Bill Simmons article on NBA teams (character counts)

[paulpressey25]

Simmons put this one up today:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ortCat=nba

Says that successful NBA teams need high character guys to win as the Spurs, Celtics and Blazers are doing......

Somehow he forgot to mention this has been the Bucks gameplan for the last number of years.....and hasn't worked.

And forgot to point out how well Golden State is playing with their band of castoffs.....

I think he's secretly trying to somehow justify the crazy luck of the Celtics and his own deal with the devil as it relates to Boston sports teams. "We deserve this don't we? Ainge is a brilliant GM. "

[heynow]

Simmons put this one up today:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ortCat=nba

Says that successful NBA teams need high character guys to win as the Spurs, Celtics and Blazers are doing......

Somehow he forgot to mention this has been the Bucks gameplan for the last number of years.....and hasn't worked.

And forgot to point out how well Golden State is playing with their band of castoffs.....

I think he's secretly trying to somehow justify the crazy luck of the Celtics and his own deal with the devil as it relates to Boston sports teams. "We deserve this don't we? Ainge is a brilliant GM. "

You need "High Character" guys with "Talent".
The "Talent" part is as important as the "Character" part.
Some how the Senator and GM Harris missed the talent part of the equation.

[Newz]

We don't have guys with great character anyways.

Bobby Simmons has had his mix-ups off of the court and appears to not really care.

Charlie Bell clearly is unhappy and is the exact opposite of a high character right now.

Bogut doesn't seem like a high character guy to me, he doesn't seem to really like a lot of the guys on a team and vice versa... Plus he just appears to have attitude issues in general.

CV is clearly unhappy and doesn't put forth a lot of effort.

Redd is a great guy, a very nice person and religious and all... But the rumors of him and Ford not getting along bring up some questions about him.

I'd say Mo is the best 'character' guy we have on the team.

High character should lead to a lot of effort because it should be guys feeling responsible for how hard they play and what sort of product they present to the fans... Which clearly this team could care less.

[75totheMACCfund]

High character would be difficult to maintain once you've been paid. I'm sorry, but I bet when most of these guys get paid their desire declines at least slightly. None of us, besides deepthroat, know what it's like to be a successful millionaire many times over. I'm not saying that all NBA players are like this (KG, duncan, Nash, etc), but it seems like many of the Bucks players are complacent. This could be countered with people saying Michael Redd gets better every year, etc. Yes, his individual game has been elevated every off season but he has yet to elevate the team he is playing on which is more important.

[BuckFan25226]

I think he meant talented high character guys, huge difference.

[paulpressey25]

Simmons is avoiding much of the "talent bit"....here's a few quotes:



But it's an amalgam of three concepts that have formed the foundation of the Duncan era in San Antonio: chemistry, character and (cap) flexibility. As soon as Duncan arrived, in 1997, Popovich and Buford began to avoid bad guys and bad contracts, preferring role players, quality guys and short-term deals.

....Regardless, Popovich and the Blazers' Kevin Pritchard have to be cringing. Their secret is out: Talent and chemistry go hand in hand. Will we ever see a team willingly trade for Davis or Blount again or sign a knucklehead like Randolph to an $86 million extension? Sure. There will always be desperate GMs. But I expect more teams to copy the Celtics and Blazers with shrewder signings, more short-term deals and a higher premium on character.

You can only get by with short term deals and higher character guys if you already have your stars in place......otherwise you need to gamble more than the next guy to try and piece together a team of 41-wins.

[BuckFan25226]

Simmons is avoiding much of the "talent bit"....here's a few quotes:



But it's an amalgam of three concepts that have formed the foundation of the Duncan era in San Antonio: chemistry, character and (cap) flexibility. As soon as Duncan arrived, in 1997, Popovich and Buford began to avoid bad guys and bad contracts, preferring role players, quality guys and short-term deals.

....Regardless, Popovich and the Blazers' Kevin Pritchard have to be cringing. Their secret is out: Talent and chemistry go hand in hand. Will we ever see a team willingly trade for Davis or Blount again or sign a knucklehead like Randolph to an $86 million extension? Sure. There will always be desperate GMs. But I expect more teams to copy the Celtics and Blazers with shrewder signings, more short-term deals and a higher premium on character.

You can only get by with short term deals and higher character guys if you already have your stars in place......otherwise you need to gamble more than the next guy to try and piece together a team of 41-wins.

Wait, Simmons punched a hooker in the face. That takes us out of the high character club

[Newz]

-= original quote snipped =-




Wait, Simmons punched a hooker in the face. That takes us out of the high character club

Exactly.

[TheGhostDog]

"These guys eat dinner, hang out, work out and play video games together. They don't care about stats, acclaim, shots or minutes."

Simmons may very well be playing the homer again when talking up Celtics unity, but reading that line about stats, shots and minutes made me feel like a kid pressing my nose against a candy store window - God I wish the Bucks were like that. Thank God the Packers do seem to be like that.

[paulpressey25]

It is all about having a couple stars that can help you win a bunch of games.....if you have that winning taking place, everyone is happy....

......and the role players on those teams can't bitch much about playing time or contract dollars because they know for sure they can't match up to the stars....

[europa]

It's also about not passing on a chance to add a major talent when he becomes available. I think Paxson is a very good GM but not trading for Garnett because he didn't want to part with Deng was monumentally stupid. I like Deng but a guy like that is a helluva lot easier to find than someone like Garnett. Ainge had been a pretty poor GM prior to last summer but to his credit he didn't hesitate to part with "potential" so he could bring in an elite talent. One smart move like that can cure a lot of ills.

[BrewersGM]

We dont have any on this team. Redd used to have some. But he has seemed to lose it the last couple of years while we have been losing...

[heynow]

It's also about not passing on a chance to add a major talent when he becomes available. I think Paxson is a very good GM but not trading for Garnett because he didn't want to part with Deng was monumentally stupid. I like Deng but a guy like that is a helluva lot easier to find than someone like Garnett. Ainge had been a pretty poor GM prior to last summer but to his credit he didn't hesitate to part with "potential" so he could bring in an elite talent. One smart move like that can cure a lot of ills.

I couldn't agree more. His fascination with Deng is going to be viewed as a missed opportunity.
It always amazes me how a team with a great player tends to have more character then one that lacks one.

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

Simmons is foolish. That is just another way he could plug his Celtics... Don't make these players anything more then they are.

Character is meaningless in winning games and titles. That is utter bull crap.

The Bad Boys Pistons' won back to back titles! You don't win with character you win with winners and talent and scoring more points then the other team and making them score less.

And sometimes you win because of the officiating like the Celtics did for years, along with other teams with calls in game 7's!

The playoffs are not 'nice' and sweet. The smartest and or the toughest and sometimes the luckiest teams win in the playoffs, not the ones with 'high character.'

Shut up about character. That is so overblown here and it does not sell tickets and win games. Society and sports entertainment is not built around high character. Give me a break!

Character my ass...just play basketball and win! Give me a couple of knucklehead that compete and know how to win and I will be okay and kick your teams ass as well.

Portland is not winning because of 'character' and neither are the Spurs or Celtics! They are winning because of execution. To hell whether you like them or their character when the step on the court.

They just have good players and play sound basketball! You can have a team for of high character guys like the Bucks' and be losing ass clowns.

Tell Simmons to take his Celtics and their character and shove it! There is this thing people speak of called basketball character or sports character that people talk about which touchy feely...

But all that is hogwash. But the character a lot in the media and the Bucks focus on is community service orientated, and nice, well mannered, moral personalable, clean cut, church going and stand up citizens.

And that is all nice and good...off the court. But can you win games on it!?
Yes or no?

You can have all the personal integrity and goodwill character you want and it is like Leo Durocher said, "nice guys, finish LAST!" Dead ass last!

Enough with character already, unless you talk about winning character!

[MilBucksBackOnTop06]

We don't have guys with great character anyways.

Bobby Simmons has had his mix-ups off of the court and appears to not really care.

Charlie Bell clearly is unhappy and is the exact opposite of a high character right now.

Bogut doesn't seem like a high character guy to me, he doesn't seem to really like a lot of the guys on a team and vice versa... Plus he just appears to have attitude issues in general.

CV is clearly unhappy and doesn't put forth a lot of effort.

Redd is a great guy, a very nice person and religious and all... But the rumors of him and Ford not getting along bring up some questions about him.

I'd say Mo is the best 'character' guy we have on the team.

High character should lead to a lot of effort because it should be guys feeling responsible for how hard they play and what sort of product they present to the fans... Which clearly this team could care less.

Simmons is full of crap. Have you ever read Garnett's lips after he scores or does anything he likes....HE CUSSES LIKE A SAILOR.

The dirtest mouth in all of sports. Now I see high school and middle school kids cussing because he does! He drops as many F-bombs as he does baskets!

So don't talk to me about character. As for Portland they are still young. Just wait until teams catch up to them and expectations come. Then that
so called 'character' will be tested!

Trust me...Every team is tested. Injuries, losing streaks, bad calls, close game losses...contract years. A 13 game winning streak is not because of character. They played decent ball and exectuted Nate McMillen's game plan.

There is game character, and personal character. It is nice if a player has both, but one has nothing to do with the other on the court! Nor does it have to do with winning big.

There is a meaness, toughenss, and edge any great team needs that is not as clean and pristine in the heat of competition as many think.

Many call Artest a nut and would not say he has any character at all...but I will take 10 Ron Artest and beat you over the head with him...on my team!

Same with Randy Moss who many of you said, "I would not want him on my team!" You can have him and Javon Walker..."

Okay fine, loser! Move then, let me take them and I will see your team and mine in 10 minutes and whup your a--! Be altruist all you want. We'll play to win!

Just get it done. We have not won here in 37 years! WIN SOME GAMES!!

[fam3381]

It is all about having a couple stars that can help you win a bunch of games.....if you have that winning taking place, everyone is happy....

......and the role players on those teams can't bitch much about playing time or contract dollars because they know for sure they can't match up to the stars....

Yep.

We dont have any on this team. Redd used to have some. But he has seemed to lose it the last couple of years while we have been losing...

Wow, how's the high horse treating you?

We only see a small bit of what these guys are like. From what I've seen and heard I have no problem calling guys like Mason or Mo high character guys. But at the end of the day I don't know them. Still, just because they have been disappointing as a team doesn't mean they're bad dudes.

Aside from Storey I'm not really concerned about any of them making bad decisions off the court (and I suppose Awvee's worst decision was technically on a court). It's sad in some ways that guys get a lot of credit for not being idiots, but that's the first step. I do think we have some unselfish guys who really want to win, but I can also understand if there's a lot of frustration with how things have been (not) working out.

[paulpressey25]

..Yep....

I was thinking about this column some more today and how what Simmons is writing about is even more crap. Look back on the Bulls. When they had Jordan and Pippen (and the third wheel marginal all-star in either Grant/Rodman/Kukoc) that team was able to make all sorts of crappy scrubs look great.

I don't remember all the names, but Bill Wennington, Luc Longely, Randy Brown, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Dickey Simpkins, etc, etc. all looked great playing with MJ and Pippen. Heck, even BJ Armstrong got one all-star game appearance in a down year courtesy of MJ.

Find a superstar, team him with two all-stars and there is no magic to finding scrubs to look really good on the team.

All the Celtics success is showing me is how awful a GM McHale is. He could never get another true all-star next to Garnett in ten years of trying. And when he actually got two marginal former all-stars on the major downside in Cassell and Sprewell, those guys were enough to get them to the WCF.

What if the T-Wolves had kept Garnett and drafted Brandon Roy? Things look good in Minny right now.

[fam3381]

Find a superstar, team him with two all-stars and there is no magic to finding scrubs to look really good on the team.

Those guys are the key...if your stars are morons who are getting in trouble and looking out for themselves then the coaches have a much harder time getting everyone else to buy in. The Spurs philosophy is find three stars and then surround them with guys who will go through a brick wall to win. Well, I think you need stars with a similar attitude.

And amazingly the more your stars act like that, the more your role players will too.

[paulpressey25]

-=And amazingly the more your stars act like that, the more your role players will too.

Exactly right....and if you don't have those stars with max contracts, all your other players (i.e. the entire Bucks roster the last few years) will think they are just as good as the other guy on the roster and should play offense to garner a big contract.

Having a true alpha dog superstar shuts down a lot of jealously, contract disputes and political infighting. No one on the Lakers is questioning whether Kobe is earning his $20mm. They might not like him personally, but no one thinks they are a better player than him.