Showing posts with label the knicks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the knicks. Show all posts

Sunday, June 20, 2010

June 17, 1994: Subtle Choices Are Choices Nonetheless

ESPN's presentation of Brett Morgen's documentary June 17, 1994--part of the sports network's 30 for 30 series--opens with the director addressing the audience, saying:

June 17, 1994 is not your typical documentary. There are no talking head interviews, there's no narration, there's simply my editor, myself, and a bunch of footage. Over the last ten years what I've been trying to do is create non-fiction films that are what I call experiential. They're movies that take place in the past but are presented in the present tense. The reason we chose June 17, 1994 is just about every emotion that one relates to sports took place on that day.

I'm not sure whose idea it was to have Morgen describe his directing style before the start of the film, but that person should be commended. Leaving aside the fact that this introductory remark may provide evidence that there is, in fact, at least one talking head interview included in the film, Morgen's opening explanation is a necessary one. It's the first documentary I've seen that eschews reflective interviews and, even if the audience would be able to follow the action without this documentary staple, it takes something of a mental shift to realize that what we're watching is not a meditation on that June date through the lens of sixteen years of reflection: we're watching the on-the-spot reactions of those who witnessed these events unfold in real time. Morgen's introduction might not be the most elegant way to prepare the audience for this change, but I'll take what I can get from ESPN.

The film follows a single day of events in the sports world. The New York Rangers victory parade down the streets of Manhattan. The opening day of the Chicago-hosted World Cup. Arnold Palmer playing his final round of golf at the US Open. Game 5 of the NBA finals, featuring the Knicks and Rockets. A full slate of baseball games. And, of course, OJ's car chase.

The most interesting part of the film is some really great behind-the-scenes footage of Bob Costas, hosting NBC's coverage of the NBA finals. Costas, in these clips, discusses with his production staff how to handle the uncomfortable need to broadcast what was considered a rather important basketball game during what became one of the biggest news stories of the century. The viewer sees Costas desperately trying to determine how best to introduce the game even while OJ sits in the back of a speeding car with a gun to his head. This, in a nutshell, is the major theme of the movie: it's an exploration of how context and juxtaposition create meaning and how people respond to these juxtapositions. While Costas puts on a professional and appropriate face, Morgen throws everything together, forcing the viewer to assimilate six events at once. Trust me when I tell you that each event informs the others, as everything always does. What's fascinating here is that no one--except maybe those working the nation's newsrooms--could possibly have followed the day's events with a level of attention matched by Morgen's mashed-up day. June 17, 1994 as experienced by an average American bears only a slight resemblance to June 17, 1994 as experienced by the film's audience.

And this brings us back to Morgen's opening claim. Just because Morgen claims that this is a thoroughly experiential film, throwing the viewer back in time to 1994, doesn't mean that we have to believe him. As in all films, what the audience sees on-screen is highly curated. The very editing itself is nothing if not a subtle form of reflection, offering moments of commentary through juxtapositions that are anything but neutral. Jumping from OJ's 1985 NFL Hall of Fame induction speech in which he thanks Nicole for some of the best years of his life to an image of a bloody garment at the Simpson residence in 1994 says something. Bringing together footage of a high-speed car chase and a clip of OJ running through an airport on Hertz's dime says something. Apposing the Rangers Stanley Cup victory parade with the throngs who lined the California freeways to gawk at and cheer for OJ's infamous white Bronco says something. Of course, films are supposed to say things. That's the point. And no, this documentary does not faithfully represent how anyone actually experienced that warm June day, but, again, this is the point of film: to selectively tell a story, bringing together diverse elements while omitting needless ones. Morgen does that in spades.

Recommended.

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

LeBron's Changing Narrative

Full disclosure: I did not watch a second of tonight's NBA playoff contest in which the Boston Celtics defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers by a final margin of 120-88. I had some writing to do, we don't have cable in my apartment (apparently we're one of the few remaining holdouts in this country), and I really didn't feel like putting shoes back on to go outside to find a cable-enabled TV. But just because I didn't see any part of this game doesn't mean I can't write about it. That's what blogs are for.

I find that lately I've been equally interested in the narrative of sports as I am in the suspense and the action. And the narrative aspect of this particular game comes across plenty clear from the box score:

LeBron James: 42 minutes, 3-14 FG, 0-4 3FG, 9-12 FT, 15 Points, -22 +/-. As mentioned before, his team lost by 32 points in a fairly crucial playoff game.

Now, this series isn't over. Cleveland might very well win these next two games before proceeding to stomp their way to a championship. LeBron has fallen short in the playoffs before. And his team will probably fall short again. After all, everyone besides for Jordan has lost. Yet this loss feels different. This isn't part of the chosen-one narrative. This shouldn't be part of the story. In the past, a LeBron loss was due, narratively, to his poor teammates. And while there's still no second-banana who compares to a Pippen or a Pau, the question is whether this situation will improve. The supporting cast in Cleveland isn't getting any better. The Knicks, even with LeBron and a max-contract friend, will be missing at least three key rotation parts. What does this guy need to do to win a championship?

I find it interesting that NBA Off-Season's brainworks chalks up tonight's loss more to a lack of motivation than to a lack of talent or skill:

Do you think there’s any part of LeBron that’s rolling over?  Do you think there’s any part of LeBron that’s saying, “I don’t want a fight.”  Fighting and winning might mean Cleveland gets knocked off by the Magic (again), and maybe that makes Bron’s life more difficult?

Because, again, failure due to lack of skill just isn't part of the narrative for the most talented basketball player in the world. If the Cavs go on to lose this series, when LeBron wins a title--and I'm still just about certain that he will--we'll look at that victory as the one which removed the monkey from his back. Have we reached the point where these losses no longer fit in the emerging talent learns his lessons by going again the veteran team storyline? How has it come to this?

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Knicks Recap

Thanks to Seth over at Posting and Toasting, I attended last night's Knicks-Thunder game in T-Mobile's luxury suite. Even though the suites at MSG are way up in the rafters (the dual "15" banners for McGuire and Monroe were just about eye level), it's really a nice experience, mostly because of the free food and the private bathroom.

But this game would have been fun to attend even if I was rubbing elbows with the common folk. I haven't seen the Garden this excited for a Knicks game in years and years. And with good reason: despite the extremely high price they paid at last week's trade deadline to clear cap room for two max-contract free agents this summer, the Knicks have a plan for the first time this decade and they're sticking to it.

And it was exciting to see three new faces get serious minutes. Let's consider them one-by-one.

Tracy McGrady
The night, in short, belonged to him. The Knicks reordered their pre-game player introductions to save the shooting guard position (read: McGrady) for last. If this didn't make a clear enough point, the crowd erupted into a sustained "We Want T-Mac" chant during the fourth quarter. Besides for the injuries, the question with McGrady has always been motivation, and quotes like this make me think that he might come to play through April:

“I haven’t felt that good in a while, to really be received that way, to hear those chants,” McGrady said. ”It really gave chills down my spine.” 

I don't think McGrady will be with the team past June, but I understand the rationale for the crowd's excitement: Tracy McGrady is the biggest name to play for the Knicks since Ewing.

On the court, McGrady looked a step-slow, a little sluggish, and just a bit sloppy. But it's hard to argue with the results. He ended up with a few favorable foul calls that could have easily been called offensive, banked in a jumper from the top of the key, but managed to slither and scoop his way to 26 points on 10-17 shooting from the field. Some of the sloppiness may be attributed to the fact that there are T-Mac's first meaningful minutes since February 2009. The athleticism from McGrady's younger days was nowhere to be seen, but he's only 30 years of age and seems to be capable of transforming himself into a key member of the crafty-scorer club. Two skills that didn't disappear during the twelve-month layoff are McGrady's passing and court vision, most notably on display during his length-of-the-court fast-break bounce pass to Al Harrington. This, more than anything else, is what we can expect from McGrady.

Eddie House
It feels weird rooting for House after all those years he played for the Celtics, but he's a fun player. A gunner without a conscience (in a good way) who plays off his dead-eye shooting by making clever passes when a defender overreacts to the threat of a shot. Pairing him with Gallinari holds promise as a fun and effective lineup.

Sergio Rodriguez
Rodriguez played 26 minutes last night and limited himself to only two turnovers. This would seem to be the big concern with his play, as he's averaged 3.4 per 36 minutes over the course of his career. He's a dynamic creator and contributor--those six assists could easily have been eight or nine if some players (Al Harrington, in particular) knocked down a few wide open looks facilitated by Sergio. Knicks point guards have been of the solid and nondescript variety for as long as I can remember. From Derek Harper, to Ward, Childs, and Duhon, the Knicks haven't employed a point-man who excelled at getting to basket and distributing in a whole long while. (Don't get me started on Marbury.) Rodriguez can't shoot a lick, but he brings a skill to the team that they've been missing.

In the end, the Knicks lost for three reasons:
  1. The team can't defend the interior at all. Russell Westbrook put up 31-9-10, and he got to the rim whenever he wanted. A quick consultation with ESPN's shot chart reveals that only four of his thirteen field goals were jumpers, and only two of those came from beyond ten feet. 
  2. The Knicks were in the penalty for what seemed like every minute of the game action after the half. The Thunder shot 41 free throws, and even though they only made 30, the twelve extra converted freebies kept the Knicks from really building and then maintaing a lead.
  3. Kevin Durant is a cold-blooded killer.
The game was a fun watch and the Knicks played with the sort of urgency that's been sorely missing during the past six weeks. The playoffs are just about an impossibility at this point, but, if last night's contest is any indication, the remaining 28 games should be entertaining. That's all a fan can ask for as we count down to the summer free agency period.

Sunday, December 6, 2009

Paragraph of the Week

From a recent Knicks Knation blog post by Frank Isola about the changing game experience of Madison Square Garden:

But what do you expect from the Garden, which no longer acts or resembles the Garden of old? They have a group of people who are constantly firing T-shirts into the crowd. It begins right before tip-off and never ends. They do that in Memphis, and for good reason. Such antics should be beneath MSG. And do we really need to hear the public address announcer tell the crowd to “Stand up and cheer for your Knicks?" What in the good name of John Condon is going on over there?

Thursday, January 22, 2009

The Knicks, Car Washes, T-Shirts, and You

If the relationship between Patrick Ewing and Knicks fans had to be described using only two and a half words (contractions count, for this purpose, as 1.5 words) of Facebook terminology, this connection would be defined as: it's complicated.

Ewing is undoubtedly the most talented Knick of my lifetime. (And it's not particularly close. I guess Allan Houston would have to be the second greatest Knick of the last 25 years, and his career just doesn't compare to Ewing's.) But there's still a nagging sense that Ewing never quite lived up to his potential. He never won a championship, obviously. He missed a finger roll that could have won Game 7 of the 1995 Eastern Conference Finals in Indiana. The Knicks went on a run to the NBA Finals in 1999 without him. It are these failings which define the Ewing Era of Knicks basketball.

This characterization is not fair, of course. Ewing was an original Dream Teamer. An eleven-time all-star. Rookie of the year winner. One of the 50 greatest NBA players of all time. An NCAA champion at Georgetown. More: If John Starks had made that buzzer-beater in Game 6 of the '94 Finals, Ewing would be remembered the way Hakeem Olajuwon is. If Starks had shown up at all in Game 7 of that series, Ewing would be one of the few basketballers to be the best player on an NCAA champion and a NBA champion.

So yes, Ewing might be the most accomplished Knick. He is certainly the best statistical Knickerbocker of all time. But there is a vague feeling of unease when it comes to Ewing's career.

There is no such ambiguity when it comes to Ewing's teammate and on-court bodyguard, Charles Oakley. Oakley was always the toughest guy in every game he played. Michael Jordan keeps him around to be the toughest guy in the room. He was never expected to lead a team to a championship, so the lack of a championship doesn't define his career like it does Ewing's. He was never in the position to attempt a game-winning finger-roll in a deciding playoff game, so he never missed one. Oakley is remembered solely for the things he did well, not for his shortcomings. And that is why Oakley might be my favorite Knick.

As a Knicks fan forced to endure the Isiah Thomas Era, I don't think I can be blamed for having greater affinity for a player who represents only the good aspects of the last really good epoch of Knicks history. (I'm not including the 1999 team because they had no chance--none--of beating the Spurs. Also, that shortened strike season was weird and maybe shouldn't be taken seriously). There shouldn't be anything complicated when it comes to my favorite Knick. And so, if anyone is already searching for birthday presents for me, you could do much worse than this official Oakley's Car Wash t-style shirt. And yes, I did compose this entire post as a way to link to that shirt.

(Somewhat relatedly, I think David Lee's unquestioned status as New York's favorite Knick is related to Oakley. I, for one, have always wanted another Oakley on the Knicks, and it looks like the Knicks may have found one. Even though Lee is a far superior offensive player now, in his fourth season, than Oakley ever was, and even though Oakley was a way better defensive player. But their rebounding percentages are pretty similar. But those who argue that Lee would better serve the Knicks as trade-bait, and that those who advocate keeping him around are thinking irrationally might not know the half of it. The irrational love of Lee might have been building for 20 years.)

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

The NBA and KIA Motors: Catch the Fever!


I'm eternally grateful to KIA Motors for their interesting partnerships with sports and cities. Maybe the coolest thing I did during my Europe-cation over the summer was watching the EuroCup Final (featuring Spain and Germany) with 65,000 of my closest Spanish, mulleted friends in Plaza de Colon. And those giant screens carrying the Spanish broadcast were made possible by none other than KIA Motors. I doubt they sponsored the scary Spanish beer or the fireworks/low-powered grenades which were continuously detonated throughout the match, but they may do things differently in Europe. The point is, KIA normally does good when it comes to these public plaza interactive sports events. It's not their fault that the NBA Tip-Off event I attended today in Union Square Park was too lame for words. (Note: this will not keep me from writing about this function using--yes--words.) Sometimes things are just lame.

The real problem afflicting this event was that there was no event. In Spain they showed the championship contest of an international competition. The NFL's Kickoff event on September 4th of this year featured musical performances by Keith Urban and Usher. The NBA Tip-Off, on the other hand, had like this elaborate collection of lines. There was a line to get on the raised platform basketball court to shoot a free throw in order to win a t-shirt. There was a line to spin a huge The Price is Right-style spinning wheel, which granted one of three prizes, all sponsored by and labeled with the T-Mobile logo: an orange, basketball-looking stressball; a small tin of mints; and a set of dog-tags depicting I'm not sure what. (I won the mints and left them in a coffeeshop around the block; my friend won the stressball and graciously gave it to me.) And there was a line in which some KIA employees at the end of the line handed out a credit-card shaped piece of plastic which I was to present to the KIA employee at the front of the line. The lady took my card and offered me a mousepad, a water bottle, a strangely shaped magnet, and a sports towel.

I'm fairly certain that the point of these lines was to allow these KIA folks to ask people if they'd be willing to take a short survey. I agreed because I'm somewhat of an idiot who doesn't like refusing people. Also, I was kinda interested in what they'd ask.

Sample Question: "Would you describe yourself as a casual NBA fan or an avid NBA fan?" ("Avid.")

Another Sample Question: "Does KIA's partnership with the NBA make you more likely to purchase KIA products?" ("No.")

Yet Another Sample Question: "Would you like your local KIA dealer to contact you regarding special offers and discounts?" ("Hell no.")

The main reason I attended is because I am unemployed and I already had watched two episodes of It's Always Sunny in... today. But the second most primary reason I attended is because I wanted to meet such NBA superstars as Scottie Pippen, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and Walt "Clyde" Frazier, such NBA stars as John Starks and David Lee, and such NBA role players as Charles Smith, Kenny Walker, Malik Rose, Nate Robinson and Danilo Gallinari. I even brought this Free Darko-approved Lenin Closet t-shirt in an effort to get it signed by some of the names. (I'm not sure if getting this thing autographed would enhance or completely ruin the joke.) I stood in line in Union Square Park for about an hour and none of those people were to be seen. I'm sure all those guys were there at some point during the day, but it's super annoying to wait around a rainy park waiting for some guys to show up anytime during a tentative three-hour window of arrival.

It's hard to feel cheated by a totally free event. But this came close.

The one good thing that came out of this is my googling of Wilson Chandler, because I wanted to see if the tall guy in one of the pictures I took was him. (It turns out he wasn't scheduled to appear.) Google turned up this gem of a photo, of Chandler meeting "with Rabbi Grossman at the Migdal Ohr 'Family Carnival' held at the Madison Square Garden Training Center."

I wonder what they talked about.