Latest news with #ChosenOne
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Sport
- Yahoo
Steve Nash breaks down the Thunder's principles that make them an elite defensive team: "They keep that paint area a no-go zone"
Steve Nash breaks down the Thunder's principles that make them an elite defensive team: "They keep that paint area a no-go zone" originally appeared on Basketball Network. Steve Nash did not have a reputation as a good defender, but he knows an elite defense when he sees one. In the latest episode of the "Mind the Game" podcast, the two-time MVP raved about the Oklahoma City Thunder's defensive philosophies and explained how these fundamental principles make the court a living hell for their opponents. Advertisement "They're a 'pack the paint' team; they want to keep you out of the paint," Nash said. "So, for the fan, if a guy drives from the wing middle, typically in our league, we wanna show body and stunt because we don't wanna give up a three or create a rotation. OKC, they will show full-body help to keep it out of the paint, especially for the primary initiator. They give a full-body rotation, which leaves weakness on the back side. So, the guy from the corner… who's an athlete, flies to the corner." "I think what they do is pack the paint, they give up threes, but they give up contested threes. Hard contests, flying at guys. It gets dark; you think you're wide open, before you know it, it's like, 'Ah!'" the Hall of Famer added. AC embodies that philosophy As "MVSteve" mentioned, these principles work for the Thunder because of their personnel. They could employ multiple 3-and-D guys at once, and they all buy into the team's defensive philosophy. Nobody personifies the Thunder mantra as well as Alex Caruso, as LeBron James could attest. Advertisement "One of my favorite plays from their clincher (in the Western Conference Finals), AC was guarding the ball on the left wing… Anthony Edwards was able to get middle… but AC, he went middle, and there was a guy that helped at the nail. Full body help at the nail and made Anthony Edwards get off it. He hit the guy on the wing, and there was a defender on the corner, and he rotated all the way to take away that shot on the wing," James recalled. The nail is literally the spot in the middle of the free-throw line. OKC usually has a guy posted there to prevent drives to the paint, and in this scenario, another Thunder defender was helping Caruso in his "Ant-Man" assignment. As James remembered, another OKC defender came flying at the open guy on the wing, which prompted an immediate reaction from the "Bald Mamba." "Instead of AC just standing and watching, he ran through to the corner. Julius Randle actually made this three, but the percentages when it comes to this effort, they're gonna win that percentage," stated "The Chosen One." Related: "Shaq, I'm from the Balkans, you cannot haze me so hard, I've seen everything" - Goran Dragic recalls how he survived Shaquille O'Neal's rookie treatment "No-go zone" From Nash and James' viewpoints, OKC's defensive philosophy and their personnel's commitment to bringing this to life took them this far, with a chance to win the Larry O'Brien trophy. Again, there are nuances in play, but it's fundamental basketball that fans should enjoy watching. Advertisement "For the fan to recognize, they're gonna keep you out of the paint. They're gonna allow you to take threes, but they're gonna fly out and be on a string and contest those threes. I love that principle… they keep that paint area a no-go zone. To me, that's a commitment, that's a clarity," said one of the best pure point guards ever. The exciting thing about the 2025 NBA Finals is that the Indiana Pacers are not a team that lives in the paint. They move the rock around and play the closeout game extremely well. As many NBA experts have noticed, their ball movement could theoretically test the Thunder's defensive commitment. Whether that movement leads to breakdowns or just more contested jumpers will be a chess match to watch. Related: "It would put him in the conversation of top-five point guards of all-time" - Ric Bucher on what if Shai Gilgeous-Alexander wins 2025 Finals MVP This story was originally reported by Basketball Network on Jun 5, 2025, where it first appeared.
USA Today
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- USA Today
Opinion: Coco Gauff doesn't dominate tennis, and that's OK. She's still rare.
Opinion: Coco Gauff doesn't dominate tennis, and that's OK. She's still rare. Show Caption Hide Caption Aryna Sabalenka set to play Coco Gauff in 2025 French Open Women's Singles Final World No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka beat four-time champion Iga Swiatek to set up a French Open final against No. 2 seed Coco Gauff. Sports Pulse It's time for American sports fans – even American tennis fans – to stop taking Coco Gauff for granted. On some level, that's a crazy sentence to write. For two straight years, she has been the highest-paid women's athlete in the world, earning $21 million in endorsements alone in 2024, according to Sportico, even though she's never been ranked No. 1 in the world. Nor has she ever been viewed like Caitlin Clark as a singular breakthrough figure taking her sport to new heights. You could even argue Gauff has been a bit overvalued relative to her lone Grand Slam title at the 2023 US Open. If the theory behind Gauff's marketability and potential to transcend her sport in American culture was that she could succeed the throne of Serena Williams, it's a bet that has not – and may never – come close to paying off. And yet, shouldn't it be a bigger deal that she's going to play in yet another Grand Slam final on Saturday, trying to win the French Open at just 21 years old? The problem with being The Chosen One in sports is that there's rarely much of a payoff that exceeds the intoxication of possibility. LeBron James and Tiger Woods may be the only two American athletes in history who have ever truly conquered the bar that was set for them as teenage prodigies. When Gauff burst into the public eye in 2019, beating Venus Williams at Wimbledon as a 15-year-old, she was forced to carry that burden – even if she wasn't really old enough at the time to fully understand what it would mean, and the rest of us didn't fully appreciate how hard it would be to fulfill even a fraction of it. The truth is, someone like Serena Williams is a once-in-a-lifetime figure. Gauff is just a great but flawed athlete who happens to be a really cool person. Collectively, we all need to do a better job making sure that's enough. And that goes for Gauff's hardcore fans, too. If you ever dare to peruse the tennis-loving corner of social media during any of Gauff's matches, the general vibe among her supporters is often one of disgust that she isn't routinely dominating players who aren't perceived to be as talented as her. She's not this, she's not that, she's gotta fix that forehand, what's wrong with her serve, it's time for a new coach, how does her mother deal with the stress, etc., etc., etc. MORE: French Open brackets Schedule, results from Roland Garros Maybe that's just social media doing its thing, but I know it's real because I've felt that way too. I've written columns about it. Outside of that incredible run in the summer of 2023 when she truly reached the peak of her powers, watching her navigate match after match has often felt more difficult than you think it should be. And yet, when you look up, here's the résumé pending Saturday's final at Roland Garros against No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka: 1 Grand Slam title 3 Grand Slam finals and two more semifinals 1 WTA year-end championship 2 WTA 1000-level titles and 9 WTA titles overall A solid grip on the No. 2 ranking Finals this year in Paris, Rome and Madrid, the three biggest tournaments of the year on clay. If any other American athlete had accomplished this much at 21, every tournament they played would be an event. But Gauff does not get that privilege now and may never have it, even as well-liked and respected as she is, mostly because she is not going to be the best women's tennis player of all time. And that's too bad because it's not only remarkable what she's done at such a young age, the way she's doing it is perhaps even more inspiring than most people understand. The mistake we made with Gauff at the very beginning was the assumption that she possessed this generational ability to win Grand Slams because she was beating grown women when she was 15. Now that Gauff has been around for so long, we need to accept a totally different construct for her career. Of course she's a very talented tennis player, but not in the same way as other prodigies like the Williams sisters, Jennifer Capriati and Martina Hingis, who did the technical things at a level far beyond their years. Gauff is more of a great athlete than a dominant hitter of tennis balls, and the skill that truly stands out is her ability to beat the person on the other side of the net no matter how many double faults she hits (still way too many) or how easily she loses confidence in her forehand (almost a daily occurrence). In so many matches, even this year during the French Open, you will watch her struggle and struggle trying to figure it all out, play what seems to be sub-standard tennis and look like she's about to be dismissed from the tournament. But by the end, she somehow finds a way, most of the time, to play a little bit better than her opponent. That's just who she is as a tennis player. It's also an incredible element of athletic talent that not too many of her peers possess. The fact Gauff doesn't make it look easy should not be a demerit. Instead, it should be the reason she sells out stadiums, causes TV ratings to spike when she plays and earns $20-plus million in endorsements. Is that a harder bandwagon to sell a ticket for? Of course. American fans tend to reward dominance. It's just how we're wired. It would be a mistake, however, to undervalue what Gauff has already done and how she's done it. She may not be a once-in-a-lifetime tennis player, but she is rare. And even if Gauff is not yet collecting big titles at the rate people might have once envisioned, the way she keeps putting herself in the mix despite very much being a work-in-progress is something we need to celebrate more than we have.
Tom's Guide
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Tom's Guide
‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer' revival is moving forward on Hulu — and I really wish it wasn't
RIP beepers. That was my first thought when Sarah Michelle Gellar recently announced the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" revival on Hulu. Then came the existential dread. Don't get me wrong — my "Buffy" obsession runs deep. I even spent my 21st birthday meeting David Boreanaz and James Marsters at a convention instead of gambling in Atlantic City. Every year, I queue up season 2's 'Surprise' exactly 17 minutes and 50 seconds before midnight on my birthday, just so Willow's 'It's happy birthday, Buffy!' hits right on time. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" defined my childhood (and let's be real, my adulthood) as much as it did the '90s. But to paraphrase a certain angsty, bottle-blonde vamp: Let it rest in peace. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" gave us a beautiful ending (spoiler alert for anyone over 20 years late to the party). Both Buffy and fans bid farewell to Sunnydale and the Hellmouth after the Scooby Gang took on their most insidious and oldest adversary yet. 'Chosen' marks the end of Buffy's coming-of-age arc, and frankly, we don't need to see what she's up to decades later. Our Slayer doesn't get a happy ending with either of her fanged suitors, Angel and Spike, but both receive powerful goodbyes honoring the part they played in making Buffy who she is. Ultimately, she departs with the weight of the world no longer solely on her shoulders as she enters the next era of her life off-screen. Yet it wasn't Buffy who closed out the show. Love Dawn or hate her, the final line comes from Buffy's sister asking, 'What are we going to do now?' Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Well, apparently, we're going to revive the show two decades later. Though the reboot was in the works long before the tragic death of Michelle Trachtenberg, sullying that ending feels even more wrong now. Gellar just confirmed that the show will pay homage to Trachtenberg, but the best way to honor her legacy is to leave that ending be. I'm no Dawn fan, but Buffy died for her sister, and the inevitability of killing Dawn off-screen leaves a sour taste in my mouth. Yes, life went on after the credits rolled, but we don't need to see it. The awful Buffy comic books make that abundantly clear (did anyone ask for Troll Dawn and Xander to hook up?). Activating the potential slayers was a powerful story arc, but it also offered a natural conclusion to Buffy's Chosen One journey. I don't want to know if Buffy is married, divorced, widowed or has kids. We don't need to know that — because that's not the story we tuned into every week for seven years. Those details are better left to the imagination and AO3. At this point, most "Buffy" fans are probably as sick of love triangles as I am. Yet Spike and Angel helped define the original series. James Marsters and David Boreanaz certainly made the most of the vampiric elixir of youth that Hollywood hides from the rest of us mere mortals, but they're not 20 anymore. Even if they wanted to return, they couldn't — not convincingly — which is one of the biggest reasons a reboot never seemed feasible. With key characters dead, others unavailable and the vampire-aging thing being what it is, the revival already feels like a hollow version of the original. And yeah, I know — 'What's dead doesn't have to stay dead.' But maybe it should. Especially if it's just for the sake of a cash grab. I trust Sarah Michelle Gellar. She's always been fiercely protective of Buffy as a character, and the fact that she's turned down so many revival pitches before makes me think she sees something here. But without most of the core cast, it's hard to imagine this feeling like anything other than a shadow. The original show resonated because of who stood next to Buffy when the world ended, not just the monsters she slayed. Look, Hulu isn't the problem. If "Buffy" has to come back, it's the best place for it. Hulu's track record with smart, emotionally rich genre shows ("The Handmaid's Tale") and even its approach to camp ("The Great") actually lines up with "Buffy's" tone. The platform could support a revival ... but that doesn't mean it should. "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" was lightning in a bottle: sharp writing, iconic one-liners ('I may be dead, but I'm still pretty'), flawed but lovable characters, and emotional stakes that often hit harder than the supernatural ones. At its core, "Buffy" was about found family, love and choosing to fight through darkness together. You can't recreate that with a couple of callbacks. You can't reboot the soul of a show without the people who gave it one. "Buffy" was a product of its time and that's part of what made it work. Set it in the 2020s and you lose the charm, the cheese, the campy magic. We've already lost the Hellmouth; now we're losing the plot. Sure, there may be merit to the new story. And yes, I'll stream it the second it drops and probably hate myself for it. I did it with the "Teen Wolf" movie. I'll do it for "Clueless." And I'll definitely do it for "Buffy." But reviving these quintessential '90s titles — especially when the original ended on such a strong note — risks sullying the legacy for what? One or two seasons of mid content? Nostalgia runs pop culture now, sure. But the hardest thing in this world is to love and let go. The Powers That Be need to be brave and allow Buffy stay in the '90s, where she belongs.
Chicago Tribune
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Chicago Tribune
Review: Tom Cruise holds the key to ‘Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning'
Saving the world often enough has a way of inflating any superstar's ego. Early in 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,' the bulky, sentimental, slightly pious but nonetheless satisfying capper to an eight-film franchise, the U.S. president (Angela Bassett, returning to the role) refers to espionage all-star Ethan Hunt as 'the best of men,' and by inference the first man you call when you need someone to run an errand in a Tom Cruise hurry. Later in the movie, another character sneers that Hunt is way past ordinary greatness; he's now 'the Chosen One.' Not just a world saver, but a world savior! By this point in the sanctification of our hero, 'Final Reckoning' has made it relentlessly clear that only these two superstars — Cruise (real, and a proven industry savior thanks to the pandemic-era 'Top Gun: Maverick') and Hunt (fictional) — can prevent the 'truth-eating digital parasite' and next-generation artificial intelligence troublemaker known as The Entity from destroying the world. Its mission, clearly accepted, is to redesign Earth according to its own controversial notions of progress and preferred sentient AI-to-human ratio. The Entity emerged two summers ago in 'Mission: Impossible — Dead Reckoning Part One,' with Hunt's rogue Impossible Mission Force scrambling after the literal and metaphoric key to vanquishing its renovation plans. The AI source code, we learned from the earlier outing, lies at the bottom of the Bering Sea, stashed in a sunken Russian submarine. Much of the new picture concerns the retrieval of that plot device. In one of 'Final Reckoning's' most compelling sequences, finessed nicely for maximum intentional audience breath-holding, Hunt risks the bends and death itself to complete this piece of the mission, as he rolls around amid massive cylindrical nukes in the hulk of the sub rolling around and upside down on the ocean floor. A little 'Inception,' a little 'Poseidon Adventure.' In league with its sniveling human colleague Gabriel (Esai Morales, cackling with evil intent as if being paid by the cackle), The Entity conducts a good deal of digital foreplay in the new movie, co-written and directed by 'M:I' franchise veteran Christopher McQuarrie. This means the AI monster is hacking into the world's nuclear defense systems and taking control of the missiles, one paralyzed and panicking nation at a time. Meanwhile Hunt's team, back in reasonably good graces with the U.S. government despite Henry Czerny's welcome, born-to-distrust return to the franchise as CIA director Kittridge, follows a travel itinerary spanning the U.K., the U.S., Norway (subbing for St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea off Alaska) and South Africa. McQuarrie's script, written with Eric Jendresen, manages to stretch a fairly simple, easily summarized plot into the longest of the eight 'M:I' films. At 169 minutes, it's about an hour longer than director Brian De Palma's 1996 swank, cynical, quite beautiful diversion based on the hit TV series. The grandiosity and solemnity of the stakes in 'Final Reckoning' test the very limits of what some of us want from an 'M:I' movie. Maybe it's a matter of real-world confidence in some of our leaders; watching a film about what might happen in a case of uncertain nuclear intentions, and wondering how your own leaders would handle it, well, it's basically the opposite of escapism. The dialogue scenes all have two or three too many reiterations of the mission's importance per hour of running time. Elsewhere, 'Final Reckoning' becomes a festival of callbacks and flashbacks to the entire series, with dozens of Easter eggs for the superfans, including the release date of the De Palma movie. Just in time, for my taste, the climax goes old-school for old times' sake, per the producer and star's wishes, featuring Gabriel's biplane winging its way through narrow gorges while Cruise dangles off the wing, making sure we see that it's him there, not a stunt double. In 'Dead Reckoning' two years ago, the big wow was the motorcycle plummet and parachute routine, pretty amazing, and nicely compact in its duration and impact. The climax of 'Final Reckoning' is likewise impressive and scenic, but also what you might call lengthy. Show-offy. Paced and edited less for the good of the overall movie and more for risk-verification purposes. That said, this franchise has class. Always has. Plus, it has the virtue, taken as a 29-year entity, of having had a striking variety of directors at the helm. McQuarrie's ideal in many ways, devoted to both traditional '60s-derived 'exotic' locations and spy games, and to star maintenance and ever-higher threat levels. Stalwart regulars from Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg to more recent series ringers Hayley Atwell and Pom Klementieff act as grounding points for this purported wrap-up, which may be more at home in the air or underwater but there it is. And there's this, a small thing in theory, but a huge bonus in practice. It's not a spoiler, since he's foregrounded, conspicuously, in the 'Final Reckoning' trailer, but the movie boasts a real dinger of a callback: the very minor role of CIA analyst William Donloe. He's the fellow who failed to notice Cruise hanging from wires in that vault in the bowels of Langley in the first film. Last we heard, 29 years ago, then-IMF head Kittridge promised to exile Donloe to a radar tower near the Arctic Circle. He's back, in a happily expanded role, and from my perspective, 'Final Reckoning' exists primarily to allow the actor playing Donloe, Rolf Saxon, an opportunity most character actors never get in this lifetime. He's not just there for nostalgia's sake, but for real scenes, in which Saxon's nearly forgotten minor player performs with an equally welcome series newbie, Inuk actor Lucy Tulugarjuk, who plays Donloe's resourceful wife. In a franchise built on extremes, and the grandiosity that tends to come with a near-$400 million dollar production budget, Saxon's own personal mission appears simply to have been: Play this material nice and easy, not like a callback or a punchline, but a relatable human being in unusual circumstances. He may not hang off a biplane, but the year's unlikeliest franchise MVP makes 'Final Reckoning' something better than superhuman: human. 'Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning' — 3 stars (out of 4) MPA rating: PG-13 (for sequences of strong violence and action, bloody images, and brief language) Running time: 2:49 How to watch: Premieres in theaters May 22
Forbes
18-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Forbes
2025's Best-Looking Retro Platform Game Finally Gets Release Date
'Ruffy and the Riverside' has all the hallmarks of an indie GOTY, and it lands next month. One of the most charming indie games of the year finally has a release date. Ruffy and the Riverside, which draws on classics like Banjo-Kazooie and Super Paper Mario, will officially arrive on June 26 for PC, Xbox, PlayStation, and both Nintendo Switches. When I checked it out earlier this year during a surge of indie demo showcases, Ruffy and the Riverside immediately stood out for its inventive but nostalgic gameplay and gorgeous presentation, blending colorful, hand-painted visuals with core mechanics unlike anything you've ever seen in a platformer, either modern or retro. At the heart of the game is the SWAP system, a clever feature that allows players to copy and paste environmental textures and alter terrain in real time. It's an ingenious mechanic for puzzle-solving and exploration, letting you transform waterfalls into climbable vines, ice into lava, or steel into wood. Players take on the role of the titular Ruffy, a wide-eyed and perpetually positive protagonist dubbed the 'Chosen One,' who starts his journey to save the World Core from the sinister Groll. Ruffy and the Riverside is set across seven distinct regions, with quests and areas alternating seamlessly between expansive 3D sections and side-scrolling 2D sequences. FEATURED | Frase ByForbes™ Unscramble The Anagram To Reveal The Phrase Pinpoint By Linkedin Guess The Category Queens By Linkedin Crown Each Region Crossclimb By Linkedin Unlock A Trivia Ladder Naturally, its missions are heavily influenced by your god-given ability, while countless collectibles push you to think in a whole new way and experiment with your surroundings. All the while, you're surrounded by a cast of funny, quirky NPCs, daft side quests, and a bunch of mini games, including one that draws on fellow summer release Tony Hawk's Pro Skater. 'Ruffy and the Riverside' purportedly clocks in at 25 hours, making it a great summer investment (if ... More it's as good as the demo, of course). Ruffy and the Riverside has been developed by Zockrates Laboratories, a team of artists in Nuremberg. It's a labor of love they've been quietly polishing since 2017, and the long development time has translated into the wider experience, which boasts a 25-hour playtime. It also marks the first release for publisher Phiphen Games, a new interactive media division of indie film and TV house Phiphen. If the demo's anything to go by, Ruffy and the Riverside will smash it this summer — and despite a year that's already given us the likes of Blue Prince and Despelote, it could be a sleeper selection for indie game of the year.
