I don't get it
I have always been a big baseball fan, and also a hockey fan. The hockey love I inherited from my dad. The baseball love skipped him and came right to me. He never understood how a person can hit .300 and be considered good...since he is doing his job less than a third of the time. (We have discussed the skill needed to hit a 90 mph fastball, etc.) I like to argue that if a player's defense helps the team win, its worth a lower batting average. The entire NL West is sub-.500 already, following last year. What if the best team in that division does not finish with a winning record? I know its early (that comforts the Yankee fan inside), but last year the Padres finished 82-80. That doesn't give us much to rely on. The NHL's worst playoff team record this year is 41-28-13 (Edmonton), and they took the best team in hockey (Detroit--almost makes me puke to say that) into double overtime in the first playoff game of the season.
Now, here's the part I don't get. The NBA has 2 teams in the playoffs with a .500 record, and 1 even with a losing record. Check out the standings, I kid you not! Now, I don't hate basketball, but doesn't it seem like something needs to change, here? I am also in favor of changing the rules in baseball to keep sub-.500 teams watching tv in October.
In my job, I am expected to do things well, and I am expected to make my team strong. Are athletes expected to make their teams strong, or just make their teams not suck as much as the next? Is the player who averages 30 points a game leading his team out of the playoffs (see Allen Iverson) worth more than the player with 20 points per game leading his team to the best record in the game (see Richard Hamilton)?
Or...is the coach, who really pulls the team together, actually worth more than any single player?
The last time I rooted for the Edmonton Oilers The team leader was a guy named Wayne.
Go Oilers!
Now, here's the part I don't get. The NBA has 2 teams in the playoffs with a .500 record, and 1 even with a losing record. Check out the standings, I kid you not! Now, I don't hate basketball, but doesn't it seem like something needs to change, here? I am also in favor of changing the rules in baseball to keep sub-.500 teams watching tv in October.
In my job, I am expected to do things well, and I am expected to make my team strong. Are athletes expected to make their teams strong, or just make their teams not suck as much as the next? Is the player who averages 30 points a game leading his team out of the playoffs (see Allen Iverson) worth more than the player with 20 points per game leading his team to the best record in the game (see Richard Hamilton)?
Or...is the coach, who really pulls the team together, actually worth more than any single player?
The last time I rooted for the Edmonton Oilers The team leader was a guy named Wayne.
Go Oilers!