Won't someone think of the defence?
The NBA All-Star Game had so many points that it became a crisis. But don't expect today's players to start taking it seriously. That ship has sailed
If you’ve dabbled at all with any of the MANY gambling apps that are advertised MANY times during any televised sporting event, you’ll be familiar with the concept of free bonus bets.
These are bets that end up in your account after a loss, usually through a promotion, and allow the user to place wagers without risking their own bankroll. It’s like a free bet, except Ontario regulations forbid that particular marketing term. Also, they expire, to incentivize you to get back on the app sooner.
I had one of those bets sitting there, about to go poof, last weekend and so I used it to bet the over on three player-totals for the NBA All-Star Game. Seemed reasonably safe as these things go. Somewhat miraculously, in a game that finished 211-186, this parlay did not hit. Steph Curry went under his point total, although if there was a number on how many times he slung a pass from his hip across the court to an open teammate, he would have crushed the over.
I’m not bitter, just disappointed. It was a free bonus bet, after all. But boy howdy were a lot of people mad about that game.
It was “embarrassing.” It was a “disgraceful farce.” It was “an absolute travesty.” These were all comments from long-time NBA reporters and former players. It was “disrespectful to basketball.” Gosh, basketball must be furious to have been disrespected in that manner.
Naturally, this led to calls to either change the game’s format or scrap it altogether. That last part won’t happen, not when NBA All-Star Weekend functions as it does as a schmooze-fest for the league’s many corporate partners to attend parties, meet a celebrity or two and maybe watch a little basketball. So can it be changed in some way to make it more like real basketball, with, you know, defensive effort and stuff? Good luck with that.
The NBA has been tremendously successful over the last few decades. With that has come a massive influx of money. Franchise values have soared, broadcast-rights fees have skyrocketed, and because players are collectively paid an amount linked to the league’s overall revenue, they now earn the kinds of money that used to only be available via white-collar crime. Which means they really don’t have to be arsed about a mid-season exhibition game no matter what the format.
Understand, this is not an argument that the players make too much money. It’s only right that the players, who are the key ingredient in a league that has seen its revenues spike so dramatically, have received a proportionate chunk of the increasing spoils.
But it can also be true that with so much money available to the players in this era, they aren’t worried too much about the pleadings of a commissioner who asks them to respect the competitive integrity of the All-Star Game. Would you rather hustle back on defence or protect the legs that allow you to earn US$45-million a year? Tough call.
Commissioner Adam Silver ran into similar problems with provisions in previous Collective Bargaining Agreements that encouraged players to stay with their existing teams — or more accurately to discourage them from signing with a team in a warm-weather big market at the first opportunity. Those provisions allowed teams to offer bigger raises and longer contracts to their own players, which made perfect sense in theory. But once the salaries got high enough, the extra money was less of an incentive to stay. It seems crazy to leave US$50-million on the table, but if there’s already US$250-million on the other table that still seems like a pretty good table.
The connective thread here is that the players have such earning power now that they can be comfortable with whatever they choose — and are less likely to do the bidding of the guy who runs the league. Don’t expect the All-Star Game to turn into playoff basketball anytime soon. And my advice is to not bet on it.
Weekend Reading
The management at Unobstructed Views will save some space on Fridays to share a few items that are worth your time:
The gambler who bought a soccer club
Haralabos Voulgaris is a fascinating story. A Winnipegger who made millions betting on the NBA before gambling was widely legal, using computer models to identify value bets, he was later recruited to work for the Dallas Mavericks. It didn’t go great. He’s since taken some of his wealth and used it to buy a team in the third tier of Spanish soccer. It seems like the ultimate test of whether an outsider, one with math on his side, can outperform the traditionalists. Nerd versus Proper Football Men. A battle for the ages.
Maybe don’t say that part out loud
Los Angeles Angels third baseman Anthony Rendon was widely roasted this week when he showed up at spring training, didn’t seem too enthused to be there, and told reporters that baseball “wasn’t a priority.” I covered the 2019 World Series in which Rendon was an absolute terror at the plate, but he’s been a disaster since leaving Washington for Anaheim and a monster contract. This column provides some good context on Rendon, but ultimately reaches the obvious conclusion: if you are getting paid $35-million a year to play baseball, it is probably best not to act like it is quite such a burden.
You put HOW MUCH money in a shoebox?
This wasn’t from last week, but close enough. If you haven’t read the story of the *personal finance columnist* who was scammed out of 50K, it is like the text version of watching a slow-motion car crash. My thoughts upon reading this were that I couldn’t believe how many times the author sailed past obvious red flags, and then that she would want to tell this story in public. But she’s leaned into it, doing CNN this week to warn about the tactics of such scammers, despite the predictable public shaming. Honestly, that’s pretty brave.