Jack’s Blog

Taking charges was once hailed as a talent - something only the toughest players would do, the guys who would give up their body against a massive beast driving to the hoop.  A charge would be called and teammates would rush to help their brave man to his feet, while the color commentator would gush with compliments.  “Taking a charge is as important as hitting a big shot, more so because of the momentum swing it gives a team.”

Seldom, however, did it seem the superstar made this defensive move.  There were reasons for it.  As much as players like to hear their names and get patted on the back, the risk vs. reward for the charge was often too high, e.g. it could wind up as an injury, possibly even a career-ending one.  It was said the guys who were taking charges were doing so because they didn’t have any (other) skill.  Or it was a way for a washed-up veteran to hang on to a roster spot.  Some guys who performed this defensive maneuver wound up with cult hero status.  Dennis Rodman was the president of the club.  On the flip side, Kobe Bryant called it “a chump move.”

The essence of the move was to try to get the referee to buy not only that there was contact, but that it was excessive.  Even if the offensive player barely touched the defender.  As things tend to work in the NBA, if this move worked for one side, why not the other?  Soon fans were watching games in which a dribbler coming off a screen where the screener’s defender stepped out and the ball handler made like he was mugged.  Or a guy taking to the hole and flails when a defender nudged him.

Like anything else, at first, it was kind of slick; then it became annoying; finally the act got tired.  The once proud move became known as “flopping.”  Whether done at the offensive or defensive end of the floor.  Everybody started to complain about it and by everybody, we mean coaches (always the first to complain - something about gaining/losing an advantage), players, referees, fans, even play-by-play men and color commentators.  The bitchin’ got all the way to the commissioner’s office and one thing David Stern doesn’t care for is negative publicity.  Truth be told, he nor his advisers didn’t care for flopping either.

Public opinion got so bad the league did what it seems to do best.  It decided to legislate against it.  Call it the “anti-flopping” rule.  What happens when rules are broken by NBA players and coaches?  Warnings, fines and suspensions, those are what.  While it seems like a means of cutting down, if not eliminating the problem, it becomes another way for players to lose money.  First-time offenders get a warning, second-time is a $5K fine, naturally increasing to possible suspension on number six.

So what happens when there’s a disagreement between players and the league?  Don’t tell me another strike.  No, that’s just the last resort and those involved in the last one claim it will be just that - the last one.  Prior to any action (I imagine including the kind that takes place on the floor), the players’ union needs to get involved.  It is currently claiming that implementing the rule would be tantamount to an unfair labor practice.  Particularly when it involves an unclear rule.  The players’ union allege the whole problem is an overreaction by the commish’s office.  Which means they’re upset they weren’t contacted first before their league made the rule.  Someone needs to explain to these millionaires (and, contrary to the football players who say only a few of them are that highly paid, basketballers really are all millionaires) how being an employee works.  OK, only 95% of them.

Imagine if the players had involvement on this decision?  I wonder who the player reps would be?  Shane Battier?  Anderson Varejeo?  Manu Ginobli?  Derek Fisher?  Paul Pierce?  Maybe Kobe could argue for both sides.  It should be stated for the record:

“Be careful what you wish for; you may just get it.”

Stan Van Gundy “occasionally” had his differences with the media.  Not surprising since Stan knew his craft well, certainly better than the people who covered him and his team.  Rumors abounded during his tenure as head coach of the Orlando Magic and it definitely rubbed him the wrong way.

Since the invention of the Internet, writing the game story isn’t enough.  Sportswriting has become a sport.  So many people are writing about the same team that writers are looking for the “story within the story,” i.e. the gossip.  I have to admit that my memory is not nearly as good as it was - from what I’m told, the result of reaching 60 plus - but I can’t remember the term “anonymous source” being used in sports stories - or any other stories for that matter - when I was growing up.

Possibly, I shouldn’t have been surprised when I read that Stan, on a radio show in Orlando, made the seemingly outrageous statement that Chicago Bulls’ superstar Derrick Rose might leave Chi-town.  Rose, a Chicago native and former #1 overall pick, signed a $50 million contract extension that keeps him from free agency until the summer of 2017 but Van Gundy said “the league has changed.”  While Stan said Rose is a great player and ambassador for the NBA, in today’s world guys want a chance to win it all and if Rose doesn’t get better players than his current supporting cast, he might be tempted to go to a team with that has a superior roster.

The turning point in the NBA came when the Boston Celtics obtained Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen to go along with their all-star Paul Pierce - and proceeded to win the championship.  LeBron James and Chris Bosh hooking up with Dwyane Wade took a couple years but won a title this past season.  Van Gundy cited Chris Paul leaving a bad roster in New Orleans for a better one, that he wants to improve even more, with the Los Angeles Clippers.  Add to that the recent transactions of Steve Nash and Van Gundy’s former stud Dwight Howard by the LA Lakers and you can see Stan’s point.

Basically, it comes down to winning - and winning it all - which ain’t easy.  As the saying goes:

“If winning was easy, losers would do it.”

Dwyane Wade reached out to a couple of his friends and the three talked about hooking up and creating a dynasty.  The first year, they went to the NBA Finals and lost.  This year, well, you know what happened.  The Celtics pulled off the same move, getting Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen to join forces with Paul Pierce.  That move turned out OK too.

With the new CBA being what it is, teams will be using this philosophy to build an instant winner.  Which, after all, is what the fans want.  I find it amusing that when a team is getting older, one question that’s always thrown out is, “Should the team be blown up and built back up again.”  There are a variety of opinions.  I have never doubted the sincerity of those who say the team should be blown up.  Yet I wonder how many of them will stick by their team through the rebuilding process.

Often, which decision is made is based on the location of the team.  Small market teams usually have a more devoted fan base and can withstand growing pains better.  Not that losing doesn’t hurt.  Whatever the case is with those clubs, the teams found in large markets have a loyal group of fans as long as the team wins.  If there’s a prolonged (a short?) period of losing, many will say, “Good luck.  Get back to me when you start winning again.”

Contending isn’t enough for these clubs.  There’s “blow up” talk regarding the Knicks (at least they’re finally good enough to talk about blowing them up), Celtics, Spurs, Mavs and the Lakers.  It’s hard to believe that anyone who has anything to d0 with the Los Angeles Lakers would ever considering anything for their team but challenging for the championship.  I just turned 64 and can’t remember a season in which LA wasn’t a serious contender.

The latest move the Laker brass pulled off will either give the team a chance to add another title to the rafters or . . . call for the bomb squad.  For years the pundits listed “point guard” as a negative for the Lakers.  Adding Steve Nash to their current group will eliminate that problem - unless the talk turns to defense.  Now, if a deal can be made to trade Andrew Bynum for Dwight Howard (don’t ask for the details or why Pau Gasol isn’t the big guy traded), the Lakers become deeply involved in title talk.

After this past season, people became believers in LeBron’s multi-championships boast.  The Oklahoma City Thunder is, for many - especially for small market teams - the prototype organization.  Young and built through the draft, the Thunder made it to the finals this year.  If not favored to win it next year, they’ll certainly be one of the favorites.  The problem is the draft’s so fickle, it might be too hard a road to take.

When the Knicks traded for Amare Stoudamire, Tyson Chandler and Carmelo Anthony after the Celts and Heat made theirs, the boundary lines were set.  After Phoenix acquired so many draft picks for Nash, small market teams were given their game plan.  The problem for the NBA is there are so many more small market franchises that, while ratings for the Finals will be great, the league office might consider condensing the regular season again.

These arguments will be further bolstered if the Lakers get Dwight Howard.  And if that happens, everybody will have to deal with it because at that level, the best advice could be a line from Zig Ziglar:

“Don’t be distracted by criticism.  Remember, the only taste of success some people have is when they take a bite out of you.”

A story that hit the wires - or is it now the information superhighway? - was about what Kevin Garnett does best.  At least one of the things he does best - trash talk.  The story claims KG called Charlie Villanueva, who suffers from alopecia universalis (a disease whose symptoms are an inability to grow facial or body hair), “a cancer patient.”

Villanueva called out Garnett on his Twitter account - in my opinion, an invention the world would be much better served without, especially professional athletes who have egos in direct proportion to their talent.  KG responded that he was a victim of “miscommunication.”

Kevin Garnett is a marvelous basketball player who toiled for years on an awful Minnesota Timberwolves team before the Celtics pulled off what the Heat did last summer, bringing him and superstar Ray Allen in, to join their own premier player, Paul Pierce.  A championship followed shortly thereafter.  No one has ever questioned Garnett’s work ethic nor his desire to win.  The Celts nearly had another championship last season, losing to the Lakers in the finals.

KG’s past is another story.  It’s one of a kid from rural South Carolina who was moved to Illinois because he had gotten arrested after a fight between black and white students that he (allegedly) wasn’t in.  After his senior year in high school (Farragut Academy in Chicago) he faced the decision to go to college or head straight to the NBA.  The story that’s been told - which every college coach I know is certain is apocryphal at best or a flat out lie at worst - is that, with his NCAA eligibility in doubt due to his inability to obtain a high enough score on the ACT (standardized test), he didn’t want to chance passing the deadline to enter the league, so he decided on the NBA.  Then, on the day he declared, someone told him the mail had come and he had, in fact, scored high enough on his ACT (fourth attempt) so he would have been eligible, after all, for admission to the Division I schools, e.g. Kentucky, Michigan, Illinois that were recruiting him.

Since taking his skills to the NBA, he’s been known as a relentless worker - and an equally intense trash talker.  His academic background doesn’t lend someone to believe he filters much of what he says on the court, although biographical accounts say while he shunned school and extra academic help that was offered when he was at Mauldin HS in SC, he became quite the scholar (3.8 GPA) at Farragut Academy.  Which makes his “counter-tweet,” i.e. his version of what occurred on the floor, extremely suspect.  Suspect that he said what his tweet claims and suspect that he, and not someone else (a Celtic publicist, perhaps?) actually wrote it.  It read: “I am aware there was a major miscommunication regarding something I said on the court last night. My comment to Charlie Villanueva was in fact ‘You are cancerous to your team and our league.’ I would never be insensitive to the brave struggle that cancer patients endure. I have lost loved ones to this deadly disease and have a family member currently undergoing treatment. I would never say anything that distasteful. The game of life is far bigger than the game of basketball.”

Does this sound like Kevin Garnett?  In his own words, “Nothing is impossible.”

The greatest sportswriter who ever lived, in my opinion, is Jim Murray.  He might be considered old school and, considering when he was born (1919) and when he wrote (1961 until his death in 1998), I doubt he would have taken issue with that.  A column he wrote for the LA Times on 11/26/95 had the following thought in it.  I guess I’m old school as well because I’m totally on board with what Jim wrote:

“Trash talking is something 8-year-olds in a schoolyard do.  So, what’s the mental age of a millionaire who does it on a basketball court or the football field?”

There’s one thing that’s the same for all of us, independent of how much - or little - money we have.  That thing is time.  Each person has 24 hours in a day.  The difference is how we choose to use that time.

One of the most difficult challenges in life is balancing work and family.  Coaches, especially those who are ultra-competitive, are a highly driven bunch.  In addition, the great ones (and to be honest, the not so great ones) form such a tight bond with their teams that that group becomes, as corny as it sometimes sounds, their second family.

So, although Doc Rivers’ older two children, Jeremiah and Callie, are student-athletes in their senior year in college, the former a basketball player at Indiana, the latter a volleyballer at Florida, and his second son, Austin, a star hoopster at Winter Park (FL) HS, he’s decided to return to coach the Boston Celtics.  Is he choosing work over family?  Hardly.

Four years ago, Doc reportedly spent over $200,000 of his personal money to charter planes to be there at his kids’ games.  It made for a hectic schedule but for guys like Rivers, it’s the only way he’d have it.  Work and family.  Expensive, time consuming, tiring - but worth it.  He happens to be someone with two passions - and finds makes the time to successfully accomplish both at championship levels.

As I’ve mentioned in previous posts, I enjoy audio books when I’m driving.  One I recently listened to was entitled Fifth Quarter by Jennifer Allen.  Other than the fact that it must have been a cathartic experience for her to do the book, I can’t imagine why someone would publicly go into detail assassinating her entire family.  The contents of the book might be the topic of a blog someday, but for now, suffice to say that when Papa George did find time to drag away himself from his job to spend with his family, he - and they - were miserable.

On the other hand, Tony Dungy, no less a coach in the win-loss column than Allen, managed to strike a balance between his two families - the biological one and the team he happened to be in charge of - by encouraging his assistant coaches to have their wives and children around the team and the franchise’s facilities as much as reasonably feasible.

Another coach, Phil Jackson, whose family is grown, but whose body is broken down, made the identical decision as Rivers - even though he has yet to sign a contract and there have been rumors that, while Laker owner Jerry Buss wanted his leader to return, he planned on cutting his $12 million salary in half.  I imagine Phil will get his dough (in addition to the $12M, he received another couple mil for winning the championship).  It just seems that coaching and the competitive drive fuel these guys - so much so that, although one would be content watching his children play and the other happy to allow his body to heal, their lives would somehow be incomplete without their profession.

After Doc’s performance as head coach following the acquisition of, among others, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, I would imagine the Celtics, who compensate him quite handsomely, have inserted a clause which states that he needn’t shell out his own hard earned cash in order to maintain a somewhat normal relationship with his wife, Kris, and their four children.  Leading a team to two NBA Finals in three years, winning one and going to a Game 7 in the other, earn a coach a longer leash.            

Meanwhile, keep in mind that a man of this makeup doesn’t want to leave his other family, especially when the window for winning is closing fast.  That’s why Doc said, “We want to go after it one more time with this group,” meaning, in all likelihood, that Paul Pierce, who recently opted out of his contract to be a free agent, and Ray Allen, whose contract is up, will be offered contracts and will most likely rejoin the Celts to make another run at a title - one they felt, barring the injury to center Kendrick Perkins, would have been their second in three years. 

Rivers’ priorities are properly in line and even the most cynical critic can’t question his integrity, work ethic or results.  The wrap up quote belongs to Doc: 

“It’s not the perfect way to live, but it’s the right way.  I know there are Boston fans out there who think I should live up there.  But if it comes down to upsetting a million people in Boston, or the five people in my family, I’ll figure out a way to deal with the million.”

The Boston Celtics beat the Los Angeles Lakers in Game Five of the NBA Finals because:

1) In addition to the Celtics beating the Lakers to nearly every loose ball, they also won the battle of fourth quarter “hustle” plays, e.g. after Rajon Rondo reached back to knock the ball away from Kobe Bryant as he drove to the basket, Ray Allen made a great save which ignited a Boston fast break, culminating with a Rondo layup; Rondo somehow tipping in an offensive rebound although he didn’t have inside position; Tony Allen’s anticipation of a lob pass being thrown to Pau Gasol and coming from the help side, over 20 feet away, to block Gasol’s sure deuce; with only four seconds to get the ball over midcourt, Paul Pierce making a miraculous catch of a Kevin Garnett pass and then, somehow, finding Rondo who once again, laid it in; , and at games’s end, when the Lakers were making a comeback and Boston was missing shots, the Celtics managed to extend possessions by retrieving several offensive rebounds which allowed them to run more clock.

2) ESPN’s Linda Cohn called it “a team vs. an individual.”  It’s difficult to argue with that analysis.  Yet, I believe the was a reason for it and that was confidence on one side and lack of confidence on the other.  In the beginning of the game, Kobe Bryant was aggressive offensively, but when he drove and attracted numerous defenders, he’d find open teammates - each of whom either passed up open shots or looked tentative shooting them.  Boston’s guys - from 1 through 8 - seem to understand and accept their roles.  Each displays the ultimate confidence to shoot when he has “his” shot or do whatever is required to execute the game plan.

In the second half, Kobe came out and scored the first 19 Laker points (which actually was 23 in a row as he scored the last four of the first half).  The Lakers, however, couldn’t stop the Celtics and wasted a sensational offensive performance by Bryant because not only was Kobe scoring, but the degree of difficulty of his shot-making was incredulous.

3) If Ron Artest isn’t locking down his man (Paul Pierce so far in the series but maybe Ray Allen or even Rondo in Game Six - since the Lakers may feel the need to make a radical defensive adjustment, unless they believe the Staples Center will be that much of a difference), he becomes a liability for LA.  Offensively, Artest either takes bad shots or misses a lot of good ones.  Plus, he is the ultimate example of a player who overdribbles and doesn’t follow in any way, shape or form what the coaches want on offense, i.e. the famous “triangle offense.”

With the series moving to the west coast, it will be interesting to see what changes are made to the above three areas.  If they don’t, they’re putting a tremendous amount of faith in the home crowd energizing them.  If they don’t change, they’re philosophy might be regarded as:

“I like hitting my head against the wall because it feels so good when I stop.”          Â

At this time of year, with the World Cup capturing the interest of such a large segment of society, with the NBA Finals grabbing record TV shares, with Major League Baseball revitalized - mainly due to superb pitching - and with NFL camps in full OTA swing, the world of sports is teaching the lesson that, in order to win, teams need to pull together.  Even John Wooden’s passing last week reminded us of his teachings (preachings) of togetherness and winning as well-oiled units. 

Why is it then, as I have blogged on other occasions, that in politics, the main message is, “Don’t vote for the clown who’s running against me!  And to prove I mean it, I’m going to put my money where my mouth is - television ads!”  Living in California, I know so much dirt on Meg Whitman that I feel like the people here voted for a major loser!  Of course, I would feel the exact same way had Steve Poizner won.

Imagine a basketball game between the Celtics and the Lakers in which the winner was decided by a fan vote.  Paul Pierce ( a crowd favorite) would tell the crowd (including a national TV audience), “Remember that Ron Artest (who has a strong following of his own) was the guy who went into the stands at The Palace in Detroit and fought with a fan,” to which Artest would say, “Oh yeah?  Didn’t you get that scar on your face after you got into a fight in a bar?”

Then Rajon Rondo (an extremely popular Celtic) would jump in and say, “Lamar Odom is a guy who went to Rhode Island because no other school would even try to get him in after they saw his transcript.”  Then Lamar (a true swingman) would retaliate with, “Hey, Rondo, you want to talk about violatin’ NCAA rules?  Man, you went to Kentucky!”

Naturally, (the magnetic) Kevin Garnett would come to his buddy, Shorty’s, aid and deflect the Kentucky-NCAA issue (which certainly could swing the voters away from a Celtics’ victory) by attacking the Lakers’ main strength, Kobe Bryant (who, if left unscathed, could deliver the Lakers a victory nearly by himself).  “Let’s not put Kobe too high on a pedestal.  Don’t forget Colorado.”  The Black Mamba, being the competitor that he is (and realizing that in a war of words, he has a distinct advantage over KG), retaliates with, “KG, at least I can speak.  As a matter of fact, I’m bilingual.  Oh yeah, I forgot.  So are you - English and profanity.”

As the “game” wore on, somebody would bring up that Doc Rivers did something bad when he was in high school in Chicago, followed by a report that insinuated Phil Jackson might have been involved with “Mary Jane” during the long-haired time of his life.  Then the campaign will talk about Kendrick Perkins spending time in the principal’s office when he was nine and Pau Gasol being part a protest in Spain during his teenage years.

At some point, there will have to be a vote to determine the “winner.”  Really, these votes determine the worse of the two losers.  And we get stuck with the runner-up as a representative.  What brought this to my attention was a Q&A in the recent Time magazine (6/21/10) with Florida’s governor, Charlie Crist, who’s running for the Senate.  In it, Crist said, in answer to the question about his leaving the Republican party to run as an independent, “Washington is stuck in gridlock.  There’s a lot ‘party first.’  The purpose of good government is to fight for the people, not the party.”

His quote that attracted me was: “There’s all this bickering back and forth.  People want our leaders to be better than that, to rise above it.

“If we’re just arguing with each other, how are we making progress?”

Or know who’s winning?  

  Â

Throughout the years, the Lakers and the Celtics have played in some of the most memorable NBA finals.  Whether the 2010 version goes down in history as memorable, it certainly will be at the top of the list of “hardest to figure out.”

The series started out looking like a possible Lakers’ sweep, not surprising since it matched the #1 seed from the West against the #4 seed from the (weaker) East - even if Boston did eliminate the Cleveland Cavaliers, owners of the best record in the NBA.  In truth, Cleveland had a great deal to do with its own elimination. 

In Game One, the story line was simple: Kobe Bryant was unstoppable and the Lakers were unbeatable.  Much was made of Kobe’s amazing focus (this blogspace included), ignoring Chris Rock’s antics even after the game had pretty much been decided.

Then came Game Two and Kobe struggled to get anything to go down while Ray Allen set an NBA playoffs record by making eight (out of nine) three-pointers.  The Celtics, displaying remarkable resiliency and an incredible talent for dealing with adversity,  bounced back to win the game and take home court advantage.  With the 2-3-2 format, the question became “Would the Celts be celebrating on their home court?” 

Game Three in Boston saw the home team jump out early to a commanding lead (if there can be such an animal in the first quarter of an NBA game), only to go totally flat for the rest of the game.  Hero Ray Allen looked as though he was kidnapped in Southern California and replaced by some fraud bearing a remarkable resemblance.   Going scoreless, the only consolation Allen could take was shooting a combined 8-17 from three over the course of two games.  He went 0-13 overall and the Lakers were back in control.

With pundits and fans wondering how in the world Boston could even make the series interesting, the Celtics did nothing to contradict them, displaying an inability to run any kind of an effective offense.  Actually, they got good shots, but continually missed them.  Down by three at halftime, it was the feeling of anyone who’s ever been involved in a back-to-the-wall situation that the Celtics would turn to their veterans.  These were the guys who got them here and these were the guys who were going to pull them through.

They were pulled through, but it was their bench who did nearly all the heavy lifting - namely Glen “Big Baby” Davis and Nate (act like a big baby) Robinson.  Kobe knocked down 33, but other than Pau Gasol, the Lakers’ point production was non-existent.  Even the referees contributed to this confusion.  Granted, the guys in the striped shirts have an impossible job, especially with the “game within the game,” i.e. complaining on every call - and non-call (see my 5/26/10 blog).  However, technological progress, in the name of instant replay, has made the referees look even worse (although most of the replays show the zebras got it right, but nobody remembers those - right, Jim Joyce)?

Early in the third quarter, one of the officials whistled Kevin Garnett for a three second violation.  The Celtics had rebounded a Laker miss, advanced the ball upcourt and threw a lob pass to the posting KG.  The replay showed the shot clock at 20 seconds when the call was made, meaning it took the Celts only one second to cross midcourt.  Later on (1:17 to go in the game, to be exact) with the Celtics up six, Kobe Bryant rotated perfectly and was planted outside the restricted area when he took a charge on Paul Pierce.  That was the way the instant replay saw it but not the way the referee called it.  So, instead of the Lakers with the ball, down six, the Celts got an “and one,” effectively ending the game.

The way the series has been going, it was inevitable for Boston to win.  After seeing the heroics of Derek Fisher in Game Three and Robinson and Davis last night, no less an authority on NBA playoff basketball than Magic Johnson exclaimed:

“This has been a great and exciting series, but normally, it’s the SUPERSTARS who win the game in the fourth quarter.  In my 30 years in the NBA, I’ve never seen anything like it.  It’s crazy.”

Just a couple days ago, the Boston Celtics stole home court advantage from the Los Angeles Lakers, prompting Paul Pierce to remark that he didn’t plan on the series returning to LA.  After last night, he might just be right. 

During Game Two, his teammate, Ray Allen, set a record knocking down eight (of nine) three-pointers.  Last night, except for a couple guys who missed one more shot than he did (on their way to an infamous, borrowing a term from the late Al McGuire, schneider), Allen would have set another record.  As it was, he wound up 0-13 (o-8 from three-point land) and scored no points.

The game doesn’t only deflate the losers’ egos.  After some godlike performances in the playoffs, including a sensational display in Game One, Kobe Bryant has struggled to find his (normal) shooting touch.  And if it wasn’t for a good Game Three, Lamar Odom might have acquired the reputation as the second Los Angeles superstar alleged to be hiding out at the Kardashians’.  Kevin Garnett, long thought of as one of the league’s best, is finding out that, sure enough, “anything is possible.”  Just not the way he’d imagined.

The amazing part of this story is that, in 48 hours, all roles could be reversed.  As far back as I can recall, I can still hear the admonition of many a coach, preaching to their teams:

“No one’s bigger than the game.”

While players always talk about taking it “one game at a time,” bloggers have the liberty to look ahead.  As far as the current NBA playoffs, why not?

The Lakers are up 2-0, having won both games at the Staples Center.  But their wins were more than just holding home court.  Phoenix just doesn’t look like a team that even thinks they can beat the Lakers.  Granted, they do make the outcomes tantalizingly close, but in the end, it’s too much - what’s the new (new, as in a few years now) word - length.  Teams used to be tall.  Nowadays tall’s not enough.  Your team has to be long too.  And if you don’t understand what I’m referring to, just watch the Lakers.  Long fits them - with no explanation necessary. 

The other series is also 2-0, but looks even worse for the team in the hole.  Orlando has lost both games at home and just doesn’t seem to have an answer for the Celtics’ - for lack of a better description - game plan.  If anyone listens to the TV broadcast, they’d have to be pretty dense if they didn’t come away with the point that color commentator Mark Jackson feels the best way for the Magic is NOT to run the initial offense through Dwight Howard, especially if they feel there best option is to have Howard try to score with his back-to-the-basket game.

So, rather than dissect the remainder of those games, let’s jump ahead to the Lakers and the Celtics (inevitable) series.  The match ups are fascinating.  Fisher vs. Rondo at the point.  If Fish thought guarding Steve Nash was a difficult task (and it is), he might consider using some sick leave against Boston.  However, where the Magic struggle guarding Ray Allen - chasing him around all those screens (not exactly Vince Carter’s forte) - LA has a couple of guys who are rather adept defenders.  Whether Kobe or Ron Artest guards Allen isn’t as much of a concern because their defensive prowess is such that the other could D-up Paul Pierce.  Now, defending Pierce isn’t a slice of heaven but being shadowed by Bryant or Artest is no day at the coast either.  In addition, one of those Celts (but probably not both at the same time, as the Suns discovered in Game 2) has to guard Kobe - and that takes several ounces of energy, as well as providing a feeling of humility.

Next, the match up of Gasol and KG.  Advantage?  I’d give it to whichever guy is on offense.  Finally, Perkins and Bynum, the nearly forgotten fifth starters, might be the X-Factor, although because each club has a deep bench, the center position is, more than likely, a wash.  So, what about the benches?  Both provide spark. 

Odom (in reality a starter) is probably the most talented of anyone not out there for the opening jump, but Big Baby and Tony Allen have found their confidence.  ‘Sheed never lost his.  On the other side, Jordan Farmar has made momentum shifting plays (example: last night) and Shannon Brown can be a freakish human highlight video.

Not lacking for interest - or impact - is the coaching match up between two master motivators, Phil Jackson and Doc Rivers.

One day at a time?  Sorry, as far as most fans are concerned. the cry is:

“Bring it on!” Â