The Coliseum at Richfield: An Appreciation

Between the Daugherty/Nance/Price era throwbacks that the Cavs rolled out this season, my awesome new t-shirt, and that I no longer spend an hour of each workday on route 77, I've been thinking a lot about the old Richfield Coliseum.  It's probably mostly the t-shirt, really, because I've never had strangers smile at me in such numbers as they do when I wear it out of the house.  So what I've been thinking is that I'm sure that these smiles come from more than just nostalgia, but also from the fact that the whole idea of the Coliseum was and remains so uniquely interesting.   More specifically, that the Coliseum simultaneously represents the best of what Northeast Ohio is as well as the worst of what it could have been.

As for the best of what the Coliseum represents, I mentioned my old daily commute because, to some degree, I miss it.  It's long been one of the things I love about Northeast Ohio, that I can live so close to each of two such distinct cities as Akron and Cleveland, and can get from one to the other so relatively quickly over such a relatively beautiful landscaped forest.  Everyone knows the old joke that the distance between any two points in Northeast Ohio is "20 minutes."*  And I've noted before that I'm sure it's all even part of what's contributed to the singular absurdity of the survival of the last  racist caricature in all of America, right here in Cleveland; that it's so easy to live in beautiful 'country' that's such a short trip away from such a cityscape and that Wahoo represents to so many of us the magic of those first 'trips to the city.'

So it's hard not to appreciate that "the Coliseum was built in Richfield to draw fans from both of Northeast Ohio's major cities, as nearly 5 million Ohioans lived within less than an hour's drive."  In this way, the Coliseum was built to take advantage of the very best of the area. 

Of course, there's another way to look at this story; which is to conclude, as the Coliseum's Wikipedia entry suggests, that the facility was built to take advantage of 'urban sprawl.'**  But isn't it such a fine line between "sprawl" and properly-spaced development? 
 

Thankfully, by the time the Coliseum was built, local legislators had already gone far to contain the threat of damaging sprawl.  In an excellent piece on "the rise and fall" of the Coliseum at The Trust for Public Land's website, Lee Chilcote notes that:

The fate of the property [where the Coliseum formerly stood] was but the latest act in a 30-year-old drama. In the 1960s, as suburban development seemed poised to spread for 40 miles between Akron and Cleveland, a group of farsighted civic leaders launched a plan to protect the bucolic Cuyahoga Valley, in the heart of the rapidly developing region. "At that time there were two competing visions for the Cuyahoga Valley," says Chris Knopf, director of the Ohio Field Office of the Trust for Public Land. "In one, the valley was paved over and developed. In the other, the open space was preserved, urban sprawl contained, and a park created for future generations."

Of course, even with sprawl contained, there were good reasons to move the Cavs back downtown, but we can save those reasons for another piece.  The point here is to remember that as funny as it can be to think of "the Palace on the Prairie," the whole idea of it might have been much-better conceived then we give it credit for.  And anyone who was around for those twenty years might remember that it was a hell of run there in Richfield.   

To wrap up, a deep bow to John Seiberling, Gund family, Bishop Pilla, Mike DeWine, Ralph Regula, Tom Sawyer, and the Cuyahoga Valley Association, and a quick note on how funny that nickname "Palace on the Prairie" really is.  Of course, Richfield's not a prairie at all, but actually, one of the peaks of the Cuyahoga River Valley, and one of the most "mountainous" places in Northeast Ohio.  The Coliseum itself was situated just a mile or two from the highest point in Summit County,*** that county having been named for its decidedly un-prairie-like qualities.  Here are some photos of the river valley in the areas just surrounding where the Coliseum used to be that help show why we're bowing to the aforementioned folks.  These photos were all taken twenty minutes away from downtown Akron, twenty minutes away from downtown Cleveland, and twenty minutes away from one another, naturally: 

(Dan Nihiser)

(grendelslair)

(David Hill, via AmericanWhitewater.org)

(Above All Aerial and Specialty Photography)

(John Alvord)

(da Lunatik (nice NEO landscape gallery here))

That's all for now.  Maybe a Frowndup this afternoon.  Happy Tuesday.

----------

*The only exceptions to the twenty minute rule are that Cleveland and Akron are forty minutes away from one another, and anywhere in Youngstown is an hour away.

**One of my friends lives in Phoenix and works downtown.  He says he rarely goes for beers with his coworkers because they all live 90 minutes away from one another.  Sprawl.  

***Relatedly, Akron comes from the Greek word ἄκρον meaning "summit."  Like as in Acropolis.

Train photo courtesy of the Cuyahoga Valley National Railroad via About.com.  Old Coliseum photo courtesy of Don160@aol.com via Hockey.Ballparks.com.

The Real Super Bowl MVP

Who else?

Pete Townshend sees your five windmills and raises you thirty-thousand.

No doubt Townshend wanted to send a message to the world last night, and especially to those at sports books who set the over/under on his "windmill moves" at a meager five.  Halfway into the second number in The Who's four-number Super Bowl halftime set, the world had lost count of the rotations and the books had been blown away.  It was the all-time lock of Super Bowl prop wager history.   

Townshend you old bastard, you've still got it.

A few other things this morning.

First, and most importantly, read the remarkable tale of The Tim Couch Bear.  Please help us return him to Cleveland. We'll pay all expenses for this here. 

Finally, that was a good Super Bowl.  We hit two of three of our prop wagers (Townshend and Brees OVER 285 yards passing), and our play on the Saints +5 helped us run our record against the spread in these NFL playoffs to 10-1.  It was a good run.  It was a good season.  Who can't wait for the next one?

We'll have some accounting up for the regular season here soon.

Stay tuned as to whether Manning takes as much criticism for not shaking hands as LeBron did.  

Today is the first day of the new year around here.  We have loads of salt to mine, so this is all we have for now.  Might be back with a look at tonight's hoops actions later.  Hope everyone's week is off to a good start. 

----------

Thanks to Coachie for the image, per usual.

Super Bowl 44

It's the Colts vs. the Saints in what's, going in, the most compelling Super Bowl match-up we've seen in at least a decade, and we have to answer why, if the match is so compelling, are the Colts favored by a full five points?

(Coachie's latest Super Bowl piece, perhaps not as compelling as last season's, but could anyone've topped that one, really?)

The first easy answer here is that folks are paying for Peyton.  It's hard to question the emerging consensus that Peyton Manning is quarterbacking in the NFL in a way that no one has before him (more than anyone we've ever seen, he's doing it with his brain), and it's really hard not to be impressed with the results. 

ESPN's Vegas insider Chad Millman kicked off his Super Bowl coverage by noting that "Manning is so good, so technically sound and such a cool assassin, we lose sight of how spectacular he actually is."

But do we really?  What about the cover of ESPN Mag's '09 NFL preview?  "No Dungy? No Marvin? No problem. The heart of the Colts beats on," it said, right on the cover.  And it's not like Peter King didn't remind us with his excellent mid-season SI cover story on the efforts of "the league's hardest-working and most cerebral quarterback."

Maybe it was easy enough to dismiss all of this as big media fluff before what Manning did to the Jets in the AFC Championship game (or more specifically with the King piece, to skip reading it altogether, because if you'd read it, it would have been hard to dismiss).  But is there anyone who doesn't get it now?

In the same column, Millman went on to observe that over the course of the NFC Championship game, the Colts had moved from a 3-point favorite to being favored by 5.5 just 30 minutes after the Super Bowl match was set.  This is all the more impressive considering that the team that was favored to come out of the NFC is the team that did.  Of course, part of this is due to the way the NFC Championship played out, but at least as much of it has to do with Manning's surgical deconstruction of the Jets defense.

We have to hand it to Bill Simmons for representing so well "the voice of the fan" here.

"[I]f you're thinking about betting against him in the Pierre Bowl, ask yourself this: How dumb will you feel in the fourth quarter, with the Colts leading by 10 and driving for another score, if Manning has the New Peyton Manning Face going? Would you be kicking yourself? Would you be saying, 'Why did I go against Manning? What was I thinking?' . . . I can't pick against Manning in a big game."

So yeah, maybe we'd feel dumb if the Colts were about to go up 17 in the fourth quarter and we'd taken the Saints.  Or maybe it just would have been the way the ball bounced.  But the issue is whether there's any chance that the fear Simmons writes about here hasn't been bought and paid for in the five point spread. Do you really want to go into this one laying five points on the idea that people just don't understand how good Peyton Manning is?

Because if you don't, it's hard to see what else there is for you to hang your hat on.

How impressed are you with playoff wins over Joe Flacco's broken hip and the receiverless Ravens, then the boisterous charlatan Ryan and his Jets who couldn't have been happier just to have been there?

Neither of those teams was anywhere near as equipped as these Saints are to exploit the Colts' thin secondary, and the rookie Sanchez still threw for 265 yards on them giving rise to history's first occasion in which Braylon actually had a right to complain.  

And now with a severely limited Dwight Freeney?  It's tempting to look back on the Colts' week 3 domination of the Cardinals as a template for how this one will go, but Freeney was a monster there, with two sacks and four QB hits, helping rush the more-than-slightly-less-mobile-than-Brees Kurt Warner into two interceptions.  And that was before the Colts' lost top cornerback Marlin Jackson who grabbed one of those picks.  The closest thing that these Colts have faced to these Saints has to be the Patriots in Week 9.  We know what happened there, and we know that these Saints are no Patriots. 

And if you have to decide on what's the most underrated unit playing in today's game, don't you have to pick Gregg Williams' Saints' defense? 

There seems to be more than a little bit of recency bias at play on the point spread here.  It's true that the Saints didn't at all look good in beating Minnesota, but the situation and the matchups are very different here.

First, there's a fine line between "too happy to be there," and the "dangerously loose underdog," and it's easy to see how these Super Bowl Saints contrast well with the Jets of two weeks ago in these categories.  Responsibility for the cancellation of New Orleans' first Super Bowl party when it's a 3.5-point favorite to happen, on the other hand, is major pressure, and has to explain a lot about the Saints uneven performance in the NFC Championship game. 

And while the Colts have Manning, they don't approach the Vikings brute force and athleticism in the trenches and at the offensive skill positions. 

It's true that many of these Colts have been here before, and a certain hyper-competitiveness/too-tightly-wound-ness on Brees' part might also have something to do with the shakiness against Minnesota and be cause for some concern for Saints-backers today.  (Again a fine line, but let's just note that Brees is spoken of as having political ambitions while Manning is not.).  But this Saints offense is too well-built to not expect success against this riddled Colts defense, and the Saints' underrated defense won't have to play the game that their counterpart Jets unit would have had to have played to stay in it against these Colts, the latter being a factor that makes an underrated difference (see, for example, all the nonsense in the comments to various posts at this website about the Jets "#1 ranked defense.").

We've been hearing a lot these last two weeks about Peyton Manning's legacy depending on this game, but really, it absolutely doesn't.  It's amazing enough what Manning's already done this season with such a thin Colts unit, and there's little reason to believe that he won't play in at least one more of these before he's through.

The most interesting thing about Manning's role here might be the way it tests the old wagering saw that you don't back an underdog unless you think the dog has a chance to win outright.  On one hand, our valuation of the prevalent ideas about this game tells us to take the Saints and the points here.  On the other, yeah, it is hard to see Manning letting this one get away.  But aren't these Colts the absolute masters of the dominating by-four-points-or-less victory?   So why should today be any different? 

Because winning this 30 unit 6-1 wager on the Colts to win the Super Bowl that we made in October, AND this 90 unit hedge on the Saints +5 would be too good to be true?  

As if there were any such thing as too good to be true.  Anyway, once again, should be a hell of a game.

Per our earlier look at the props for today's game, I'll put 5 units on Drew Brees to throw for more than 285.5 yards (-145), 1 unit per on Darren Sharper (30-1) and The Field (10-1) to win MVP (Bethea is part of "The Field" at my book), and I'll go 2 units on OVER 5 rotations on Pete Townshend's windmill move (-220) ("Windmill move must be a full 360 degree revolution and be shown on TV to be counted for this wager.").*

Happy Super Bowl Sunday, everyone!  I'll do my best to keep up with the fun on Twitter today.

----------

*I tried to go 6 units on the windmill wager, but the limit at my book is 2 units for this play, which is probably because this is free money.  Seriously, is there any chance that if Townshend knew that this wager was available that he wouldn't go high speed 30X rotation right off the bat?  Who wouldn't love him for this?  Do you think he knows about this?  Wouldn't somebody have told him?  DO IT TOWNSHEND!  ROTATE, YOU OLD BASTARD!   GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

**You should also know about this, from "the commenter formerly known as 'p'," who also likes the Saints to cover in Super Bowl 44: 

On Jan. 31, Kobe Bryant scored 44 points to surpass Jerry West, formerly #44 for the Lakers, as the leading scorer in Lakers history.  Of course, Kobe accomplished this feat just a few days after Barack Obama, our 44th President, delivered his state of the union address, which happened just a few days after the Vikings of Minneapolis, MN (latitude 44 degrees) covered the spread against the Saints in the NFC championship game.  And it just so happens that 44 years ago, the NFL granted franchise rights to New Orleans, and the Saints were born. 

Creepily, 44 also happens to be the number of wings I will eat, and how many times one might click on this website tomorrow before a new post is up if the Colts win/Saints cover combo comes through.

***Don't forget we haven't missed a Super Bowl pick here yet.  (Two for two.)

Bye Week Buckets: Please Don't Go Edition

After last season's desperate exercise, we're especially glad to be sad to bid farewell to Bye Week Buckets* in 2010.  Since NFL conference championship weekend, we're 9-1 against the spread on NBA (8-0) and NCAA (1-1) basketball games here, to match our 9-1 record ATS in this current NFL playoff tournament.  Also like with these NFL playoffs, we've gotten the winner right in all ten, only missing the spread when the Buckeyes won by 13 to fall short of -15 against Penn State last Wednesday. 

Tonight it's Cavs/Knicks, and "Please Don't Go" night at the Q.  If you haven't heard, Kent State junior Austin Briggs (aka, "real hip hop artist"** A. Gully), wants to help send a message to LeBron by passing out 15,000 masks to attendees of tonight's game that look like this:

It's hard not to appreciate the community organizing efforts here, as much as LeBron surely already knows that Cleveland loves him and doesn't want him to leave.  Maybe there's a chance he plays a little extra hard tonight as a result of the gesture.  And maybe his teammates too, who we have to assume don't want him to leave either.

Anyway, and either way, we've been enjoying the heck out of this current brought-to-you-by-a-historically-friendly-scheduling-spot Cavs covering streak (7 of their last 8) and said that we'd ride it out until it ends, so tonight's pick is easy: Cavs -13.5 over Knicks (6 units);

But still, those masks should have been drawn with a less pathetic expression.

It's true that it will be a tragedy if LeBron leaves, and we should do our best to help him understand this.  But that might be tricky because understanding the tragedy here requires understanding that if LeBron does leave, he's the one who's the jerk, not us.  Cleveland would surely move on eventually, and all of humanity would at least benefit from the resulting medical experiment of such a rich, famous, and public man's soul rotting from its core so irreversibly as a result of his having turned his back on his home in such a singular way. 

It won't happen.  It just won't.  But if it did, we wouldn't want to be jerks about it. 

Anyway, go Cavs.  The Super Bowl preview will be up in the morning. 

----------

*Bye Week Buckets is our annual transitional attempt to re-ingratiate ourselves to the Basketball Wagering Gods and our initial offering to the stern master February that occurs during the two weeks between the NFL conference championships and the Super Bowl. 

**You'll want to go to the 2:15 mark of the video here to see A. Gully's response to our friend Vince G.'s criticism of his music at Cleveland Scene.  It looks to be 100% true that 10 out of 10 people on Gully's block who knew Gully three years ago still know Gully today.

Bye Week Buckets: Prospectin'

The Cavs have owned the Lakers this season.  The Magic too.  Is anyone really concerned about the Celtics or Hawks? 

These Denver Nuggets on the other hand are really really good.  With the Lakers looking to have lost a certain edge after last year's title run, these Nuggets look like the team to beat in the West.  If they come in to the Q on February 18th to sweep the season series from the Cavs, won't they be the team to beat in the NBA? 

Did you see what they did to the Lakers last night, in L.A.?  Did you see that they were playing without Carmelo Anthony?  Do you know that Denver is 2-0 against L.A. this season, having won the two games by a combined total of 39 points?

Anthony is playing the best basketball of his career.  Then, so is LeBron of course, and Carmelo, while great, is no LeBron.  Nobody is. 

But Nene, Kenyon Martin, and the Birdman seem to be more than a decent match-up for Shaq, Andy and Z, and it's fair to say the Cavs have no fourth front-line option that's as good as Joey Graham. 

Which is to say nothing of the guards, which is where Denver has a critical edge over Cleveland.  We know about Chauncey Billups, but even assuming Delonte's defense can keep him under control to some extent, what happens if this is the year that J.R. Smith -- one of the last supertalented high-schoolers to go straight into the league before the rule changed -- gets it all together?  It's already true that the Cavs have nothing coming off the bench to match his firepower, and as soon as the kid can establish any measure of consistency in his game, Mo Williams becomes a poor-poor-man's J.R. Smith.  The addition of Aaron Afflalo and Ty Lawson give Denver incredible depth at guard that they sorely lacked last season. 

And George Karl's not a bad coach, either, is he? 

Which is all to say two things, mainly.  First that February 18th should be circled on every NBA fan's calendar (I saw lower bowl tickets on StubHub for less than $100 per as late as last evening, fwiw).  Second, and perhaps more urgently, the Nuggets are an absolute steal at the sports book right now.  You can get them at 4-1 to win the West (I'll take 10 units here -- compare to the lakers at 1-2.75 (which means you'd have to lay $275 to win $100 on the Lakers)), and 12-1 to win the title (5 units for me here -- compare to Cavs at 1-1.75).  Seriously, a steal.  These numbers will not last long, and it's hard to think of a better fan insurance policy* for Cleveland** (or Lakers) fans than this.

As for today, Georgetown/Villanova is an interesting enough match-up for us to get interested in.  Nova's off to its best start in school history (20-1), having only lost once this season to in-town rival Temple on Temple's home court.  Georgetown is 16-5, and looked great destroying Duke at home last weekend with President Obama sitting courtside, before getting caught by upstart South Florida on Wednesday.  I thought it was funny last year when Mike Krzyzewski said Obama should focus on the economy instead of the NCAA tournament, but when I saw him sitting courtside last week I realized how good and important it is that we now have a President who publicizes his tournament bracket.  Let's play Georgetown today on the angle that these kids should be inspired by their up-close-and-personal with the President last week, and that Wednesday was an especially bad spot for the Hoyas to go up against an especially good upstart (look at USF's Dominique Jones here).  Georgetown -1.5 over Villanova (5 units).  Game starts at noon, so you'll have to hurry.

The Super Bowl pick/preview will be up either later today or early tomorrow.  

*Also keep in mind that I'm on a really good run with the futures plays.

**And that The Curse of Wahoo is another obviously undervalued factor that makes the Nuggets an excellent play.  

----------

Thanks to Coachie once again for the artwork.

SUPER BOWL

The preview won't be up until tomorrow, or maybe even Sunday.  Sorry.  This is a tough one and these things can't be rushed.  In the extremely unlikely event that you've forgotten, you should remember that I've picked the winner of all ten NFL playoff games so far this season, 9-1 against the spread.  You should also remember that the Super Bowl is one that you'll want to take special care to get right, and that I'm also 2-0 picking Super Bowls against the spread here at Frowns.  The preview will be worth the wait.

While we're here on a holiday weekend and since this 5-0 run picking NBA games has to end some time, let's take the Hawks -8.5 over the Bulls (2 units), and the Nuggets +8.5 over the Lakers (4 units).  Wouldn't it be just the thing for the Cavs to establish regular season dominance over the Lakers just to see the Nuggets (who've already beaten them once, when Mo Williams was healthy) come out of the West?*

Happy Super Bowl weekend everyone.  Might be back with more basketball picks before The Big Game.

*The second and final Cavs/Nuggets regular season match is right around the corner; Thursday February 18. 

----------

Coachie's done it again, with the postcard.

Let's Not Worry about Worldwide Wes

LeBron took a trip across state lines last weekend to promote a new sneaker, watch a good college basketball game, and cheer on his friend, presumptive number one NBA draft pick John Wall, so of course we had to hear all week about James and Wall ending up together with the New Jersey Nets in 2010.  And of course we had to hear about the singularly mysterious Worldwide Wes (aka William Wesley) and the various connections between and among Wes, James, Nike, Nets owner Jay-Z, Wall, and Kentucky coach John Calipari.

We had to hear it even though LeBron is as much an employee of Nike as he is of the Cleveland Cavaliers, and has excellent business reasons to nurture his relationships with Wall and the Kentucky basketball program (to say nothing of how much he must have enjoyed modeling that new sweater). 

Of course, the insertion of Worldwide Wes into the story makes it much easier to traffic in this kind of speculation.  There's so much mystery surrounding Wes that it can seem like anything's in play when he's involved.  It's enough to make some Clevelanders worry about "what Wes is going to advise LeBron to do" when LeBron becomes a free agent this summer, and it's plenty to make anyone wonder about how a guy gets to be so mysterious. 

Of course, there's a difference between access and influence, despite that either combined with secrecy would yield mystery.  There's no question that Wes' access is legendary (from Michael Jordan, to Nike, to Jay-Z, and he even has Bill Clinton's phone number), as is the level of secrecy he maintains regarding his affairs. But how much influence does he really have?

ESPNs Chris Sheridan has said Wes might best be described as a "professional friend to most of America's top athletes."  So how does somebody get that job?

ESPN's Henry Abbott has long been concerned with "the big void of information surrounding William Wesley," and has observed that "that void gets filled with assumptions" such as that "Wesley is making money from this or that sinister or exploitative mechanism."

Well, sure.  Because if it wasn't for sinister or exploitative mechanisms, who would ever need a "facilitator" who specializes in "procurement"?  How do you get to be a "professional friend" to America's top athletes?  You get them stuff, of course.

GQ reported in 2001 that Wes "watched and learned" from his close friend Milt Wagner's experience as a young NBA star, "realiz[ing], for instance, that a young athlete who signs a big pro contract needs somewhere to live."  So Wes became a mortgage broker, and eventually,

formed an additional business, William Wesley Enterprises. Wes provides any service a pro athlete or--in his godson[ DaJuan Wagner's] case--a future pro athlete would want." 

Author Roland Lazenby told Abbott that:

Wesley is likely one in a long line of NBA "facilitators." "The main thing facilitators do," [Lazenby] says, "is procurement. People at that level have needs. They need tickets. They need good, safe, well-managed recreation. And you can't go hire a company to get that kind of stuff for you."

Abbott later noted, of Wesley's relationship with Dennis Rodman, that

If you’re a celebrity with voracious appetites for all kinds of stuff, it can be extremely handy to have someone around who is capable, sensible, and discreet.

All kinds of stuff. That kind of stuff.  Extremely handy.  Of course people have needs.  Of course you just can't go hiring a company. And if you were a guy who is in the business of getting all kinds of stuff, you'd be intent on secrecy too.

If you were the guy that could always get all kinds of stuff, of course everyone would love you.  Again, per Abbott:

Wesley makes it his business to figure out what you want, and to help you get it. Doing that again and again and again, for countless people, is a rich source of good karma, good friends, and goodwill.  

(Stuff's da bomb, Wes.  You da bomb, Wes.)

Right.

In a summary piece on his Wesley investigation, Abbott observes that Wes' success is due to his ability to fill "a power vacuum in the NBA" that no doubt "exists in all of professional sports."

The players are at the top of the mountain, but many are not sophisticated at wielding that power as businessmen. For obvious reasons, most are focused on basketball, eager to delegate many of the intricate responsibilities that come with the position of international media superstar. There is work to be done managing myriad relationships . . . ; somehow keeping in touch with the values of a typically humble upbringing while adjusting to the realities of the decadent present; maximizing earning before the playing days are over; establishing a brand that has multicultural appeal; constantly improving as a basketball player; and organizing lots of fun while staying out of the kind of trouble that can bring the house tumbling down.

A power vacuum.  Of course.  It was really easy to get all kinds of stuff when you were growing up in the hood.  The stakes were much lower for everyone involved back then.  But when you become a professional, you need to be able to rely on someone who understands how to assimilate your need for all kinds of stuff in the decadent present with your need to delegate many intricate responsibilities and manage myriad relationships.  

You don't have to know LeBron or any NBA star personally to know how foolish it is to pretend that the need for all kinds of stuff isn't there.

Many, perhaps even most adults suffer from a rapidly diminishing capacity to enjoy all kinds of stuff as they enter and proceed into adulthood, for a number of reasons.  But millionaire superstars with demanding daily physical routines to create a strong incentive toward moderation with respect to all kinds of stuff?  Not so much at all; which makes it all the more important for these folks to know folks who can reconcile various needs in this way.

So why wouldn't Kentucky coach John Calipari want guys like Wes around his program?  It's tempting enough for these kids to think it will always be easy for them to get their hands on all kinds of stuff.  They need to learn fast that that just isn't the case.

And why wouldn't David Stern like David Wesley?  What a disaster for him if his stars had to worry more about getting their hands on all kinds of stuff.

So maybe that folks call Wes "the most powerful man in sports" shouldn't be a mystery at all.   By all accounts, he's a good guy who never asks for anything.  American history is full of good businessmen and/or good guys who have risen to incredible fame and power in part for their abilities to help folks get their hands on all kinds of stuff.

The NBA is likely the most rich, powerful, close-knit, and protected network of people with a use for all kinds of stuff that one could imagine.  Why wouldn't a person who made it his good business to make all kinds of stuff available to this network wind up so powerful, and "as connected an NBA insider as there has ever been"?

Doesn't it make more sense in this light, and isn't it more humorous that Alex French's essential Worldwide Wes piece in GQ kicks off with a quote from Reggie Miller of all people, complaining about Wes's presence on the court during the infamous 2004 brawl between the Pacers and Pistons in Detroit.

"What is he doing? He has no business out there! He injects himself into the middle of everything!”  

That darned Wes!

No doubt LeBron is a lot different from Reggie Miller, and would appreciate Wes' or anyone's efforts in making the world, and specifically his world, a place where its easier for folks to get all kinds of stuff.  But if this is the source of Wes' power, there's little reason to believe that Wes would have much if anything to say about where LeBron signs in 2010.

Of course, maybe Worldwide Wes is just a really good mortgage broker who's made the most of his friendship with Michael Jordan in a league of men who generally just want to Be Like Mike.  And if LeBron wants to listen to Wes just because Michael did, then maybe Cleveland should be especially encouraged that Jordan didn't leave Chicago until he'd won six titles.

Either way, count us among Clevelanders whose only concern with Worldwide Wes is that he keeps up the great work. 

----------

Also on that, see the amazingly resolute job that Henry Abbott has done covering Wes at TrueHoop.