It may not have registered as much more than an isolated blip on the sporting world’s proverbial radar, but I have to admit I took full notice of the Trail Blazers’ recent signing of point guard Omar Cook to a 10-day contract. And I’ll be honest, it really has nothing to do with the impact Cook is going to have on the Blazers – he’ll likely play about 10 minutes a night as their back-up point guard. But at this time of year, with NBA teams handing out 10-day contracts like they're rice cakes, there’s been a huge influx of marginal players, castoffs and prospects gone wrong coming into the league, each of whom may only have about 40 or 50 minutes of actual time on the court to prove himself during those 10 days. In the NBA, just as in the real world, 10 days isn’t much time to prove one's worth, and I suppose on some level Cook caught my eye because of the simple fact that he’s a player fighting for his basketball life.
But truthfully, that’s not the real reason I’m paying attention to Cook. To give you a little background in case you don’t know Cook’s story, he came to St. John’s as a highly touted point guard in 2000, and during that one year he certainly showed promise, averaging over 15 points and 8 assists a game. However, he also showed during that season that he had a lot of flaws – he averaged a ghastly five turnovers a night and shot a rotten 36 percent from the floor. And at the end of the season, despite the urgings of many who thought he should stay in school, Cook declared for the NBA draft. Since Cook just got signed to a 10-day contract and I already mentioned that he's fighting for his basketball life, you know how his career has gone so far. The Blazers are his fourth NBA team (he was traded on draft night), and now, at 22 years old, there’s no questioning that had he stayed in college for four years and developed he could be the best point guard in the NCAA preparing to reap untold fortunes in the league.
Of course it's possible that he had no choice. Maybe Cook, like many other players who have a shot at NBA money, needed to make the leap to support his family. If that’s why he left, I respect it. In fact, I think it’s a downright noble pursuit, but I’ll admit it has nothing to do with why I’m pulling for Cook to succeed.
In short, I sympathize with Cook because during his one year of college basketball, he radiated a blind confidence that frequently teetered between being fully justified and totally delusional. At times he was absolutely spectacular, at others he was horrendously awful, but throughout it all he didn't back down. I think a big part of why Cook left St. John’s for the NBA was because, all money issues aside, he honestly thought he was that good of a player. If you watched him during his one year at St. John’s, you would have seen that Cook had a swagger and bravado that was extremely rare, especially for an 18-year-old. His jump shot was truly hideous to behold, but Cook shot that thing as though he thought he was the purest shooter in all the land. Brick off the side of the backboard? No matter. Next time down he's hitting it. Maybe I’m reaching here, but I honestly think Omar Cook was (and maybe still is, deep down) a special talent because of that confidence.
Now, a cynic would probably say that Cook wasn’t a great talent, he was just an idiot who couldn’t shoot and, like so many other players, made the jump to the NBA too early and permanently stunted his basketball growth. Any moron could average five turnovers a game, and it ain't that hard to shoot 36 percent. And when you put it that way, I suppose that the cynic actually has a point. Omar Cook totally blew it.
But as a tribute to Omar Cook, I'm going to tune that cynic out, ignore all the haters, and fire away from the lyrical three point line as though there is no such thing as a bad shot:
