Jim Alexander: Well, before we begin the serious (?!) discussion, this just in: According to Front Office Sports, Giannis Antetokounmpo has invested in the Los Angeles team that will be part of the Tiger Woods/Rory McIlroy TGL – Tiger Golf League, I suppose? – which is supposed to begin play this January.
Bottom line: The Giannis-to-Lakers rumors should begin in … 5 … 4 … 3 …
Mirjam Swanson: Has he bought property here yet? On a golf course, maybe? Seems inevitable – the Giannis-to-the-Lakers talk, not necessarily him buying a mansion in town. Antetokounmpo has been forthright with both his desire to win “another championship” and also with his desire to flex his business muscle, so honestly, it’s always seemed a bit like Giannis-to-the-Lakers could prove an inevitability too. He’s that kind of star – even with the cheesy dad jokes. (I actually love the dad jokes.)
I find myself hoping, though, that when he comes, he’ll do it as a free agent and not by forcing his way out via a trade demand before 2026. I get why guys do it, and why teams would play along (there’s more money in it, more flexibility if you can keep Bird rights, etc.), but part of Giannis’ appeal is that he’s such an upstanding dude. Rather not see him get muddied in one of these Dame-to-Miami sagas or semi-annual James Harden-to-___ ordeals.
Jim: Cheesy dad jokes … don’t those have to be surrendered at the Wisconsin border?
(Yeah, I know. Sorry.)
OK. USC-Nevada this Saturday at the Coliseum. The Trojans were favored by 33 the last I looked – the line for last Saturday’s game against San José State was 30 – but I think the smart guys in Las Vegas are missing the boat. They should establish an over-under prop bet for the number of points Alex Grinch’s defense gives up.
Seriously, I thought some of the reaction after Saturday’s game was a touch overdramatic. No, the defense was not the finished product or anything close, and yes, there were some bonehead plays (especially on the SJSU touchdown right before halftime that made it uncomfortably close). That said, USC went pretty deep into the depth chart on both sides of the ball as the game progressed. The greater concern might be if USC keeps giving up lots of yards against better opposition and doesn’t have the same ratio of takeaways it had last year, when it led the nation.
Mirjam: Lincoln Riley tried to get ahead of things Saturday, when he complained about what the “narrative” would be after the first game, criticizing the critique that was coming after USC gave up 396 yards, 24 first downs (only one fewer than they had), and 28 points to SAN JOSÉ STATE.
I’d have rather him gotten out ahead of it by telling the truth: That ain’t gonna cut it. Not for a team that has its sights set on a national championship.
We know what a great defense looks like, what it means to smother and stifle an opponent, to strip away any hope – the way Georgia did to Texas Christian in last year’s championship game at SoFi Stadium, where the Horned Frogs scored seven points and had nine first downs and just 188 total yards.
Watching USC on TV last weekend sure wasn’t that. Sure, it’s early and there’s time to iron out the kinks. But if Georgia’s was what a championship defense looks like, from what the Trojans showed Saturday, they don’t have it.
Jim: They’ve got time.
Meanwhile, Dodgers-Braves begins tonight at The Ravine, and even though both have substantial leads in their divisions, it qualifies as a big series both as a potential preview of coming attractions in the postseason and also because the Dodgers have a chance to chase down Atlanta for the best record and home-field advantage in October. I don’t think anyone thought that was possible even in late July, but the Dodgers’ crazy August has changed the dynamic.
Plus there are four MVP candidates on the same field, and let’s hope no one decides to hop the fence and go after Ronald Acuña Jr., the way a couple of knuckleheads did in Denver this week. Good thing the Rockies’ security staff wasn’t totally dozing when that happened.
Acuña, Matt Olson, Mookie Betts and Freddie Freeman. If you had an MVP ballot, what say you?
Mirjam: I confess, I’m glad I don’t have to vote for that stuff anymore, like I did for a couple of seasons as an NBA writer. Especially when it’s this close, I always hated feeling like a part of the story.
But if I had a ballot this baseball season, I’d be checking the box next to Mookie – and then deleting and checking the Acuña box. Deleting and checking the Mookie box. Deleting and …
No one has ever had a 30-60 season like Acuña is going to, with at least 30 homers and 60 stolen bases. Even with baseball’s new rules intended to encourage more aggressive baserunning, that’s mind-blowing.
But then there’s Mookie, who’s been game to let Manager Dave Roberts plug him in wherever needed on defense, and who’s performed wherever he’s been slotted, which has allowed the Dodgers to maximize the talent on their roster. And he’s also got a 1.020 OPS – almost equal to what it was during his 2017 MVP season in Boston and better than Acuña’s .988.
So I’d probably wait to mail in my ballot until after this series, honestly.
What about you?
Jim: To me, Mookie’s versatility is the difference, and maybe it’s because we see him every day and understand just how that allows Roberts to write his lineup and maximize his platoon advantages on a daily basis. That’s something I suspect will be lost among most of those who have MVP votes. (In fairness, I still hold a strong belief that the “Valuable” in Most Valuable Player is the most important. It’s not titled the Best Stats Guy award, after all, although it often turns out that way.)
You can’t go wrong with either Mookie or Ronald. And Freeman and Olson are having monster seasons, too. And like you, I’m glad I don’t have an MVP vote. I do have a vote for another award but I don’t plan on disclosing the vote, or even the award, until everything is announced. We’ve been told there are people trolling in an attempt to get BBWAA awards voters to reveal their picks ahead of time, and the belief is that some folks who might be interested in laying down a few bucks on the winner are trying to get inside information. They won’t get it here.
One more subject today: I wrote about the whole Steph Curry/Best Point Guard Ever talk this week, and I let the world know who I thought the point guard GOAT is. (Sorry, Steph.)
But let’s approach it another way: If you could pick one guy to start a team and build your roster around him, who would you take? Steph? Magic? Or someone else?
Mirjam: Well, Michael Jordan, if everyone’s available. Or Austin Reaves maybe.
I’m joking.
But if it was between Steph and Magic? Recency bias had me contemplating this like it was a serious question when it first came across my radar in the past few days, but then I read your column and came to my senses. Obviously, it’s Magic.
I actually love what Steph’s done for the game, even though people are critical of young players who just want to shoot deep 3-pointers and forget about regular offense. I particularly love his influence on the women’s game, which for so long was criticized because it didn’t include dunking – but now movement and shooting is cool.
But Magic’s size, his effectiveness not just as a creative scorer but as one of the game’s all-time great facilitators, not to mention HIS profound impact on the style of play … just a different package. So if a young Magic and young Steph both showed up at the playground near my house, I’d pick Magic.
Jim: Me too. But the bottom line: Both were/are tremendously fun to watch, both are winners, and both have positively transformed the game.