Skip to main content

The Last Dance: Ratto nails it

So I like positive thinking and so should you--I mean, if you want to succeed generally, you should probably think positive. But at the same time you need to be able to face reality, and if you're in an environment where there's so much positive thinking that most people are missing reality, then you will be able to make a name for yourself as a realist and a cynic. In other words, you will take what is generally a bad thing--cynicism--and make it a good thing. Your cynical, bitter words will be like water given to a man in the desert who's dying of thirst.
That's Ray Ratto. Like, if I'm raising a kid and he's as cynical as Ray Ratto, I'm very concerned. I'd be on the line with a therapist, sending him regularly, trying to get him out of his deep, deep depression. But Ray's not a kid, and so his mental state is his own responsibility, and as far as his professional life goes, we all benefit from him being like the only guy in the room who keeps it real and doesn't suck up to the system. And that's what we get with this Last Dance story

I didn't watch the Last Dance but it's prompted mostly a lot of discussion about how good those Bulls teams were, and you can listen to any number of professional arguers discussing whether those Bulls could beat the 2016 Warriors or the 2012 Heat. Sports writers of Ratto's age often form a prejudice toward this athlete whose glory years coincide with their own youth--but Ratto is having none of it. None, you hear me! 

I just watched PTI (as I usually do) and Kornheiser and Wilbon cannot even spare a single negative word for Jordan, even though today's news item on that story is about how Horace Grant is firing back  at him for the criticism he aimed at Grant in the documentary. That is--here's a documentary about Jordan, starring Jordan, including recent interviews of Jordan. And in those interviews what does Jordan do. Well, average sports writers like the PTI guys can't bring themselves to say it, so let Ratto explain--he punches down at people who were involved in the events that Jordan is being celebrated for! 

So, without having even seen the documentary, I can tell Ratto is nailing this and nobody else is. Big hagiography being made about you and your sporting exploits from 10 years ago. Gee, what attitude should you take toward others while you're being celebrated? Be gracious, you moron! And yet that has not been Jordan's strength, especially in the years since his retirement.  

And so also in the midst of this Jordan celebration where so many sports writers are commentating while holding their hands over their eyes to avoid seeing any new information, Ratto can safely lodge an opinion over something else that I suspect he is right about--that is, the Jordan-is-better-than-LeBron takes are somewhat sadly and desperately offered by an older generation that insists its generation is better. But older generations always think that and they're seldom right. This opinion, that Jordan probably is not better than LeBron, lands well in this Ratto piece because it's puncturing the annoyingly full balloon of insistent exaggeration that marks so much of sports talk. (If you want a more thorough argument that comes to the same conclusion as Ratto, check out this Jonathan Tjarks piece in The Ringer. Basketball is evolving.)

Like Ratto, I'm glad the Jordan praise will now fade--there is no reason for any further revivals. His career is over, they made a documentary--that ought to do it! And hey, I loved watching Jordan's career, especially his second three-peat. He was an amazing competitor, and they were a great team. They won six championships. But if there's one thing that annoys me as a sports talk subject, it is, "How many championships should they have won? Or how many could they or would they have one if Jordan hadn't retired? Or if the team had stuck together? Would they have beaten the Rockets in 1994? The Spurs in 1999?" The could've-would've-should've arguments, I've seen a few of these on PTI and elsewhere.

These are stupid! This is like, the ultimate reality-denial. The Bulls won six championships, and that's such a great way of saying exactly how excellent they were. Six championships--twice as many as any other dynasty. "But if this, or if that, then ... "  Let me just sum up those arguments: If they had won five championships, then that would be less than six. If they had won less than five, then maybe they would have won four, or three, or two, or one! If they didn't win any championships, then the number of championships they won ... would be zero! On the other hand, if they had won more than six championships, well then they would have won seven! Hey but, do you know who else would have won seven championships, if they had won seven championships? The Phoenix Suns! Yup, they also would have won many championships. You know how many championships I would have won, if I had won championships? Well, if I had won seven championships, then that's how many I would have won! 

Alright, tomorrow maybe we'll talk about baseball's plan to come back, and auto racing being back already. Later!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Baseball Should Come Back & Basketball Shouldn't

So I previously stated this elsewhere and more forcefully--the whole "basketball is coming back" story kind of sucks and we'd all be better off if it weren't the case. On the other hand, "baseball is coming back" is a sensible story that hopefully will happen, although it might not. Let's review the differences. Basketball season goes from November to June. If not for Covid-19, they'd be finishing the Conference Finals this week, getting us set for the final, best-of-seven, championship series to be played next week. However, most everyone agrees that whomever returns to play needs a week-plus of training to get back into shape. So while the Finals normally end by June 15, this rescheduled end-of-basketball-season wouldn't start until July or August, which is usually the offseason. Meanwhile, baseball usually runs from April till late October. Thus, though we've missed the first half of the baseball season, it can start in July and it will be...

The Art of Being A Pundit

I'm glad I have my own show, because the tension between these hosts who work together is normally not good. I guess that I think Kornheiser and Wilbon do it as well as anybody--and I don't think they do that good. Here I have to remind myself that I'm talking about living people and not like ... historical or fictional characters. And that's because Kornheiser and Wilbon are victims of their own success. I'm saying, I guess, that Kornheiser and Wilbon are a little bit like The Simpsons . They were great for several years--let's round up and say they were good for a decade. They had personality, edge, charisma--the necessary components to being good. But to stay on the air for longer than a decade, a sports personality has to make compromises. The edge just can't be real for longer than a decade. (Maybe the same is true for an animated sitcom but I'm not sure--the analogy was more the number of years one can be good for.) The "chemistry" on PTI...

Yeah, I guess a lot of this is Self-Help.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CAxVdkBlry8/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link View this post on Instagram 6 June 1993: #Illustration #calvin #billwatterson #cartoon #selfhelpbooks #calvinandhobbes #comics #funny A post shared by Calvin & Hobbes (@calvinhobbes2020) on May 29, 2020 at 4:55am P Calvin & Hobbes is just funny; I think Bill Watterson, the mysterious author who created it, is a comedian—an artist not devoted to any viewpoint but devoted, ultimately, to comedy. He uses his character, Calvin, to find what is funny. He occasionally also finds what is poignant and moving and profound, but he constantly returns to funny—it is like the True North that he re-orients himself to. I say this not having recently done any deep reading of Calvin & Hobbes; I’ve just been following some of these accounts that re-print old C&H comics. But as I do so, and as he makes me laugh, I find myself wondering what is behind the jokes—what is the viewpoint of this joke,...