Pistol - A review

Pistol: The Life of Pete Maravich by Mark Kriegel

My rating: 4 of 5 stars


There’s a line in Mark Kriegel’s book “Pistol” that does a good job of summarizing Pete Maravich’s life, and the book, quite nicely - “I don’t want to play 10 years in the NBA and die of a heart attack at 40.”

Instead, he died of a heart defect at 40, after playing in the NBA for almost 10 years.

“Pistol” is not so much a biography as it is a study on passion and obsession and how the two can be confused. At it’s core it’s about how much a father, in this case Press Maravich, can drive his son into greatness and tragedy. Into a legend, although one marred by tragedy.

To me, the way Pete Maravich was described reminded me of Pete Rose. Rose took a one-time criticism from his father on not running out a groundball into a career known as Charlie Hustle, much in the same way that Press’ love for basketball led to the devotion that Pete poured into it, devoting his life to the game. However, Rose got off lightly compared to Maravich, who almost all of his life playing the game, almost never getting the respect he deserved, at least not until his career had finished.

“Pistol” covers not just the life of Pete, but also that of Press. The book opens with a young Press, stuck with no future in a Pennsylvania steel town (where the sky was colored a flaming orange by the factories, notes Kriegel) discovers a way out - basketball, a game which he takes to almost immediately. The book was surely not off the mark when it says that Press mistook the game for salvation - it would dominate the rest of his life.

From there the book covers Press’ exploits in the early days of professional basketball and the first few years of what to become his pastime, coaching. By the time that Pete was a small child, Press was coaching his just as much (and perhaps more) then he was with his team, the NC State Wolfpack.

Here, the book goes into great detail, from newspaper clippings to interviews with people who were around, into this period of Pete’s life, when he was almost forced into basketball, practicing for hours a day, right up to during his teenage years. It was here, on the basketball court, that Pete found what he was craving all along - affection, from the fans who loved seeing his flashy moves and passes.

The book does a great job of covering both the highs (His 68 point game against the Knicks, his record setting performances at LSU) and the lows (his knee injury, LSU’s collapse in the 1970 NIT) of his career, as well as the interesting dynamic of Press and Pete’s relationship, and how it changed over the years.

It goes on, later, describing the aftermath of his NBA career - his depression, his spiritual rebirth as a born-again Christian, and eventually, his early death (on a basketball court, fittingly).

Overall, “Pistol” is an interesting book - it paints a picture of Pete as a tragic and often depressed superstar, and does a very good job of it. It’s meticulously researched (there’s even a large list of footnotes and references included) and very well written, although it does compare Pete to another flawed legend, Joe Namath (who, by the way, was the subject of another book written by Mark Kriegel) on a regular basis.

It’s definitely worth a read.

The Saga of Maid Marion - Wimbledon '07

It was surprise upset, a victory out of left field - but if it’s remembered for anything, it will be the loser, not the winner.

The 2007 Ladies Wimbledon championship was a grueling match under a hot English sun, with both Venus Williams and Marion Bartoli getting hurt. It was also one of the least expected match ups in any recent Grand Slam tournament.

Both players faced hard roads to this final and neither player was expected to make as far as the semi-finals, let alone win the championship. Williams faced a young, fiesty and unranked Russian named Alla Kudryavtseva in the first round, nearly losing in a dramatic match. Later on she faced a #2 seeded Maria Sharapova, upsetting her in the process.

Bartoli, on the other hand, went a different route. She not only upset both the #1 and #3 seeds (Justine Henin and Jelena Jankovic, respectively), but had to come from behind in each match as well! The Frenchwoman quickly went from being virtually unknown to a fan favorite among the crowds at Wimbledon, who did The Wave in support and cheered her during stoppages in play, dubbing her “Maid Marion”.

The final match started off a bit slow, with Williams taking a quick 3-0 set lead, but Bartoli battled back, eventually tying her at 4 sets apiece. However, William’s game was too fast for Bartoli, forcing her to run back and forth all game just to keep up.

This eventually was too much for Bartoli to bare. By the second set she was visibly fatigued and looking sluggish. Before long the running was getting to her - she had to call for a trainer: all the running had created a large and open blister on her foot.

However, this method of play also proved to be too much for Williams as well. During the same injury time-out, she also called for a trainer to deal with a sore thigh. And despite a wrapping for it, she looked hurt and finished the game despite a visible limp.

She limped, in fact, all the way to the Venus Rosewater Dish, winning in just two sets - 6-4, 6-1, ending the match with a blisteringly fast ace that hit Bartoli. Williams is now the fourth player to have won Wimbledon four times, joining such tennis legends as Billy Jean-King, Steffi Graf and Martina Natrilova.

Granted, Williams never looked to be in trouble. Marion started off with some sloppy play, such as her double faulting a number of times, and was never able to get the ball past Williams with much success.

In a world where seemingly every Men’s final is Federer vs. Nadel, it was refreshing to see a tournament that was as wide open as this years Wimbledon. Bartoli was seeded #17 going into the tournament, while Williams was #23. And while this win cemented Williams as one of the greats, it also thrust Bartoli into the spotlight.

Who knows what Maid Marion will come up with next?

Why 350 means everything

Even if it doesn’t seem like it, 350 is a very important number.

By winning his 350th game on Monday, Roger Clemens joined one of the most elite clubs in baseball history - one so elite that it has had just 7 other members over a century.

So elite that he’s the first new member since 1965 and the only one still alive.

So that win is a very big deal. Especially when you consider that only one other active pitcher, Greg Maddux, is even close to him - and Maddux benefited from pitching in the National League, never having to face the DH and never pitched in cozy Fenway Park - something that Clemens did for good portions of his career.

It’s an even bigger deal when you look at today’s top pitchers. Unlike home runs, where it’s not uncommon for a leader to hit 40, even 50 in a season, wins keep going down and down.

With the modern specialization of pitching, it is doubtful that we will ever see a 350 game winner from today’s crop. Last season, for example, we didn’t even have a pitcher who won at least 20 games for the first time since 1995. In the last 10 seasons, we haven’t had a pitcher win more then 24 games.

However, we have seen a player hit 72 home runs in one season.

Could any of today’s pitchers ever hit 350 wins? The closest are Greg Maddux, who has already 340 wins, and Tom Glavine, at 297. Both of those pitchers are nearing the end of their careers (they’re both 41) and are unlikely to catch Clemens. There’s only one active pitcher who is under 40 and has close to 300 wins - Mike Mussina, who has 243 - at the age of 38.

But what about today’s young, fresh pitchers? Well, let’s take last season’s top pitcher for the American League: Cheng-Ming Wang. Wang, who won 19 games for the Yankees at the age of 26, has a total of 27 wins coming into this season. For him to get to 350 wins, he would have to have 18 seasons of at least 19 wins. Then, when he’ll be 44 years old, he’ll just hit 350 wins . To ask him to be that good, for that long, is just not a possibility.

So, if this is the final season for Clemens, 350 wins looks like the cherry on top of the sundae of his career. It adds to his resume as the greatest pitcher of his generation, and perhaps the greatest pitcher of all time. Sure, he has a reputation as a hired gun, going where the money is. He’s even burned some bridges behind him, in Boston, Toronto, Houston and arguably in New York.

Were he somebody else, this could be a fatal flaw.

But this isn‘t somebody else; this is somebody who‘s career reads like a wish list for pitching. From the seven Cy Young awards, his multiple times leading the league in wins and ERA to his World Series rings, his career is the gold standard that pitchers will be judged against in the future. By every definition he is a hall of fame player - there are far, far lesser players in the hall of fame.

But still, those accomplishments can be repeated. A pitcher wins the Cy Young and a team wins the World Series every season. It’s possible to win 20 games in a season or to have back to back Cy Youngs.

However, 350 is still a very large number, and is one we may never see again - hence it's importance.

What's wrong with Venus Williams?

If it seems like an odd question to ask, that’s because it almost is, since she just won her first round match.

But, at the same time, it was a match that she was supposed to win and almost didn’t, even looking like she couldn’t at times. Williams was making unforced errors all throughout her match against Alla Kudryavtseva, and had to grind her way out of a 6-2, 2-0 hole early on.

And, by the end of match, it didn’t look so much as Williams won, but that Kudyavtseva lost it, in more ways then one.

About halfway through the third set, with the match tied 4-4, an unknown spectator yelled “Out” on a close shot. Kudryavtseva, believing it to have come from an official, stopped playing and allowed Williams to take a lead.

This was the beginning of the end for Kudryavtseva, whose frustration overcame her fantastic start to this match. By the end of the match, she was slamming her racket into the grass, and as the ESPN commentators noted, looked to be holding back tears.

It was a fitting end, however, to match that was simply electric. By it’s end, the stands were full, the restaurant reduced to standing room only, as everybody that could tried to get a view of court #2, watching to see what would happen.

So, then, what is wrong with Venus? In a match where she should have dominated - this was Kudryavtseva’s first Wimbledon match - she let herself get behind early and never dominated like she used to, despite ample chances.

Perhaps she’s getting too old. Tennis, especially women’s tennis, is a young persons game, and Venus turned 27 just a few days ago. Her opponent, on the other hand, just turned 19 this year. Can she keep up? She’s definitely past her prime; it’s been almost five years since she was ranked #1.

Perhaps we’re simply overrating her. Yes, she’s a three-time winner of Wimbledon, she hasn’t made it past the third round since 2005. In fact, she hasn’t won a tournament since then. Are we judging her on her past merits, not on her current play?

However old or overrated as she may be, she’s still a threat. She showed that by battling back against Kudryavtseva, forcing a third set and eventually overcoming her.

Still, this match showed both the good and the bad of her game. It showed that she still has the grit and determination of a winner, but it also showed that her play is getting increasingly sloppy, as she made unforced errors in the double digits in two of the three sets she played.

So, maybe nothing is wrong with her. For a player seeded #23 and who is 27 years old, she seems to be about right where she should be.

Just don’t expect her to win.