Recently, I finished the book "The Jordan Rules," by Sam Smith. From it, I learned several things that I not only didnt know about the Chicago Bulls, I also learned about specific things that occur throughout the league itself. To be completely honest, it changed the way I thought of a lot of things about the NBA and its legends. For example, although most great players are portrayed as ideal role models, several players had particular qualities about them that made them hard to deal with at times. I believe that Sam Smith sought out to inform us of these kinds of things throughout the book so at the end we could conclude and see how things compare to our expectations and inferences.
Michael Jordan was the best player to play the game. He started his career in the early eighties and from the on skyrocketed. However, the road to greatness for him and the Bulls was very rough and tougher than most people know. For example, Jordan received a lot of critiscm for the number of shots he constantly took, some games completely relying on him shooting an unfundamental amount of shots. However, it was severely exaggerated as Michael had been an underrated passer, who liked to penetrate and the pass out the ball to open men. Another unknown aspect of the NBA is the true advantage of playing on your home court. For example, game balls are either overly or underly pumpmed with air, according to the preference of the home team. Magic Johnson used to prefer a high dribble, so the Lakers always pumped their balls up to 11-17 pounds of air.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Thursday, April 11, 2013
The Jordan Rules: The Winning Formula
"The Jordan Rules," is a story of how the 1991 Chicago Bulls won their first NBA championship. However, things started out very rough. Problems that intruded with the chemistry between players on that team mainly include money, playing time, and downright ego displacement. For example, Michael Jordan can be very controlling and intolerable of the faults of others. This caused several conflicts between players such as Bill Cartwright, Horace Grant, and Stacey King. Also, the stubborn antics of former Bull's general manager, Jerry Krause, made being on the team Itself hard to enjoy with the constant difficulties in trying to negotiate contracts. Scottie Pippem himself was the sixth highest paid athlete on the team, although his play was worth much more. These problems and more probably serve to explain why the Bulls only went 2-3 in their first five games that season. I believe that several things must go right in order for a team to do well,.
Months into the season, improving an excellent record of 37-14, the Bulls as a team resolved most of their chemistry problems. Jordan, although very overconfident, began to see the error of his rants and acted towards helping the team rather than putting it down. He evolved as a leader, and that made things much easier for the coaching staff and players alike. This conflict and resolution situation contains a commentary on life itself. For example, you can't let yourself try to control extraneous things without a negative consequence. If we just let things resolve themselves or if we do things in a reasonable way, then all problems would be resolved.
Months into the season, improving an excellent record of 37-14, the Bulls as a team resolved most of their chemistry problems. Jordan, although very overconfident, began to see the error of his rants and acted towards helping the team rather than putting it down. He evolved as a leader, and that made things much easier for the coaching staff and players alike. This conflict and resolution situation contains a commentary on life itself. For example, you can't let yourself try to control extraneous things without a negative consequence. If we just let things resolve themselves or if we do things in a reasonable way, then all problems would be resolved.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
The Last Olympian by Rick Riordan
"The Last Olympian," by Rick Riordan is a very interesting book in several ways. Being the final book in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians pentology, it closes out and finalizes the series. It also concludes several conflicts within the story. However, when one reads this book and comes to the end, the surprising g twist in which Luke Castellem, the son of Hermes, sacrifices his life to rid his body and the world of the should of Kronos, who was planning a full on attack of Mount Olympus. This somewhat renders the fact that Percy was the actual hero of the Great Propechy. This Propechy is super relative to the "Hero's Journey," storyline authors like to use. I find that this leaves the reader unaware that a plot twist can be iminent, since they assume that the relativity between the prophecy and the Hero's Journey is so close.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Pistol: Alcoholism and its Affect on Pete
Alcohol is bad for anyone in Amy amounts. People die periodically from overdoing it, drinking and driving, etc. However, although at its worst, people enjoy it most. What kind of people exactly? Well, wealthy people, including athletes. It takes horrible affect on their bodies, and one person who can tell you that best is Pete Maravich. According to the book, "Pistol: The Life of Pete Maravich" Pete downright loved to drink. He did it for several reasons. He did it to wash away lost games (there were a lot in his first pro years), he did it leisurely, and he did it to overcome unwanted emotion. This is not only a bad idea from a psychological standpoint, but from a physical standpoint as well. The book went into painful detail Pete's next games, with him scoring way below his point average due to "medical complications,".
One severe example of Pete's malnutrition was when he developed an infection in his throat, similar to streptococcus, but more severe with several more symptoms. As he tried to soldier his way through games, he often was hurting and couldn't produce to even his minimal expectations. In that stretch of games with the throat infection, he averaged10.2 points a game on 33% shooting, very well below his standards. Does this go to show that when you need it, you're body deserves the utmost care? That's a given priority if you plan on living a long happy life. However, if you're going to let alcohol slowly destroy you by overdoing to a point where your liver needs to be replaced, your life is as good as done because alcoholics will always hit the ground running, if they can actually run. So as always, when the time comes, please drink responsibly.
One severe example of Pete's malnutrition was when he developed an infection in his throat, similar to streptococcus, but more severe with several more symptoms. As he tried to soldier his way through games, he often was hurting and couldn't produce to even his minimal expectations. In that stretch of games with the throat infection, he averaged10.2 points a game on 33% shooting, very well below his standards. Does this go to show that when you need it, you're body deserves the utmost care? That's a given priority if you plan on living a long happy life. However, if you're going to let alcohol slowly destroy you by overdoing to a point where your liver needs to be replaced, your life is as good as done because alcoholics will always hit the ground running, if they can actually run. So as always, when the time comes, please drink responsibly.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
The Jordan Rules: How to Win
"The Jordan Rules," by Sam Smith is a very informational yet resounding book in my opinion. While directly commentating on the Chicago Bull's 1990-1991 championship season, Smith also goes deeper and explains and complicates the relationship between management and the players themselves. This is deeply important, considering every ball player nowadays follows money more so their loyalty to the team. Unless the team is committed to keeping their best players paid, then players will listen to consider teams that offer multi-million dollar contracts. However, if players are not worth the money or off-court-drama, they'll let them go. This was a large problem for the Bulls prior to their 1991 championship run. As anyone with a common knowledge of basketball would now, Michael Jordan was not only the best player of his era, but of all time as well. He definitely knew it too, as he was never satisfied with his salary or with his teammates.
Jordan was just beginning his prime run as a NBA player, having been in the league since 1984. His teammates were never up to his caliber, however this never necessarily meant they didn't give as much as he did each game. According to Smith, in the early years of Jordan's prime, he usually managed to upset teammates by making negative remarks and commentary on their game. "Careless and lethargic," is how he once described the overall team play after being swept by the Detroit Pistons one playoff run. In fact, in the late 80s, the Bulls saw the playoffs so few times as they recorded several 50+ loss seasons that decade alone. Only in 1989 did they reach the Eastern Conference Finals, where they lost in seven games to Detroit again. The past failure of the Bulls is heavily due to the fact that Jordan was just a rookie, the management was still in the middle of a rebuilding stage, and generally there was poor coaching. By 1991, this was all resolved by getting rid of Jerry Reinsdorf, who's offensive gameplan was basically was to ride Jordan each and every game, acquiring supporting talent to help out Jordan (i.e. Scottie Pippen), and by hiring the renowned coach, Phil Jackson, who went on to make the Bull's game a team game with a triangle offense dominant offensive game, rather than just Jordan trying his best to dunk on someone.
Now why is this important? Well, to me it gave greater insight on to a very strategic, yet free flowing contest. Being familiar with the triangle offense, I found that it made sense that Jackson had used it for the Bull's. Jordan, who was always getting bodied wherever he was on the court, was now able to breathe a little and others could get the ball. This also sends a message of a spread out effort rather than just depending on one, core effort. Strength comes in numbers, and that had to be learned in order to win.
Jordan was just beginning his prime run as a NBA player, having been in the league since 1984. His teammates were never up to his caliber, however this never necessarily meant they didn't give as much as he did each game. According to Smith, in the early years of Jordan's prime, he usually managed to upset teammates by making negative remarks and commentary on their game. "Careless and lethargic," is how he once described the overall team play after being swept by the Detroit Pistons one playoff run. In fact, in the late 80s, the Bulls saw the playoffs so few times as they recorded several 50+ loss seasons that decade alone. Only in 1989 did they reach the Eastern Conference Finals, where they lost in seven games to Detroit again. The past failure of the Bulls is heavily due to the fact that Jordan was just a rookie, the management was still in the middle of a rebuilding stage, and generally there was poor coaching. By 1991, this was all resolved by getting rid of Jerry Reinsdorf, who's offensive gameplan was basically was to ride Jordan each and every game, acquiring supporting talent to help out Jordan (i.e. Scottie Pippen), and by hiring the renowned coach, Phil Jackson, who went on to make the Bull's game a team game with a triangle offense dominant offensive game, rather than just Jordan trying his best to dunk on someone.
Now why is this important? Well, to me it gave greater insight on to a very strategic, yet free flowing contest. Being familiar with the triangle offense, I found that it made sense that Jackson had used it for the Bull's. Jordan, who was always getting bodied wherever he was on the court, was now able to breathe a little and others could get the ball. This also sends a message of a spread out effort rather than just depending on one, core effort. Strength comes in numbers, and that had to be learned in order to win.
Monday, March 4, 2013
"The Jordan Rules" by Sam Smith
This week, I read "The Jordan Rules," by Sam Smith. Although I only recently started it, I already appreciate the information and the style that Smith writes with. For example, the book is centered around the 1990 NBA season, most particularly centered around that season's championship team: The Chicago Bulls. I mean, initially I was more so attracted to the book because Michael Jordan was on the cover, and I had finally found a book to be enthusiastic about, but still, I learned a lot of things I never actually knew or figured about "the greatest to ever play the game,". Yes, everyone knows that Michael Jordan didn't make his high school varsity team the first time around. However no one really empathized with the fact that he worked so hard just to make his team the next year, he woke up every morning at seven o'clock each morning to workout with the varsity coach until that next year he made it. The public only knew him for his flashy dunks, his abilities, his shoes, and his movie "SpaceJam,". They didn't realize that it was failure and the comeback that brought him to believe in himself and get to where he was.
I believe that since this is such a frequent topic in the book, I feel its meant to be almost a message. As a matter of fact, if its not a message then I don't know what is. If we try to establish a world-to-book connection, I believe that people usually are prone to just quitting after emotional and what they believe is terrible failure. If you think about Michael Jordan, who locked himself in his room and cried himself to sleep that night, and how he failed, he wasn't like most people. Thats why he's so unique though, he went in stronger and faster where others would've just stopped to avoid the pain. However, Jordan shows us, or me at least, that anything can done and it doesn't matter how long it takes or if you fail at it at first. The work put in before it is what takes you up to the highest pedestal. Sam Smith wants his audience to realize this, because he totally knows, and anyone who knows anything about Michael Jordan knows, that what he did was inspirational to the biggest basketball stars today. If the kids who read this apply the same effort and work to everything they do, they can be great in their own way. A kid with terrible grades could turn things around and be a straight A student the next time out. A poor citizen could make it to the middle class and even beyond if he works hard at his goals and tries. The message, so far, in this book is undoubtedly the fact that hard work sets you free.
I believe that since this is such a frequent topic in the book, I feel its meant to be almost a message. As a matter of fact, if its not a message then I don't know what is. If we try to establish a world-to-book connection, I believe that people usually are prone to just quitting after emotional and what they believe is terrible failure. If you think about Michael Jordan, who locked himself in his room and cried himself to sleep that night, and how he failed, he wasn't like most people. Thats why he's so unique though, he went in stronger and faster where others would've just stopped to avoid the pain. However, Jordan shows us, or me at least, that anything can done and it doesn't matter how long it takes or if you fail at it at first. The work put in before it is what takes you up to the highest pedestal. Sam Smith wants his audience to realize this, because he totally knows, and anyone who knows anything about Michael Jordan knows, that what he did was inspirational to the biggest basketball stars today. If the kids who read this apply the same effort and work to everything they do, they can be great in their own way. A kid with terrible grades could turn things around and be a straight A student the next time out. A poor citizen could make it to the middle class and even beyond if he works hard at his goals and tries. The message, so far, in this book is undoubtedly the fact that hard work sets you free.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Blog Review- Terri's Pride and Prejudice
http://jaarb.blogspot.com/2013/02/pride-and-prejudice.html
For this blog review week, I read Terri's recent post about the old time classic of "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen. Although I never read the book, Terri's post gave me a decent overview of the basic plot and character makeup of the book. I thought she kept her opinions well state while giving interesting information about the book. For example, she gave many examples of names of characters, then she made some sort of connection between her and the character. However, she doesn't only talk about the book itself. She also points out sophisticated themes that she perceived in the book. A good example of this is the theme of love that she points out. She explains that it's a very difficult phenomenon to understand for anybody however it takes time to develop and explain. She mentions too that the book did a good job of doing so, and I can't say I don't agree considering that when I think of "Pride and Prejudice," I think of a story of love and that book being one of the best romance novels of all time. Not every book gets a movie adaptation, and according to Terri, P&P sounds very worth of one.
Alright, although I liked Terri's post, I also have some constructive criticism for her future posts. Having read through 2-3 of her posts already, I believe that this one might've been a bit short. I think there could've been a bit more elaboration in a few places. Also, some of the things she said may have been a bit repetetive, however not too much to disrupt the flow of the post. There was also a bit of no real conclusion to the post, she ended the post on an idea and I thought at one point she was going to sum up the whole book. I thought that would've been appropriate and really good because she brought up a lot of great ideas.
Overall, I thought Terri's post was good, but a little more elaboration and a conclusion could've made it even better. She made a lot of great connections and made me think about things I never really commit to thought, let alone relevance. However, bringing all these ideas together in a conclusion would've made a large difference for the better. It's not bad at all that she didn't have it, it would've made me feel a bit jealous though, but in a good way. Good job Terri!
For this blog review week, I read Terri's recent post about the old time classic of "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen. Although I never read the book, Terri's post gave me a decent overview of the basic plot and character makeup of the book. I thought she kept her opinions well state while giving interesting information about the book. For example, she gave many examples of names of characters, then she made some sort of connection between her and the character. However, she doesn't only talk about the book itself. She also points out sophisticated themes that she perceived in the book. A good example of this is the theme of love that she points out. She explains that it's a very difficult phenomenon to understand for anybody however it takes time to develop and explain. She mentions too that the book did a good job of doing so, and I can't say I don't agree considering that when I think of "Pride and Prejudice," I think of a story of love and that book being one of the best romance novels of all time. Not every book gets a movie adaptation, and according to Terri, P&P sounds very worth of one.
Alright, although I liked Terri's post, I also have some constructive criticism for her future posts. Having read through 2-3 of her posts already, I believe that this one might've been a bit short. I think there could've been a bit more elaboration in a few places. Also, some of the things she said may have been a bit repetetive, however not too much to disrupt the flow of the post. There was also a bit of no real conclusion to the post, she ended the post on an idea and I thought at one point she was going to sum up the whole book. I thought that would've been appropriate and really good because she brought up a lot of great ideas.
Overall, I thought Terri's post was good, but a little more elaboration and a conclusion could've made it even better. She made a lot of great connections and made me think about things I never really commit to thought, let alone relevance. However, bringing all these ideas together in a conclusion would've made a large difference for the better. It's not bad at all that she didn't have it, it would've made me feel a bit jealous though, but in a good way. Good job Terri!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)