Inside the NBA Crew Discusses Giannis Antetokounmpo's Message About Failure
After the Miami Heat eliminated the Milwaukee Bucks in the first round, a reporter asked two-time NBA regular season MVP/2021 NBA Finals MVP Giannis Antetokounmpo if he considered this season to be a failure. Antetokounmpo's answer is, as TNT's Kenny Smith later put it, a masterclass or TED Talk:
You asked me the same question last year, Eric. Do you get a promotion every year? No, right? So, every year you work is a failure? Yes or no? No. Every year you work, you work toward something--toward a goal--which is to get a promotion, to be able to take care of your family, to be able to provide a house for them or take care of your parents. You work toward a goal. It's not a failure. It's steps to success. If you've never--I don't want to make it personal.
Michael Jordan played 15 years. Won six championships. The other nine years was a failure? That's what you're telling me? I'm asking you a question...Exactly, so why you ask me that question? It's the wrong question. There's no failure in sports. There's good days, bad days, some days you are able to be successful, some days you are not, some days it is your turn, some days it's not. That's what sports is about. You don't always win. Some other group is gonna win, and this year somebody else is gonna win. Simple as that. We’re gonna come back next year and try to be better, try to build good habits, try to play better--not have a 10 day stretch of playing bad basketball. Hopefully we can win a championship.
So, 50 years from 1971 to 2021 that we didn't win a championship, it was 50 years of failure? No, it was not. There were steps to it. And we were able to win one and hopefully we can win another one.
Sorry, I didn't want to make it personal, because you asked me the same question last year, and last year I wasn't in the right mind space to answer the question back--but I remember it.
TNT's Inside the NBA crew just had a heartfelt discussion about what Antetokounmpo said. Charles Barkley recalled that when he grew up in the projects of Leeds, Alabama he could have never imagined living the life that he has lived. He rightly considers himself to be a great success, and he refuses to be defined by not winning an NBA title. Barkley feels sorry for anyone who defines himself by what he did in sports, because sports is a very small part of life.
Shaquille O'Neal offered a different perspective. He said that he grew up with a military background, and based on that background he has a simple definition of success versus failure: if you accomplished the mission then you succeeded, and if you did not accomplish the mission then you failed. He emphasized that he is not criticizing or disrespecting Antetokounmpo and he added that failure is not necessarily a bad thing because often you must fail before you succeed. O'Neal said that as the number one overall pick in the NBA Draft he felt that his mission was to be the most dominant big man and to win a championship every year, so he is OK with being told that he was only successful during the four years that he won NBA titles.
Kenny Smith said that Antetokounmpo had given a TED Talk for adults in terms of how to think about their lives and put things in proper perspective. Smith suggested that O'Neal's definition of success versus failure is accurate but incomplete. Smith said that each person should ask himself if he took every necessary step that he was supposed to take. If you have taken every step that you were supposed to take, then you did not fail. You may be disappointed with the outcome, but that is not the same as failure. Smith said that after hearing Antetokounmpo's answer, he now understands why Antetokounmpo and Russell Westbrook play so hard every possession of every game: they know that they cannot control the outcome of the game, but they can control taking every step that they are supposed to take.
By nature, my attitude is more like the one that O'Neal expressed: if you have the necessary talent to dominate, then every time you don't dominate is a failure. My second grade teacher, Miss Day, said that I put way more pressure on myself than anyone else did; I turned everything into a competition, and I was very driven to win every competition. Some of us are just hard-wired to be very intense, very driven, very competitive. Such people view anything less than dominance as abject failure. Think about Bill Russell winning two NCAA titles, an Olympic gold medal, and then capturing 11 NBA titles in 13 seasons. That does not just happen; that is a product of a laser focus on domination, and a deep inner belief that you can never win enough to be satisfied.
It is funny to hear O'Neal take this position on failure now, because the main thing that he and Kobe Bryant used to feud about as teammates was that Bryant did not think that O'Neal worked hard enough to be dominant; Bryant tried to destroy everybody not just in every game, but in every practice, while O'Neal may have aspired to that mentality but he did not live it in terms of work: O'Neal is not cut from the same mold as Antetokounmpo or Westbrook--or Bryant. Everyone wants to win--but few people will suffer to win. Bill Russell used to throw up before every game. Bryant played through an assortment of injuries that would sideline most current NBA players for weeks or months. People like that don't talk about how much they want to win nearly as much as they show how much they want to win through their behaviors, their habits, and their willingness to suffer to win.
As I get older, I am starting to understand that it is healthy to have a growth mindset like the one that Anteotkounmpo expressed and that such a mindset is not incompatible with being fiercely competitive. Anyone who listens to what Antetokounmpo said and concludes that Antetokounmpo is not competitive enough or does not care about winning missed the point. The key concept to grasp--as Smith noted--is that we are all responsible for taking all of the steps that we can take to get the best possible outcome. After we do that, we can accept what happened--and if we are disappointed by the outcome, then we can learn from it and do more work. Note that Antetokounmpo repeatedly mentioned the steps to the process, the building of correct habits, and doing the work so that his team can win a title next year. Of course Antetokounmpo is disappointed that the Bucks did not win the NBA title--but he does not view himself as a failure because losing is part of sports and part of life.
Antetokounmpo is remarkably mature for someone so young who is at the top of such a competitive profession. I am much older than he is, but I may not have reached that level of maturity.
In Turning Failure Into Success, I wrote, "Julius Erving endured six years of frustrating playoff setbacks before winning an NBA championship and throughout that period he stayed true to his core belief: 'I've always tried to tell myself that the work itself is the thing, that win, lose or draw, the work is really what counts. As hard as it was to make myself believe that sometimes, it was the only thing I had to cling to every year--that every game, every night, I did the best I could.'"
That is what Antetokounmpo is talking about--not accepting losing, but accepting outcomes as they happen while also learning, growing, and continuing to do everything possible to obtain better outcomes.
Ernie Johnson and Barkley emphasized another important point: Antetokounmpo took great pains to not personally attack or insult the questioner. When Antetokounmpo said, "If you've never..." and then stopped himself, you could tell that he was about to say something about that reporter never doing something at an elite level--but then Antetokounmpo switched gears, and used Michael Jordan as an example. At the end of his answer, Antetokounmpo again emphasized that he did not want to make his answer personal. Smith noted that Antetokounmpo tried very hard to make this a teaching moment. It was beautiful to watch Antetokounmpo try to educate the reporter instead of just belittling him.
I think that Antetokounmpo provided great insight into the thought process of someone who, by virtue of hard work, intelligence, and toughness--rose from poverty to becoming the best in the world at his craft.
It will be a shame if people misunderstand or misinterpret his message.
Labels: Bill Russell, Charles Barkley, Ernie Johnson, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Inside the NBA, Julius Erving, Kenny Smith, Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal
posted by David Friedman @ 2:04 AM
16 Comments:
this continues the thread from my prior comments re G (posted in the post-Game 4 thread)...
I'm not saying I'd take other players over G or would not; I'm just evaluating his comments on the merits -- with attention to (1) context, (2) grace, and (3) larger trends/issues.
(1) context
when you're paid a quarter billion over 5 yrs in salary (not incl endorsements) and you've just lost in 5 games in rd 1 as the #1 seed, asking if it's "failure" is a legit question -- of the top player whose FT (and FG) shooting down the stretch was very poor.
I don't care for Belichick in many ways; but he's right, "when you win say little, when you lose say less." all G had to do was say obviously they didn't achieve their goal of winning a title, but give credit to Miami and Jimmy G for succeeding. --> give a short answer and move on. if the guy follows up by asking about "failure", say you'll leave such questions to the writers; you gave it all you had. next question
(2) grace
instead of complimenting Miami, G denigrated Miami by saying Miami was playing to beat them, whereas Bucks were playing for a championship (ttps://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/36301434/giannis-antetokounmpo-says-bucks-early-exit-not-failure, last line of article). That's his way of saying that Miami was a weaker team which made its season by beating the Bucks -- a comment which shows no grace, and may prove totally false (if Miami keeps winning).
the reporter who asked the "failure" question probably will make less in his lifetime than G in 1 month or 6 weeks. again, show grace; reacting with indignation (and overtly biting your tongue -- and saying, "I'll stop myself", is not what I mean by grace).
(3) larger trends/issues
when you make a quarter billion in 5 years in base salary, part of the deal is that you have to deal with criticism.
G showed think skin over the word "failure".
great as he is in some ways, RW (another quarter billion contract guy) can't deal with "Westbrick" heckling and confronts fans over it (https://nypost.com/2023/04/19/suns-make-changes-to-arena-after-russell-westbrook-incident/).
given these guys' stature and salaries, they're remarkably petulant and sensitive over questions they deem insulting ("failure") and silly heckles ("Westbrick")
as touchy as they are -- and as high-motor and brilliant players as G and RW are -- it's unclear that they actually have laser focus. maybe they love to play tight T and hustle. but neither seems to love practicing FT shooting, which is a crucial skill. G's FT % this year was sub-65 and more than 12% lower than his peak 77% in his 4th year, which was part of a 5-yr stretch in the mid-70s; and his FT misses went a long way to costing the Bucks Game 5. RW's FT shooting has fallen even further, from mid-80s to mid-60s. is RW willing to practice to overcome new rules on wasting time inbetween FTs? what area of the game reflects practice more than FT shooting?
if you understand how incredibly fortunate and blessed you are to make a quarter billion over 5 yrs in base salary, then why show petulance over words directed at you by outsiders? why not put that energy into practicing FTs? hire a sports psych to help you manage your emotions, in game and out of game. let the negativity fuel your inner drive, not outward petulance.
I'm certainly no fan or Curry, but I don't think he's ever shown such petulance, has he?
but in the end, the blame lies not with G or RW or the others, but with a society that places people on a pedestal and hangs on their every word, just because they're gifted in athletics
--J
J:
I will first reiterate what I said in the other thread: I find it odd that with all of the nonsense (tanking, load management, players who don't work on their games, etc.) going on in the NBA now that you find it more important to lash out at Giannis than any other player.
Regarding your specific points here, the question was asked in an obnoxious way and, as Giannis noted, the same person asked the same question last year. The reporter could have said, "Would you characterize this season as a success?" or "How would you characterize this season?"
How much Giannis makes or how much the reporter makes are not relevant. The reporter should be respectful and ask intelligent questions. I see nothing wrong with Giannis' response. You are free to agree or disagree with his perspective, but he explained how he feels and why he feels that way.
It is a big reach on your part to grab one sentence from a whole press conference and twist it around to mean that Giannis disrespected Miami.
I think at this point you should just say, "I don't like Giannis" or "I don't like highly paid NBA players." That would be more honest than trying to hide your true feelings under the cloak of weak arguments.
I think that Giannis did an excellent job of dealing with criticism. He answered the question honestly. Do you prefer guys like Dillon Brooks who run their mouth and then skip the postgame press conferences?
Heckling and booing are one thing. I disagree that fans have the right to call someone out of their name. As Westbrook mentioned in a press conference, his kids have to deal with that instead of having pride in their family name. A family name is meaningful. The fans can yell "Brick" or "Airball" or whatever, but the name calling is crass, and it is even worse when it comes from, as you might put it, highly paid media members like Skip Clueless and Screamin' A. I call them out of their names only because that is how they treat others.
Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell each shot less than .600 on free throws during their careers. Were they not great players? Would you accuse them of not working on their games?
The players did not create the salary structure. I agree with you that society's values should be restructured, but that does not mean that players should be treated disrespectfully just because they make a lot of money.
When the Orlando Magic defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers in the 2009 ECFs, LeBron James walked off the court without shaking hands with anyone on the Magic and ducked the media afterwards. If he had apologized the next day and owned up to his immaturity that would have been one thing but he didn't do that. This is what he said a few days later: "I'm a winner...I'm a competitor. That's what I do .It doesn't make sense for me to go over and shake somebody's hand." That might be the most immature and unenlightened thing a superstar player in any sport has ever said. Quite a few people in the media rightfully blasted him for his comments but some people were defending him by saying that it was alright because he was only 25 years old. Only 25 years old? Little League players know that they should shake hands with the opposing team in defeat so needless to say, Lebron's age should not have been an excuse.
Giannis Antetokounmpo's comments, on the other hand, were profoundly mature and thoughtful. The "reporter" asked him the question purely to get a negative reaction from him, and I'm sure that Antetokounmpo briefly considered lashing out at him, but he composed himself and gave a tremendously insightful answer that should be celebrated, not used as proof that Antetokounmpo is soft or not competitive. There is no guarantee that Giannis will lead the Bucks to another championship but he has many years left to accomplish this. The 2010-2011 Spurs had the best record in basketball and were defeated in the first round by Memphis but that didn't prevent them from winning the championship in 2014 by a record margin in the Finals.
based on your response, my message was a "failure" in that it was misunderstood. no worries, easily clarified.
I don't hate (or like) Giannis; I don't know him. Ditto for the other in the quarter billion-dollar crew (or even others who are highly paid).
At issue is their conduct and words. I dislike excessive petulance and self-involvement -- which does not permeate every single one (e.g., Butler, Jokic). The excessive self-involvement is at the core of the load management (failure to care about impact on fans, competitive integrity of league) and other problems you mention. The excessive petulance is just another instance of the excessive self-involvement.
Like most people, these players have some days where their conduct/words are admirable and others where they are not.
I don't know why Wilt and Russell struggled with FTs. Different era, different conditions, may partly explain Bill Russell's %, which was actually higher than Wilt in many years. Shooting has been revolutionized in last 20 years -- look at # of players able to shoot 3s. It's possible Wilt didn't put a ton of work into FTs, though I haven't read up on it either way.
I criticized G on what I believe to have been, within the larger context, an inappropriately petulant reaction to an aggressive journalist who was doing his job, after a massive upset occurred (by seeding).
I probably held him to a higher standard due to his past history of working hard and walking a straight path -- which caused my disappointment ("lashing out").
You have convinced me that other people may disagree with my opinion, to which I personally continue to fully adhere. Having a minority opinion (if that's what it is) does not make me a "failure" in my book; the "failure" was in communicating what my actual opinion is. I still enjoy the website. No worries
--J
Michael:
I agree with you that Giannis' maturity and depth of thought stand in marked contrast to the behaviors and words of many other NBA players.
J:
I share your dislike for petulance, self-involvement, and load management. I just disagree with you that Giannis displayed those traits in this specific answer, let alone in general.
Wilt reportedly spent a lot of time practicing free throws and regularly hit a high percentage in practice. No one can explain why his in game percentages were so low. Interestingly, little mention is made about Russell's free throw percentage, which was almost as bad as Wilt's. I have never seen any discussion about why Russell was such a poor free throw shooter or what, if anything, he did to improve in that area.
It is OK to have a minority opinion. The Inside the NBA crew did not agree about Giannis' answer, although no one on the panel criticized it quite so harshly as you did. I think that one can disagree with Giannis, as Shaq did, without viewing Giannis' perspective as representative of the whole list of issues to which you connected Giannis' answer.
I can accept that others disagree, though I still fully adhere to my original opinion.
I'll leave it at that, except to again ask: what did G mean when he said, "But at the end of the day, I feel like they were playing to beat us, and we were playing to win a championship." (https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/36301434/giannis-antetokounmpo-says-bucks-early-exit-not-failure) ?
--J
J:
If you listen to or read the full quote (never rely on excerpts, particularly from ESPN), Giannis made the point that the Bucks got ahead of themselves instead of focusing on the task at hand: "We were a little bit ahead of ourselves, to be honest."
Far from disrespecting the Heat, Giannis was actually critical of the Bucks' mindset.
Marcel
I like giannis and think he a top 25 player all time.
But this season was a disappointment
As far as expectations they had for themselves.
When kd or LeBron said this all media head disrespect them.
The media clearly loves giannis hates LeBron and KD
Fact is ur gonna lose in life and ur gonna win in life.
Ur not a failure when u lose
Ur a failure if u never try at all
Milwaukee season wasn't a failure just a disappointment
David,
Great post and very interesting comments here in the discussion thus far.
Giannis' post-game interview has been truly fascinating to the point where the Inside the NBA panel discussed it not once but TWICE after it had happened. I thought yesterday's discussion was incredibly refreshing to watch on live television. Despite the differing viewpoints that were shown (primarily with Shaq and his military upbringing), any sensible observer can see how much respect all four men have for one another. In a time when the ability to have collected dialogue has gone all but nil, I applaud the producers of Turner for also letting the panel just keep speaking their minds.
My thoughts in this whole discourse has a mix of both Shaq's stance and Charles' stance. I do think that the expectations that are held on Giannis' shoulders are fair and that in terms of not reaching the singular goal of winning a title this year, then yes, this season was a failure. The Bucks absolutely could have (and should have) won Games 4 and 5 had they not imploded in the fourth quarters of both games. That being said, Giannis is already a champion so mainstream media and reporters don't have any more ground to further criticize his body of work. If anything, the expectations and criticisms should be held for the other MVP finalists for this season in Jokic and Embiid.
Giannis' response was very well put, but as the leader of a team with the best regular season record, getting ousted in the first round to a Play-In team is definitely disappointing and fair grounds of being asked if this season was a failure. However, this doesn't excuse some reporters purporting to be journalists to ask these athletes these "baiting" questions to elicit a viral soundbite for clicks, etc. Giannis' professionalism and calm demeanor are definitely commendable attributes that the younger generation of athletes should strive to emulate.
All in all, this series and the outcome was shifted immensely the moment Giannis went down with his back injury in Game 1. If injuries didn't occur, I think we would be all talking about how the Bucks would have a much easier path to the ECF than their other conference counterparts.
Shifting gears, I'm looking forward to your BOS vs PHI series preview. It's a shame that Embiid is already injured, but what else is new. Even if he were 100% healthy, I would have taken the Celtics in 6 games.
Marcel:
You really think that the media "hate" LeBron?
ESPN, TNT, and NBA TV are the three main networks that cover the NBA. Can you name one person from any of those networks who even criticizes LeBron, let alone unfairly criticizes him or "hates" him?
LeBron was rightly criticized for "The Decision" and for various times that he quit during playoff series, but in general he is beloved by the media and he is protected even from justified criticism.
Eric:
Thank you!
My Boston-Philadelphia preview will be up soon.
David,
It's not so much the content of what Giannis said but the "grace under pressure" aspect to it that's so remarkable. Under the circumstances, Giannis showed he had a long memory in pointing out that the reported asked him the same inane question last year. But Giannis in a jiu-jitsu type maneuver managed to call him out by flipping the question back on him. Like, if he doesn't get promoted at the end of his work year was it a "failure". Very smooth, that. Giannis challenged the reporter to show empathy for him but without "personalizing" it. And what a nice bit of logic, Giannis' analogy of Michael Jordan's nine nonchampionship seasons not being "failures". Finally, the man was hurt, but he didn't make any excuses. It's just so refreshing to see "the face of the league" demonstrate such aplomb. Kids can watch that now-viral video and see that you can be a winner even if you've experienced "the agony of defeat" as in the old Wide World of Sports commercial. Giannis gets that he's not entitled to a championship, unlike so many other ring-chasing stars who whine about in the NBA today. Anyway, appreciate your thoughtful commentary.
Anonymous:
Thank you!
It is interesting to see that the people who "get" Antetokounmpo's message really get it at multiple levels.
It is also interesting that some of the reporter's colleagues are now trying to retroactively justify his disrespectful question by arguing that if the question had not been asked then we would not have received Antetokounmpo's message. That is so condescending. I am confident that Antetokounmpo can deliver an eloquent message without being provoked by a reporter.
The reporter could have asked, "How do you characterize this season?" or "Would you classify this season as a success?" Instead, he insulted Antetokounmpo. To paraphrase a line from the movie "Searching for Bobby Fischer," Antetokounmpo is better at playing basketball than most people are at doing anything. The reporter could do his job without being disrespectful, but many reporters like to put themselves at the center of the story because that is the only way they will ever be noticed.
David,
Same "Anonymous" just now. Just want to add that there's also much to be said for the fact that Giannis earned his championship the hard way, for the same city he started out in. And so the Jordan analogy is apt. Jordan paid his dues in another long-suffering midwestern city before bringing those championships home. Giannis is delightfully old school, like Magic, Bird and Isiah bringing home multiple championships to the franchises they started out with. You've given Giannis props for not running to a different team to chase a ring before and I thank you for that. Also, as a fellow chess fan, appreciate the nod to "Searching for Bobby Fischer". I remember that scene and it definitely fits this situation. Not that that particular reporter necessarily asked his question out of envy, but kinda seems like his point in invoking "failure" was to bring the megamillionaire megawatt star, arguably the best in the world at what he does, down to size.
Anonymous:
Yes, Giannis has consistently done things the right way. Unlike many of today's players, he would fit in perfectly in earlier eras.
Post a Comment
<< Home