"Wilt and the Game"

Where have you gone Wilt Chamberlain, the basketball fan turns its lonely eyes to you

Wilt the Stilt Chamberlain played basketball at the University of Kansas. He left Kansas U.  after his junior year in 1958. Wilt stood 7’1”, and flat-footed could lift his arms to a height of 9’6”.  Lest you think he was just an unusually tall guy consider: he was a star on the track and field team for three years and one former teammate said he was the best conditioned athlete he’d ever seen, that he never got tired. A sports writer coined the phrase “Wilt the Stilt” because of his long thin legs but the nickname he preferred most was “The Big Dipper”. He dominated college basketball and went on to have a Hall of Fame career in the professional ranks. 50 years later Wilt still holds many NBA records. He averaged 30 points and 20 rebounds a game for his entire career. (Today if an NBA player does a 30/20 game it’s the lead story on ESPN)  He had (45) 50 point games and (63) 40 point games in his career. His best professional year was 1961-62.

Think about these numbers: In that year he averaged 48 minutes a game which means he averaged playing every minute of every game. He fouled out a couple of times but his minutes in overtime games made up for it. That year his scoring average per game was 50.4, his shooting pct. that year was 73% which is still  a record and one not likely to ever be surpassed. Also, Wilt averaged 27.2 rebounds per game. You have to understand he was a force of nature. But his best moment occurred on March 2, 1962 in Hershey, Pa. His Philadelphia Warriors were playing the New York Knicks. They were playing in Hershey because the arena they played at in Philadelphia had been previously scheduled. That night Wilt scored 100 points. He had 59 points in the first half and made 22 of 33 shots in the first half. Overall he made 36 baskets by himself and the rest came on free throws as the hapless Knicks resorted to fouling him the minute he touched the ball.  His main moves were the slam dunk, a fade away jump shot that included using the backboard (bank shot) and his patented finger roll where he simply got high enough (the rim is 10 feet off the ground) to let the ball roll off his upturned hands into the basket. 

He wasn't just a one season wonder; years later in 1967 when he was playing against the Baltimore Bullets he made 18 straight field goals, still a record. He played 11 NBA seasons and retired arguably the most dominant force ever to play the game. Because he was an athlete (not just tall) after his professional basketball days were over he went on to play professional beach volleyball on the sands of Southern California. He was still playing professional volleyball well into his fifties. He is also in a professional Volleyball league Hall of Fame.

I never met him but I saw him 3 times. The first two times was when he played for the Los Angeles Lakers. My god what a show he put on. He slammed home basket after basket. He finger rolled, did the fade away jumper. One of the games I saw he scored 42, which was fairly routine for him. The second game he scored 39 but he was repeatedly hacked and fouled by the other team. You see Wilt was also a notoriously bad free throw shooter.  Had he made his free throws at the then league average of near 70% his career scoring average would have been even higher.

The third time I saw him was on the beach in Santa Monica long after his NBA days. I had gone there with a friend and he was walking across the parking lot. He was huge with his burly, muscular upper body on those long thin legs. I was staggered by him because I knew how famous he was and what an icon he was in the sporting world. But, here he was just headed to the beach in flip-flops and a gym bag as nonchalantly as ever.  He never sought the limelight like so many athletes do today.

This posting is NOT just about Wilt Chamberlain per se. I mention him and his scoring accomplishments to address 2 major problems with the game of basketball today.

Wilt’s scoring feats could never be done again because the game of basketball has changed too much. It is not the same game that Wilt played decades ago. It is in name (of course) and it’s still a case of whoever scores the most points wins but key things have changed the game for the worse. Basketball today is the antithesis of scoring points. I hate the way basketball is played today.

CONSIDER: Forget one person scoring a hundred points in a game most NBA teams do not score 100 points (collectively) in a game. Last night I saw the NBA’s NY Knicks play the Utah Jazz and after 24 minutes of basketball the score was 34-31. The half time score was 42-40. Look I announced games for Poway High School in San Diego and Poway used to have 30 points in the first quarter. Keep in mind high schools play 8 minute quarters and the NBA plays 12 minute quarters. I once announced a game where Poway scored 110 points and the team they played scored 69. One hundred seventy nine points in 32 minutes of action. The crowd was so excited they could barely catch their breath.

There was a recent Division I (highest division) college game where after 40 minutes of play the final score was 34-31. The lowest combined score since 1952. Wilt, would turn over in his grave to see what is going on in basketball. So too would Pistol Pete Maravich another shooting wizard from the late 60’s who often (himself) scored 34 points in a half. What in the name of Dr. James Naismith is going on?

 Here are the 2 biggest problems in basketball today and why it’s ruining the game.

The first problem is the installation of the 3 point line (now referred to as the “arc”).  The 3 point line was introduced as a way to add scoring (you could get three points for a basket instead of two if you could hit a longer range shot) and the theory was it would help teams catch up quicker if behind. It’s true that it has created a bunch of memorable last second “3 pointers” that have tied or won games.  However, these few ESPN video moments do not make up for the sluggish, woeful, ugly games that are played every day of a season.  Teams “jack up 3’s” all night long and miss anywhere from 50-100% of them. When these constantly raining missed shots carom all over the place it makes the tall player under the basket pointless. Why be a good re bounder and learn to box out the opponent? Why when the long range shot (some shots are 30+ feet out) is likely to bound backwards or angle off in some bizarre way? Traditional rebounds “under the basket” are mostly gone replaced by scrabbling for a ball that reacts like a pinball. 

So here is how it goes, a team brings the ball up court and all five offensive players spread out around the arc. Sloppy, truthfully illegal (if they called it the way the rule states) screens are set and the ball is passed around the perimeter. If a player doesn't get free to rush in for a layup and take his beating; one of the players will “jack up a 3 pointer”. Since at least 4 offensive players are behind the arc when the ball goes up there is no point rushing in to get a rebound (because you can’t even reasonably predict where it might go) so the whole offensive team immediately falls back to their defensive end of the court. The other team gets an easy uncontested rebound and they bring the ball up the court and do the same exact same thing. The game becomes a “half-court” shoot fest and thug a thon. The game slows down; there are few fast break transition baskets. The full court press perfected by UCLA back in the 60’s and a significant reason for their decade and a half dominance in college basketball is simply rendered useless.

Players today shoot 3’s in practice, that’s the game they want to play and most of them couldn't hit a mid-range jumper if their scholarship was on the line. I see these players today and sometimes the ball will be in their hands about 12-15 feet from the basket (inside the arc) and they are wide open (no one there to guard them) and they seem virtually paralyzed. They look lost. Years ago that was the land of scoring but today it seems more like no man’s land. Most times they will look to pass. Sidney Wicks, Curtis Rowe, John Vallely, Henry Bibby (Great UCLA players from the past) and scores of other lived off the 12-15 foot open shot.

The 3 point line along with allowing defensive players to virtually mug the offensive player and get away with it has made trying to get close to the basket the Bataan death march.

 I mean the defensive player(s) virtually climbs up on the offensive player’s back and/or grabs, slaps pushes and hacks away. The guy dribbling the ball must literally take his free arm and shove the defensive player backwards. In the past that in itself was a foul. Today it’s called self-defense and the officials let both actions go (the mugging and the effort to push the attacker away). The defensive big man literally shoves hacks and mugs his offensive counterpart. If every foul were to be called properly there would be no players on the court by half time. None!

The made 3 point shot can be impressive, the slam dunk dramatic but c’mon man with the 3 point line, the rough street ball fouls that aren't called, the lack of fundamental skills in general, the inability of a college player today to even understand that an uncontested 12 foot shot should be easier to make than a contested 25 footer, the game has de-evolved. An NBA team this year scored 58 points in a game. 58 total points in a game. Wilt the Stilt (alone) had 59 by half time in 1962.  Let’s get this game away from the innovators that have ruined it. Let’s get rid of the 3 point line, start calling the fouls, spend more time on fundamentals in practice (what kind of drills do they run in practice for god’s sake), and restore the game to the beauty it was. Hall of Famer Jerry West,  “Zeke from Cabin Creek” was a prolific college and NBA scorer (he was also on Wilt’s L.A. Lakers team) and he stood about 6’3”. If he were playing today he would average 12 pts. a game and sport 2 black eyes, and double hernia.

I swear if I win the Power ball lottery I’m going to start a 2 pt. league and get basketball back to the 120-119 thrilling games I grew up with. It was a game where players could show their basketball skills and innovative play.  I’d love to watch the UCLA full court pressure for about 10 minutes, a Sidney Wicks 12 foot bank shot, Pistol Pete drive the lane, Jerry West’s patented 15 footer or even better see a Wilt the Stilt finger roll. 

"Upper East Side Irregulars"

New York City is home to quite a collection of odd characters. I am on the streets virtually every day and I have seen plenty. These are three (3) people (that I have come across) that are hard to believe. Here, then are three upper east sides “irregulars”.

“BRAHO”

Braho is my building’s super. He is either Russian, Albanian or extra-terrestrial. He’s about 50+ years old but it’s hard to tell. Is that road- wear on his craggy face, a life-time of IBS, or was he a roadie in a Russian band in his youth? His job is to make sure things run smoothly in the building but the owner has mechanics that account for breakdowns so Braho’s main job is to come to the building in the morning, take the trash out of the outside receptacles bundle it up, put it on the curb and then hose down the sidewalk. Then he goes and gets coffee with the super(s) in the next two buildings that are also Russian, Albanians or came they on the mother ship with him. I can’t understand his halting English but I am sure he is yelling at me most of the time. I told him a joke one day and he just stared at me when I had finished and so I started talking about the building as if I’d always been talking about the building. He got into a one-way shouting match with a tenant that kept putting his bagged trash outside his door first before taking it out to the bins. 

Braho told him: “whatsa madder vit U? U kent liv yer begs outdsede yer door.  Dun’t do it. Dun’t do it. U mest alvays take to bins, right avay. Dis, leafing yer bags outside yer door must be a no. Dun’t take trash out of yer partment unless you take to bins. Please”! 

I rushed to my apartment and closed the door. I kept peeking out hoping the coast was clear. Finally I crept out.  Since my trash wasn't full, I filled a bag with wadded up newspapers just in case he was out there. That way he’d see that “der vas nutin da madder vit me”.  

“THE SPITTING WOMAN”

No one knows anything about her except she spits on anyone and anything close enough to be spat upon. I first encountered her when I was sitting in a small park across the street from Starbucks. I heard this woman yak up a wad and spit.  I turned to my right to see this old woman spitting on empty seats in the park. Not inconspicuous spits but the kind that the kid worked up in High School which made you vaguely uneasy. I thought, OK  she wants to spit on an empty chair, maybe an ex spit-mate used to sit there. BUT NO, she proceeds to spit on the next chair and the next. I realize she is working her way over to me so I asked the woman next to me is “she going to keep spitting her way over here till she spits on us”? She said yes, that’s the spitting woman and she got and left. I waited till the spitting woman was about 7 chairs from me before leaving. I've been accused of being a “dare-devil”.

Another time I saw her in the subway spitting on the walls, columns, ticket booths and turnstiles. One time I saw her spitting on windows along 1^st Avenue until some guy came out waving a wooden spoon and chased her away from his store. I thought he was short sighted, I would have thought a roll of paper towels and some effort and he could have had clean windows, after all she supplied the cleaner. I have a recurring nightmare. In it I am the next to last person that gets shoe-horned into a crowded subway car, with barely any room to move around at all. And just before I hear the “stand clear of the closing doors please” one more person squeezes in: “the spitting woman”.

“THE RELIGIOUS APPEAL-ER”

I go to St. Monica’s almost every day for a few minutes to give thanks for many things and remember others. One day I noticed “the” guy. Older than me and standing off to my right next to the side wall of the Cathedral. Was he praying? NO!  Was he lighting a candle? NO! Was he just standing quietly, meditating? NO! He was standing in front of a marble statue of the Madonna. This statue is white and about 5 feet tall. He was talking (albeit in a very low voice) and gesturing to the statue. He appeared to be appealing or arguing a case. He wildly gestured, made a point, laughed, threw his hand up in the air, and then went back to pointing at the statue, pounding his fists. Try to imagine an upset person trying to win an argument or an attorney doing a closing argument. When I arrive there in the morning he's almost always already there appealing his case and he is still appealing his case when I leave. The next day he is back appealing his case again. He bothers no one (really) but I have to tell you it is a little disconcerting to see someone working so hard at communicating with a statue. 

One day after saying my own prayers, I picked up my things and since the “ Appeal-er” was not there yet I sidled over next to the statue of Madonna and said under my breath “Say Maddy, this guy’s really serious. He really means it whatever it is. If it’s all the same to you could you possible give him a “2 thumbs up”? That would be great.  I don’t mean to stick my nose in, I’m just saying, he looks like he could really use a win on this one”. Now there's faith for you.

Just 3 of the Upper East Side Irregulars

"Is This really America"?

Early Colonial leaders like (Adams, Jefferson, and Washington etc.) created a system of civic participation called “representational democracy”. They set up a system where by anyone that met minimum qualifications could run for an office. The people would then choose their representatives in free and open elections.  This would be an election system that was of the people, by the people, and for the people. This system was more or less the way things were done for 200+ years. Things began to change (and not for the better) a few decades back.  What we have now is a system that is NOT a true representational democracy.

Today there are two elections in every major election. The first election is conducted by the super wealthy, power brokers. They decide what two candidates are put before us and we get to choose which of those two we want. It’s like when you were a kid and you wanted peppermint ice cream but your mom said well you get to choose between chocolate and vanilla and you asked her why you couldn't have something else and she most likely told you it’s because I said so. So you either chose chocolate or vanilla that is unless you elected not to choose at all. That’s the metaphor for our election system today. CONSIDER this:  159 people in this country (the super wealthy) contributed 60% of the total money raised by the super PAC’s 159! Four hundred fifty people (including the 159) contributed 88 % of all the money raised and spent by Super PAC's in the last presidential race. 450 people determine who gets the money it takes to win any nomination.  It’s the super PAC(S) that determine which person will be on the ballot representing the Republicans and Democrats.  That’s why every Republican kisses Grover Norquist’s ass and why the Koch brothers have so much say so. That’s why a Rand Paul would never even come close to a ballot. That’s why if you want to run for president and you don’t want to kowtow to the super PAC wealthy (the 450) you can only do it by forming a third party. Both parties are run by super PAC(S). This is the secret election inside the election.

So the first corruption is the secret election inside the election.

 Why is the system so hopelessly grid-locked? Consider this: the one thing the super wealthy (159 or 450) demand of their nominee is a promise. Promise to pay back money? NO Promise of a cushy government job? Maybe they would want some job for some of their friends but not for them. NO the one promise that must be given is: You must never try to change the system. The super wealthy want things to stay the same. Staying the same means they get more money and power. How many senators, congressmen/women, and Presidents owe these people big time? All of them?! Politicians want to get reelected and to do that you need the super wealthy, powerful people and so you play ball.  How many times have you heard someone say, things need to change in Washington?  Well, forget it. They are not going to change with the way things are structured now. The days of Jimmy Stewart as Mr. Smith going to Washington are over.

The second corruption is that you are not allowed to serve in office following your own convictions and beliefs.

Then there is the wall of silence. No politician is allowed to talk about these things. You are allowed to get huffy and puffy, cry and shout but not one past or present politician will tell the American people how it all really  works. Even when you leave office you are expected to stay quiet for the most part..   Ever wonder why when politicians are voted out they never do lengthy exposes on what really happens in the halls, closets, and dark back rooms. There are no detailed tell all books of secret deals, pay offs and of the careers that were made and destroyed. If you don’t want the wrath of the super 450 all over you and some say it is worse than the wrath of God, then you keep your mouth shut. So the truth is rarely spoken while in office and its hush, hush out of office. Remember the Congressman that lost his cool and shouted at the President, “You lie” during the President’s first State of the Union. Well, he broke the rules. He was censured and you never heard a peep from him again. Hell, Teddy Roosevelt was shot making a campaign speech, and plenty of Presidents have been taken to task over the years but it’s a new game today. You play by the rules or you don’t play at all.

So the third corruption is the wall of silence about the first two corruptions.

Consider this: why in the world would Washington politicians who have the lowest citizen approval rating ever in the history of congress (6%) risk further public condemnation by allowing the fiscal cliff to be approached? Why would they allow the unthinkable sequestration to take place? It is because these are politicians that are “beholden” to the people that put them in office. People that don’t want the system to change.  People that like things the way they are. And a politician in office would rather suffer the anger of their constituents than the anger of the super 450 they owe their careers to. Besides they have a built in excuse and that is, “it’s the other side that is creating the log jam”.  They get to self-righteously vilify the other party, claim they are the victim, profess their concern for the working classes,  kiss another member of the super 450’s ass and then go on to spend 65% of their time in office (documented) working on their next reelection. Perfect!

Honestly, ask yourself this question: if all the senators and congressmen were NOT beholden to anyone ( I mean to anyone) and could (never again) hold office after the term they are currently in is up, do you think they could make some meaningful progress towards  budget, guns, environment, and health care reform? They are smart people and they could get things done, if they were actually allowed to.

The founding fathers would not recognize the political system we have today. They would quickly and easily see that it is not the “representational democracy” they so carefully crafted and put in place. They would wonder if this is really America at all.

"I Did it Adrienne, I Did it"

A couple of weeks ago I spied an opinion piece by Rebecca D. Costa in the NY Times discussing whether or not human beings are losing the will to live. She cites the shootings in Connecticut and Colorado in 2012 as examples of 2 persons Adam Lanza and James Holmes that seemingly had lost the desire to live. According to her when people like Christopher Dorner (cop rampage in California) essentially make the decision to die, they cease to care about anyone or thing. They aren't burdened by guilt, a sense of fairness, or remorse. Since they have nothing else to lose (they have willingly decided to give up everything including their own life) they don’t care about others. Suicide bombers don’t care and hijackers that fly planes into buildings don’t care about others. Costa's overall point is that we've never had a time like this where so many people are simply losing the will to live.

Consider: when John Wilkes Booth shot Abe Lincoln he frantically tried and did (for a few days) escape.  Bonnie and Clyde committed crimes but they were always trying to get away, they were, “running for their lives”. Killers like these aren't like Adam Lanza or Dylan Klebold. The impulse to survive and thrive is why even serial killers will try to avoid getting caught. The most dangerous person is the person that no longer cares or wants to survive and thrive. They can kill a 5 year old or a 95 year old with no reaction because since they have lost the will to live it doesn't matter to them if someone else lives or not.

Consider: The number of suicides in this country has reached unprecedented numbers. 1 million people report trying to kill themselves every year just in this country and 1 person every 15 minutes on average does kill them self.  The suicide rates in the U.S. Military has reached the same level as the civilian population, something that seemed unheard of 20 years ago. Of the 1 million that report trying to kill themselves in this country (each year) it is estimated that at least double that amount seriously considers doing so. It’s not just in the land of plenty (USA) either. Globally, suicides have risen 60% in the last 45 years. Why are so many  losing the will to live?

Thoughts

Socrates said the noblest thing a human being can do is to live out their life. Sounds simple but think about it, life is fraught with many obstacles, disappointments, losses, rejections, health problems, lost jobs, accidents, injustices, bad luck, depressions and if those things weren't enough there is the energy output needed every day just to live. To live a long full life, you have to be tough, smart, resilient, strong, clever, aware, focused and determined. It is not easy to live a long full life. According to Socrates if you do, you have done something truly noble.

My friend Mike Moldeven (age 94) died the day after my friend Debby lost her mother Vee (87). This happened 2 weeks ago. I went to see Mike at his “senior assisted facility in Encinitas” and I also went to see Vee in her residential place right up to when I left for New York. When I would go see them I also saw many, many really older folks at the places. A few were doing relatively okay but most were really struggling. It wasn't easy to see people whittled down by life but I have to say I had the greatest respect for every one of them. I started thinking of them as “real road warriors”. I mean they were the survivors of the longest race there is “the life marathon”. They didn't get knocked off along the way nor did they throw in the towel. They were still getting up, trying to stand and walk at 95, determined to keep going. I thought, do you know how tough-minded, how stubborn you have to be to do that?  I know many of these people struggled with hearing loss, body function loss sometimes, memory lapses and so forth but there they were still refusing to quit. It's like they thought,  lose my hearing? Fine I’ll read lips. Lose a leg? Fine, I’ll learn to walk with a prosthetic.  To make it to 94 is extraordinary. BUT Mike did and he was a hero to me.  Mike was running his own blog at age 88! Vee overcame cancer and polio.  

Shakespeare wrote about the very issue of the will to live. His famous character Hamlet, faced with the knowledge that his Uncle murdered his beloved father and then married his mother is so heartbroken and stressed that he considers killing himself.  “To be or not to be, that is the question.” That is the question isn't it? Should a person try and persevere and keep going when the shit hits the fan or just give up? “Whether to suffer the slings and arrow of outrageous fortune or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing, end them. To die, to sleep, No more….”  When, if ever, is it okay to let go of the will to live?

The Scottish poet Dylan Thomas wrote a poem in which he said, “Do not go gently into that good night; rage, rage against the dying of the light”. He was writing to and about his ill father that seemed to be giving up when the doctors had told him he could get better.  He goes on to suggest that whatever time we get in this life, it’s not enough.  If we make it to 93 we should want and demand 94 and so forth. Do not ever give up. My friend Neville told me about a time when he tried out for a basketball team and his father told him, “Make em cut ya”. Those are profound words, “make em cut ya”.  Don’t give up on you, don’t stop fighting and trying, make the powers that be stop you, never stop yourself.

The great metaphysical poet John Donne wrote a poem “Death Be Not Proud” where in he suggested that we have nothing to fear in life, because even when faced with the biggest fear of all, our death, we can overcome that. He says, “Death shall have NO dominion over us”. We live and then for a few brief moments death has us but we rise to an eternal life. Once we have reached the eternal life, death has no hold on us ever again.  He gives us great hope and comfort because he mocks death by saying, death you aren't so great, you have no hold on us, and in fact “death, thou shalt die”.

Conclusion

We need to be like Rocky Balboa in the movie “Rocky”. He goes the full 15 rounds with his far superior opponent Apollo Creed. He takes a ferocious pounding. He won’t win the fight but that is not the point. He is a winner by not giving up. In the end when the fight is over, he is bloodied but still standing. “I did it Adrienne  I did it” he shouts. Did what? What he did is show courage against the odds. He did what Socrates told us to do….take whatever life throws at you, be a battler, have confidence in you, use your strength, cunning, experience, smarts, patience, faith, determination and will to still be standing at the end. To still be standing at the end despite all the odds against us that’s the noble thing to do. Make life cut ya, don’t cut yourself.
I am sorry so many people are losing the will to live. I also believe that as a country we must find ways to keep weapons out of the hands of those that no longer care about life. But, I  care about my life and I care about yours. I have no intention of going gently into that good night and I don’t want you or anyone you know to either. Let's be Noble together.