Jack’s Blog

For starters, Cavs’ owner, Dan Gilbert’s reaction is completely understandable.  He made as many concessions to LeBron as the King requested, e.g. from obtaining Shaq and Antwan Jamison to the incredibly foolish move of allowing James’ cronies/posse/leeches to travel on the team plane.  Still, c’mon Dan, making all the accusations you did - and going public with them - made you sound like a spoiled, rich kid and made your open letter rival the worst owner blunders since . . . Ted Stepien.

While he may not have heard of the decision until it was made, LeBron’s not returning his phone calls nor responding to any other forms of correspondence had to be a hint-and-a-half.  Plus, if all those nasty things Gilbert said about him were actually true, why would he even want someone like that to be the face of his organization?  And promising that the Cavs would win a championship before LBJ does, well, judging from the Cavs’ roster, his best hope is for a tie. 

As far as classless moves go, LeBron, in the ultimate oxymoronic gesture, has raised the bar to new depths.  Of course he has the right to select whichever team he wants, but at least he should have shown the common decency to personally inform to his former employer who, by all accounts, did everything humanly possible to keep him home.  He compared all of this to ending a long relationship with a girlfriend.  Doing it through an hour tv special isn’t exactly page 23 of the “How to Break Up.” manual.

Another observation is that we have seen the “athlete of today.”  First, Dwayne Wade met with the Bulls, he made the statement, “I will make the best decision for me and my family (a divorce has his kids in Chicago).”  Yet, in an interview with Michael Wilbon, he answered the question, “What was the deciding factor in re-signing with the Heat?” his response was, “Playing with Chris (Bosh).”

James’ comment on selecting Miami was, “I’m taking my talents to South Beach.”  Isn’t it strange he’d phrase it that way? Did he say it that way to ID his new home or because the location was a reason.  Maybe it’s just the “today’s athlete’s” way of making a statement.

The lessons we can learn from LeBron James’ decision are numerous:

1) His character is in inverse proportion to his talent.   We would be hard-pressed to find a more self-absorbed athlete (mostly because Barry Bonds retired).  As uncomfortable as it may be, your former organization deserves to hear that you’re not returning - from you.  Then, if they can’t deal with that, so be it.

2) His business acumen parallels his character.  When several powerful businessmen want to show you their plan to make you a billionaire - with a B - you don’t make them come to you (when you have your own Gulfstream) nor do you show up to the meeting in sweatpants and a t-shirt.  Imagine Michael Jordan - one guy LBJ wants to compared to (what other reason for the “chalkdust in the air” pregame routine) showing up to a business meeting in sweats and a T?  Never happen.  Arguably, the most successful NBA star-turned-businessman is Magic Johnson.  Think Magic would dress down for that meeting? 

3) He simply doesn’t realize that a true superstar has the courage to take whatever hand (or roster) is dealt him and make them into not only big winners, but champions, a la MJ and Larry Bird. 

4) As far as comparing James to other NBA megastars, Allen Iverson is more like The King than either MJ or Kobe.  LBJ and AI were born out-of-wedlock to teenage mothers and have taken their underdog squads to an NBA Finals but come up short.  Doing an hour-long special displays an attitude of tremendous self-importance.  Iverson’s rant of “Practice.  We talkin’ ’bout practice!” also illustrated that what norms that apply to others don’t apply to him.   Neither guy gets it.

A couple unanswered questions are:

1) Is the rumor true that the Boys and Girls Club got $2-3 million (a tidy sum), rather than the $5-6M that the extravaganza allegedly hauled in?

2) Of greater interest (except to the B&G’ers) is whether Pat Riley, who fined guys for helping up fallen opponents and banned talking to the other team’s players during pregame warmups, let LeBron’s “extra baggage” on the team charter and how will he react the first time he stages one of his famous make believe picture sessions just before a game? 

The best quote to wrap up this blog would be a humorous one and for that, I turn to Conan O’Brien, who was quoted as saying:

“I don’t care where LeBron James goes - as long as it’s not at 11 pm on TBS.”

When ESPN was first launched, people wondered if there was enough sports information to air 24 hours a day.  Now, the network has multiple stations and it has got to be a program director’s nightmare to attempt to fill it with enough worthwhile viewing.

The station’s new venture, 30 For 30, is a huge hit.  There have been some truly entertaining episodes (the Reggie Miller vs. the New York Knicks piece and the one about the Baltimore Colts’ band trying to stay together after the team bolted town under the cover of darkness for Indianapolis were two in particular).  Last night, the highly anticipated show about the trial of Allen Iverson (while he was in high school) was aired.  I was glued to the set - so much so that when I missed part of it due to being on an important phone call - I waited until it aired again later in the evening to catch the parts I missed - and wound up watching the show in its entirety, although I had seen the ending.

One reason I was so interested in this piece was because, as an associate head coach at USC, I went on a recruiting trip to see a young high school phenom our head coach, George Raveling, had told me a friend of his had seen and couldn’t stop raving about.  When I got to Allen’s high school, it was football season and, although I couldn’t talk to him due to NCAA rules, I wanted to make sure he saw me (naturally, I was decked out in SC gear) and, having coached football in high school, I was anxious to see him practice.

His basketball coach and I walked out to the field where the players were standing around, taking a break in between drills.  The coach started to point him out to me.  Before he could say a word, I told him it wasn’t necessary.  I said, “That’s him, right?”  Now, I don’t pretend to be any great judge of talent, but it was so clear who he was by the way he looked, it was impossible not to pick him out as a premier athlete, even among his teammates, all dressed alike.  It wasn’t just his physique, but the way he carried himself.  In coach’s parlance, he was a stud.

The show, directed by Steve James, someone who was a contemporary of AI’s, was about an incident in a local bowling alley that led to a trial for Iverson and a couple of his associates.  It was an incredibly riveting account, digging up something from many, many years ago that most people remembered.  Yet, few of us understood the implications it had on the Hampton/Newport News area.

The show’s theme was based on the racial bias/lawless behavior displayed toward and by the participants.  But it wasn’t just a racial divide.  There were white folks who sided with Iverson, while there were blacks who thought the kids on trial were in the wrong.  What was most telling about the story - to me - was how, so many years later, a great number of those involved didn’t want to have anything to say.  It was like, “It’s an old story, something that will never have a consensus, and retelling it will only open up old wounds.”  The show discussed the incident and then, went into the prejudices of those involved - much of which illustrated how deeply the people on the periphery felt.  There were some absurdities -conspiracy theories by both sides - that made me wonder when someone was going to introduce a grassy knoll.       

I will be fascinated by how people will analyze this show after viewing it.  This is another instance where, after hearing both sides, I will not be able to comprehend how anyone who wasn’t actively involved in it (and even some who were) could possibly form an unbiased opinion. 

Although anyone who’s ever taken a course or been instructed in how to deal with the media has been told, there is one answer to a question that should never be used.  In this case, however, it’s the only one that, after watching James’ extremely thorough and even-handedly done documentary, makes sense to me.  To me, the answer to the question, “So, what do you think of the trial?” can only be responded to - intelligently - with:

“I really don’t know.” 

Tom Izzo is a grunt - and admits to it.  Nothing easy ever came to him.  Sure, he has one of the best jobs in the nation but he worked his butt off to get it to that position - as a graduate assistant, full-time assistant and as the guy in charge.  He wasn’t a star player who walked into a cake job.

At first, following Jud Heathcote, one of the wisest coaches - and sharpest wits in the business - was a challenge.  And that’s nothing short of one of the great understatements of all time.  Jud had won a national championship (with Magic Johnson) and came close on other occasions - all the while, doing it his way.

Tom’s first year at Michigan State found his club in the NIT.  For his maiden postseason voyage, they sent him and the Spartans packing to Fresno.  It was Jerry Tarkanian’s first year with the Bulldogs and, by the end of the season, Jerry’s guys had bought into his pressure defense.  Tom’s offensive philosophy was to run plays.  Jerry’s defensive philosophy was not to let teams runs plays, to force them to make plays.  By the time MSU pulled into Fresno’s Selland Arena, the joint was hoppin’ - 10,220 strong.  The ‘Dogs blew away Sparty.  Years later, the two teams and coaches met again - in the NCAA tournament’s second round.  This time, after years of gruntwork, i.e. serious recruiting, Izzo got his revenge - beating Tark and eventually making it to Final Four.  Where he’s seemingly been ever since.

Last year, the stars were aligned and not only did Michigan State make it to the Final Game, but it was held in the Palace at Auburn Hills, nearly walking distance for Spartan fans.  Unfortunately, the opponents were the UNC Tarheel teams, loaded with first round draft picks.  The ‘Heels prevailed but this year, while UNC’s season turned south, Michigan State returned stronger than ever.

And then, in as exciting a second round game as the tourney’s ever seen, they knocked off Maryland - only because they had the ball last.  In the process, however, they lost Kalin Lucas, their point guard and leader on the court.  For the rest of the tournament.  What looked like a stroke of luck, #1 overall seed and next opponent, Kansas, was upset by Northern Iowa, turned sour after Lucas went down.  While the Spartans could still get by UNI, Ohio State looms as the team standing between them and another Final Four (if the Buckeyes can get past Tennessee) and, ironically, OSU found itself where MSU is now earlier in the season when their superstar, Evan Turner, took a nasty spill and sat out a number of games. 

When’s a good time to get hurt?  Turner is probably still smarting from the awful fall he took early in the year (while dunking), but he’s thankful he’s healthy now, while Lucas can only cheer.  But at least those guys got hurt in action, helping their teams win a game. 

Darryl “Truck” Bryant of West Virginia broke his right foot in practice.  We’re talking about practice.  Maybe Allen Iverson had it right.  Although that’s really not the case.  The foot had begun to bother Bryant in the Mountaineers second round game against Missouri.  He changed shoes at halftime, knowing something was wrong. 

Bob Huggins has been to the Final Four once before - in 1991 as a #4 seed.  I didn’t even have to look it up, as it is indelibly etched into my brain.  I was associate head coach at USC and we were the #2 seed (in the Midwest).  We were handed a crushing defeat by Georgia Tech (their freshman, James Forrest hit the first three-pointer of his college career - with 0:00.8 of a second left in the game - and us up two).  This, following then-Memphis State’s upset of #3 Arkansas and the day before the biggest upset, UTEP beating #1 Kansas.

Hugs thought his team this year was better than that club.  Until Bryant went down in Tuesday’s practice.  This type of adversity is devastating, but when it happens twice to the same guy.  Huggins best team, the 1999-2000 Cincinnati Bearcats, were poised to make a run at a national championship when, during the Conference USA tournament, Kenyon Martin, the ‘Cats’ star broke his leg and missed the NCAA tournament.  How good was he?  A short while later, he became the number one overall pick in the NBA draft.

As harsh as it sounds, the Spartans and Mountaineers should heed the advice of one of the world’s great leaders, Sir Winston Churchill:

“If you’re going through hell, . . . keep going.”Â

The major contenders for the Larry O’Brien trophy as the best professional basketball team in the world each made big moves in the off-season.  Some were better than others, e.g. Rasheed Wallace wearing green and Ron Artest joining the Lake Show.  But the other three, namely, the Cavs (obtaining Shaq), the Magic (picking up VC) and the Spurs (adding Richard Jefferson) also made moves designed to gain their ultimate goal - winning an NBA Championship.

Somehow, the Memphis Grizzlies were mistakenly sent the same memo, or decided to read tea leaves, and they, too, spent money in the free agent market - on Allen Iverson.  Make no mistake about it, there is an I in Iverson and, as far as the talented (elderly) vet is concerned, there’s an I in every other word he knows.  It didn’t take long for AI to start his bickering, just a few games into the season, after playing fewer minutes than he wanted.  He talked about how he can still put up big numbers - as if that alone is the mark of a championship caliber team.

Face it, the guy’s probably a lock for the Hall-of-Fame, and deservingly so, after all he got out of a rather frail body in a game dominated by giants.  But another thing that must be faced is that the Grizzlies are much closer to being a lottery team than they are to being a contending team - and if he thought that Memphis, with a good, young nucleus, was going to revamp its entire system so that he could be the centerpiece -(or what? - the gratification of his ego - which is and always has been inversely proportional to his body), then he’s as foolish as people - for years - have been making him out to be. 

And so are the Griz.  A few of the talking heads and scribes have said that they shelled out the dough because they thought the ROI would more than balance in their favor - meaning tickets sales would escalate.  Do they really believe that people want to shell out hard earned bucks (and was there ever a more fitting term in today’s economy than “hard earned”?) to watch a bunch of young, talented players (of the future) hang out with a guy who’s at the end of his career (unless you ask AI who’d probably tell you he has another good two or three . . . decades left to play).  That feeling must come from his thinking of what in the world he would do if he stopped playing basketball.  I’m just saying, don’t be surprised to see Iverson play overseas after his NBA run is over. 

Sometimes it’s that way with one dimensional people who have the ability to focus so intently on one thing, they lose the ability to see anything else.  It’s understandable for Iverson to feel the way he does.  It’s not, however, at all clear to figure the motives of the Memphis franchise.

My late mentor, John Savage, used to say:

“Some people are a mile wide and an inch deep, while others (AI) are an inch wide and a mile deep.”Â

My reasoning for the 2009-10 NBA season to have a repeat champion is not only because last year’s winners, the Los Angeles Lakers, got appreciably better by replacing Trevor Ariza, a vital piece of their championship club, with Ron Artest.  To sum up that move, the Lakers replaced a poor man’s Ron Artest with the real thing.  Ariza’s skill set is virtually identical to Artest’s, but the latter has been performing that role better and for longer than the former.

A shrewd move by the Lakers’ once (and often) villified GM Mitch Kupchak, who, upon realizing injuries to the Rockets’ Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady were going to preclude Artest from signing there, leapt at the opportunity of substituting the promising and talented Ariza for the proven and talented (and volatile) Artest.  That last adjective, for all the Laker-haters (of which there many), will be the difference between last year’s Kobe-led Lakers (all bowed to the captain) and this year’s version.  Because Ron Artest bows to no one! 

Don’t believe the chemistry issues people are talking about (hoping for in the case of the Laker bashers).  Ron Artest might be a charter member of the P-I-T-A club, but he’s no fool.  He, as well as anyone, knows how difficult it is to play against Kobe and will relish the opportunity to play alongside him.  No one, no matter how inflated an ego (I’ll go out on a limb and even say AI, the one from Memphis, not the one from Philly - how soon they forget, Allen) wouldn’t admit that Kobe is better than he is.  Plus, the “in” thing for players from this century is “the ring” - and between them, Bryant and Artest have four, all belonging to Kobe.  If ever Ron will be on his best behavior, this coming season will be it.

However, that’s not the only reason I am predicting a repeat champion.  You see, in my mind, the Celtics were the champions and as soon as KG went down, they never had a chance to repeat.  While LA was certainly a deserving champion, I don’t feel as if they dethroned the Celtics. It was more like Boston took a sabbatical.

Now, with a healthy Garnett (and all that comes with him, e.g. the competitive fire that he morphs into superleader), the Men in Green are back to truly defend their crown.  Maybe not legally - as far as the NBA historians are concerned - but in their minds.  Sure they’re a year older (Pierce & Ray Allen - along with KG), but that is a positive when it comes to Rondo, Big Baby and Kendrick Perkins.

Plus, the Celtics made a huge deal - also for a potential hothead - in Rasheed Wallace.  Yet, if you ask anyone in the league, the answers border on unanimous that ‘Sheed is a major positive factor in the locker room.  He’ll have to tone down his confrontational attitude toward the refs (good luck with that) and the opposing fans (but his teammates will have his back when and if that ever comes into play).  In the meantime, Boston now has not one, but TWO big men who can score both in and out.  Meetings about the defensive game plan against the Celtics just got quite a bit longer.

The other contenders?  Orlando?  Sorry, Vince Carter gives them much more explosiveness but any reasonable person who watched them play in last year’s playoffs has got to come to the conclusion that losing Hedo Turkoglu hurts them more than two  VC’s would help.  A 6′10″ guy who can run the point of a “pick & roll/pop” is infinitely more difficult to replace than a slasher.

The Cavs?  Shaq will have to do more for them than he did for the Suns.  If he does (not including pregame choreography, which everyone in the NBA is conceding to the Cavs), they have a chance.  But pulling Shaq out to guard in P&R situations is a detriment to their defense.  And, really, how much better can LeBron play?  Admittedly, that’s a frightening thought. 

The Spurs?  Adding Richard Jefferson was a nice move, but they weren’t as close as everyone would like us to believe last year.  Age (and the nagging, if not serious, injuries that go hand-in-hand) can work to their disadvantage as well.   

So, . . . whether either the Lakers or the Celtics win it all, it will say “Repeat” to me.  How do I know this?  I learned it from none other than Dr. Benjamin Spock who said:

“Trust yourself.  You know more than you think you do.”

And he’s continuing to do it.  To think, everyone thought brother Jeff was the family’s coaching whiz.  (Actually, the true coach guru in the Van Gundy family is father, Bill - and I’m sure either of the two boys would attest to that).

Let’s break down this Stan Van Gundy character.  I’ve known his brother, Jeff, a good deal longer.  While we happen to be talking about the Van Gundy’s (in reality, I was the only one who was talking about them, but let’s say it was a team effort), it’s nearly indisputable, and I readily admit to being completely biased, that Jeff is setting the standards for color commentators.  In my mind, Jeff and Hubie Brown (another prejudicial vote on my part because I have a connection with Hubie, albeit it a stretch) are on islands by themselves when it comes to analyzing a game as it happens, all the while entertaining the viewing and listening audience while doing it.  If the island took a census, though, it also might claim Doug Collins as a resident.

Back to Stan, who by no means is the poster boy of what we thought an NBA coach would look like.  It’s relatively apparent he never played in the League and I’m not sure it would register as much of a shock if we were to find out he never played in any league (of course, he played for his father @ SUNY-Brockport).  With all the movements throughout the years, we’ve heard claims from groups such as the NAACP that a black worker has to do the work twice as well as that of a non-minority in order to merely maintain his employment.  Similarly for women, so say organizations such as NOW.

That might be true, probably is.  And in some cases, “twice as good” might be a rather conservative estimate.  Yet, if someone believes those opinions to be valid (and, while no one may really know the exact numbers, I would agree in the concept), trying to crack into such as a glory type club as the NBA, without having gone through the actual wars, . . . that’s going to be some hill to climb.  The numbers are much more skewed for coaches in the NBA, who did not play in the League.

So, his basketball career wasn’t the deciding factor in having him wind up in the professional ranks.  Based on what I’ve encountered, heard (from both coaches and players) and observed, success in the NBA comes from one thing more than any other factor.  And that trait is the ability to gain the players’ trust - and you can’t be phony about it.  That might get you through a year or two, but then somethin’s gotta give.

At one of the annual self-improvement clinics we used to hold for “our mastermind group,” (see my blog on 8/7/09) I remember hearing Stan’s brother, Jeff (when he was an assistant coach with the New York Knicks), telling us, “The best way to gain the players’ trust is to have them see you sweat right along with them.”  That was why when Jeff had a individual improvement session with one of their players, say, Patrick Ewing, he never got some kid to shag the balls for them.  He told me Patrick never said anything to him about it, but Jeff, himself, felt more comfortable by doing it that way, and, wouldn’t you know it, it wound up really gaining the trust of others because that was how he treated every player on the squad.  If specific drills or such were designed for “bigs”, then he might make adjustments, not because of “prima donna-ing,” but because that person needed a modification of some sort.  And it’s the same way for Stan.

Something else you’ll notice about SVG.  Watch how often the Magic score when they have possession of the ball, out of bounds, after a time out - independent of where the ball is inbounded.  Check on the subtle defensive changes, e.g. they were doubling the post after his first dribble, but changed to an immediate trap just to throw off the ballhandler’s sense of rhythm. 

Stan Van Gundy belongs in the NBA - and not just the league.  One more win and he’ll be where he deserves.  I’ve heard that Stan Van Gundy has a lookalike - some porno star.  Not being a charter member in the porn industry, I wouldn’t know.  It’s just that when people are expecting to see someone who looks the part of an NBA coach, but is far from it, he tends to be treated much more critically. 

Although not nearly in the same category, I imagine Stan Van Gundy agrees whole-heartedly with Martin Luther King’s statement:

“It may be true that the law cannot make man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.”

So much for my blog saying the Lake Show would destroy the Jazz.  Like Kenny “The Jet” Smith said, “It was just a replay of Game 1.”  Maybe the Lakers are bored - or just can’t wait for the Cavs, because it certainly doesn’t look like anybody is going to come close to either of them.  So now I’m back with another prediction.  If this doesn’t come true, you can start calling me “the SI Cover Jinx.”  (Actually, I’d rather enjoy being referred to as the SI Cover Jinx, since it’s that time of year when teachers tend to get called a lot worse things when grades for the kids who have been warned about not working hard enough, not paying attention, not getting extra help in the form of math labs or tutoring and not putting in enough (any) study time, receive their final grades - and summer plans may have to be disrupted).

As I mentioned in my blog yesterday, my main man from Fresno, Dave Severns, is now with the Chicago Bulls in the capacity of assistant coach for player development.  One day, as the season was winding down, I brought up the fact of how great it would be if they could make the playoffs.  The playoffs!  For Sev, it meant that a year removed from winning the conference and playing for the Valley championship in girls’ badminton at Roosevelt HS, he’d be part of an NBA team in the PLAYOFFS, best known for 1) not having to send a rep for the draft lottery ping pong ball fiasco, 2) getting a sweet (and desperately needed) bonus check (and in the NBA, it’s for more than $100) which members of all the teams and staffs get if they make it out of the draft lottery and 3) being able to listen to the old interview cuts of Jim Mora without thinking, “Damn, we coulda been there.”  It’s also known for incredibly, beyond belief, intense basketball action, displayed by the best athletes in the world (see yesterday’s blog for further explanation).

Shortly after that call (and the subsequent winning streak the Bulls would go on), he told me how they could be the 7 seed.  I said, being a math guy, “the numbers say you could be as high as 6″, to which he replied, “Maybe, but getting 7th would be fantastic.”

“Why aren’t you fired up that you guys could move up to number 6?” I asked him, not understanding his reaction had nothing to do with just “getting versus not getting in.”

“Don’t get me wrong,” he said, “I’d love for us to be the 6th seed.  But getting to 7th means . . . we don’t have to go to Cleveland for the first round.”

Therein lies what many, if not everyone in the East feels.  As long as we don’t have to go to Cleveland.  And, for once, it has nothing to do with bashing the city.  OK, so they didn’t tie the home court regular season record of 40-1 due to Coach-of-the-Year Mike Brown (wisely) resting his best guys (meaning LeBron James and . . . some other good players), but what they’ve done to the Detroit Pistons (granted, an old team whose trade for Allen Iverson didn’t turn out how they hoped it would . . . but how everyone else who has ever seen a basketball game, including the Saturday morning 5-year old kind, knew it would).  Remember the quote from a few blogs ago, “The greatest indicator of future behavior is past performance“?  The trade of AI for Chauncey Billups is a living example of it.  So, as Dave had expected, whoever was going to Cleveland was going to leave there with their feelings hurt - and probably not have to worry about going back until next year.

The Cavs’ counterparts on the other side, LA, has played down/toyed with/virtually ignored their opponent, the Utah Jazz.  The Jazz has a few big-time NBA players, but with Mehmet Okur out (give them something to use as a crutch so they don’t have to admit to complete and utter hopelessness), they work like the devil and come close, but in the end, it’s as inevitable as Lucy vs. Chuck - with the Jazz playing the ignominious role of CB (and, Kobe Bryant masquerading as Lucy).

The way all the other series are going, I just don’t see any other (barring something catastrophic happening) scenario but an LA-Cleveland finals.  That doesn’t mean there won’t be some entertaining, and certainly exciting, hoops for your viewing pleasure (if you enjoy basketball at its finest).  Thusfar, watching the other games (naturally, I’m biased, but, especially the first two games of the Chicago-Boston series) has been phenomenal, independent of which team you’re pulling for.  That series shows an, up ’til now, non-existent fact: Kevin Garnett might not be the Defensive Player of the Year and he might not be the MVP, but he certainly is the Defensive MVP of any league.

As stated, I’m a Bulls fan (and have been ever since this past summer), but if anybody in the world thinks the Windy City guys would be consistently on top the side of 100 (like they have been for the first two games), if KG was on the floor, there’s this great timeshare I have in Pigeon Forge, TN I’d love to talk to you about taking off my hands - for cheap!

While Boston, Utah and, of course, San Antonio and even Philadelphia, have been hit with untimely injuries, the Lakers are just now getting back Andrew Bynum, who is getting better as he gains more experience and gaining confidence because he might just be too young to realize he’s having it a little more easily than guys like him on other teams because they have to focus on the other Lakers so much.  Bynum gets, more or less, a free pass to exhibit his array of skills and use his height and length quite efectively.

But if you think the Lakers or the Cavs feel bad for the teams with the injured guys (or anyone else, for that matter), you might heed a bit of advice one of my high school coaches gave me after I had a bad practice and was hanging my head:

“If you’re looking for sympathy, you can find it in the dictionary - between shit and syphilis.”  

  Â

Although I’m not sure who it was who thought up the idea of talk radio and television, there ought to be a statue of whoever it was in the backyard of every successful pundit’s mansion.

Why?  Because the premise was: be marginally (or completely) outrageous, stir up the emotions in your listeners (your “kind” - e.g. liberal or conservative will gravitite to whichever you are) and stimulate lively chatter.  I was going to say “debate” but it’s usually not debate at all.  It’s one side preaching to its choir, while the other side does the same to its own clones.  And it’s worked beyond anyone’s wildest dreams.

The problem that has stemmed from it is this: all of this rhetoric is based on which side can WIN!  Except the question is: Win What?  Which side can be more flip and embarrass the other more?  It’s great entertainment (depending on which side you’re on and whether you’re listening to your “friends” or your “enemies”).  You can have a barrel of laughs at the other side’s expense or have your blood pressure skyrocket hearing the fanatics blather on using “facts” they pretty much they manufactured (as did your side, but that’s OK because it’s proving your case).

There are two topics that, I don’t believe, have been brought up (other than in a few of my previous blogs: 4/22/07, 6/30/08, 9/27/08 - this is a subject that hits my “hot button”).  One is that , while, initially this was brought up to add interesting discussion on radio and TV, it has blossomed into the anti-team motto: “What’s Right Is More Important Than Who’s Right.“  Every successful group, team, club, organization, company has at its core this fundamental belief.  Because of our attachment to these shows (and their hosts), we have lost the team concept that made America so great.

What these shows have done is violate Stephen Covey’s Fifth Habit of Highly Successful People - Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood.  If you’ve ever listened to one of these shows, especially if opposing sides are represented, all one side does, is to find a hole in their opponent (right there, we have pitted members of the same team - the United States of America - against each other) and wait … until they hear whatever tidbit they’ve been waiting to pounce on and, rather than listening all the way through, they interrupt (displaying what’s become a great American trait) and if their counterpart won’t stop talking, it turns into a shouting match to see which individual can yell over the other, thinking that whoever finishes the thought is declared the winner.

That has not - ever - been the case.  People who believed what they believed prior to the high decibel debate will still cling to their original belief.  In other words, what started out as good audio or visual entertainment, has polarized the nation - and, this is me being a realist more than a pessimist (although I hope I’m wrong) but I don’t believe we’ll ever be the same country we once were (at least when it comes to teamwork).

Right now, since the Democrats (liberals) are in power, the Republicans (conservatives) simply lie in wait for something - anything - to happen, whether it’s  a new policy, idea or proposal (independent of if, deep down, they think it’s great for the country) or some misstep, flub, or semi-controversial comment made by their opponent (which is how we look at those who disagree with us).  When that inevitably happens, it’s “OK, what’s wrong with it, how can we exploit it, twist it, repeat it thousands of times (even though it was only said once), to make us look good and, more importantly, them look foolish?

Should someone in the liberal camp be reading this and thinking, “Yeah, those bastards, that’s exactly what they do,” don’t be so righteous.  When the roles were reversed, the actions were identically reversed as well.  

The reason for the “statue” comment at the beginning of the blog is that many of the debates between the two fanatical groups deal with the financial well being of the citizens of the country: is the (upper) middle (working) class, because of their strong work ethic, getting wrongfully punished and therefore are expected to do more for those unfortunate or should the lower class (even though, many are good people who’ve been hit hard by the economy, lost their jobs and homes, and, basically, have next to nothing) start earning their keep, by pounding the pavement and pull themselves up by their bootstraps - similar to the rest of the country (other than those who form the “Lucky Sperm Club,” entrance of which is mandated by choosing one’s parents correctly)?

The ironic part of this entire dialogue is that every host, regardless of which side they’re on, have one trait in common: every last one of them is filthy, stinking rich as all get out.  Yeah, they have their charities and foundations, but so do Allen Iverson, Carmelo Anthony, Mark McGwire and the rest of the overpaid athletes (also entertainers).  And while those philanthropic (aka tax write-offs) are truly terrific gestures, don’t think for a minute that the “heads” of those foundations weren’t taken care of first - and in an extremely comfortable first class manner - before a dime was given away. 

Oh, to be a fly on the wall when some of these radical thinkers and screamers - on opposing sides - get together.  As pompous and egomaniacal as every last one of them - be it Rush Limbaugh, Jesse Jackson, Sean Hannity, Anderson Cooper, Karl Rove or even “fair and balanced” Bill O’Reilly, a dollar to a nickel says there are at least some, “Is this a great country or what!” exclamations echoed throughout their little inner sanctorum.

Maybe it’s impossible, but what would be nice would be to have a television (or radio) show about people like us (call us the middle class) hosted by people like us.  And if the show topped the ratings, the hosts got no raises.  The money would go to those who deserved it.  Who?  That’s another verbal battle for another day.

Why are these “gonifs” (thieves) as my grandfather used to call them doing so well?  As a speaker I once heard (I believe it was Danny Cox of Orange County, CA) say, when asked if it was really possible to create emotion: 

“Did you ever go to a movie and laugh?  Ever go to one and cry?  Do you think it’s something they put in the seats?”

The Lakers beat the Cavs in the “Q” (Quicken Loans Arena) in Cleveland and by doing so, swept their season series.  What is it that allows the Lakers to beat the Cavs each time they play when the Cavs seem to roll over nearly all their other opponents?  Get ready for some brilliance.

Better players.  Although zone is now allowed in the NBA, it’s still predominantly a man-to-man league.  Some coaches look at the six match ups (each of their starters vs. each of their opponent’s starters and their bench vs. their opponent’s bench).  Naturally, if you win every match up, i.e. if your man outscores his match up, you’re going to win. 

It’s not always points that are included in the totals, though, but how many points is your man is accounting for, e.g. in the Suns-Pistons game, say the match up was Steve Nash vs. Allen Iverson.  A quick look at the stat sheet shows Iverson bested Nash 25-15 in the points category, making AI a +10 but upon closer inspection, we see The Answer (although not always to the question that’s posed) had 7 assists, meaning he accounted for a minimum of 39 points (25 pts and 14 pts off 7 assts, assuming every asst was for a 2 point bucket) while Nash had 25 assists, meaning his total minimum contribution (sounds like an IRA for someone over 70 1/2) was 65 points (once again, assuming every asst led to a two-pointer).  When taking pts/asst combined, Nash is a +26.  It all depends on your established criteria.  Note: if you combine points and assists, your total points will far exceed (or you hope it does) the actual number of points scored in the game.

Back to the Lakers and Cavs.  From my vantage point, Kobe and LeBron (and, if the game’s on the line - think Finals of the Playoffs - they will guard each other) will usually negate each other (independent of what criteria is used), but Kobe is still the veteran, the one with the championships and isn’t about to give up his throne easily (remember, “King” is just a nickname) as he showed yesterday when he came down with the flu and tried to duplicate his idol, MJ, when he had an even worse case and put up big numbers - on a bigger stage.  If you asked 10 random NBA people (coaches, players or GM’s - excluding the Lakers and the Cavs for obvious biases) who they’d rather have in a big game, KB or LBJ, my bet is Kobe wins 8-2 (and that may be generous to Bron-Bron).  In five years (or maybe two), those results might change, but I’d be willing to put more than a few euros on my prediction.

Therefore, it’s imperitive for someone (or more than one) to become an X Factor.  Check the other match ups: Fisher and Williams - at playoff time, experience usually overcomes youth, so since they’re each primarily jump shooters, I think Fisher would have the edge.

Between Walton (or Ariza) and Pavlovic (or Szczerbiak), all can shoot, with Walton probably the worst shooter, but the best passer, so I’d consider that match up a push (unless somebody came out with the hot hand - and therein lies the X Factor I alluded to; yesterday, Szczerbiak did his best to fill that role).

Up front, Gasol and Ilgauskas cancel each other out - each can score with his back to the basket, although both would rather face up and shoot, Gasol probably better at putting it on the floor, taking it to the hole and finishing, but Z possessing a little better range.  Because he’s more mobile - and five years younger - Gasol gets the edge.

Next is Odom and Wallace (or Varejao) and, unless Lamar is guarded by the guy who does the best job of shutting him down (that being Lamar himself), I see the Lakers having a significant advantage - like when he gets 15 points and 10 rebounds in the third quarter (on his way to 28 and 17) like he did yesterday.

The bench guys who haven’t been mentioned thusfar are Farmar & Vujacic compared to Gibson & Hickson and none are likely to tip the scale either way, unless one of them goes for a career game. 

Better players usually win big games, especially the best of seven series kind.  However, one line each player ought to give some consideration to, when assessing their overall career (although it may be a little too deep for the average pro) is Kurt Vonnegut’s:

“A flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do the maintenance.”                    

Most of today’s NBA fans can remember Dennis Rodman when he was helping the Detroit Pistons win NBA championships.  An even greater percentage of people who enjoy the NBA can recall his contributions to the Chicago Bulls’ championship runs in the years following his tenure with the Bad Boys of the Motor City.  Yet, I would wager that far fewer can recite his career with San Antonio, the Lakers or the Mavs. 

Most of his career was based on a few “re” factors: re-bounding and re-belling.  The reason people don’t have memories of his time with the Spurs - even though it was in between his stints with the Pistons and the Bulls - is due to a third “re:” re-spect.  Rodman had some unique skills (for the purposes of this blog, I’ll limit them to the “on the court” kind).  Snatching missed shots was one, but not respecting authority, be it his coaches or referees, was just as pronounced a skill in his life - and it led toward his team’s lack of success just as the rebounding aided in their winning. 

With people who “had the hammer,” e.g. Coach Chuck Daly and teammates Joe Dumars, Isiah Thomas and Bill Laimbeer with the Pistons and Coach Phil Jackson and teammates Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Ron Harper, Rodman acted up, but showed respect, or at least enough respect to be given some rope so he could “act the fool” - up to a point.  At San Antonio, Los Angeles and Dallas, his lack of respect caused more discipline problems (often translating in losses) than his talent could to help them win.   

We’ve seen other versions of this “respect or the lack of it” theme since Rodman and I’m not in any way suggesting he was the first NBA player to disrespect his coaches, teammates or the game, but he’s the first that came to my mind.  Since then, others who have picked up on this behavior are Latrell Sprewell, Allen Iverson, Baron Davis and Stephon Marbury.

In Sprewell’s case, nearly everyone remembers him choking his coach, P.J. Carlesimo, being dragged away, only to return and take a swing at him (which grazed the coach).  He was suspended for 10 games, the Warriors voided the remainder of his contract (nearly $24 million over three years) and, subsequently the NBA susoended him for 82 games.  Over a year later, he was traded to the Knicks - and claimed he was a changed man.  He focused his intensity to matters on the court and led the 8th-seeded Knicks to a first-ever (for a team seeded that low) spot in the NBA Finals where, despite his good overall play, they lost in five games. 

Since he “retired” over what he and his agent called insulting contract offers, it’s been reported he is in deep debt.  While he was suspended, I was with an NBA head coach and asked him if he thought Sprewell was a player he would want on his team.  His response was, “Sure, I think he’s very under-valued.”  The answer shocked me, but in the NBA, that’s what it’s come to - value for your money, i.e. it’s easier to deal with someone who might not respect you, than not have enough talent because if your people skills are good, he can help you win.  Not enough talent gets you fired.  But not having respect for people or money gets you broke.

Allen Iverson’s case is also complex.  A little guy in a big man’s game, AI backs down from no one.  Judging from his past (all the way back to high school), it seems like basketball isn’t the only venue Iverson refuses to back down - but that’s another story.  While he was making mega-bucks with the 76ers (Philly was the perfect type of city for AI and they loved him), he once went off when his coach criticized him for not attending practice. His “Practice?“ tirade is one that ranks alongside Jim Mora’s “Playoffs?” and Herm Edwards “You play to win the game!” as the three most often repeated lines when the topic of a question the interviewee doesn’t feel relevant comes up.

Now, however, after leaving Denver (his stop after the Sixers traded him) and hearing his coach there, George Karl, come out and criticize him for selfish style of play, he is determined to lead his new squad, the Pistons, back to a championship.  One problem: he skipped practice - yeah, practice - to stay and have Thanksgiving with his family.  He didn’t tell anyone, didn’t receive permission from bosses and was the only team member not to show up.  He has since apologized, claiming, “It’ll never happen again.”  Believe it?

Baron Davis isn’t as known for his lack of respect mainly because he’s always played on such bad teams.  Therefore, fans seldom get to see him.  He has unreal talent - even compared to guys in a league loaded with talent, but has acquired the nickname of “Coach Killer” or “CK” for short.  He met his match with Don Nelson and I’ve wondered on occasion if this isn’t the true reason, or at least one that played a bigger part than his wanting to go and make the Clippers a winner (ha!) with his buddy Elton Brand, who then signed a contract to play in Philadelphia.  While CK could have opted to stay with Golden State (he had yet to sign his new contract), he said he would move anyway because he was a man of his word - me being the word.  He’s an aspiring Hollywood director and Los Angeles is a better location, plus it’s home (he played high school ball at Crossroads, then went to UCLA for two years).  Not surprisingly, there have been reports that Davis and Coach Mike Dunleavy have been at odds, to which Davis admitted, “There has been a disconnect.”  Disconnect - must be a “director’s” word.

Finally, we come to the poster boy for unrealized potential - Stephon Marbury.  “Starbury” comes from a basketball playing family - brothers Eric (Georgia), Donnie (Texas A&M) and Norman (called Ju-Ju, who signed with Tennessee but failed to qualify academically).  Selfishness ran in the family if you ever watched the Marburys play and, being the youngest and most talented, Steph was going to be it all and have it all.  He went to Georgia Tech and played well, leading the Jackets to the Regional Semifinal game. Everyone in the world of college basketball knew he was going to declare himself for the NBA draft following his freshman season, but he wouldn’t make the announcement public.  

This became the beginning of the end for Bobby Cremins and Georgia Tech.  Any talented point guard Tech tried to recruit would ask Cremins if Marbury was coming back.  He’d tell them what was common knowledge, but rival schools kept telling these prospects that if he was going to enter the draft, why hadn’t he said so.  Put 2 and 2 together, they’d tell prospects: he was coming back (none of them had that big an ego they thought they could beat out Stephon Marbury - recruiting at the highest level is one of the nastiest businesses you’ll ever find).  For whatever reason, Marbury kept putting off his announcement.  When he finally made it public, all the great point guards were gone.

Fast forward to today.  Marbury still has that sense of entitlement.  He’s making an absurd amount of money, not earning even a small percentage of it and when his new coach, Mike D’Antoni (he’s feuded with all the others he’s had) told him to go into the game (due to injuries on the team), he refused.  Next year, he’s due $20.8 million and initially said he wouldn’t take a penny less.  He hasn’t done anything to deserve it and has no consideration for how the economy is affecting everyone else (although, technically, it’s not his problem, if all of us took on his attitude, the US wouldn’t be one of the most desirable places to live - as it is now).  He’s become a cancer and as with all cancers, the best thing to do is cut it out.

The Knicks have suspended him so the NBA Players Association has filed a grievance on Marbury’s behalf.  I wonder who in the Players Association would want to publicly go to bat for him.  Sounds like a case for Mark Geragos, Gerry Spence or some other lawyer who has the ability to check their conscience at the door. 

At one of my nine college jobs, we had a player who was talented, but had the knack for getting into more than just mischief.  One day, his high school coach (who liked him, but also understood him) described this kid to my boss with a line I’ve never forgotten, even though it’s decades old: 

“I think he’s finally become more problem than he is player.”