Author: John Paulsen (Page 185 of 937)

Melo headed to the Big Apple?

Denver Nuggets Carmelo Anthony reacts on the bench in the third quarter against the New York Knicks at Madison Square Garden in New York City on March 23, 2010. The Knicks defeated the Nuggets 109-104. UPI/John Angelillo Photo via Newscom

Ken Berger of CBS Sports writes that the main reason Carmelo Anthony hasn’t signed a three-year extension with the Nuggets is because he has a burning desire to play in New York.

Anthony, an ideal fit for the Knicks, already has told confidants this summer that he’s eager to explore playing in New York. His dilemma is whether to turn down a three-year, $65 million extension offer from the Nuggets with only 10 months left in the current collective bargaining agreement. The new deal is expected to be much less lucrative for players. Sources say owners who were rattled by this summer’s free-agent frenzy — orchestrated by CAA, which represented James, Wade and Chris Bosh — are determined to clamp down not only on player salaries in the new agreement, but also player movement.

Anthony’s desire to play in New York is so strong, sources say, that those close to the three-time All-Star have scoffed at the efforts of executives touting themselves as being able to deliver him.

“Carmelo already wants to play in New York,” one person with knowledge of his plans told CBSSports.com. “He doesn’t need anybody to bring him there. He’s a gunslinger. That situation is perfect for him.”

The new CBA is the wild card. Anthony may be leaving a lot of money on the table by turning down that extension, but playing in one of the world’s biggest markets would no doubt enhance his Q Rating and his ability to make money via sponsorships.

Fit-wise, the Knicks need a player like Anthony to build around. He and Amare Stoudemire would make a formidable 1-2 punch, and his ability to make jumpshots would be ideal for Mike D’Antoni’s offensive attack.

As it stands, the Knicks have plenty of cap space to sign Anthony outright if does indeed become a free agent next summer. The other team to watch in the race for his services is the New Jersey Nets, who project to have comparable cap space and a good young nucleus in Brook Lopez, Devin Harris and Derrick Favors. Next summer, the Nets might only be one year away from a move to Brooklyn, so if Favors shows star potential, Anthony could view the franchise as the best fit for his game.

As for the Nuggets — well, it looks like their run might be over. Chauncey Billups is 33, and other than Ty Lawson, there aren’t enough promising young players to convince Melo to stay put.

2010 Fantasy Football Preview: The Perfect Draft

OAKLAND, CA - JANUARY 03: Zach Miller #80 of the Oakland Raiders catches a touchdown pass in the second quarter against the Baltimore Ravens during an NFL game at Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum on January 3, 2010 in Oakland, California.  (Photo by Jed Jacobsohn/Getty Images)

Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve outlined my strategy for the upcoming fantasy football season in the various segments of the 2010 Fantasy Football Preview. In this post, I’ll attempt to pull them all together to provide a (somewhat) coherent strategy that you can, if you so choose, use on draft day.

Below is an overview of the various components. Note: I’m assuming this is a 12-team, TE-required PPR league.

1. Quarterback By Committee (QBBC)
This year, I am recommending that fantasy owners draft Eli Manning in the 7th round and Ben Roethlisberger in the 9th (since it looks like Roger Goodell is going to shorten his suspension to four games and in effect, raise Ben’s fantasy stock). I’m going with 7th/9th because it looks like Eli’s ADP is creeping up as the fantasy preseason wears on. If Eli goes before your pick in the 7th, then go with Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco or Carson Palmer, in that order. Their schedules all mesh well with Big Ben’s.

2. Defensive Team By Committee (DTBC)
I’m targeting the Chargers in the 14th, and then using my next pick on the Patriots, Dolphins, Colts or Bears, in that order. If you miss out on the Chargers, there are various other options outlined in the DTBC piece.

3. Draft Zach Miller in the 8th round.
Here’s what I wrote about Miller in our TE preview:

Jason Campbell is in as the starter in Oakland, which means that for the first time, Miller will have a capable QB throwing the ball. Campbell loved throwing it to Chris Cooley in Washington, so Miller projects to have a nice year. He caught 37 passes over his final six games and with a solid QB under center, he should be able to build off of that success.

Of course, if Tony Gonzalez or Brent Celek somehow slip into the 8th, I’d take either over Miller, but barring that, Miller is my man in the 8th.

The rest is fill in the blanks and it largely depends on your draft position and who you like in each round. I put together the table below as an outline. Along the top you’ll see different picks (1-4, 5, 6-7, 8-12) which represents all the picks in the first round. (Note: You can see a bigger version of the table by clicking on it.)

Continue reading »

Should the Warriors embrace the ‘Oakland’ surname?

Dave Newhouse of the Oakland Tribune thinks so:

No other surname in professional sports is as repulsive. The Warriors’ surname, which won’t ever disgrace this space, also is meaningless. It doesn’t reflect a city or state, thus it has no mayor, no governor, no voting precincts, no ZIP code.

A more suitable surname, and easily more palatable, would be “Oakland Warriors.”

He goes on…

…but if Lacob is aware of the Warriors history, the team relocated to Oakland for the 1971-72 season after its financial disaster in San Francisco, and has mostly flourished at the gate on this side of the bridge. And even with the Warriors’ latest prolonged slump, they still have the NBA’s most loyal fans.

Thus Lacob and Guber can’t argue that renaming the team the Oakland Warriors will affect how well they play or how well they’re supported.

As further proof that a team’s surname has no influence on its performance, observe the Oakland A’s and Oakland Raiders. They’ve both experienced the summit and swampland of success — in the arena and at the turnstiles. But if they were the Jolly Green Giant A’s and the Silver Lode Raiders, it wouldn’t matter.

When I first heard this idea I thought that the name change might alienate fans living in San Francisco, the city of Oakland’s natural rival. His point about the A’s and Raiders makes some sense, but San Francisco has its own NFL and MLB teams, so delineating those make sense. There’s only one NBA team in the Bay Area, and it’s the Golden State Warriors.

What do I think the chances are of renaming the Warriors?

Not good.

You see in June, two weeks before the team’s sale was announced, the Warriors changed their logo and their look once again — new uniforms, new merchandise, new home court surface logo — complete with that same disgusting surname.

I believe Lacob and Guber agreed to that logo change. Otherwise, why would the old Warriors ownership seek to upset the new Warriors owners, who might begin firing staffers right and left as soon as they walk in the door?

I just don’t foresee the Oakland Warriors happening. And if that’s the case, I wish the new owners nothing but futility dunking on their heads.

Newhouse’s use of ‘repulsive’ is a little over the top. I’m sure the fans in Oakland would rather have the team named the ‘Oakland Warriors’ (which sounds b*tchin, by the way), but what percentage of the team’s historically supportive fan base lives in San Francisco or some other part of the Bay Area and would be turned off enough by the change to stop coming to games?

If the new ownership is thinking about such a change (and it doesn’t appear that they are) maybe a poll of season ticket holders is the best way to gauge the inevitable reaction.

« Older posts Newer posts »