Straight Outta Compton: Afflalo does UCLA proud

Nothing has ever stood about Arron Afflalo, short for maybe his name. As a shooting guard, he’s hard-nosed, gritty and possesses a smooth jumper—yet he never leaves you with your mouth agape the way that other players do.

He slashes to the basket like an acrobat, nails three pointers without a conscious and locks down offensive stars, yet he’s never been the center of attention.

Even being the UCLA fan that I am, Afflalo has never been my particularly favorite player: in recent years, those honors probably go to “The Prince” Luc Richard Mbah a Moute and Jordan Farmar. He’s just not the kind of guy that people necessarily gravitate toward.

Sure, I recognize how important he has been in UCLA basketball’s immense success over the last few years. But for some reason, he’s still easy to ignore.

Well, screw all the haters, including me.

Barely any draft predictions had Afflalo going in the first round, and I personally thought he’d drop deep into the second round.

But the Pistons knew better. They picked up the perfect hard-nosed player for their system—there really isn’t a better fit for either party. I couldn’t be happier for Arron. I would have liked to see him return for his senior season with UCLA, teaming with Darren Collison, Josh Shipp and Kevin Love to bring home banner No. 12 to the Bruins, but he made a professional decision. He did what he had to do.

You could argue that even now, despite his first round selection, Afflalo still doesn’t stand out in any remarkable way. And you might be right.

But you know what? He’s got a guaranteed contract, a spot on the Detroit Pistons and a bright career ahead of him. Rock on, AA. You've always had the class, now you got the money to match.

A Tale of Two Schools

Posted June 21, 2007

I have always seen the world from a dialectic point of view—a struggle between the forces of good and evil, the strong and the weak, the haves and the have-nots. And forget Karl Marx. I’ve had that take on life since I was five years old.

To me, the National League stood for everything that was good and great in the world while the American League and their nasty tactics embodied all that was wrong. Coke was an emblem of what it meant to be American, while Pepsi was little more than a good-for-nothing wannabe brand.

And, growing up in Los Angeles, UCLA was naturally the quintessence of all good in the world, while USC was—well, USC.

In the next four hundred words or so, I’m going to explain exactly why USC is the bourgeoisie, why Tommy the Trojan is a plague to society and why the University of Southern California stands for everything that is wrong in the world.

Note: the rest of this isn’t meant to be taken seriously. This is not a pissing contest of any sort between UCLA and USC. Please don’t be offended—unless you go to USC, of course (just kidding, I swear).

So here it goes: the Manifesto of Los Angeles, a city eternally divided by the universal forces of good and evil.

The following are proof of why UCLA stands for all that is good and great in the world, while USC is the epitome of all that isn’t:

1) UCLA is a public school.

It represents the citizens of California. Haven’t you seen that one inspiring commercial where people of assorted ethnicities and backgrounds talk about how UCLA is THEIR school?

USC has always been, and will always be for the Republican, tax-evading private-school assholes that pervade Orange Grove Blvd. in Pasadena.

Fucking Republicans.

2) The colors.

Both the Bruins and Trojans share their own hues of gold, but they deviate in their other colors: UCLA wears a beautiful baby blue while USC dons the menacing “cardinal.”

UCLA’s blue is soothing and pleasing to the eyes. Blue can stand for the sky, the ocean, or any of the other wonderful delights that nature has to offer.

Red (I refuse to associate USC’s colors with the mascot of my very own school, Stanford) is emblematic of blood, death and the devil. If you had to pick one color to embody the most evil and ugly things in the world, you’d choose red in a heartbeat. Coincidence? I think not.

3) The Figureheads.

The most recognizable representative of UCLA—among many other distinguished figures and heroes—is Jackie Robinson.

And who would USC’s most recognizable figure be? O.J. Simpson.

I’ll leave it at that.

4) The Mascots.

Joe Bruin is a cuddly, upstanding mascot who exudes character with every step he takes. Tommy the Trojan is a prehistoric, wannabe macho man with a plastic sword stuck up his ass. Enough said.

5) Location.

UCLA is located in the hip and cultured milieu of Westwood. Take a walk down the street and you might see a star or two.

USC is located in South Central. Take a walk down the street and you’re likely to either a) get shot, b) witness a drug deal or c) get shot while witnessing a drug deal.

6) Education/Academics.

This might be a touchy subject for some, so I won’t go into detail in trying to belittle USC or praise UCLA.

I’ll let the facts speak. UCLA’s better.

7) December 2, 2006.

13-9, UCLA.

Money

I was lying in bed last night when an interesting thought came to me--when it comes to money, there are only two kinds of people in the world:

1) those who see money as strictly utilitarian, and 2) those who view money as having inherent value in itself (i.e. just having money for the sake of having money is an asset).

I think that those in the first group are generally more happy, relaxed, and take life as it comes. The second group often comprises what our society defines as success, but I'd rather enjoy my life as a fleeting, meaningful and beautiful experience as opposed to a rat race to the ten million dollar mark.

The first group is where I strive to be, and I think (or at least hope) that's where I'm headed. Just a year ago, I was probably the greediest person I've known. I didn't want money just to buy stuff, support myself or take trips--I wanted money for the sake of having it. But now, I realize, that, well, money is no more than a means to an end. It's a great thing, but getting too caught up in accumulating your net worth or liquid assets soon becomes sickening.

I know for a fact that my first year at Stanford elicited this change in me.

Who knows? Maybe by the time I graduate I will have gone from a money-thirsty Wall Street wannabe to a wandering journeyman. I guess we'll just have to see.

Debate of the Century? Oden vs. Durant

This appeared in the Stanford Daily on May 25, 2007. And my thoughts are still the same:

Standing at seven feet and weighing 280 pounds, Greg Oden is a beast of a man. His worn face wears a full beard that would lead you to believe he’s in his mid-30s. His immense size and strength leave opponents both awed and intimidated. Only 19 years old, Oden is a freak of nature, almost sure to be the No. 1 pick in the 2007 NBA draft.

Standing at 6-foot-9 and weighing 225 pounds, Kevin Durant is slightly less of a behemoth. The former Texas forward is long and gangly, still filling out his slender frame. He wears a boyish grin on his round face that makes you think he’s got a high-school prom to go to this weekend. His offensive skill set and sheer will dominated collegiate opponents this year, as he averaged 26 points and 11 rebounds per game. Still 18 years old, Durant is likely to be the No. 2 pick in this year’s draft.

Both are freshmen finishing out their first and last years in college. Both are classy and talented kids who represented their respective universities as best as they could. Both are the centerpieces of what many experts believe to be the best draft in years.

And both deserve all the praise they’ve gotten. They’re just that good. But one of them is better. And it’s not who you might think.

With the first pick of the 2007 NBA Draft, the Portland Trail Blazers select... from the University of Texas, Kevin Durant!

At least that’s what David Stern should be saying.

When Portland is on the clock on draft day, they’ll have a tough decision to make — Oden-Durant might be the biggest debate since Lincoln-Douglas, or at least Carmelo-LeBron.

Oden seems to be to the conventional choice, however; a 7-foot monster like him is a rare commodity in a game ruled by guards.

But don’t fool yourself. Durant is the guy.

There’s no doubt in my mind that Oden would be a solid, if not perennial, All-Star player for the Blazers if they were to draft him. He would give instant credibility to their team in the paint, blocking shots and throwing down dunks.

But Kevin Durant is a star waiting to happen. He’s a nice-looking, mild-mannered guy off the court. Much like Oden, he says all the right things and defers to others. But once he’s on the hardwood, his act is over. He can take over a game with his assertiveness alone.

Sure, Durant has the athleticism, the reach and the offensive skill set that most players can only dream of. But he’s got more than just that. He’s got the right stuff: the swagger, the savvy or whatever you want to call it.

He had one of the best freshman years in the history of college basketball, and it wasn’t only because of his physical tools. He had the moxie, the cockiness and the court presence that only the greatest possess.

Oden is going to be a fantastic center no matter what. A player of his physical size, talent and athleticism is destined to have a fine career as long as he stays relatively injury-free.

But Durant isn’t going to be just great. He’s going to be up there with all the greatest — maybe not the next Bird, Jordan or Kobe, but definitely the next Durant.

Oden has all the physical tools to be up there, too. But as weird as this may sound, he’s just too nice.

When he was interviewed on College Gameday back in January, Oden showed his overwhelming humility when he was asked about his potential pro career.

“I haven’t proven anything yet. Right now it’s really a lot of talk,” he said. “I mean, I know a couple of guys right now who are really doing something, like Kevin Durant.”

Yeah, he really did say that.

Even before the NBA Lottery on Tuesday, Oden was already deferring to the Longhorn phenom. It’s very humble of him, but at the same time, it’s just too nice for an NBA center.

Oden can’t be a nice guy. He can’t be Tim Duncan. His game fits the role of the classic, dominant NBA center. The model for Oden’s game is none other than the belligerent and brazen Shaquille O’Neal.

Some might call Shaq conceited, wearing a Superman “S” on his shoulder. They also might say he isn’t the nicest guy: He has no reservations about cussing out a reporter on live television after swatting his minuscule opponents to the floor. If you piss off Shaq, you’re in a bad place.

If you piss off Oden? He’d probably act like a reasonable human being. And, as absurd as this is going to sound, that might be his biggest flaw.

You can say that a player’s demeanor off the court has little to do with his performance on the court. And you’d probably be right. But becoming one of the most physically commanding NBA centers of all time (which is what Oden’s build dictates) takes more than just size and ability.

You need anger. You need to be pissed off. You need to be like, well, Shaq.

Which obviously doesn’t detract from Oden as a person. I’m sure that he’s going to represent the NBA 95 percent better than most of its current players. He’ll be an All-Star for years to come and a hero to many.

But I have a feeling that his career may leave a lot of us wondering, “What if?”

And as for Durant: His boyish smile, his gangly features and his classy presence are merely a ploy.

The kid’s a killer.