On the 3-0 and the Lead Pass

That Sports Follow-up I Somewhat Promised

My concern for the Celtics' NBA Finals victory I had predicted was unfounded:  they won comfortably in Game 5 to wrap it up.  Next year will be a whole new thing, as the difficulty of defending the Association title will once again be demonstrated with top teams gearing their rosters to defeat the champions:  Exhibit A, the 76ers signing of Paul George. 

The 3-0 lead the Celtics had over the Mavericks, and the simultaneous 3-0 lead the Florida Panthers had over the Edmonton Oilers in the NHL Stanley Cup Finals, illustrated an interesting phenomenon in modern major sports seven-game series (Major League Baseball's World Series being the other one).  Marketing loves the seven-game series and, from a competitive aspect, it's a valid test for these teams.  The 3-0 lead, though, is bad for ratings. The drama is basically gone, with the final outcome all but assured.  The historic performance of teams down 0-3 is even worse than chance should allow.  Fortunately for ratings, that 3-0-leading team tends to slacken and lose, allowing for at least one more televised game.  I will not draw unseemly conclusions but comment that motivation truly does affect outcomes, and the underdog down 3-0 has strong motivation to avoid the embarrassment of a sweep.  Game 5 usually wraps it up, usually back at the home court of the favored and leading team (as with the Celtics' win), but if they drop that one Game 6 becomes a battle, and Game 7 a war.  Somehow, though, that team that led 3-0 almost always comes out on top (as happened with hockey's Panthers).

I have been loving the Euros, but the Copa America not so much (and not just because of Team USA's first-round flame-out).  It's been all too evident in both tournaments that well-disciplined defensive units can shut down most offensive efforts, and toward the end of the round-robin portion teams had little desire to expose their defenses with much offensive effort.  So my inerest lies in those teams that can rise above, offensively, and especially if they can do it more than just episodically.  Still, it has been the accidental goals, and the desperation ones at the end of game time, that have predominated.  The instinct of defenders to go back to help out when the ball is bouncing around inside the goalie box has been punished frequently.

A little complaint about how these random brackets are working:  The two best teams in the Euros' group stage, Germany and Spain, met yesterday in the quarterfinals.  Two of the three best teams in the Copa America, Brazil and Colombia, were in the same group!  The former produced a fantastic game, worthy of a final, while the Brazil-Colombia game occurred with both teams having clinched success in moving to the next round:  the only incentive was the marginal difference between playing Uruguay and the US-Panama survivor (it turned out to be Panama).*  The two rivals scrapped and kicked each other but did not have the real passion: that will be in their likely semifinal rematch. 

Copa America's tournament rules differ from the Euros' in one important facet--the Western Hemisphere one eschewed the "Extra Time" added on after a tie score in regulation, in favor of going immediately to a penalty kick shootout.  The results showed yesterday, as the Spain-Germany game was dramatically resolved in the final minutes of the 30 minutes of extra time through an sudden, unexpected goal.  The Canada-Venezuela game last night, probably the best so far in the Copa tournament, just went to the loaded-coin flip of penalty kicks, as did the Argentina-Ecuador one.   I preferred the Spain-Germany outcome, but recognize that, too often, the ET play is desultory, exhausted. 

As for the pre-tournament Euro favorites: as I write, exactly halfway through the quarterfinals, England will have to improve its game to defeat  Switzerland, and, in the next round, while France must better its game to defeat Spain. The really interesting game is later today, between Netherlands and Turkey.  The Dutch finished third in their group, and both teams have already raised their play to the level required for the knockout rounds.  

Go Long! 

 In soccer, most passes are directed at a stationary teammate, one with an opening to receive the ball.  The more beautiful passes, though, are to a place where a teammate has not yet arrived.  A stationary pass recipient will not generally have a "look" (as they say in basketball) at the goal, as defenders will move to block that view, or more to the point, the line of a shot toward goal.  The pass to a moving player, though, can create an opening.  It is a fine skill to place the ball where the teammate should be, without using your hands. For me, that aspect is what "the beautiful game" mode of playing soccer is all about. 

 American football's great beauty in modern times is exactly that downfield pass with perfect timing, to catch that moment when the receiver will have a free direct line from the arm of the passer.  In either case it is the dynamism and flow in the lead pass which creates the drama; it also brings more risk, in the sense that a longer pass to a moving player is less sure to end up with its target.  That risk is why soccer coaches love the strategy of playing the ball forward from player to player rather than sending it long and American football coaches like the short "possession" pass or running plays.  But the long bomb is where it's at. .

The long pass in soccer works best when the receiver is unencumbered by a defender; then the receiver can bring it down or under control, ideally right in stride.  When it's contested on the receiving end, though, then it becomes a physical battle to meet the ball with the head.  That contact usually will send the ball away from the receiver and defender, so the skill is to direct the ball so a teammate can get "the second ball'.  Strategies are developed around that combination; I expect soon they will be developed around controlling "the third ball".  

Basketball is another game that combines the fixed point-to-point passing with some of the more dynamic plays (catch and shoot, alley-oop, pick and roll).  Hockey is a game where the players move so fast that the player with the puck must be thinking ahead always, to the next connection, physical contact, or deflection.  Baseball, on the other hand, is more with stationary points and less movement; when it has movement (the play is live) the ball's target is still a stationary one (with the exception of the rare rundown play, and in contrast with the kids' game of kickball, where you can throw out the runner by hitting them with the ball).

We are All Sinners, Now 

Tennis, and some other head-to-head sports, have an opposing method in dynamic passes in play with their rackets (or other tools), which is to send the ball in an arc away from its recipient, such that they can't get at it ("the passing shot"). 

Speaking of tennis, another bracket beef:  in the men's Wimbledon tournament, as with the French Open, the most critical match is likely to be, not the final but the semifinal between #1 seed Jannik Sinner and #3 seed Carlos Alcaraz.  I feel, though I may be proven wrong, that either Sinner or Alcaraz can handle their likely finals opponent, the mighty Novak Djokovic, who is beyond his peak but still able to compel submission from most. 

So why this #1 vs. #3 in the projected semifinal (and the #2 vs. #4--Zverev the #4 seems like a perfect foil for Djokovi in the semis)?  I prefer he NCAA basketball's approach, where #1 is projected against #4 (or #5) and #2 and #3 are set up to battle in the semifinal. 

At any rate, looking ahead to the renewal of the Sinner-Alcaraz rivalry, the grass surface of Wimbledon is a good challenge to each.  Sinner has shown remarkable improvement over the last 18 months to reach the top ranking, but despite that success he is only on par with prodigious Djokovic and prodigal Alcaraz.  I will be rooting for the Northern Italian, but I have to admire the variety of Alcaraz and his sunny disposition.  They appear to be embarked on a lengthy, profitable contestation; I hope so for the sake of us all. 

P.S.  The Netherlands-Turkiye game was all that I hoped for.  I will be rooting for the Dutch over England--which showed its character for about 5 minutes when behind but still seem less than present--and for Spain over France--which has looked just as listless as England.  And for Colombia, to top both Brazil/Uruguay and Argentina.

Official reminder that the Paris Olympics will start soon!  I will be a consumer and not a predictor.

*Not to disrespect Uruguay's team, and they may well defeat Brazil. * However, neither team was subject to the real penalty, which would have been to move over to the Argentina bracket.