Jack’s Blog

It’s great to be back but I’m leaving again.  I’m honored to be the emcee at the party in Las Vegas tonight to celebrate Jerry Tarkanian’s induction into the College Basketball Hall of Fame.  When I get back, it’s off to the Stanford Pain Management Center for a pump refill and check up.  Then, into the car to drive down the 101 to Monterey to pick up Alex who just finished his first year of college at Cal State Monterey Bay and bring him home for the summer.  He claims he nailed it academically this semester.  If he can match his inaugural season in college hoops, in which he was one of only ten players in the country to make the Division II Freshmen All-America team - and the only one from the west coast - he’ll have had a successful beginning to college life.

Not done yet.  For those of you who have ever checked out CoachGeorgeRaveling.com, the website for my boss previous to Tark, you might have seen the video section entitled #JackAndCoach.  On it, I turn the tables on George who has interviews with individuals such as Oscar Robertson, Nolan Richardson, David Falk (MJ’s agent) and my man, Tark, among many others.  In our segment, I pose questions to get to know “the inside Rave.”  Currently, there are between 25-28 “shorts,” about 3-5 minutes in length.  Some are very funny, others quite moving, all entertaining.  We spent about five hours shooting last fall and it’s time for round two, so I’ll be, ahem, on location in LA, as they say, this weekend.  This blog will return Monday.  

The Chicago Bulls teased the entire country when they won Game One of their best-of-seven series with the Miami Heat - in Miami.  Nate Robinson showed what a little guy can do when given a chance - and is playing for a contract.  The fact that Nate hasn’t stuck with any of his five teams yet has more to do with his just being an ultra-short little guy.  The performance that night - and his continued aggressive play despite all the odds - raised the eyebrows of fans and, probably some general managers.  Last night was an abomination of a contest.  Tired or other issues?  Why haven’t the Bulls been able to repeat an effort like they did in the opener?

ESPN has four guys talking about it when the games are on their stations; TNT has four (in my opinion, better) analysts discussing the contests when they’re aired on their network.  The groups chime in on what has happened and what needs to be done to fix the problem.  In each case we hear about how some player needs to contribute more, to become that all-important creation of analysts - the X-factor.  Basically, the talking heads aren’t necessary for this series.  When a superstar is forced into street clothes, it’s obvious the team’s getting nothing from him that day.  In addition, they’re probably going to encounter a serious drop off at that spot in the lineup.

The complete analysis for the Bulls and Heat goes as follows:

“The Bulls have lost their starting point guard and both wings.  They’re playing against the best basketball team in the world.  Next?”

If anyone ever wanted to see a weird playoff basketball game, the Chicago Bulls and Brooklyn Nets were more than happy to oblige.  During the regular season, there are games in which one team jumps out on another and the team that’s behind comes back to make a game of it, sometimes even win it.  But usually, there’s an underlying reason.  The team that’s ahead might be playing the third game of a back-to-back-to-back and exhaustion finally sets in.  Maybe there’s some other scenario.  Whatever.  Sometimes it happens.

But in the playoffs?  And with a 5′8″ guy who takes over as if the game was invented for short people.  Nate Robinson got into one of those zones where no one could stop him - and, which is not always the case - his teammates recognized it.  Robinson scored 24 points - from the fourth quarter on!  Of course there were three OTs to give him a few more scoring opportunities but he was clearly the X factor.

In terms of physical attributes, while his best one surely isn’t his height, believe it or not, it’s not his quickness either.  Sure, the little fella is definitely quick enough but his true strength is . . . his strength.  Plus he’s low enough to the floor that he’s impossible knock off balance.  Yet none of Nate would have been necessary had C.J. Watson not missed a wide open transition layup/dunk with 3:16 left in the game and his team up 14 points.  Here’s a coaching point for C.J.  Either jump higher or just lay the damn ball in the basket.  You can never be ahead by too much.

Another coaching point for the Nets is, especially in one possession games, it’s mandatory to block out on missed free throws because Nazr Mohammed’s rebound of Carlos Boozer’s free throw pretty much iced the game that should have been yours.

To say that Bulls’ coach Tom Thibodeau is a basketball purist is like saying Euclid understood geometry.  So, Nate Robinson (whose line happened to be 34 points, 4 assists, 2 steals and a huge forced five-second call on a Nets’ side OB play), if Dr. Tibbs gets pissed when you take bad shots - which you are prone to do (and, for the record, did last night on several occasions) - how do you handle him in the huddle?  Nate’s answer last night was classic:

“Just keep shootin’ and hope to make ‘em.”

P.S. The OKC-Houston game could have easily been the subject of this blog.  39-19 OKC at the end of the first quarter.  Thunder up 26 with 8:00 minutes to go in the half, Rockets go ahead with 3:45 to go in the game and are up two under a minute.  Kevin Durant took a three-pointer that hit the back rim, then hit the side of the rim, then hit the back rim again, then fell through.

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

After 82 games (many of those last week being played by guys who won’t see much action from here on out, so the key guys would be well-rested), the NBA playoffs are finally here.  It sure seems like a long season just to eliminate less than half the teams.

The final week of the NBA schedule was like training camp - it gave most teams a chance to see some of its “prospects” in game action, even though the games meant nothing.   Except for the Bulls and Raptors (and with Chris Bosh’s season-ending injury, it was much better for all concerned the Bulls got the 8th spot) and, maybe, a few others jockeying for a chance to move up a spot, most of the teams were resting for the playoffs (or the lottery). 

Now, the level of play will certainly ratchet up several notches (except for Joakim Noah, Chris “The Birdman” Anderson and Edjuardo Najera who are always ratcheted up) and interest in the NBA will increase in direct proportion.  I know many basketball coaches who won’t watch a pro game until the playoffs.  Ask them why and they’ll say they’re bothered by the less-than-all-out effort during the regular season.  Ask them why they like the playoffs and the answer’s usually, because then, we get to watch the greatest athletes in the world.

When the season began, and even as it progressed, many thought a Lakers-Cavs showdown was inevitable.  Now, there are diverse opinions as to whether either or both may not even be there when the finals roll around (in June, as amazing as that sounds).  Will Shaq’s return raise the level of Cleveland’s game (after all, he is one of the greatest players to ever put on a uni and has four championships on his resume) or will his presence slow them down, clog the lane and mess with what’s been pretty good chemistry to date?  He’s allegedly been working out during Cavs’ games - even on the road, where he burns a game’s worth of calories by riding the bike and working out in the weight room, on the road as well as home.  Supposedly, he’s in the best shape of his career and totally focused on fulfilling his promise of bringing a championship to Cleveland.  Shaq has been known to blow smoke every once in a while, however.

How about LA?  Is Kobe’s finger healed?  Don’t ask him.  We know what that answer will be - even if he comes out to shoot with only four of them on his hand.  What about the addition of Ron Artest?  He’s a lightning rod for controversy, but has also been a lockdown defender - and if his head is right, he’d be an major asset.  Incredible as it sounds for someone of his talent, all he’s expected to be is a role player, albeit a significant role.

Consider the potential road blocks for these two along the way.  Although Boston occasionally looks old, the every other day off format of the playoffs aids veteran teams.  Think all the way back to the Celtics when Bill Russell was at the end of his career and the Knicks a few years later.  Because of KG’s injury last season, the Celts still consider themselves the defending champs, i.e. no one’s beaten them when they’ve been at full strength.  As for their X factor, Rasheed Wallace has a bad rep with officials (and deservedly so), but, throughout the league, he’s known as a great locker room guys and is as crafty as he is talented.   Plus, now is the time Doc Rivers is at his button-pushing best.  The flu bug has hit Boston (mainly Rajon Rondo and Glen “Big, But Don’t Call Me Baby” Davis), but what could cause Boston to be really sick is if Dwayne Wade takes over the games, as he is able - and prone - to do.

There are those who feel Orlando will repeat in the East (and they have the best chance to take down the Cavs) but they have to get through Charlotte first.  Larry Brown is as good as any coach at game-planning and now that he has quelled the rumor that he’s headed to the Clips or the Nets (for at least a week), the Bobcats and Magic series is an intriguing one.

Forget even attempting to handicap the West.  The Mavs had a terrific season, got the number two seed and their reward is they get to play the Spurs.  All the other match-ups in this division are just as compelling.  In a best-of-seven series, it’s usually the better team that wins.  Yet, with all the injuries this year, no one’s sure which is the better team!

The games start today, so as far as analyzing the NBA playoffs any further, it’s time to follow the advice from the Al Pacino-Robert DeNiro movie, Heat, in which the famous exchange ends with the line: 

“Yeah, stop talking, OK, Slick?” Â

According to Trent Dilfer, Peyton Manning won the MVP while he was on the sideline during the game Jim Caldwell decided to forego the undefeated season and rest his starters shortly after halftime.  Dilfer’s reasoning was that Manning’s absence from the game showed how much he means to the Colts.  What the nation saw was - when Peyton Manning is at quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, they win. 

My prediction might be influenced by the fact that my wife and Peyton Manning both went to Tennessee (although separated by a few decades years) and I worked at Fresno State, alma mater of Trent Dilfer, the guy who explained to the sporting world - before the MVP voting - why Manning would win it.  Logic would dictate that as long as Peyton Manning stays in the game, the Colts win.

So my pick to win the Super Bowl is the Colts . . . as long as Peyton Manning stays in the game.  If the Saints can get away with enough of those “remember me” hits - which will be the X factor but also will be difficult after the league (and everyone else) heard Saints’ defensive coordinator, Greg Williams, make those statements about a week ago (don’t think they haven’t been a topic of discussion among the refereeing crew) - and they have a cumulative effect on Manning, rendering him unable to play, I change my pick to New Orleans.

My motto is:

“It’s better to be boldly decisive and risk being wrong than to agonize at length and be right too late.” Â

A word bandied about when describing powerful people is charisma.  To me, charisma is having a presence.  I’ve worked for many bosses, some with that presence, some without.

Someone I know quite well told me a story that sums up charisma or presence or magnetism or X factor or whatever you want to call it.

Apparently, a female acquaintance of my close friend absolutely despised Bill Clinton.  This was during the time of the allegations by Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones and others, and capped off with the Monica Lewinsky fiasco.  Coincidentally, this lady’s husband was invited to a fund raiser with President Clinton.  Only because her husband’s boss expected him to attend did she consent to go to the affair (no pun intended).

The couple arrived and got in the “meet & greet” line, this lady glaring at the President as they got closer and closer, thinking about the type of immoral “role model” we had leading our country.  They finally made their way to the President and Mrs. Clinton and were introduced.  Everyone politely shook hands.

The lady told this story to my friend and, when she got to the part about shaking hands, she looked my friend straight in the eye and said, “And if he had asked me to go to bed with him right then and there, I would have.”

Marianne Williamson captured charisma when she said:

“Charisma is a sparkle in people that money can’t buy.  It is a visible energy with visible effects.”

As the 2009 NFL season gets under way, there will be many fans whose wishes will be kept alive with some early season success.  Others will have their dreams dashed right out of the gate.

The beginning of the season allows fans to engage in what’s quickly becoming America’s favorite pasttime - trash talking.  And when it’s your team that gets crushed in the first two regular season games, you need to take it out on someone.  After all, it can’t be your fault.  I mean, you don’t play.  (Funny though, how much bravado you display when your team wins). 

Who that someone is will most likely depend on where you, or rather your favorite team calls home.  If Buffalo tanks early, T.O. will be a scoundrel, a cancer that everyone knew he’d be all along - even if he’s putting up big numbers (we’re talking reality football here, the way the game was meant to be played, so when the team loses, people who root for that team get upset).

If Oakland goes south, Al Davis will be catching the overwhelming majority of the criticism.  He probably doesn’t deserve all that he’s gotten the past decade, but it’s pretty close to proportional to the praise he received when the franchise was bordering on a dynasty.  That wasn’t all Al’s doing, either.

In Chicago, should Da Bears lose, Jay Cutler will be villified - super stats or not - and all because he popped off when there was no need - right after the trade.  There is a group of loyal fans there who will forgive his losing, but only if the Bears cover.

And, if it were multiple choice question as to which of the Falcons would catch hell if that club started poorly, every answer to that question (but the last one) would be Michael Vick.  And the last answer would be “All of the above.”

Naturally, if these same teams busted out of the gates playing near perfect football, these same cast of characters would be hoisted on the city’s shoulders for their godlike qualities. None of the above have been portrayed - at least recently - as a “nice guy,” which should bode well if you’re a devotee of the man whom a complex is named after.  One of the most diminutive, but nonetheless, effective bosses of all time, Napoleon, is credited with saying:

“A leader of whom it is said. ‘He’s a nice man’ is lost.”

   Â

This summer seems to have given us more walk-off winning plays that any other I can remember.  The “walk-off” is an amazing phenomenon.  The first prerequisite is that a team must be involved.  This is true, mainly because the team has to mob somebody - usually whoever produced of the walk-off moment, i.e. the hero.  Or else, what makes it so dramatic?  A mob scene at home plate or midcourt or midfield beats a caddy hugging the guy whose bag he’s been carrying or seeing a guy taking a victory lap waving the flag of his native country.

Although the celebration of this event is directed at one guy, it’s still a team game, meaning this jubilation could never have taken place if not for the efforts of so many other team members.  For the moment, we’re talking about baseball, so let’s examine that sport for just a minute.

Yesterday, Alex Rodriguez knocked out a home run in the bottom of the 15th inning of a previously scoreless game.  The time was past midnight.  Think of all the plays that had to be made defensively, by the members of both teams, to have the game be zip-zip for that amount of time.  I mean, even a couple of timely errors by the visitors in the 3rd or 4th inning and the Yanks wouldn’t have needed A-Rod’s heroics.

No matter how many times you’ve made the play to end a game, you never forget the moment - or the feeling you had.  Personally, I can recall a few of my own: a field goal with no time left in a weekend get together (our school vs. your school) of 7th graders.  I can still feel my fellow 13-year-olds putting me up on their shoulders, even though there wasn’t one spectator at the barnburner.  Other kicks (a PAT in a 42-41 Homecoming Game victory in college) and a 33-yard field goal (with a strong wind at my back) and only seconds to go in the last game of that same season (to beat perennial power, Wagner College); a couple free throws with 3 seconds to go (and our club down one) in a nail-biting intramural game (also in college) and a game-winning single to end a high school summer rec league baseball contest that kept us from having to go into extra innings. 

The point of this trivia (or minutia) is, no matter how insignificant the actual moment is, the is no greater feeling of satisfaction you could possibly have.  And don’t give me the birth of your children or your wedding day (days for some).  That’s an apples vs. oranges comparison.  What game-winning experiences give you that none other can is that the outcome was riding on you . . . and you came through!  That feeling of accomplishment is something you can bring up a half a century later - and I can’t begin to tell you how many people I’ve heard bring up past history.  Think about it and there’s no doubt in my mind you have had the same experiences I have.

No matter how much later in life, it’s still such a great rush - and something you not only can’t forget but love reliving - again and again.  Although we’re constantly reminded to live for today and plan & look forward to tomorrow, hitting the rewind button serves as possibly the only addiction that can really do no harm.  It might just be because of all the time we spent daydreaming as kids of doing just that - making the game-winning play.  And no matter the competition, we did it - and nobody can ever take that away.

As I heard on numerous occasions during motivational speeches:

“Some people dream of worthy accomplishments while others stay awake and do them.”

Talk about a humbling experience!  Yesterday’s blog was about the term, “X Factor.”  In the post, I mentioned that an “X Factor” was not referring to a superstar, or even a starter, but, rather, to a player no one thought much about, but who could have a major impact in deciding who would win the game.  In addition, I said the X Factor in the game shouldn’t be spoken about until after the game had been completed.  Only at that time, could one select the X Factor, e.g. the team member who performed so well, unbeknownst to everyone prior to the game, it was that contribution that actually determined which team (the X Factor’s) won. 

At the end of the blog, I mentioned, “If you think I’m wrong, let me know.”  Yikes!  I don’t know if I should be flattered that so many people read my blogs or demoralized so many people think my opinion isn’t worth donkey dust (for lack of a more descriptive term).

There was certainly no shortage of opinion.  People got in touch with me I hadn’t heard from in years.  “Just read your blog.  See you haven’t changed much.”  I’m not sure, but I have a sneaking suspicion that was not meant as a compliment. 

Others were gracious enough to offer medical advice (probably because he is a loyal reader and truly understands the pain I’ve had to endure).  “So, you don’t think someone like Kobe or LeBron can be considered an X Factor?  You need to have your head examined.“  Made an appointment with a psychologist right after reading that and am looking forward to our session.  Wonder if I should send a copy of the blog ahead so she can have a better insight to her new patient?  On second thought, I think it might be better if I surprised her.

Still other readers were complimentary of my potential.  “An X Factor has to be a reserve?  Come on, Jack, you’re better than that.“  It’s refreshing to know I haven’t reached my max yet.

There were others, many of them more colorful.  Two of them were from 1) someone I ran into at the store (lucky I was in the Express lane) and 2) a call from a friend in New Jersey, who gave me advice on how to be taller (as only someone from New Jersey can).  “If you believe what you blogged yesterday, you ought to spread your legs as wide as you can . . . and see if you can pull your head out.”

Years ago, I would have argued with each and every one of these people.  It’s amazing at how strongly people will argue - even when the other side has proven they’re wrong; at how they’ll try to redirect the valid point just made by the person they’re speaking with, or blurt out a sarcastic remark, diverting atention from their mistake - so they won’t have to be thought of as that dreaded word . . . wrong.  If you’re not sure the type of person I’m talking about, just listen to Ann Coulter when she is having a conversation with anyone but Sean Hannity, e.g. someone who disagrees with the gospel according to Ann.  If you think I’m not a particularly big fan of Ann’s, consider that I’m Jewish and her remarks on Donnie Deutsch’s Big Show about Jews needing to be perfected were quite offensive to me.  In fact, if Ann Coulter is perfect, I want to be about as far from perfect as is humanly possible.

Honestly, I was so influenced by the number of people who cast dissenting votes against what I posted last night that I have (drum roll, . . . ) changed my mind!  The one argument that did it was, “when the Cleveland Cavaliers played the Pistons, if LeBron wasn’t the X Factor, i.e. the guy who made the glaring between the two teams, the one guy who the Pistons did not have that the Cavs did, please tell me who was.”

Checkmate.

What I learned in situations such as these can be summed up in a quote from the former head of Intel, Andy Grove.  Put this practice to use and, not only will you walk away from “discussions” quite a bit more intelligent, not to mention, informed but you won’t have to go back to your hotel room, or house, or office, thinking, “Gee, did I make an ass out of myself today.  Why can’t I ever give in to even a minor point?”  Try it and you’ll immediately gain more credibility.  Andy’s line? 

“Fight like you’re right; listen like you’re wrong.”    Â

Someone came up with the name “X Factor,” which was meant to stand for the player whose contribution to his team’s effort in a specific game (or over the course of a series or even a season) made (or could make) the difference between the squad winning rather than losing.  It is a term not usually attached to a star, or even a starter.  It is a compl-i-mentary term to describe a compl-e-mentary player, one who is the envy of all opponents.    

There are so many members making up what, at one time, was called the Fourth Estate, that new catch phrases or terms (such as X Factor) are more than welcome.  It gives reporters more to talk about.  (We all remember that now infamous quote: “If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be“)?  X Factor has such a positive connotation, Gatorade named a whole brand after it - and it’s become one of their most popular sellers.

 As with most “inventions” that take off quickly, there’s a tendency to overuse it.  Instead of it being someone who performed so well the game was changed by that singular achievement, we’re now asking, in advance of the contest, “Who will be the X Factor?”

In this context, we now have a potential hero, but also, a possible scapegoat (if the proclaimed X Factor turns in a subpar performance).  I don’t think that was ever the intention of the term X Factor.  An X Factor is someone who changes the outcome in a positive manner, not someone who might change it or whose peformance aided in losing.  Players want to be an X Factor, not a potential X Factor.

Besides, basketball is a team sport.  There’s no one NBA player who can influence a game so much that he alone is the difference in a W or an L, assuming the player in question is not intentionally tanking.  I’m not talking about a superstar who is so superior to anyone the other squad has, the opponent has no chance to win - like LeBron against the Pistons or Hawks.  If that’s the definition of an X Factor, then I’ve got it all wrong and this blog is as useless as much of the other things you’ve read today.  However, if that truly is the case, I apologize and please come back tomorrow.

But, then again, if that’s the case, then you’d think that KG and Yao would be considered X Factors - and if that were true, how come the Magic had to go to seven games to beat the Celtics and the Lakers needed the same to advance past Houston? 

Sometimes, the home crowd is the X Factor., e.g. when both teams are physically drained, but the home team feeds off the energy and volume of its fans and is able to summon up the effort necessary to pull out a win, when every mistake the visitors make is so roundly cheered, it psychologically further drains the opponent.

In my humble opinion, an X Factor is someone (or “someone’s”) who is (are) determined after the game, not prior to it.  If you think I’m wrong, let me know.  I’ve posted well over 600 blogs.  Naturally, readers will disagree with some of them.  That’s simply human nature, because, as I learned many, many years ago:

“If you and I agree on everything, one of us isn’t necessary.”