The Beautiful Games Part One - by Apollo

You would think that having three of the North American professional leagues off-season would give us less to comment on, but that would be wrong. The 2 Wise Men sometimes prefer the off-season for it allows us to eloquently wax on about sports without the distraction of actual games. You will all soon learn that "What if...." is one of our favourite questions. Whenever a change in management occurs, or a player is traded, we also begin to wonder and imagine what the impact of these decisions will be.

Recently, our not-so-beloved but much maligned Toronto Raptors hired their third coach in three years, Sam Mitchell, a former NBA veteran who spent most of his career as a mentor to Kevin Garnett with the Minnesota Timberwolves. It speaks to the desperation of this franchise and its fans when we are willing to settle on a new coach with zero head-coaching experience and give him the benefit of the doubt. After all, he could not possibly be any worse than the other infamous failures that have run this organization. To his credit, Mitchell not only remembers what it is like to be an NBA player, but in fact played against many of the Raptors' core players, including Vince Carter, Jalen Rose, Donyell Marshall, Alvin Williams and Lamond Murray. I can just picture the practices now..."Hey coach, remember when I dunked on you?"

Mitchell has already said he wants the Raptors to be more of a running team and to push the ball at all times, which is music to the ears of fans who had to suffer through watching the Raptors use all of the 8 seconds allowed to walk the ball past halfcourt so often. Fans can bear losing to a certain point, so long as the effort is there and games are exciting. Nothing is worse than watching your team lose and being bored by it at the same time.

What then is more important in professional sports - entertainment or winning? Obviously winning, but I ponder this after watching my beloved France fall to the monotonous tactics of Greece at the Euro 2004 tournament. While Les Bleus certainly are to blame for falling embarassingly short of repeating their 2000 championship, Greece and coach Otto Rehhagel have drawn praise and ire for their defensive style, keeping as many players as possible around their own goal and relying on 1-0 and 2-1 victories. Let us not take anything away from Greece or any other country, and let us not forget that winning - in any fashion - remains key. However, does it take away from our enjoyment of sport when we are forced to watch the Raptors stumble their way to a 77-75 victory, or watch a neutral zone trap in hockey or a 9-6 field goal fest in American football or a 1-0 soccer game?

Of course, these questions are only asked when our favourite teams are eliminated. Partisan fans will espouse the resiliency and heart of their winning teams when a game turns ugly. Their heroes are suddenly victors in a defensive struggle or a match of wills as opposed to the reality that they in fact bored their opponents to death. Tactics are often used to compensate for a difference in talent, and that's fine. Still though, the sports fan in me, the one who grew up watching the offensive juggernauts of the Los Angeles Lakers, the Edmonton Oilers, the Dallas Cowboys and Brazil can't help but cringe when watching Hack-a-Shaq, or the left-wing lock or a nil-nil draw decided by penalty kicks. Defence does win championships, but usually top defensive teams still know how to score and generate offence.

It all comes down to what our idea of sport really is. A draw decided by penalty kicks is not soccer to me. Intentionally fouling a player in the dying seconds to prevent a game-tying shot is not basketball. Watching 25 aces is not tennis. Here's hoping then on the eve of Canada Day, that Portugal, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Greece can return to the beautiful game, and that once the Raptors season does begin, rookie Coach Mitchell can get his team running again.

Rock the Vote Part 3 - by wongoz

Good citizens of Canada, I salute you! Regardless of the fact that the Libs have retained power, albeit in a minority government, an impressive 60.5% of registered voters turned out to cast a vote! The 2 Guys can't claim all the credit, but we'd like to think our exhortations did have something to do with it... :P

alright, so the fallout of the election has yet to be determined, but basically, the Canadian electorate has given the Liberal platform another chance, though with some restraint, to be sure. A surprisingly poor showing by the Conservatives (do we still call them Tories?) in central and eastern Canada means that though the party represents the strongest opposition to the government in some time, they really only represent western Canada (shades of the Reform party and the Canadian Alliance? i think so.).

The big winners are the NDP and the Bloc Québecois. The Bloc has brought the sovereignty issue back on thre front burner, while the NDP demonstrated that left-leaning Canada does indeed still exist. In fact, the parties I consider to be left-leaning garnered almost 20% of the popular vote - something that cannot be ignored.

So what can we expect in the next little while? Well, first of all, there will be a lot more political tangoing than we've seen in some time. The Libs need a partner to push through any legislation (and to avoid a loss of a vote of confidence, which would trigger another election), and that makes the NDP the real powerbroker, as the Grits probably don't want to be seen cozying up to the BQ.

Well, it might not be very efficient, and there might be a lot more political dancing to be done, but at least it's something that we've chosen for ourselves.

Next up: Apollo's take on new Raptors coach Sam Mitchell.

NBA Draft 2004 Part 2 - by wongoz

well, this post is a bit late, considering the draft happened on thursday, but my opinion is always valid, so here i go anyways.

i watched, er, followed the draft on espn (disclosure: i am in no way affiliated with espn. i just happen to like their sports coverage.) and believe you me, i just about blew up when the raptors' pick came over the wire. rafael who?

i understand there's a lot of hype going into the draft about "upside" and "potential" and comparisons to current or former players coming out the wazoo, but still. you'd think that the possibility of this pick unfolding the way it did would've been reported by somebody?

i was quite disappointed in the first few picks as the players that were most talked about in toronto - ben gordon, shaun livingston and devin harris - were all scooped up in the first 5 picks. that left us with a plethora of unproven big men with "upside", and swingmen of which the raptors already have an abundance of.

i suppose we should commend raptors GM rob babcock for sticking to what he needed, but wouldn't it have been possible to swing a deal, any deal, that would've prevented us from making the biggest reach in this year's draft? this is aleksandr radojevic all over again.

the obvious pick at the 8th spot would've been andre iguodala, who has drawn comparisons to scottie pippen. now seriously, did we need a big man that bad that we passed up on someone like that?

of course, if comparisons and prognosticators were always correct, then kwame brown would be the best centre in the eastern conference, but alas, we know different. still, i think it's best to err on the side of possibility, no?

well, here's hoping rafael araujo pans out, because stranger things have happened... i mean, greece beating france in the euro 2004 quarterfinals? what the blood?

NBA Draft 2004 Part One - by Apollo

We normally will not post twice on the same day. We want our fans to have at least 24 hours to absorb the brilliance of each post. Having said that, sometimes the world of sports does not give you that luxury and so we have to move on to the coming drafts this week. Wongoz will bring you his view once the draft is over and the picks are done. Before we continue though, Thierry Henry and France rule!

I always look forward to the NBA draft, mainly because it's the shortest of all the professional drafts (only 2 rounds) and unlike the other professional drafts (except the NFL), the players selected are all likely to contribute right away, or at least will be given the opportunity to do so. The nature of running an NBA franchise means that more and more rookies and younger players are being asked to play significant minutes for their teams whether they are ready (Tayshaun Prince, Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, Dwayne Wade) or not (Kwame Brown, Keith Bogans, Speedy Claxton, Dirk Nowitzki). I know Dirk is a superstar now but his rookie season was ugly. As a fan, the NBA and NFL drafts are fun because you can start plugging players into your team's lineup, as opposed to MLB and NHL drafts where you know you won't likely see any of the draftees for a few years.

This year's NBA Draft is more wide open than ever, due to the lack of a consensus impact player like Lebron, Shaquille O'Neal, or Tim Duncan, as well as the increased presence of high school and European players, who are all being drafted more on their potential as opposed to their ability to contribute right away. Even though the NBA draft remains only 2 rounds long, it seems to be moving towards the MLB and NHL models where players are selected and developed for a few years before they are expected to play significant roles.

This season, our beloved Toronto Raptors select eight overall, which is low enough to still get a quality player but too high to get an impact guy for this season. The Raps will have to pray that Luol Deng, Andre Igoudala, Devin Harris or Shaun Livingston fall to them, otherwise they'll be left to consider Luke Jackson, Josh Childress or Andris Biedrins. Trades could change this entire situation, but I don't think the new Raptors management team has the luxury of waiting for a European or high school player to develop. Look for the Raps to take Childress or perhaps trade down for Jameer Nelson if none of the top players fall to them. Regardless, tonight should be interesting.

The NBA has said it wants to raise the eligible age for players entering the draft to 20 or even higher in order to prevent future high schoolers from declaring early for the draft and skipping college. This issue is also under debate in the NFL, where Maurice Clarett recently lost a court challenge of the age rules in that league. Here's my thoughts:

1. There will always be high schoolers who think they're ready for the pros no matter what the rules are. NBA MVP Kevin Garnett was drafted straight out of high school and few NBA superstars finish college (or even attend college in some cases) before turning pro.

2. The idea that these players would benefit from going to college and getting their degrees in the United States is a farce. These athletes spend far more time on the court than in the classroom and there are likely far more athletes than student-athletes in America's colleges anyway, so they may as well not bother with school.

3. There is no requirement for non-athletes to go to university before they can start working, so why regulate athletes? Anyone can start work after they're done high school, or even during high school. It is true that post secondary education generally increases one's job prospects, but the responsibility is on the individual to be aware of the risks of his decisions, athletic or otherwise.

4. Other sports such as tennis, soccer, hockey and baseball freely allow teenagers to compete, and even encourage it by having minor league and junior team systems in place. In Europe, high school age players can be put into the development system of professional clubs at a very early age.

As far as individual rights go, I don't mind seeing high schoolers come out for professional drafts. I do find it tragic when high schoolers get seduced by the promise of big money and fame and do not realistically evaulate all their options. It doesn't help that the NBA and NFL have no realistic development system in place. At least baseball, hockey and soccer have an abudance of minor league systems to at least allow drafted players the opportunity to earn a living playing their sport while they develop their skills.

From a fan perspective, I would prefer an age requirement only to try and ensure that players coming into the professional leagues have better fundamentals and skills. It's great that Lebron and his fellow high schoolers are athletic and can dunk, but ask them to hit a 15 foot shot or consistenly make their free throws and that gets harder. Unfortunately, there's no guarantee that forcing these players to go through the college system will improve these skills, and until the entire development structure of basketball in North America is evaluated, all we can hope for is that each draftee, regardless of age, is fully educated on the risks of entering a sport where you're always only one injury away from the end of your career.

Euro 2004 tiebreakers - by wongoz

So the knockout round of the European football (sorry, soccer) championship begins today, starting with a sweet matchup involving England and host country Portugal. The other matches of the quarterfinals are: France vs. Greece, Sweden vs. Denmark, and the Netherlands vs. the Czech Republic. My sleeper pick of the Czechs is looking pretty good, though both Apollo and I are rooting for the French.

One of the most exciting things about the Euro tournament is the round-robin style pool qualification round. Due to the possibility of ties (or draws), there are more than a few permutations of results which can lead to teams finishing with the same number of points. Therein lies the basis of this post: how people don't understand the tiebreaker system.

Two days ago, Sweden drew 2-2 with Denmark, a result that guaranteed both teams entry to the quarterfinal round, regardless of how Italy fared in their match against Bulgaria (Italy won 2-1). The complicated system of tiebreakers determined that though all 3 teams had 5 points (1 win, 2 draws), it was the Scandinavian contingent which would advance.

I read no less than 3 incorrect reports about the reason why the Swedes and Danes would advance rather than Italy. Two articles (here and here) said it was due to superior goal differential, while another article was blatantly wrong in specifying "a lack of goals against". Say what?

So what are the tiebreakers? According to the BBC, the order goes: 1. head-to-head record; 2. goal differential vs. tied teams; 3. goals scored vs. tied teams; 4. goal differential vs. whole group; 5. goals scored vs. whole group; and then a couple more not based on the competition.

Let's have a go at it, shall we?

1. Head-to-head record: all 3 teams tied each other during their matches - Italy 0-0 Denmark, Italy 1-1 Sweden, Sweden 2-2 Denmark. Onto the next one...

2. Goal differential vs. tied teams - well, since they all tied, the goal differential for all 3 teams vs. the others would obviously be 0. Next!

3. Goals scored vs. tied teams - where's the beef? It's right here, baby. Previous to Tuesday's results, Italy had scored only 1 goal in the matches against Sweden and Denmark. Sweden had only 1 goal in its match vs. Italy, while Denmark was goalless.

This is where it opens up. If either Denmark or Sweden had won their match outright, then it would have been the winner plus Italy who would've advanced (since the loser would have had only 4 points). But a 2-2 draw (or one with a higher goal count) meant the result of the Italy-Bulgaria match was irrelevant.

If you haven't grasped it by now, here's why: a 0-0 draw or 1-1 draw would've given Sweden the clear edge in the third tiebreaker (goals scored vs. tied teams), but Denmark would've either lost (if 0-0) or tied (if 1-1) on goals scored with Italy. If the result was indeed 1-1, then the fourth tiebreaker (goal differential vs. the whole group) would've been used between Denmark and Italy, which is why Italy needed to win by at least 3 goals to advance (that they didn't is another story).

However, the 2-2 draw gave Sweden 3 goals scored vs. Italy and Denmark, while Denmark had 2 goals vs. the other teams, leaving Italy on the sidelines with just 1 goal scored vs. the Nordic teams. Thus, the 2-2 draw negated the score of the Italy-Bulgaria match, even if it was 15-0. So much for superior goal differential.

Bottom line? Sweden and Denmark advanced due to having scored more goals amongst the tied teams, and Italy became the first team since pool play was introduced in 1980 to fail to advance to the quarterfinals despite not having lost a match.

Rock the Vote Part 2 - by wongoz

Many apologies for the late post... i've been a little busy of late and i didn't want to shortchange my reply. As it is, it may seem shortchanged anyways, since i didn't want to delay it any longer, what with the 2004 NBA draft coming up on Thursday.

alright, as Apollo mentioned, we're on the same side of the coin, when it comes to voting - far be it from me to disagree with him on this one. But while i rant and rave about it on one side, my track record leaves something to be desired (i was once tossed from a job as chief returning officer - admittedly, i knew next to nothing about the position going in, so i had it coming), so let me play the devil's advocate and offer up some reasons why Joe Canadian (or Johann Deutsch) would NOT vote.

I'll start off with a bunch of reasons why people won't vote, before I try to rebut a couple of Apollo's talking points.

1. People just don't care - honestly, some people don't. I can probably count the number of people i know who actually care about politics on my two hands.

The people who care about the election are usually the same people who are already on one side of the political spectrum or other. The secret, latent force in political issues is the number of eligible, undecided swing voters who normally could care less about an election. All they want is that their leaders don't make asses of themselves (which is still hard to come by).

Disclaimer: frankly, i'm guilty of this. I've been living in Germany for the last 3 years, and i still don't read any German newspapers or newsmagazines, and I don't watch or listen to any German news programs, so I know less than nothing about German politics and the issues that concern Johann Deutsch. I'm just not interested. In my defense, I'm not eligible to vote here anyways.

2. People are uninformed - Admittedly, this seems like a real cop-out answer, and I usually call people on it when they use it.

So why am I admitting this? Because I again am guilty of it, though not in your typical I-don't-know-the-issues way. I'm not sure what's worse: that excuse, or mine. I'll let you decide.

Basically, I'm not voting in this month's federal election because I was uninformed - uninformed about electoral rules. I didn't think I was eligible to vote, so I didn't bother looking into it. Well, lo and behold, it turns out that I AM eligible, or rather, I was eligible, until 6pm today.

Actually, I've been eligible for any federal elections (haven't yet looked up provincial or municipal rules) since i've moved here because the rules state that any Canadian citizen living outside of Canada for less than 5 consecutive years since their last visit is eligible to vote. Oops. My bad.

3. People don't think their vote matter - Though we can see the fallacy of this point in the 2000 US presidential election, some people still think that their one vote doesn't make a difference anyways.

Alright, onto rebuttal time:

1. Apollo says voting is free. Well, so is running in the park, but people don't do that either. If they don't have an incentive (real or perceived) to do so, then they won't. Should the electorate be bribed into voting, or somehow coerced? No, I think that some education into the importance of the issues is enough. Implementation of that education is another thing though.

2. Apollo says voting is convenient. So is putting your garbage into a trash bin, but that doesn't stop people from doing something which is even more convenient - littering. And so, for some people, it's just more convenient not to vote.

3. Apollo says we should care about the services the government provides. The problem behind this is the transparency of services - people just don't know which government provides what service. The feds are talking big about health care, but it's administered provincially. Schools are a municipal issue, but colleges and universities are (mostly) provincial. If people are like I am here, I just pay my bills, pay my taxes, and expect everything to work. My garbage is picked up, the streets are relatively clean, the public transit is punctual, I can see a doctor when i need to, etc. Who cares who delivers it, as long as it is.

4. Apollo says democracy sets us apart. Like that matters to Joe Canadian?

5. Apollo says politicians are scary. That's my argument there. If all politicians are scary, then what's the point? This is more of a motivational point if you're trying to convince someone to enter politics, but it's not really a good selling point for voting. If politicians, by nature, can't be trusted, then why bother?

Alright, here's hoping that anyone who has read this far hasn't been turned off by my post. That's not my intention, nor is it meant to provide someone a defense for their own apathy (even though I might have provided one anyways). Go out, and rock the vote June 28.

Rock the Vote Part One - by Apollo

The first discussion topic...and it isn't about sports! Well, at least not right away...

Something rather near and dear to our hearts are elections. Well, we don't love them, but I think that generally Stevan and I try and participate in the democratic process and try to be informed on relevant issues. I don't pretend to be well educated on politics, but compared to the majority of eligible voters, it appears I may be a genius simply based on the fact that I've actually voted in municipal, provincial and federal elections.

The European Parliamentary elections took place last week, and unfortunately drew an all-time low 45.3% turnout of eligible voters. Now, that still amounted to about 150 million people voting, but out of an estimated 350 million eligible voters, that's pretty sad. The media have speculated that holding the elections at the same time as the Euro 2004 football tournament was a big mistake and helps to explain the low turnout. That's right...watching a football game which lasts about 3 hours per day somehow explains why people could not vote over a four day span when polls were open for at least six hours a day.

Here in Canada, we're going to the polls on June 28 for the federal election and if past trends continue, voter apathy in Canada will also reach new highs, or is that lows? Particularly troubling is the decrease in voting among young people, where the prevailing attitude is that government is either too big or too disparate to the point where voting makes no difference at all.

Now far be it from me to rant about the lack of voter participation or to wail idealistically about the need for more citizens to exercise their right to vote, but why is it that people really don't seem to care about their elected officials?

1. Voting is free (or more importantly, it's already paid for by tax dollars whether you vote or not...your money has already been spent, you may as well be the one spending it);

2. Voting is convenient; polling stations are always within walking distance and are open longer than most banks...which you would think would appeal to citizens who spend their lunch breaks waiting in line for teller machines, doughnuts or coffee);

3. Government services are used on a daily basis - unless you plan on not walking, driving, using the telephone, eating, using money, etc. - so how can people not care about the government delivering these services to them?

4. Democracy is often used as the banner which supposedly sets us apart from them, or what helps to define us as a nation, so why ignore such a fundamental component of democracy?

5. Politicians are scary - would you trust some of these people with the well being of your family, your money, your property? Probably not in some cases...so how can you trust that the rest of the country won't vote these scary people into office unless you do something to stop it?

There's plenty of arguments on either side as to the decline in voter participation, but I for one will probably never understand. People go out of their way so often on a daily basis for the most mundane of tasks - getting a coffee, smoking, picking up laundry, playing the lottery - perhaps if polling stations were located inside coffee shops here in Canada or at bistros in Europe, we could turn voter apathy around...in any event, I'll be voting on June 28.

Introduction

Who are the 2 Wise Men?

Alright, I'll throw out the first topic here. Just who are we, and what are we doing?

Apollo and I are friends from uni, and we riff on each other all the time, on just about any topic, though mostly about sports (for example, who revolutionized basketball more - the first MJ (Magic Johnson) or the second MJ (Michael Jordan)? You could argue for a third MJ if you want (Mike James?)...).

Well, we have so much fun doing it that we decided we had to share it with the world. Unfortunately, we don't have a show like Pardon The Interruption, nor are we trained as journalists, nor are we even close to experts on any given subject matter (Apollo's an aspiring lawyer, i'm an aspiring... anything), but we still thought it would be great to have our little debates and talks forever archived for the world to see... and who knows? maybe someone on ESPN comes across it and wants to offer us a show?!?

Anyways, we'll be starting up in the next day or so, and we hope you enjoy our POVs, even if you don't agree with them. Use the Comments section to spur on more debate, suggest improvements or even to offer wagers (we've been known to take a couple). Finally, bear with us as we work out the initial kinks in our system.

Thanks for tuning in!

Welcome!

Hello fans! all... 2 of you. Glad you could be here for our grand opening, where you, our fans, get to hear us pontificate about anything and everything, not because our opinions carry any more water than yours, but just because we can.

So sit back, relax and enjoy the fireworks!