boutons_
12-13-2006, 03:13 AM
December 13, 2006
The Synthetic Jordan Era Has Lost Its Air
By HARVEY ARATON
The anticipated trading of Allen Iverson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/i/allen_iverson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) by the Philadelphia 76ers (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/philadelphia76ers/index.html?inline=nyt-org) will mark an unofficial end to a dubious period of professional basketball. Call it the Synthetic Jordan Era, when young, emerging stars had a sole shoe company-driven agenda to be like Mike.
Except it was less about the core values on which six Bulls (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/chicagobulls/index.html?inline=nyt-org) championships were built across the 1990s and more about the trappings of personal transcendence, that existential place where a team, above all, is a platform for its premier celebrity pitchman.
It turns out that a penthouse in Philadelphia is an unfulfilling perk, a lonely palace, and after 10-plus years, 16,253 shots and 19,583 points, playoffs excluded, Iverson has apparently decided he can’t take it anymore.
With his 76ers locker already cleaned out of do-rags and flat-brim caps, he will be happy to hook up with, among others, Kevin Garnett in Minnesota or Paul Pierce in Boston. Times have changed. LeBron James (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/lebron_james/index.html?inline=nyt-per) aims to share and Dwyane Wade’s championship love-in with Shaquille O’Neal last season was 1960s old school. While dodging trade specifics before coaching the Celtics (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/bostonceltics/index.html?inline=nyt-org) to a 97-90 victory over the Knicks (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/newyorkknicks/index.html?inline=nyt-org) on Monday night at Madison Square Garden, Doc Rivers said he understood why Iverson, the so-called Answer, would suddenly demand to go someplace where he would have to shoulder only half the questions.
“The pressure of carrying your team is unbearable,” Rivers said. “And no single player has done it successfully.”
No single one? Here we run smack into that double-edged Jordan legacy on which the young swashbucklers of the mid-to-late 1990s couldn’t help but impale themselves.
They were unwitting byproducts of the most prolific promotional campaign the sports industry had seen, a blitz so consuming that we didn’t think twice about shrinking Jordan’s teammates into his supporting cast, his elfish Jordanaires.
Forgotten was the fact that Jordan barely scratched the postseason surface before Scottie Pippen (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/scottie_pippen/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Horace Grant came along. Ignored was the startling sum of 55 victories accumulated by the Bulls when Jordan first took leave of the sport on the eve of the 1993-94 season, an achievement unmatched by any N.B.A. team in its post-franchise-player incarnation.
What am I saying? Certainly not that Pippen was Jordan’s equal, but that his contributions and Hall of Fame credentials and those of others were often minimized by the Nike-inspired and league-abetted sell. Players who earned what has come to be known as max money under the salary cap became more warlord than leader in the post-Jordan years. Skewed were the standards of stardom. The concept of multiple great players or even two sharing the ball and the attention, coexisting in pursuit of a common cause, was largely lost on the new breed.
•
“I think every player grows up wanting to be the star,” Rivers said. “But at the end of the day, you hope that winning shines brighter in their minds.”
That, unfortunately, wasn’t the case when Alonzo Mourning (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/alonzo_mourning/index.html?inline=nyt-per) divorced Larry Johnson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/larry_johnson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) in Charlotte; when Stephon Marbury (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/stephon_marbury/index.html?inline=nyt-per) set out on a search for the inner Starbury because he couldn’t stomach being second in salary to Garnett in Minnesota; when Philadelphia wasn’t big enough for Iverson and the young Jerry Stackhouse; when Tracy McGrady refused to play Pippen to Vince Carter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/vince_carter/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s Jordan in Toronto and subsequently suffered through nightmarish losing seasons while playing part of that time for Rivers in Orlando.
On and on it went, into the 21st century when Kobe Bryant (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/kobe_bryant/index.html?inline=nyt-per) had to prove his manhood sans Shaq in Los Angeles, the high-end talent spreading thinner and the basketball public turning increasingly contemptuous of players it perceived as overhyped and underachieving. They were far from faultless, but as always in this sport, the players were the most convenient targets, as opposed to industry forces that produced them. How would Larry Bird (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/larry_bird/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Magic Johnson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/earvin_johnson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) have been perceived if they’d come along 15 years later and wound up on desultory teams in Toronto and Orlando?
“People get mad at me in Boston when I talk about Larry, but great as he was, and Larry was great, how would he have done if he didn’t have Hall of Fame players around him — not one, when he won his first championship, not two, but three,” Cedric Maxwell, the former Celtic, now analyzing games on Boston-area radio, said Monday night.
In no particular order, he meant Robert Parish, Kevin McHale and Tiny Archibald, the Iverson of his day until Achilles’ surgery and the Celtics’ selfless system forced him to adapt his explosive small-guard skills.
In Maxwell’s typically direct opinion, the ghost of Red Auerbach will not haunt the Celtics if they land the shot-happy Iverson, as long as they don’t surrender too much of their future. As a synthetic Jordan, at least Iverson has been uniquely talented, a gritty little crowd-pleaser who carried the 76ers past a weak Eastern Conference into the 2001 league finals.
•
It’s one thing to be a Jordan wannabe, another to be an Iverson knockoff. The Knicks have managed to wind up with two, Marbury and Steve Francis (who laughably answers to the nickname Franchise), both struggling now to fit in as playmakers after years of bullheaded rushes to the rim or passes from compromised airborne positions.
Tattoos, warts and all, Iverson can make a strong case that he has been the Philadelphia franchise for a decade, no insignificant contribution to that city, but, upon further review, not exactly a ringing endorsement for the sport at large.
E-mail: [email protected]
The Synthetic Jordan Era Has Lost Its Air
By HARVEY ARATON
The anticipated trading of Allen Iverson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/i/allen_iverson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) by the Philadelphia 76ers (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/philadelphia76ers/index.html?inline=nyt-org) will mark an unofficial end to a dubious period of professional basketball. Call it the Synthetic Jordan Era, when young, emerging stars had a sole shoe company-driven agenda to be like Mike.
Except it was less about the core values on which six Bulls (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/chicagobulls/index.html?inline=nyt-org) championships were built across the 1990s and more about the trappings of personal transcendence, that existential place where a team, above all, is a platform for its premier celebrity pitchman.
It turns out that a penthouse in Philadelphia is an unfulfilling perk, a lonely palace, and after 10-plus years, 16,253 shots and 19,583 points, playoffs excluded, Iverson has apparently decided he can’t take it anymore.
With his 76ers locker already cleaned out of do-rags and flat-brim caps, he will be happy to hook up with, among others, Kevin Garnett in Minnesota or Paul Pierce in Boston. Times have changed. LeBron James (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/lebron_james/index.html?inline=nyt-per) aims to share and Dwyane Wade’s championship love-in with Shaquille O’Neal last season was 1960s old school. While dodging trade specifics before coaching the Celtics (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/bostonceltics/index.html?inline=nyt-org) to a 97-90 victory over the Knicks (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/newyorkknicks/index.html?inline=nyt-org) on Monday night at Madison Square Garden, Doc Rivers said he understood why Iverson, the so-called Answer, would suddenly demand to go someplace where he would have to shoulder only half the questions.
“The pressure of carrying your team is unbearable,” Rivers said. “And no single player has done it successfully.”
No single one? Here we run smack into that double-edged Jordan legacy on which the young swashbucklers of the mid-to-late 1990s couldn’t help but impale themselves.
They were unwitting byproducts of the most prolific promotional campaign the sports industry had seen, a blitz so consuming that we didn’t think twice about shrinking Jordan’s teammates into his supporting cast, his elfish Jordanaires.
Forgotten was the fact that Jordan barely scratched the postseason surface before Scottie Pippen (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/scottie_pippen/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Horace Grant came along. Ignored was the startling sum of 55 victories accumulated by the Bulls when Jordan first took leave of the sport on the eve of the 1993-94 season, an achievement unmatched by any N.B.A. team in its post-franchise-player incarnation.
What am I saying? Certainly not that Pippen was Jordan’s equal, but that his contributions and Hall of Fame credentials and those of others were often minimized by the Nike-inspired and league-abetted sell. Players who earned what has come to be known as max money under the salary cap became more warlord than leader in the post-Jordan years. Skewed were the standards of stardom. The concept of multiple great players or even two sharing the ball and the attention, coexisting in pursuit of a common cause, was largely lost on the new breed.
•
“I think every player grows up wanting to be the star,” Rivers said. “But at the end of the day, you hope that winning shines brighter in their minds.”
That, unfortunately, wasn’t the case when Alonzo Mourning (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/alonzo_mourning/index.html?inline=nyt-per) divorced Larry Johnson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/larry_johnson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) in Charlotte; when Stephon Marbury (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/stephon_marbury/index.html?inline=nyt-per) set out on a search for the inner Starbury because he couldn’t stomach being second in salary to Garnett in Minnesota; when Philadelphia wasn’t big enough for Iverson and the young Jerry Stackhouse; when Tracy McGrady refused to play Pippen to Vince Carter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/vince_carter/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s Jordan in Toronto and subsequently suffered through nightmarish losing seasons while playing part of that time for Rivers in Orlando.
On and on it went, into the 21st century when Kobe Bryant (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/kobe_bryant/index.html?inline=nyt-per) had to prove his manhood sans Shaq in Los Angeles, the high-end talent spreading thinner and the basketball public turning increasingly contemptuous of players it perceived as overhyped and underachieving. They were far from faultless, but as always in this sport, the players were the most convenient targets, as opposed to industry forces that produced them. How would Larry Bird (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/larry_bird/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Magic Johnson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/earvin_johnson/index.html?inline=nyt-per) have been perceived if they’d come along 15 years later and wound up on desultory teams in Toronto and Orlando?
“People get mad at me in Boston when I talk about Larry, but great as he was, and Larry was great, how would he have done if he didn’t have Hall of Fame players around him — not one, when he won his first championship, not two, but three,” Cedric Maxwell, the former Celtic, now analyzing games on Boston-area radio, said Monday night.
In no particular order, he meant Robert Parish, Kevin McHale and Tiny Archibald, the Iverson of his day until Achilles’ surgery and the Celtics’ selfless system forced him to adapt his explosive small-guard skills.
In Maxwell’s typically direct opinion, the ghost of Red Auerbach will not haunt the Celtics if they land the shot-happy Iverson, as long as they don’t surrender too much of their future. As a synthetic Jordan, at least Iverson has been uniquely talented, a gritty little crowd-pleaser who carried the 76ers past a weak Eastern Conference into the 2001 league finals.
•
It’s one thing to be a Jordan wannabe, another to be an Iverson knockoff. The Knicks have managed to wind up with two, Marbury and Steve Francis (who laughably answers to the nickname Franchise), both struggling now to fit in as playmakers after years of bullheaded rushes to the rim or passes from compromised airborne positions.
Tattoos, warts and all, Iverson can make a strong case that he has been the Philadelphia franchise for a decade, no insignificant contribution to that city, but, upon further review, not exactly a ringing endorsement for the sport at large.
E-mail: [email protected]