Latest news with #BigThree
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Sport
- Yahoo
"Without Dennis Johnson, we'd be a mediocre team" - Larry Bird says there'd be no dynasty in Boston without D.J.
"Without Dennis Johnson, we'd be a mediocre team" - Larry Bird says there'd be no dynasty in Boston without D.J. originally appeared on Basketball Network. When the thought of the Boston Celtics dynasty comes up, the Big Three are always the first to surface — Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Robert Parish. They made history. Advertisement Three men whose chemistry, size and competitive fire fueled the Celtics' dominance in the 1980s. But buried behind the brilliance of that frontline was a fourth piece, one whose impact wasn't always captured in stat sheets or highlight reels. Dennis Johnson didn't always shine under the same spotlight, but inside the Celtics' locker room, his role was never up for debate. Important piece Johnson was the adhesive. He was the rugged guard with the sharp defensive mind, the clutch jumper when it mattered and the silent director of Boston's half-court symphony. The Celtics won three championships in the '80s — 1981, 1984 and 1986 — and each time, Johnson's fingerprints were all over the wins. Advertisement Bird may have been the headline, but even he knew where the heart of the team beat. "I think Dennis Johnson is the best player I've ever played with," Bird said. "He makes everything happen. He really don't shoot the ball extremely well at times, but without Dennis Johnson, we'd be a mediocre team." It was recognition of a foundational truth. Johnson was never the flashiest, but Bird had seen enough to know that his own greatness was made easier by the man who ran the backcourt. Johnson arrived in Boston in 1983 with a championship DNA. He'd won Finals MVP with the Seattle SuperSonics in 1979, delivering elite two-way play alongside Jack Sikma and Gus Williams. Advertisement That title run introduced the league to his clutch gene, especially his defensive work against Magic Johnson in the Western Conference finals. But the fit in Seattle eventually frayed. A rocky stint in the Phoenix Suns followed, where his intensity was often misunderstood. Then came the call from up North. In Boston, the pieces finally aligned. Coach K.C. Jones saw what Johnson brought immediately — defense, toughness and leadership. As the starting point guard, D.J. didn't dazzle with speed or a high-flying game, but he controlled the tempo and made decisions that put his teammates in the best positions to thrive. He was never above diving on the floor, locking up the opposing team's top guard or making a pass one second quicker than most would even think it. His defense was elite. Johnson made nine All-Defensive Teams in his career, six of those First-Team. In an era thick with scoring guards — Magic, Isiah Thomas, Andrew Toney and the likes — Johnson was the one tasked with taking the air out of their rhythm. And when the Celtics needed a bucket, his number was never out of the question. Advertisement Related: Michael Jordan shows off his $115 million luxurious superyacht in Croatia Johnson's Boston legacy The 1985 Eastern Conference finals against the Philadelphia 76ers, the '86 Finals against the Houston Rockets and even the fierce duels with the Los Angeles Lakers all featured a Johnson moment. In Game 4 of the 1987 Finals against the Detroit Pistons, with the Celtics down 2-1 and the game tied at 104, Bird stole the inbounds pass from Thomas and found Johnson sprinting toward the rim and he laid it in as time expired. It's one of the most iconic plays in NBA history, but it's remembered more as Bird's steal than Johnson's poise to finish it. That was always the paradox with a player like that in a dynasty setting. His greatness quietly underpinned Boston's legacy. Advertisement Across 14 NBA seasons, Johnson averaged 14.1 points, 5.0 assists and 3.9 rebounds per game. In the playoffs, those numbers rose. In Boston's 1984 championship run, he averaged 16.7 points and 4.4 assists while battling against Showtime in the Finals, a matchup that showcased not just skill but sheer will. He was the glue that kept the Celtics together. The numbers don't jump out like Bird's or McHale's, but Johnson's 1,100+ career steals, 6,700+ assists and over 15,500 points remain a testament to consistency. He wasn't a stat-chaser; he was a stabilizer. He also logged over 1,100 career games, a feat of durability and commitment. His influence continued long after retirement. Johnson became a coach in the CBA, guided young players in the Celtics organization and eventually took over as head coach of the Los Angeles Clippers in 2003 on an interim basis. Tragically, his life was cut short in 2007 when he passed away suddenly from a heart attack at just 52. In 2010, the Hall of Fame finally opened its doors to him. It was long overdue. Advertisement Related: "I had two perfect women and I messed it up" - Shaquille O'Neal opens up about destroying his past relationships This story was originally reported by Basketball Network on Jul 2, 2025, where it first appeared.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Sport
- Hindustan Times
Wimbledon: Medvedev bites the grass, Alcaraz scrapes through
Mumbai: There was a time, in the transitional men's tennis phase of the Big Three dominance dwindling and two young stars rising yet not sparkling, when Daniil Medvedev held fort for a consistent face deep in Grand Slams. Between 2021 and 2024, the Russian made five Slam finals and became the 2021 US Open champion. Daniil Medvedev is out of another Grand Slam tournament in the first round after losing to 64th-ranked Benjamin Bonzi 7-6 (2), 3-6, 7-6 (3), 6-2 at Wimbledon. (AFP) This year, he's had one win and back-to-back first-round exits in Slams. Though he says he's 'not panicking' yet, the ever-entertaining Medvedev is battling a crisis of form, having lost three straight matches in Slams for the first time in his career. The most recent, arguably, is the most shocking. On the hottest opening day recorded at SW19, as per the ATP, Medvedev fizzled out against Benjamin Bonzi in four sets the opening day at Wimbledon. As the world No.9, almost resignedly, sprayed his forehand long, the 64th-ranked Frenchman completed the 7-6(2), 3-6, 7-6(3), 6-2 victory. Carlos Alcaraz, chasing a third straight Wimbledon title, waxed and waned on Centre Court against 38-year-old Fabio Fognini, whose brilliant game belied the fact that he was in his final Wimbledon. The Spaniard survived a scare before sending the Italian into retirement with a 7-5 6-7(5) 7-5 2-6 6-1 win. Bonzi, who has never gone beyond Wimbledon second round, also beat Medvedev at the 2017 French Open (the Russian retired after three sets). But that was when Medvedev was starting out on the tour, the 29-year-old having since progressed to become world No.1 of Slam pedigree. That was also the last season in which Medvedev failed to advance beyond the second round in a major. With one Slam to go this year, he's in danger of slipping back to that 2017 low. His Wimbledon fall comes as the least expected. In Melbourne, he ran into an inspired NextGen talent in Learner Tien, who stalled his Australian Open hopes. In Paris last month, Cameron Norrie messed up his French Open opener, but clay and Medvedev have always had a hate-hate relationship. On grass and in London, this self-certified hard-court specialist found enough love. The Russian reached the semi-finals in 2023 and 2024, defeating Jannik Sinner on the way last year. In his six previous appearances at the All England Club, Medvedev had never checked out from the first round. Until now, losing against a player who had never beaten a top-10 opponent in a Slam. 'I knew it was a tough match,' Bonzi said. 'But sometimes it is better to play this kind of player in the first round. Anything can happen.' For Medvedev, the worst did happen. Which not only extended his poor run in Slams this year, but also his overall lean patch on the tour over the past 24 months. Medvedev, holder of 20 ATP titles, last lifted a trophy in May 2023. After that, even as he made consecutive finals at the 2023 US Open and the 2024 Australian Open, the winning feel and consistent touch has eluded him. He signed off last season with a fluctuating 46-21 win-loss record, carrying that inconsistency into this season (23-14 so far). Through this lull, there came uplifting signs only a week ago. Competing in his second grass-court tournament in Halle after a quarter-final finish in 's-Hertogenbosch, Medvedev earned reached the final for the first time since March 2024. He lost to Alexander Bublik, yet gained enough belief through the week in which he also beat world No.3 Alexander Zverev. Which only adds to the shock value around this exit. The sweltering conditions made it challenging, even for other players given that eighth seed Holger Rune also lost in five sets, top seed Alcaraz was made to battle and two-time finalist Ons Jabeur had to retire. Medvedev struggled with his serve – he littered 12 double faults, made just 59% first serves and won 43% points on the second – that proved decisive in the two tiebreakers. Medvedev also let Bonzi dictate play from his racquet, his habit of standing way behind the baseline coming back to bite him on grass. 'First round, many, many times you play a bit worse,' Medvedev said. 'If it would be second or third round, maybe I could have better shots, play better.' As it turns out, there won't be a second round even for Stefanos Tsitsipas, his fellow post-Big Three hope that has plunged to even greater depths. Troubled by a back injury, he retired while trailing 6-3, 6-2 against French qualifier Valentin Royer. 'I'm battling many wars these days,' he said. 'It's really painful to see myself in a situation like now, I'm just absolutely left with no answers.'
Japan Today
6 days ago
- Sport
- Japan Today
Wimbledon 2025: Coco Gauff and Carlos Alcaraz give tennis two young superstars
Coco Gauff during a practice session at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club, ahead of the Wimbledon Championships, England, Tuesday June 24, 2025. (Ben Whitley/PA via AP) tennis By HOWARD FENDRICH Coco Gauff and Carlos Alcaraz are helping usher in a new era for tennis. With Wimbledon beginning Monday, the sport's most recent Grand Slam champions are Gauff, a 21-year-old American, and Alcaraz, a 22-year-old Spaniard, who are both at No. 2 in the rankings and are both coming off French Open titles secured in riveting finals against the sport's No. 1 players. They are young, they are charismatic as an be on the court and they are media-friendly off it. Along with No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka and former No. 1 Iga Swiatek in the women's game, and No. 1 Jannik Sinner in the men's, Gauff and Alcaraz offer a bright future for a sport's fanbase that in recent years saw all-time greats Serena Williams, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal walk away and currently might be pondering how much longer Novak Djokovic will contend for the biggest prizes. 'Tennis is just in such a great, great place right now. We are so fortunate to have not only Coco, not only Carlos, but a deep bench of young stars that are just propelling the growth of our sport,' U.S. Open tournament director Stacey Allaster said. 'I've been around a long time, and when we have lost great, iconic champions in the past, there's generally been a little bit of a dip. We have had the exact opposite during this transition. ... I always like to say the champions of today are standing on the shoulders of the champions of the past. These champions have jumped off the shoulders of the past champions.' One key for a sport, especially an individual one, to gain attention and grow popularity is to have rivalries that demand buy-in. Alcaraz vs. Sinner clearly provides that, much in the way that Federer vs. Nadal or Nadal vs. Djokovic did. The five-set, 5 1/2-hour men's final at Roland-Garros was as full of momentum swings, terrific tennis and athleticism as anything those greats conjured. 'The level,' two-time reigning Wimbledon champion Alcaraz said, 'was insane.' The way he and Sinner, 23, are currently divvying up the biggest prizes — they've split the past six major trophies and eight of the past 11 — is certainly reminiscent of the Big Three's dominance, albeit over a much smaller sample size so far. 'Having these two guys fighting for big trophies — I think we have to be very happy about it in the sport of tennis,' said Juan Carlos Ferrero, Alcaraz's main coach. 'For them, for sure it's something that they raise their level every time that they go on the court. They know they have to play unbelievable tennis to beat the other guy, and it's something that is going to help for sure each player to raise the level even more.' It sure does seem as though Gauff vs. Sabalenka could provide that sort of dynamic and buzz, too. Consider that, like Alcaraz and Sinner, they occupy the top two spots in the rankings. And consider that, like those other two, both own multiple major titles. Gauff's two Slam triumphs came via three-set victories over Sabalenka in the finals. Plus, their latest meeting, at Roland-Garros less than a month ago, came with some added spice because of Sabalenka's post-match comments that were seen as less than fully gracious toward Gauff. It became such a thing that Sabalenka felt the need to issue a pair of apologies — one privately via writing to Gauff, and one publicly in an interview at her next tournament. Add that sort of off-court intrigue to the on-court interest, and if there are rematches at the All England Club a couple of weeks from now, no one who is invested in tennis will be displeased. 'There's incredible momentum and wind in our sales as we think about the sport, in total,' said Lew Sherr, who is about to leave his role as the CEO of the U.S. Tennis Association. 'We've had five consecutive years of participation growth ... and that certainly is being, in part, fueled by the great talent and inspiring players we have at the professional level, and also is feeding record attendance, record interest, record viewership. Those things go hand in hand. We have not missed a beat." © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The Once-Popular Fast Food Restaurant That's Making An Unexpected Comeback
Fast food restaurants come and go, reflecting the changing tastes of consumers and varying success for different business and marketing strategies. What's rarer is to see a chain on the upswing again after a slump. However, that's exactly what's happening with Roy Rogers. The brand once boasted hundreds of restaurants across the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic before shrinking to just a few dozen locations. Now, it's beginning to return to areas where it was once a household name. This includes South New Jersey, with a Cherry Hill location opening in 2025, the first in the area since the 1980s. Additionally, the chain is slated to expand in Northern Virginia with a third Leesburg location listed as "coming soon" on the Roy Rogers website as of June 2025. These bring the number of locations to around 40 across five Mid-Atlantic states. More than half are in Maryland, where the company is based. However, that's a far cry from the over 600 locations Roy Rogers boasted in the early 1990s, when the chain was sold to Hardee's. That era no doubt represented the peak for the company, which opened the doors of its first restaurant back in 1968 in Northern Virginia. It had quickly grown through the 1970s and '80s after establishing its famous "Big Three" menu items of roast beef sandwiches, fried chicken, and quarter-pound burgers, along with its iconic Fixin's Bar of toppings. This made it a valuable acquisition for Hardee's, but sadly, the good times didn't last. Read more: Popular Arby's Menu Items, Ranked Worst To Best Things took a turn for the worse for the chain as a result of its acquisition by Hardee's, which tried to convert many of the stores to the Hardee's brand. Years of financial decline ensued as locations closed or were even sold off to rival fast food companies. Some of these were quickly closed, either to protect nearby franchises of the chains that bought them or to take advantage of prime real estate where the Roy Rogers were located. The decision didn't work out well for the company that bought the chain, either; these days, there are signs that it might be Hardee's that's not going to be around for much longer. Today's comeback started in the early 2000s, when Roy Rogers' current ownership relaunched the brand and began a slow but steady expansion over the past two decades. This reversal of fortunes is particularly impressive considering it was among the burger chains that are disappearing across the country, just a few years ago. Although it might be a while before Roy Rogers makes it back anywhere near its prominence from the past (if at all), there are certainly signs of hope for fans of this classic brand. If trends continue, it might soon be a lot easier for millions of Americans to chow down on roast beef, fried chicken, burgers, and other Roy Rogers treats. Read the original article on Mashed.
Globe and Mail
6 days ago
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Ottawa must stop the CRTC's misguided, dogmatic internet decision
Frédéric Perron is the president and chief executive officer of Cogeco. We will one day look back at 2025 and marvel at how Canadians from coast to coast, and their governments, came together to confront a new economic reality by doing everything possible to accelerate economic growth, increase productivity and remove regulatory barriers to investment and innovation. All Canadians, that is, except for the CRTC. On Friday, June 20, the CRTC tripled down on a decision that would let the Big Three telecommunications firms resell services through the internet networks of their rivals. That will lead to less competition and investment in the broadband infrastructure we need to thrive as a country. The wholesale framework was intended to benefit smaller players who lack the infrastructure they need to compete effectively. It was meant to allow them to access – and sell their services through – the infrastructure of bigger rivals. That framework was not intended for the reverse – for Telus, Rogers and Bell to not only resell each other's networks but those of their much smaller competitors as well. Under this policy, the Big Three can use regulation, which is normally designed to curb the dominance of big players, to get even bigger. Despite overwhelming evidence that continuing this flawed policy will hurt investment and competition – and broad opposition from competitors across the country – the CRTC is sticking to it. The CRTC's approach directly threatens crucial investments, hurts competition and undermines long-term affordability for Canadians. As telecommunications are now fundamental to all major national projects – from housing to AI – this decision undermines the very foundations of Prime Minister Mark Carney's agenda and Canada's economic future. Local and regional internet providers, unions, consumer groups, competition experts and others have all called upon the CRTC to exclude the Big Three from leveraging regulation to access other providers' networks. The regulator's decision ignores all those voices. Why are Canada's largest telecom companies selling stakes in their core infrastructure? It is now time for the cabinet and Industry Minister Mélanie Joly to step in and overturn the CRTC decision to save real, long-term competition in this vital arena. The Big Three already control all but a small fraction of the Canadian telecom market. The CRTC's flawed policy gives them a regulatory tool to further expand their market dominance, allowing them to ride on the networks of smaller, regional competitors at subsidized rates. This will translate into less choice and fewer affordable services. Regional telecommunication providers such as Cogeco play a key role in bringing competition and reliable connectivity to thousands of communities across the country. Our future growth – and the future of internet competition in Canada – is being challenged by this misguided CRTC decision. This will have significant, adverse consequences for Canadian consumers and communities: reduced network investment, compromised rural connectivity, fewer jobs in regional communities and, ultimately, less choice and higher prices. Canadians have elected a government focused on strengthening Canada's economy and ensuring Canadians have the tools they need to preserve their economic sovereignty and expand opportunity. It's time for Ottawa to intervene to maintain the conditions for sustainable competition and for Canada to win.
