The Sixers Sign Sergio Rodriguez: At Long Last Point Guard?

(Apologies for that YouTube audio track. Beggars, choosers.)

For $8 million on a 1-year deal, the hometown laundry has a new lottery ticket to fill the glaring need at point guard: Sergio Rodriguez, the Spanish national and past Olympic hero.

Rodriguez is 30, 6-foot-3, a past MVP in his Euroleague for Real Madrid, and seems, well, more capable than most of the guys that have been given the gig. He was 48% from the floor, 38% from three, and with past experience at three NBA stops in Portland, Sacramento and New York. He's also an ex-first round pick from Phoenix, albeit one of those very late ones. The fact that he didn't stick in the Association back in the day is not encouraging, but guys can get better at a later age, and what the hell, anything that keeps me from watching Kendall Marshall has to be a win. Besides, he comes to town with a nickname ("El Chaco") and a reputation for flair, and for a team that desperately needs that from the backcourt, there are worse things.

Judging from the YouTube clips, he's now got a poor man's James Harden beard, good size and tolerable handle (it's a little high), and a good sense of how the game is played now, in re three point arc awareness. He also seems to be the kind of guy who teammates like playing with, judging from older NBA clips, though you won't see a lot of defense. Lots of behind the back stuff. Take a look for yourself, but he's got more than a little Ginobili in him to my eyes.

Oh, and one last thing to temper enthusiasm; they seemingly got him away from Brooklyn. Which isn't exactly as if they got him away from an NBA team. But again, for a year and $8 million, that's about as low risk as you can get for a free agent signing in 2016. Also, given the low contract length, he's probably coming in super motivated to make some of that sick NBA money in next year's free agent class. So... maybe even something of a bargain?

Kevin Durant to the Warriors: The Story of the Year

No Longer Conjecture

With the news that Kevin Durant is joining the runner-up, a few quick thoughts, because this is seismic...

> From a sheer quality of life perspective, there's just a quantum leap from Oklahoma City to the Bay Area. It's just off the scale, honestly. Leaving money on the table in the short run and the higher cost of living doesn't come into play when you make seven figures... let alone eight.

> The people (idiots, honestly) who feel that Durant is less of a man for leaving an organization that was up 3-1... um, it's not as if the team is the same behind him. Serge Ibaka is gone to Orlando for Victor Oladipo. Stephen Adams isn't going to just keep doing dirty work without offensive touches. Billy Donovan is going to coach differently in the second year, and that bench is going to get different minutes. There's also immense volatility in terms of injuries and player development, let alone playoff seeding. Expecting the world to be the same 10 to 11 months from now is absurd on its face, which means that Stephen A. Smith is required by law to jerk his knee just so. Seriously, Smith is just the worst.

> How much will Durant change his style of play to go along with the Warriors? Ball movement, cutting and screens is the reason why, along with the phenomenal shooting, that this has been a dominant offensive outfit, and while Durant has been a willing and capable passer in non crunch-time situations, the fourth quarter has been another matter. He's talented enough to win playing Heroball, but in the long run, it's anathema to teamwork, and on a club with three guys who are already in the league's top 15 players (Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green), that's not great.

> In the final analysis for Durant as a person and player, though... you are telling me you would not want to be in a final five of Curry, Thompson, Green, Andre Iguodala and yourself? That's taking the Death Lineup and swapping the weakest link for one of the five best players in the world. From a sheer eyes standpoint, I want to see it, even if it's not a sure thing to work.

> Here's the hidden bummer factor that could make this all go south: injuries and uncertainties. Curry was banged up at the end of the year and is no guarantee to age gracefully. Thompson and Iguodala have had back issues. Green is volatile and might not react well to becoming fourth banana on the court when he was their only star to play well in Game Seven of the Finals. Iguodala is the oldest of the group and had back issues in the Finals. Going to the benchies, Shaun Livingston's injury history is terrifying, and Leandro Barbosa is older than imaginable for his speed of play.

> As for what Durant leaves behind, um... before we break out the crying towels for the good people of Oklahoma City, can we remember for a hot minute what they did to get their team? Can we also remember that instead of being creative to keep the best young nucleus in the NBA together, they gifted James Harden to the Rockets for no good reason at all? And that no one in their right mind goes to that city before Durant puts them on the map, and that the only reason they are there is because their dirtbag owner moved them there after promising he would not? The people of Seattle, a truly great city with an NBA history that should never have been lost, are playing the world's tiniest violins for Thunder Fans today.

> And for everyone who seems convinced that this will make the Warriors an even better team than last year's outfit... um, slow your roll. They aren't winning 73 games again; they'll settle in the 65 to 70 range and lose games on purpose for rest, like the Spurs. Durant replaces Harrison Barnes, expected to sign elsewhere now, and yes, that's a big leap forward. But to afford him, the team is likely to renounce their rights to Festus Ezeli, and maybe also move off Andrew Bogut. That's a trade you make every day of the week, given Ezeli's hands and Bogut's injury history and free throw woes, but it does not make them better defensively, and it also tears away at their depth -- which was already going to take a serious hit as the league chipped away at dominance. That is the nature of dominance, after all; it can only erode.

> The biggest guy on the hot seat (OK, second hottest: Durant is going to be vilified for no good reason) with this move is, in my opinion, head coach Steve Kerr. He's lost assistant Luke Walton to the Lakers, and he's now in a situation that no coach, frankly, wants to be in; win everything or be judged a failure. People are talking about the Warriors now as if multiple championships are a requirement, rather than success, and true idiots are probably thinking they could go undefeated. The franchise has taken a bold and strategic step to improve a team that was already fantastic; it's not a move with a lot of precedent.

> Finally, this. I don't know why the world decided it was time to hate on the Warriors in the middle of the Finals last year, and why LeBron James became heroic again after jockeying from Cleveland to Miami and back, while killing his coach and becoming the de facto GM. None of that stuff strikes me as adorable, and people who want to talk about Curses are people who need Story more than Game; they bore the urine out of me. But so be it; the Warriors Turned Heel, because sports fans are idiots who would rather be watching wrestling and probably secretly do, because childhood. Whatever.

Now? After you sign the biggest free agent prize in five years to join a team that broke the single-season record for wins, and became the first team in the Finals to lose a 3-1 lead (albeit under highly dubious conditions thanks to NBA Fixer In Chief Adam Silver)? They might as well all grow twirly Stephen Adams mustaches and all start kicking guys in the junk, because the hate is going to be intense.

Unless, of course, they win, because Heels Don't Win, at which point idiots will talk about how Durant was a visionary and Kerr was the only coach who could mesh all of this together and Curry and Thompson and Green only care bout winning and gosh we always loved Iguodala anyway.

See why I only want to watch Game, and hate Story?

Return To Meh: The Sixers Sign Jerryd Bayless

Welcome To Town

Here's how little the world of NBA free agency impacts the Sixers even now, in the post-Sam Hinkie Era where the franchise is said to have turned a corner from the days of stockpiling assets and don't need to win games right away... no free agent of note was in any way connected to the club in talks, and the impact of the first two days can be boiled down to swapping PG Ish Smith for G Jerryd Bayless. So even when they get a guy, the happiness is tempered.

To be fair, there was chatter about the club trying for G Jamal Crawford from the Clips, which probably did nothing more than make Crawford's agent happier, since it meant the Clips added some money to their deal. Oh, and they didn't make a qualifying offer for Isiah Canaan, which is fine, because Canaan probably doesn't belong in the NBA. Moving on.

Of course, calling Bayless a guy is right up there with calling Smith a PG; both are accurate, but likely beyond the point for a team with aspirations of wining as many games as they lose. (Note: this will not happen in 2016-17.) Neither move is even covered on the team's Web site, which might have something to do with NBA logistics, or the club just wants us to think much more about Ben Simmons coming to town, but still. 3 years for $9 million a year might be worth some ink, if only to give the world an idea of what Bayless is.

The short answer is a journeyman combo guard who has not been fantasy relevant, but might be a part of a rotation later. Probably better than Smith just due to age and defensive aptitude (i.e., he has any) , and maybe defensible as someone who is growing into the role... but fair from a name or an impact signing.

Because that's the dirty little truth about life in the modern NBA: no one who is worth a damn is going to a place where they don't think they are going to win. That's why no one worth a damn is taking the Lakers' money either. Timofey Mozgov or Jerryd Bayless. That's what you attract when you are bottom five; bottom five guys. Better hope like hell that Simmons and Joel Embiid really are as good as advertised...

FTT Off-Topic: Drive Of Passage

Not sports, read or don't.

My eldest turned 16 in late April, then passed her driver's ed permit test six weeks ago. As we live in a part of New Jersey where cars are still pretty necessary for most of life, and she's got an active social life, this is a big thing. We also have a third car, a twenty year old Ford that's reliable enough for short trips, and there's no great way for her to get back and forth to high school, what with my wife and I both working now. So getting her started and experienced behind the wheel is important, and the laws of the state are that they don't impact your insurance until they are a rated driver, as opposed to a kid with a permit. (Yeah, I know, that makes no sense to me, either.) So after a half dozen trips to a wide range of DMVs, which is a whole 'nother kettle of goog God almighty, do you people suck... she drives.

I don't know how many of you are parents, or are hoping to get there, but there are few things in the world more strange than being in the car with your kid when they drive for the first time. I was there, and it hardly seems like a very long time ago, when she was a bump in my wife's stomach. I own things that are older than her. Hell, the car she is slated to drive is older than she is. So to just hand her the keys and have her drive me home, all while trying to project a sense of calm about the whole thing...

Well, parenting is, at its core, pretending that you know what you are doing when you have no clue. The kids see through this as they get older, and call you on it, because that's part of growing up and all... but it's also challenging and terrible, because this relationship where you used to have all of the answers is now just becoming another place where you can be challenged for no good reason whatsoever. And more if you've raised a kid to challenge, which is what we've seemed to have done, whether on purpose or not.

It also, and there is no two ways to put this, makes you feel extremely old, extremely quickly. Once the kid is driving, there's even less sense of why you need to be around, assuming the kid isn't making terrible choices. Just in case you weren't aware that the finish line is coming -- if there can be such a thing -- having the kid behind the wheel bangs it home hard. She's ever-closer to leaving, and she's not ready to yet, but on some level, no one ever is. If I were to keel over tonight on my doomed attempt to stay healthy and/or eat badly without weight gain, most of what I would have wanted to tell her has already been said. She might not remember it all immediately, but it would bubble up in her acts and deeds, and she'd get through it. Not without a great deal of difficulty, but on some level, me being around would also be its own stress.

None of this is meant to suggest that I'm going anywhere. I've made my place in the world, and the youngest is still just turning 11 in a couple of weeks; needs there are going to be strong, and it seems like the modern generation leans hard on their parents all the way into their mid to late '20s. But not every time out, and there are, of course, no guarantees on time; either how much you have, or how much people have with you.

All of this from a stamp at a DMV, and a couple of hours as someone else's passenger. Quite an experience, really.

(As to how she drives? She's cautious to the point of scary, speeds up and slows down a little erratically, and makes me nervous... but I think I've done a reasonable job of not showing it, and there's really nothing wrong that a few hundred hours of driving won't fix. The trick now, of course, is getting it without incident. And trying not to dwell on the fact that this is just about the most dangerous thing that we let teenagers do, and something that technology will, in all likelihood, eliminate in a decade or two...)

The Obvious Olympic Question

With Cause

So we're nearing the final month or so of hype before the Rio Games, and as is now becoming the new tradition before such things, it's time to check in on the host suck -- err, country -- and see what disasters they have to overcome in the last minute, so the press can not tell the hard news story of what awful things have happened to let a party happen, and just, well, cover the party.

Oh, wait, you know what? I'm not going to bother with any of that, because that's what the rest of the Internets is for. Instead, I'm going to tell you the new normal, which is that every Olympics is a disaster. It's just a question of magnitude, and if the disaster is going to be really reported on, depending on whether or not the journalists are being stepped on or not. Kind of like how every Presidential race will be close until the actual results are in, and how every Super Bowl will be exciting, and so many other things in which the media's need to be a profit-making machine means that no new news will be generated?

Need proof as to why the Games have become a con? You don't need to look any further at where the games have been recently (Russia), where they are going to be now (Brazil), and where they are going to be next (South Korea for 2018 Winter, then Japan for 2020 Summer, and China for 2022 Winter). Notice the distinct lack of forward-thinking nations and cities, prosperous areas or homes to established political situations that won't just roll over? Yeah, me too. All of the places that the games go to now are newer to prosperity, still prone to the siren call of World Opinion, and ready and willing to lube and pony up briefcases full of cash to the human garbage that's employed by the IOC. (Open question as to which is more corrupt: them or FIFA. I'll take your answer in the form of a payment.)

Real countries no longer want, or should want, the Olympics. Sure, your advertisers are all kinds of happy about it to get non-DVR content and a potential ratings number, but without the Cold War storylines, the chance of the ratings going in the dumper is just as high as the rights fees. And you can dream your dreams of tourists from all over the world coming to fill your cash registers with food and drink and hotel orders. But the ticket sales to non-major events tell a very different story, and most of the Games are just sports that we don't care about enough to watch routinely. The ones that are, like basketball or golf, we can see better routinely. I realize that I'm not the target market for things mattering just because flags are involved (yay, flags!), but getting me to care about the Olympics is a hard sell in the best of times, and in an era of high definition television and countless streams, I can do better. And so can everyone else.

A final point on this... the Games involve logistics nightmares that no city can properly deal with, which means a ton of new and pointless construction that will go to seed the second the Games are over. Kind of a cruel joke to Brazil, who just got through this for the World Cup in soccer recently, and now have more empty venues to make and abandon now. Even for an economy that isn't ravaged by political instability and a booming virus outbreak, it's just too much graft. Add in the graft, and it's really over the top.

So, no, there will be no watching of the Games, other than to see if any meaningful hoops player gets hurt, because I could truly not give a damn. And anyone who doesn't want Zika virus, or the potential of a kidnapping for ransom during the Games, or to pour money into a country that just pulled off a coup d'etat over an elected regime because the media has been made powerless through violence and intimidation? Probably should take a big miss on the whole thing, too.

Which makes me wonder, really... why do we still have this thing in the first place? And wouldn't the world be better without it?