A while back Gene Wojciechowski ran a feel good story about Keith Van Horn taking a year off from the NBA, turning down an estimated $5 million in the process, to spend time with his family. This article was a tour de force. It opened with a cheesy lead in:
“On Halloween night -- the same evening the NBA season began -- Keith Van Horn wore a costume that still causes some team executives and fellow players to do double takes.
Van Horn went dressed as a husband and father.”
Later Wojciechowski took the obligatory shot at Latrell Sprewell:
“That's because Van Horn, the No. 2 selection in the 1997 NBA draft, isn't playing this season -- not because he's injured or because, like numb-above-the-neck Latrell Sprewell, he can't support a household on a multimillion-dollar salary.”
There was a pop culture one liner:
“The guy has spent more time on the Eastern seaboard than Tony Soprano.”
I picked up on a middle aged white guy longing for the days when athletes weren’t uber rich:
“Ah, money. You know how pro athletes always say it isn't about the money ... but it always is? In Van Horn's case, it really isn't about the cash.”
There was even a cheesy closing:
“Van Horn will be back next season. At least, that's the plan. But so much can happen between now and then.
Who knows -- maybe he'll get used to the husband/dad costume.”
However, I reference this article not to criticize Wojciechowski. Rather I want to point out the fact that there are two types of people. Those who read the it and say, “Wow Van Horn is a great guy” and those who say, “Wait Van Horn has his own shoe?” (Click on family and then Van Horn.) In case you were wondering I fall into the second group.
Upon further review it looks like Nike simply has a whole family of guys that wear its sneakers. Though as far as I can tell not every guy has his own line. I mean Brian Scalabrine is in that family.
No comments:
Post a Comment