'm-smart-aren't-I rhetoric, then the Dems might actually win this thing.

Sorry for coming across as a bit harsh, but damn that's obnoxiuos and not to mention counter-productive.

At 7/30/2008 12:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I had something in response to John, but jesus christ why bother.

At 7/30/2008 12:52 AM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

Fascism is so much more FD than the American right than it's not even funny.

Do I hope Donte Greene ends up included in the Artest deal?

Ricky Davis will always have a special place in my heart.

At 7/30/2008 12:56 AM, Blogger Bethlehem Shoals said...

Oops, I hadn't checked anything since going out. Does Greene belong more on Sacramento than Houston?

At 7/30/2008 1:06 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

This trade brings only one question to my mind:

Can Ron Artest scare Tracy past the first round?

At 7/30/2008 2:31 AM, Blogger Dude N Plenty said...

I thought correlating flip-flopping with covering for weaknesses in basketball was a fairly interesting zing but you win some, you lose some.

At 7/30/2008 7:18 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scary picture

At 7/30/2008 11:23 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

Somewhere Gilbert Arenas must be kicking himself in the mouth. Didn't he essencially say that Okafor and co. were stupid for turning down $60M last year?

At 7/30/2008 11:36 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

does this mean artest is going to give up his contract and play for free b/c he gets to play for Adelman? That might free him up to do some wild stuff our minds have yet to even dream.

At 7/30/2008 12:13 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

@Browny: Arena's point stands, as far as I can tell. Okafor essentially received the same contract that was being offered last year, risked being injured, and lost around worked 07-08 on the rookie scale.

At 7/30/2008 12:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

edit: "Arenas'" and "lost 7-8 million by working".

At 7/30/2008 1:09 PM, Blogger dsparks said...

Artest seems less redundant to Battier than McGrady, and the Rocket to whom he was most similar last year was Jackson, the player for whom he was traded. See the graphic at the end of this post.

At 7/30/2008 1:11 PM, Blogger Nathaniel Jones said...

I feel like we're gradually losing the apostrophe following Donte' which makes me inexplicably sad.

At 3/01/2022 1:36 PM, Blogger my website said...

I am truly thankful to the holder of this site who has shared this great post at here.


Post a Comment

<< Home