Month: March 2023

In his latest mailbag, Jon Wertheim answers this, plus pays tribute to one of the sport’s greatest trailblazers, Sania Mirza.

While marveling over Novak Djokovic’s 378 weeks as the world’s No. 1 player and wondering where the WTA/CVC deal stands, here are answers to your questions this week:

Jon,

Having reached the one-year mark since the start of the war in Ukraine, I was wondering about the status of Ukrainian players … specifically those that joined the armed forces in Ukraine. Do we know how they are doing?

Lilas Pratt
Marietta, Ga.

Based on the press conferences, stories like this and this, social media, data (i.e., rankings) and observations, it’s been a hell of a year. And we’re talking about active (mostly female) players. This is to say nothing of the retired men’s players—Sergiy Stakhovsky, Alex Dolgopolov and Andrei Medvedev—who have enlisted in the Ukrainian army.

I wrote to Dolgopolov and, rather than try and summarize life in a snapshot, he encourages everyone to follow his updates on his social media channels. Fair enough.

It’s hard not to feel bottomless sympathy for all Ukrainians.

Specific to the tennis players, one can imagine the range of emotions—anger, concern, guilt. You’re hitting a ball over a net while your country is at war (a war the country didn’t start or want.) You’re traveling while your peers are at home, fighting and dying and left without heat and electricity. It can’t be easy to see your Russian counterparts carry on when they are from the country that caused such devastation.

Jon,

Mikaela Shiffrin became the all-time leader in alpine skiing wins for women on the World Cup circuit and is my early candidate for SI’s Sportsperson of the Year. She also is a self-professed huge tennis fan, including having a spirited online relationship with Iga Swiatek (with stories like this 2022 one and a more recent one.).

If Shiffrin and Swiatek had been switched at birth, might they still have risen to the top of the sports where the other now sits? Or is it more likely that getting to those heights depends on the right person having the right natural ability and the right early training and opportunities that are just right for that particular sport? Perhaps we can still find out. At age 27, Shiffrin has six years on Matija Pecotić!

Rob

Six years and one fewer job! First, an aside: It is worth noting that Lindsey Vonn is also a big tennis fan who has shown up at various events, knows her Monfils from her Tsonga and can hit the ball well. Jannik Sinner was on a slope to become a world-class skier. Tamara Zidansek was a junior snowboarding champion in Slovenia before pivot-skipping to tennis. (See what we did there?) Djokovic has skiing in his background. Roger Federer and Martina Hingis, as well.

Anyway, there’s a school of thought that “athletes don’t pick their sport; the sport picks them.” But I think it’s more nuanced and—frustratingly—more case by case than that. Depends on the athlete, depends on the sport. If Rafael Nadal had taken his native athleticism, drive and hand-eye coordination and funneled it into soccer, could you envision him succeeding? Sure. If he had chosen basketball? Meh. Serena Williams as a soccer player? No. Serena as a swimmer? Sure. (As we know from the Super Bowl, maybe she had a golf future, as well.)

When we do this thought exercise, we tend to look at body type and play mix-and-match. LeBron James, at 6’9”, 260 pounds, would have been a lumbering tennis player, but you can imagine him as a linebacker. The more interesting—and relevant—consideration is temperament. Would Serena have been happy and motivated playing on a team, depending on others for her success? Would Federer have succeeded in a more technical sport with less opportunity for creativity? Would Djokovic have enjoyed a sport like golf, where you are not counteracting an opponent?

As for your question, it’s worth considering. I am inclined to think both are extraordinary athletes, endowed with the right genes and fast-twitch fibers. And both clearly are capable of the singular focus required to be an elite athlete, especially in a team sport. No definitive answer, of course. But good question.

Jon,

Roger last won a slam in 2018. Nadal is very much active. But, say, if Novak wins his 27th slam in the year 2024 or 2025 or Nadal wins his 25th slam in those years, will that be still called Big 3 dominance? Until when does Roger Federer get reflected glory as part of this threesome? Nadal and Djokovic did not get included in Roger’s all-conquering glow in 2004-07. Shouldn’t the same individual credit be given to Nadal and Djokovic from here on, without endlessly talking about the Big 3? What is the statute of limitations on glorification of Big 3 when one of Novak or Rafa win slams?

VK

Given that the previous argument was/is about the grouping of a “Big Four,” when the scoreboard is 22-22-20-4, I’m not sure there will be much outrage about a “Big Three” if it’s, say, 27-23-20. Three guys. Contemporaries. Each with at least 20 majors. Dozens of encounters in majors? Each with stints at No. 1. Each with Davis Cup wins. Each with Olympic medals. That’s hard to unyoke.

Your larger point is well-taken. When does Federer fade from the conversation? Dazzling, graceful player? Check. Artist? Check. A lovely human being who seemed to make time for everyone? Check. But numbers loom large in sports assessment and the math doesn’t really work. 

If Djokovic and Nadal both retired tomorrow, they would still have two additional majors and a winning head-to-head record. Covering Federer in his prime, I would have bet my home I would have never seen a male player in my lifetime eclipse his status.

Imagine saying to him in, say, 2008:

“Good news! You will not only overtake Sampras but you will win 20. Twenty—2, 0—majors.”

“Holy cow. That’s awesome. What’s the bad news?”

“Before you retire, you’ll be on the bronze medal stand.”

“Did you say bronze?”

“Crazy, right?”

Jon,

If you could make a biopic of one tennis player, alive or dead, who would it be?

Loretta

Great question. All depends, of course, on what you’re going for. Dark? Light? Contemporary? Historical relevance? Tennis-centric? Tennis as a way to explore deeper and weightier themes?

My off-the-top-of-my-head Top 5, in no particular order:

• Alice Marble (I know various people have tried to option and develop this.).

• Torben Ulrich.

• Bill Tilden.

• Martina Navratilova-Chris Evert as dueling dual narratives.

• Recent bias, but just this week, someone told me about a Polish player (Jewish) who served in World War II, competed at Wimbledon and then became friends with (and maybe a tennis teacher of?) Pope John Paul II. Was going to descend into the rabbit hole and try to learn more. Anyone know anything about this?

Jon,

I was looking through an old program and came across Monica Puig’s name. She, of course, won a gold medal for Puerto Rico at the 2016 Olympics but didn’t do much since. I see she is retired. Is this for good? Any thoughts about her?

Charles
Brooklyn

Funny, I was just talking to a friend and Puig’s name came up. She was one of the more enduring stories from those Rio Olympics in 2016—and never quite made a mark on the sport after that. She is indeed retired, but you can see her on a variety of networks. (For what it’s worth, she draws high easy-to-work-with marks at Tennis Channel.). She’s 29, which is “middle age” in tennis years, but I would not bet on a comeback. Not with a stubborn shoulder injury that didn’t mend after multiple surgeries. Other news: she married former Georgia Tech player Nathan Rakitt a few months ago. Sources also report she is channeling her competitive instincts into training for marathons.

Jon,

Regarding the desire for someone to be more aggro about their chances, the upcoming match, how they relate to one of those players, I’m reminded of the ATP player who, upon being asked how they felt about playing some top shelf guy in the next round, said, “I’m looking forward to it. If I don’t play them I can’t beat them.” It might not be an exact quote (but for the 2nd sentence), and I can’t remember who said it, but the attitude is the right one.

Skip Schwarzman
Philly

Good question. I couldn’t find that quote verbatim, but I love the sentiment. Ironically, it reminds me of Djokovic’s attitude, circa 2007–’10, toward Nadal and Federer. (I paraphrase here, but not by much: “I want to face those guys. I may not win. But I want the yardstick. If I avoid them, I’ll never even be in position to beat them.”)

Mirza will be missed

A few of you asked about Sania Mirza, who retired last week. I’m not sure most fans realize what a pathbreaker she was and how the WTA will profoundly feel her absence. I’m not sure that, outside of India, she ever quite got the credit she deserved. Here’s the cut-and-paste for what we say about other players (Ons Jabeur, Li Na, to some extent Djokovic) who become not just sports stars but national emblems: “They are pioneers. They carry the hopes of a nation. They inspire a generation.”

But there’s a real material impact, large and small. Most players have their fans, but they don’t shape the image of their country, or have national leaders attend their big matches, or have their faces adorn postage stamps.

One imagines this must be a source of motivation for these players—both day-to-day and at 4–4 in a decisive set. It must also be an immense source of strain. Every day is like the Davis Cup/Billie Jean King Cup. So much respect for Mirza to emerge as this trailblazing athlete (from the world’s second-most populous country, no less) and sustain excellence for two decades. All while playing under a set of pressure and scrutiny and expectation that so many of her peers will never know.

One last note …

Australian Open champion and World No. 2 Aryna Sabalenka has committed to compete in the Credit One Charleston Open, the largest women’s-only tennis tournament in North America. The tournament, which was recently named the WTA 500 Tournament of the Year, is the annual clay season kickoff event on the WTA Hologic Tour.

The event is set to return to the renovated and modernized Credit One Stadium on Daniel Island from April 1–9. With the addition of Sabalenka, the player field now showcases five of the world’s Top 10 players, including No. 3 Jessica Pegula, No. 4 Ons Jabeur, No. 8 Daria Kasatkina and No. 9 Belinda Bencic.

As he officially begins his post Wednesday, Charlie Baker outlines his first 100 days in office.

For Charlie Baker, the past few months have been quite a whirlwind.

As he completed his term as Massachusetts governor, the NCAA hired him in December to replace Mark Emmert. After he was whisked around the NCAA convention in mid-January, he took off to Australia for two weeks—his first vacation with wife Lauren in more than 20 years—and then became a grandfather last week.

Through it all, Baker’s phone buzzed constantly. From school presidents to athletic directors, from coaches to college athletes or their parents, they shared a similar message with the incoming NCAA president.

“The single biggest thing I’ve heard from people through these informal calls,” he says, “was the lack of transparency, opaqueness, and the I-don’t-know-what-the-hell-is-going-on associated with NIL.”

The inescapable three-letter acronym of name, image and likeness has enveloped the college athletics landscape, evolving into an estimated billion-dollar business that is, for the most part, unregulated. The 66-year-old Baker plans to tackle the issue as one of his first moves in office, a stint that officially begins Wednesday. He wants to lift the shroud on NIL that keeps deals struck between college athletes and entities so secret.

In an interview with Sports Illustrated earlier this week, Baker called for the implementation of a system that would provide NIL transparency and protections for athletes and their families. He suggests such a system would feature details of NIL deals, including contract information that is, for now, anyone’s guess.

“I worry a lot that the system that basically does not seem to have any of the normal transparency standards you’d see in most markets, especially billion-dollar markets, is a problem. I worry about what this means for kids and families,” Baker says.

“It’s not that unusual to have a marketplace where people are expected to post prices and where people are expected to post fees and contracts,” he adds. “The fact that so many people don’t believe anything they hear from anybody in this environment at this point in time puts parents and student-athletes in a really lousy place.”

Two years ago, before the NCAA lifted its amateurism rules to allow athletes to profit from their NIL, the association geared up to create a database to collect and share NIL deals. The NCAA even selected a small group of finalists during a bidding process, but abruptly bailed on the plan because of legal concerns after the Supreme Court’s 9-0 loss in the NCAA vs. Alston case.

Baker says he’s unsure if his plan would be similar and declined to get into specifics until he holds more discussions with stakeholders. Any new NIL concept such as the one he’s suggesting would need to be approved by NCAA member schools, but Baker says the conversation extends well beyond the association. He expects it to be part of his conversation with Congressional lawmakers in encouraging them to pass NIL legislation.

“No one really knows what the market value of any of this is,” he says. “People have been surprised by how little anybody knows about what’s going on and how much misinformation there is out there. There are plenty of ways to create a model that would solve for accountability and transparency, so that student athletes and families would know what a market looks like and where their value sits.”

While NIL is arguably the most pressing issue within college athletics, it is hardly the only one. Baker has other goals within his first 100 days in office:

• Speak to representatives of all 100-plus NCAA conferences through Zoom.

• Hire an outside party to review the NCAA’s internal business operations to uncover strengths, weaknesses, etc.

• Push for more athlete resources around mental health. Before becoming governor in 2015, Baker worked as an executive in the healthcare industry. In the past few months, he has spoken to athletes who battle mental health crises, most of them tied to social media.

  “Some of these kids told me just several stories about what happens when you miss the shot, don’t score the goal, give up the goal … people just come after them,” he says. “It’s almost all anonymous and really rough. It’s not the kind of thing that 10 years ago anybody that was a student athlete had to deal with. Combine that with all the issues around social media generally and all the challenges that young people face overall, and I know a lot of people in the healthcare world who have said to me that they’d love to help with this one.”

• Strongly encourage the membership to implement some of the transformation committee’s recommendations, specifically those guaranteeing medical care to athletes two years after graduation/eligibility and the opportunity for them to return to complete their degree 10 years after eligibility expires. “I want to make those real,” he says.

But Baker isn’t naive to the fact that NIL is currently the biggest issue in college athletics. He expects to be in Washington D.C. often, lobbying on behalf of college sports for an athlete bill that will govern NIL nationally—an argument the NCAA has repeatedly made over the past three years, but has so far failed to gain any traction.

Baker says that 90% of the phone calls he has received have been geared around NIL, mostly its transparency, or lack thereof.

“This is a really tough one for families,” he says. “If you end up on the wrong end of a bad deal, are you really going to go talk to anybody about it? There would be a lot of reasons not to. I did have one family say they are embarrassed about the whole thing and we are not going to talk to anybody. We should be able to do better than that.

“We need to create something that looks like a traditional market for families and student-athletes.”

Most NIL-related matters originate from Division I football’s highest orders, the FBS and Power 5 conferences. For years, some officials have called for a reorganization of the NCAA governance model, even proposing that FBS or Power 5 operate separately from the NCAA. While Baker acknowledges that Power 5 is “a completely different business model” from the rest of the NCAA, he believes the two can work under the same umbrella.

“I don’t think the fact they are different means they can’t be in the same family,” he says. “There are people who take the position that we are all the same or not and if we’re not all the same, then we’re not all in the same family. I don’t think that. … There’s a way to create a model that most of the work the NCAA does can support both.”

That said, the Power 5 is assembling its own NIL strategy. Commissioners of the five leagues gathered in Dallas earlier this month as part of a series of meetings to discuss a more strategic and unifying plan in encouraging Congressional members to pass a college athlete bill. The five commissioners from the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12 and Pac-12, as well as their legislative affairs and general counsel staff members, discussed in depth their Congressional strategy and message moving forward, including concessions and compromises they may make in order to inspire action on Capitol Hill.

Baker was part of the meeting virtually and plans to “stay close” to Power 5 commissioners on their NIL Congressional approach.

“I don’t think it helps any of us to have five different strategies and approaches on this,” he says. “We need to be talking to each other regularly enough across the membership, the Power 5 and our own team so that we are all on the same page. I see no value in anything other than that.”

Sandy Alcantara is the favorite to repeat, but there are other contenders who offer better value.

The reigning NL Cy Young, Sandy Alcantara, is the favorite at +475 to repeat in 2023 at SI Sportsbook.

Alcantara impressed last season, pitching to a sparkling 2.28 ERA (fifth) across an MLB-leading 228⅔ innings pitched. The Marlins ace is not a high strikeout guy, but he has an impressive five-pitch arsenal. It’s a joy to watch him pitch. There’s no reason to think he can’t repeat the volume from 2022, but with a low K-rate (only 8.15 per nine innings) and new bans on the shift, Alcantara is due for some regression. As much as I Iike Alcantara, I want better odds for him to go back-to-back.

Milwaukee’s Corbin Burnes comes in with the next best odds at +500. Burnes has now maintained a sub-three ERA for two consecutive seasons. He’s one season removed from his own Cy Young award, and 5-to-1 is decent value. Last year, his strikeout rate was down and his home runs allowed were up, but he’s only 28 years old this year, and I expect Burnes to remain in contention.

The reigning AL Cy Young winner, Justin Verlander (+650), will have an advantage as he moves to the NL with the Mets. National League batters will have not had much experience vs. the 40-year-old veteran. Verlander could easily defy father time and take home his fourth Cy Young.

If Verlander can do it, maybe I like Max Scherzer (+700) even more. Why? Competition can be a beautiful thing. It’s no secret these two are not fond of eachother, and I have a feeling they will make each other even better. Mad Max will also be looking to earn his fourth award, and he has the superior strikeout ability to Verlnader. Scherzer pitched to a 2.29 ERA across 145⅓ innings last year. If he can remain healthy, Scherzer is as good a bet as any.

• American League Cy Young Future Odds

I like the value for Zack Wheeler at +1600. Wheeler got off to a slow start with a forearm injury in 2022, and that looks to have suppressed his value. After he returned, Wheeler pitched 153 innings to the tune of a 2.82 ERA while striking out 10 batters per nine innings.

Max Fried (+1200) is a very similar pitcher to Julio Urias (+2000). Neither lefty is a high strikeout pitcher, but both are excellent at limiting hard contact, and both should log plenty of wins and be able to maintain a low ERA.

Brandon Woodruff(+2000) and Yu Darvish (+2200) also look attractive.

Here are the current odds at SI Sportsbook:

Sandy Alcantara +475
Corbin Burnes +500
Justin Verlander +600
Max Scherzer +750
Spencer Strider +1100
Aaron Nola +1200
Max Fried +1200
Zac Gallen +1600
Zack Wheeler +1600
Julio Urias +2000
Joe Musgrove +2000
Brandon Woodruff +2000
Yu Darvish +2200
Logan Webb +3000
Kyle Wright +3500
Blake Snell +3500
Clayton Kershaw +4000
Nick Lodolo +4000
Tony Gonsolin +4000

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem and wants help, call the National Council for Problem Gambling 1-800-522-4700.