1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Big Ball Theory

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Chef2, Mar 14, 2017.

  1. Della9250

    Della9250 Well-Known Member

    The quality of the points matters if you don't cross half court to play defense and you get outlet passes for wide open layups
     
  2. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Actually, not even layups, because that would require him to dribble in 20-30 feet to the basket and then run out again for the passes, a total of 50-60 feet of running per possession.

    Mainly he stood there, got the 3/4 court outlet pass, took one or two dribbles, then pulled up for a 20-foot 3-pointer, a total of maybe 15 feet of running (medium jogging) per possession. Essentially it's the same thing as standing there and shooting free throws.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017
  3. Della9250

    Della9250 Well-Known Member

  4. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    LaVar Ball didn't truly "cross the line" in the eyes of the national media until he started clowning on royalty like Jordan, Curry and LeBron's kids.

    In our celebrity-is-king-god-and-president culture that's just not something a "nobody" like Ball is allowed to do.
     
  5. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I watched it again, which I hadn't done for a couple weeks: they were mostly layups.

    And I will say one thing: I don't want to hear one single word of panty-pissing boo-hooing for the poor sorry little opposing team, Los Osos, which mainly stood there like bitches and let him dribble by. The Washington Generals couldn't have done better.

    Perhaps some different motivation was needed:



     
  6. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member


    It's more than that. I really wasn't aware of this guy to speak of. I'd seen a bit of chatter here on sj, but if you had asked me about him by name I would have looked at you blankly.

    Then he started talking about how he would have trashed MJ in his prime. I looked at his college stats, looked at Jordan's NBA stats for the same year, and concluded "This guy is a dick", which basically remains my opinion.
     
  7. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    You think he's serious? He's taking people for a ride. He's a blowhard.
     
  8. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    No, I think he's milking the coverage for publicity to sell more overpriced hoodies. Which is his business, I guess... but I don't have to go along for the ride.
     
  9. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    He's serious, he's a blowhard and he's an asshole.

    Earl Woods said that "Tiger will do more than any other man in history to change the course of humanity". Earl was serious. Turns out Tiger was famous for winning the second most majors, and banging diner waitresses.

    Ball is quoted as saying each of his kids will be one and done. If you've ever seen the middle kid play, you'd know what a crock it is, and what kind of pressure that must put on him.

    These dads are assholes. If you can't see it, its on you.
     
  10. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    I've no real problem with those comments, because they just come off as a crazy goof trolling the media for publicity.

    Instead, the comments where I think he comes off as a total asshole are ones like he made here--trashing his sons' UCLA teammates as a means to exalt Lonzo's greatness, or here--trashing (and kinda implicitly threatening) the HS coach who's been bending over backwards to cater to his sons (btw, curious what @PCLoadLetter thinks of these comments).

    But the media talking heads don't give nearly as much play to those statements as they do the silly Jordan/Curry/Lebron stuff--guess it's one thing to belittle college teammates and nobodies, but don't you dare mess with NBA royalty.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017
  11. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    Shrug. I don't bother reading the articles to know. I've thought and talked about him and his kids more in this thread than I have anywhere else.

    I treat articles about him like I do hockey articles. They are there. They are news. Some folks are very interested. I'm not.
     
  12. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    The quotes are kind of obnoxious. They just don't particularly bother me.

    The UCLA stuff isn't wrong, for starters. It's snotty and pointless, obviously. And the stuff about the coach is pretty shitty, if you're the coach at Chino Hills. I'm not. My connection to Chino is that I've driven through it. So, LaVar can light him up and I really don't care.

    The funniest thing about all of this to me -- and it was brought up again in that second article -- is the whole "What if he does this once Lonzo is in the NBA?" angle. And the answer is, some people will laugh, and there will be people who are Very, Very Concerned. None of this means anything at all.

    Personalities are OK. Not everyone has to give canned answers. Rasheed Wallace is a legendary asshole, and "Ball don't lie" and "Both teams played hard, my man" will never stop being funny to me. The league could use more 'Sheeds.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page