Jack’s Blog

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.”

So the first day of the NBA playoffs has passed and exactly how much excitement have the fans witnessed?  The answer depends on whether you’re in “NBA mode” yet.  The overall top-seed, the Chicago Bulls, were down for nearly the entire game until MVP favorite Derrick Rose decided to, once again, put the club on his back and scored or assisted the Bulls to 16 of the game’s final 17 points.  The Bulls won, 104-99.  Whew!  That was a close one.  Had they not made the final surge, . . . they would have lost their home court advantage.  The second-seeded Miami Heat also avoided such a scenario by slipping past the scrappy 76ers.Orlando wasn’t as fortunate although Dwight Howard put up monster numbers (46 & 19, 31 of the 46 points in the first half).  The Magic were defeated by the Atlanta Hawks, the team that was embarrassingly swept by the same Orlando squad last year.

Had this been the NCAA tourney, the country would be abuzz what with a near upset of the tourney’s overall #1 seed being knocked out - in the first round!  The airways would be filled with talk of Rose keeping the Bulls from making dubious history.  As far as the Heat, with the overall greatest “recruiting” class ever, their fans would continue holding their breath as the team everyone loves to hate escaped to fight another day.

The Magic wouldn’t be so lucky.  Their fans would suffer, their promising season over.  The worry over whether Dwight Howard would return or enter his name in the draft, the rumors about Stan Van Gundy losing his job and all the other water cooler topics that surface after the team is eliminated.

Instead, the way the NBA playoffs work, the mind set is whether the Pacers and Sixers can actually steal a game on the higher team’s home court (or if they can at least keep from being swept) and whether Howard’s teammates will give him some support so they can advance as usual.

Which playoff system is better?  For immediate drama, the NCAAs have it.  If you want to see the best athletes in the world, the NBA is your choice.  But which is better?

Take it from Friedrich Nietzsche:

“You have your way.  I have my way.  As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”

When people are faced with major decisions in life, one strategy that’s suggested is to take a piece of paper and write down two columns.  One of the columns is the positive side, the other the negative.

Although I spent 30 years in college basketball and got to know Tom Izzo pretty well, I am not privy to whether he used this method or not.  If he did, however, I am sure he made the right call in turning down the offer to coach the Cavs.  My only wonder is why it took him so long to decide.

In the positive column, that one being to take the job, there would be, of course, the money - reportedly $6 million/year for five years (forgive me for intruding for just a moment, but he makes $3 mil now - so how much more would his and his family’s life style improve - even with his salary doubling)?  Therefore, the only other positive I can think of would be: “If when I get fired, they owe me a whole bunch of dough.”  Imagine getting canned after year two and him coming home and saying, “Lupe, I’ve got good news and bad news.  The bad news is I got fired” (because getting fired is usually considered bad news).  “The good news is I have the next three years off and we have $18 million to spend” (which kinda takes the edge off of the bad news, don’t ya think)?   

Seriously, other than a new challenge (as if trying to win a national championship in college basketball isn’t enough of a challenge), what other possible positive could there be?  Winning an NBA title?  Even if LeBron told Izzo that not only was he going to stay in Cleveland, but his boys promised to join him (and I’m not using those words to describe the high school buddies he claims as dependents every April 15th), there still might not be sufficient reason to start planning the parade.

When moving is entered into the equation, no offense to the Rock ‘N Roll Hall of Fame and now, Betty White, but changing your address from East Lansing to Cleveland (or even Shaker Heights) isn’t considered that much of an upgrade.  Especially when you’re a legend in the former.  Sure it’s Magic’s hometown, but he doesn’t walk down those streets much anymore, so as far as “owning” a town, that one is definitely Izzo’s.

As far as “enjoying the job,” why would the NBA’s Eastern Conference grind be more fun than the Big Ten - independent of how many teams they put in it?  Certainly, the addition of Nebraska isn’t so frightening he’d consider packing his bags.  Tom is a self-described grunt and, to date, no one’s ever pinned that label on LeBron James so a marriage of Beauty and the Beast (as far as innate ability goes), might not have a fairy tale ending.  And remember, Tom, which of you is the native son.

When I first heard the Cavs were offering the job to Izzo, my first thought was, “I wonder how those guys will react the first time Tom tells them to put on the shoulder pads for a rebounding drill?”  He’d better have some serious front office backing or what could ensue would make what the French soccer team just did look like a group of guys heading for the john. 

Plus, Tom’s an emotional guy.  Sure, there are a lot of hugs when the Spartans cut down the nets after winning a regional, but prior to those embraces is a good deal of “in your face” (constructive) criticism.  Reflect on the recent NBA playoffs (I’d say the regular season, but I wanted more than two readers to be able to participate in the reflection).  Stan Van Gundy might be a screamer (but his tirades more to the team than directly at a specific player) and while Gregg Popvich did call his guys “dogs,” that was after a loss (and was said to the media).  How many NBA head coaches get right up in the players’ mugs and chew them out?  Naturally, I’m talking about serious rotation guys, not the ones who, if they chirped back, the coach could have released the following day.  And don’t start with Phil yelling at Kobe as he comes off the floor.  That’s more to show the rest of the guys what they all know - that he realizes Kobe is trying to do too much.  You’ll also notice when Phil’s barking at him, he’s never so close that he violates Kobe’s space.  Add to that scenario that Kobe’s come out publicly stating total support for his coach.  In LeBron’s case, John Calipari as coach would be more like Kobe-Phil, and the jury’s out on how that relationship would survive in the NBA.  

Tom Izzo and the Cleveland Cavaliers (or any team in the NBA) is as wrong a match as Tom and Michigan State is the perfect one.  Besides - and I know I’ve used this Jim Valvano quote before - but I also know this would be V’s advice to Tom just as it was to all those successful coaches who flirted with leaving a place they’d built and loved:

“Don’t mess with happy.”

If you were coaching a basketball team, how would you like someone who’s considered a brilliant tactician helping you - and you don’t even have to pay him?  Orlando Magic coach Stan Van Gundy has such a luxury with his brother, Jeff, a television analyst, sitting courtside watching his games (or those of his upcoming opponents).

As a matter of full disclosure, let me state that I know both Van Gundy boys.  As a matter of fact, I shared room with (a very young) Jeff in Tucson at a self-improvement clinic a couple of us college assistants began back in the ’80s (an idea we stole from one of my former bosses, George Raveling).  Jeff’s boss had just been let go at Providence College and, as happens in coaching, Jeff was out as well.  We talked deep into the night about the coaching profession and varying strategies as well.  I can still remember how impressed I was with his innate intelligence and ability to analyze situations - in and out of basketball. 

That Jeff had such an in depth a knowledge of the game Jeff was no surprise since his father, Bill, was a highly successful college coach in his own right.  (At that clinic I also was also blown away with a recruiting presentation by an assistant named Kevin O’Neill, but that story will have to wait for another blog). 

Each year, our same group would get together and, in the process, we’d learn more about each other.  One thing that struck me - this time at a clinic that Kevin hosted when he was the head coach at Northwestern - was how close the Van Gundy brothers were.  This came back to me as I was watching Game One of the Eastern Conference Finals. 

Independent of the fact that Peter Vecsey disparages Jeff Van Gundy every chance he gets (of course, Vecsey makes a living mocking people so Jeff has a lot of company anytime Vecsey places his to fingers on a keyboard), the younger VG makes some incredibly insightful points.  The average viewer may or may not pick up on some of the strategy he imparts because he mixes in humor and self-deprecation in very cleverly.

While people rooting for the Magic (or against the Celtics) might have been frustrated with the total dominance of Boston (until the last four minutes), Jeff made statements like, “In the first half, Orlando’s problem was their offense; this half it’s their defense” and, regarding Dwight Howard’s comment about the guy who gives him the toughest time being Kendrick Perkins, “This is the playoffs.  He shouldn’t be giving compliments to anybody.”  Jeff is the ultimate professional because I just know his insides had to be absolutely churning while his brother’s team was giving away home court advantage. 

Listen closely to his remarks the next time he works a game and you’ll understand why Stan, no doubt, following Game One must have said:

“Hey, brother, can you spare me some time?”

 Â

The Orlando Magic swept the Charlotte Bobcats in the first round of the NBA playoffs.  The Bobcats were the #7 seed and put up less of a fight than the #8 seeded Chicago Bulls did against the team with the NBA’s best regular season record, the Cleveland Cavaliers.  The only negative about the Magic’s play was that its center, Dwight Howard, aka Superman, was saddled with foul trouble in every game.  To hear Howard and hos coach, Stan Van Gundy, tell the story, referees were the equivalent of kryptonite.

Because they ended their series so quickly - and because the Atlanta Hawks allowed the Milwaukee Bucks, who had just lost their best player, Andrew Bogut, to jump out to a 3-1 lead in games before rallying to take the series in seven - the Magic had a week off.  At this time of the year, players love some time to rest, but some prognosticators wondered if that much of a layoff would have a negative effect.  You know, the rust argument. 

If there was any rust in Orlando’s game, it only lasted twelve minutes.  The game was a two-point affair, in favor of the home team, before the Magic steamrolled the hapless Hawks by virtually ending the contest by outscoring Cold-lanta by 18 in the second stanza to take a 20-point lead into halftime.  When action resumed, it only got worse for the Hawks - and much better for the Magic.  The final: 114-71.

That makes five in a row for Stan Van’s fans.  Sure, the East is waaaaay down compared to the other side, e.g. the #7 seed in the West “upset” its #2 (San Antonio vs. Dallas) but you can only play the team they put in front of you - and, to date, the most impressive team hails not from DisneyLand, but DisneyWorld.  Am I saying the dream match-up between the Lakers and the Cavs (really, Kobe and LeBron) won’t happen?

I ain’t saying it will.  When Orlando added Vince Carter, many predicted great things.  Then, he was panned by the critics - and in sport, there are no shortage of those.  Now, VC is playing more like the guy they thought they were going to get when they acquired him, Jameer Nelson simply took over the first round and J.J. Redick is playing like he did at Duke.  The other guys, including Howard, who shed his Clark Kent game of the first round and returned to playing like the Man of Steel.

Whether the Magic can win it all probably comes down to the heart.  If they have it, just remember Rudy Tomjanovich’s line:

“Never underestimate the heart of a champion.”Â

The term “armchair quarterback” has been replaced by what it always was: armchair coach.  Come on, did you really think that a guy sitting at home (especially one with a small - or not so small - wager on the game) would be content with just calling the shots on one side of the ball?  Plus, the new designation allows for the same couch (or chair) potato to become the “coach” for all the other sports he watches and makes brilliant comments about (usually after a play is over).  The word “he” is used because generally, someone whose actual knowledge of the game is in inverse proportion to how much he thinks he knows about it, tends to be a male.  See, guys, the ladies haven’t caught us in every area yet.

In the sport of basketball, there are so many instances where such a “professional” can put his theories to work, it’s one of the favorite times of the year for these masters of the (p)leather.  Following the NBA Playoffs alone, many an armchair must be re-upholstered, there are so many cases that have been bantered about.

One such area that lends to debate is what’s referred to by coaches (the real ones) as late game situations.  In general, these are two-three minutes or less to go in the game and what to do when certain situations arise.  Let’s discuss one particular late game situation that occurred in the recently concluded NBA Finals, possibly the turning point in the series.

With 11 seconds to go and the Magic holding a three point lead over the Lakers, Dwight Howard is at the free throw line, shooting two.  Obviously, if he makes one, the game becomes a two-possession game and, with only 11 seconds, can be chalked up as a win for DisneyWorld over DisneyLand, tying the series at two games a piece.  But, maybe to make it interesting, maybe because he’s not a good enough free throw shooter yet (probably the latter), Howard misses both and the Lakers call time out.

OK, armchair guys, compare your thinking to the coaching staff of the Magic - who, following the game, each of you blasted- according to comments left on websites, water cooler talk and quotes in the papers (media members, especially columnists, aren’t excluded from the “armchair coach club,” they just happen to get paid for voicing - in print or through the airwaves - their version of what should have been).

First question to be discussed during the time out is: where are the Lakers choosing to put the ball into play - on the baseline (94′ from their goal) or at midcourt?  Then, and this is one item I didn’t see or hear discussed, do we have a foul to give?  Admittedly, I didn’t search the internet or jump from channel to channel to hear as many views as I could have following the game, although it was the first thing I inquired when talking to my friends, mostly current or former coaches (the real kind).

If you have a foul to give (and the Lakers are taking the ball out at the end line, which is what they chose to do), when do you want to give it?  Right away, under, say, six seconds?  It is my understanding now, that, in fact, the Magic did have a foul to give.  As everyone who has more than just a casual interest in the game seems to know, the players have to be careful not to take a foul on a player who is in the act of shooting, thus giving him three FT’s and defeating the purpose of giving that last foul (whehter the opponent is in the bonus or not).  Most dangerous, because of how good he is at anticipating a foul and because of his reputation, is Kobe, so the strategy is probably: do not to let Kobe touch the ball.  If he does, double him immediately and get it out of his hands.  Imagine letting Kobe Bryant shoot a three with the game on the line and eventually losing?  You’d be fired before the series got to Game 5.

An aside: since, following the game’s conclusion, no one asked Stan Van Gundy if he or his staff knew they had a foul to give (at least no one I heard, which was limited to what ESPN-TV broadcast of the post game press conference), I don’t know if that factored into what their strategy was.  With the sheer number of coaches and all the coaching experience (Brendan Malone, himself, is a 40-year coaching veteran), I’d be totally shocked if someone didn’t mention it - although, how the Magic played following the Lakers’ timeout did nothing to make me think they did know.

Even assuming they did not have a foul to give, the argument of “do you or don’t you foul with a three-point lead and seconds to go?” comes into consideration.  This has been a hot topic ever since the first coach decided not to foul and the opponent hit a three-pointer to send the game into OT.  With my background in math (and math being based on logic), I think fouling is playing the odds and the right move. 

This strategy was asked of SVG and he logically answered the question.  His comment was, because there were 11 seconds - and because they had shot free throws so poorly(10-17 in the fourth quarter), he simply didn’t think it would be to his club’s advantage to foul, stop the clock and, in all likelihood, give them two points, then have them foul his guys (Howard had just missed two and the normally reliable Hedo Turkoglu had missed five!)

OK, back to what to do when they take the ball out and have to go the length of the floor.  We know what they chose and what happened - and, naturally, the armchairs say, “How can you double Kobe, knowing he’s going to pass it up the floor and Orlando will be outnumbered?”  Wait a minute now.  Let’s break that statement down.  “…knowing he’s going to pass it up the floor…”  What, in Kobe’s history, would lead someone to the conclusion that, at the end of a game, with a W or L on the line, he’s going to pass the ball? Because he’s double-teamed?  Have you ever taken a glimpse of some of the shots he takes when he’s doubled?  Exhibit A: take a gander at the picture of the shot he’s hoisting on page 35 of the June 15 issue of Sports Illustrated - and he’s only being “one-and-a-half teamed.”  Hey, I’m no Kobe-hater.  I think he’s the best player in the game today, followed closely by LeBron, but to say, don’t double because you know he’s going to pass, I’m going to have to accuse you of not only second-guessing, but doing so after knowing the outcome.  There is room for an argument on whether or not to double him, but there is NO basis for that argument.

Next criticism of Stan VG (having been a 30-year assistant, I feel the entire staff shares the blame, as they ought to the credit when decisions work): “Why was Jameer Nelson in the game at that point?”  Regarding this, I don’t believe there’s any reason anyone can give that would justify Nelson being in the game.  Although I was on the staff at Fresno State when Rafer Alston played there, and he and I got to be pretty close because we were both Easterners (me from New Jersey and Rafer from that suburb of New Jersey, NYC), my belief on this has absolutely no bearing the relationship between Rae and me.  The reason I say that is because I don’t think Rafer should have been in the game at that point.  Up three, with seconds to play, size is what’s needed to guard, not experience or quickness.  Who cares if one of the Lakers beats his defender off the dribble?  They need a three to hurt you!  Even Stan said in the press conference that he was astounded at how much room Nelson gave Fisher, gesturing with arms spread as he spoke.  “It’s like we were guarding against the layup,” Coach VG said, kindly using the word “we” instead of the defender’s (Nelson) name.  

If you think Van Gundy felt, “Even if they hit a three, we go into overtime,” you’re not the armchair whiz you make yourself out to be, because if the game goes into OT, no matter what he says to his guys, they know they gave it away, and the momentum the Lakers would riding into OT (coupled with the fact, lest we forget, that their personnel is better - and you can never let the favorite up for another breath if you have the chance to put them away).  Human nature takes over, along with self-doubt on one side (Orlando) and (for the Lakers) a sense of relief and renewed commitment not to let this golden opportunity slip away - again!

Unfortunately, although all of this must be taken into consideration, if a coach took this long to make a decision, the game would be lost due to forfeit.  This was just a (futile, no doubt) attempt to show armchair coaches that a little more thought and planning goes into a late game decision than, “How the hell could the Magic have not fouled?”

As I used to say when I spoke at coaching clinics or to callers on post game radio shows:

“A good coaching move is one that works.”

I’ll be leaving today for St. Louis and the NIKE Hoop Jamboree.  Our son, Alex, was selected to participate and we’re looking forward to the competition to see exactly where he stacks up against the best freshmen and sophomores in the country.  Probably won’t be blogging until we get back, but I KNOW there will be some really interesting blogs come out of this trip.

Stay tuned. 

Down 0-2 in a series that could (should?) easily be tied at one, the Orlando Magic came out last night and put on a shooting clinic the likes of which the NBA has never before seen.  That’s not an exaggeration either.  Orlando shot 75% in the first half and each made basket brought a louder roar from the capacity crowd of 17,461 who were hoping to witness (pardon the term, LeBron) the Magic’s first ever NBA Finals vistory.  That they were only ahead by a mere five points (made to look even smaller considering one Kobe Bean Bryant was in the uniform of the opposing team) was at once discomforting and motivational to the Magic faithful (as far as keeping the place alive and the hometown boys at the very top of their game). 

They cooled off somewhat in the second half, to the point of some folks thinking, “Oh no, not another heartbreaking loss in the ‘09 playoffs,” but a clutch putback dunk by Michael Pietrus and some desperately needed stops at the opposite end of the floor put everyone’s mind at ease - and looking forward to Game 4.  My blog on June 7 will become eerily prophetic if the Magic can play an identical game (I doubt even the most optimistic fan would expect that) to last night’s.

Should Orlando be able to win, momentum would do a 180 and be squarely in favor of the underdogs from Florida - with pivotal Game 5 staying in Orlando.  Whoa!  Even jai lai or the 4:30 pm early bird special doesn’t generate this kind of excitement.

For the same reason I predicted Game 2 was not a “must win” contest, no one should get jacked up about “what happens if the Magic win Game 4 (most of the Magic zealots have already replaced the “if” with a “when”).  This game of basketball, NBA Playoff basketball in particular, as if you hadn’t noticed by now (even if you consider yourself a casual follower), swings in a hurry from one team to the other - often within the game itself.  Proof positive was watching Kobe explode for 17 first quarter points, but ending with only 31 - and missing five - 5! - free throws.  Rumor has it that the last time Kobe Bryant missed five FT’s in the same game, three wise men and a virgin showed up.  That occurence doesn’t seem likely - or even plausible - especially in Los Angeles. 

Like Stan Van Gundy calmly said frantically yelled at his squad, “Kobe’s on fire; they’re on fire.  Keep up the defensive effort and the energy!“  One thing about good coaches is that, whether they ever played the game beyond high school or are former pros & Olympians, a major key to in-game coaching is to observe what’s happening and have the ability to convey something meaningful to your team at a time out or a crucial situation so that the club can employ your (a) strategy which will perpetuate the good or terminate the bad.  String a few successful suggestions or comments together and that team will follow you wherever you wish to take them.  Phony something up and you’ll be exposed for the fraud you are and evidently were all along, and if you’re not fired, the time will come where you’d wished you were.

As Pat Riley so eloquently put it:

“In coaching there are only two possible outcomes: winning and misery.”

  ¼/p>

Everyone has heard of teams making up game plans for upcoming contests.  In the NBA playoffs, it’s more difficult because not only do you have to make up a game plan for the next game, you have to settle on something that you think will work over a best-of-seven series.  Along with that task, you’d better have a contingency plan in case what you originally thought was a good idea turns out not to be effective.  And another in case the backup plan doesn’t work.  Probably no need beyond that because if you have to go to Plan D, it’s bound to be a serious gamble and not as fundamentally sound as it needs to be, meaning you’re going to wind up on the short end anyway.

Most pundits have the Magic as underdogs in the series, in which the Lakers have the best player in basketball (certainly the best one left in the playoffs) as well as the home court advantage.  So, in terms of preparing for the Lakers, Stan Van Gundy and his staff have to get their squad ready for the same three areas they’ve had to focus on in the past: defense (first and foremost, what to do with Kobe), offense (or how best to score) and special situations, e.g. they’d hate to play well enough to be right there at the end, but not be able to successfully inbound the ball (like the Nuggets). 

Take defense first.  As far as Kobe is concerned, does it matter if they force him right or left, toward the baseline or the middle, double him early or wait until after he’s put the ball on the floor?  Hint: It doesn’t.  Rather than try to come up with something brilliant, especially something they haven’t done all year, which might just confuse their own guys more than the Lakers (especially a guy who’s a student of the game, in the way Kobe is), wouldn’t it be wiser to talk to Michael Pietrus, who, in all probability will draw the assignment of guarding Bryant?  Also, ask Courtney Lee, Rashard Lewis and even Hedo Turkoglu who also may have to play him in case Pietrus gets into foul trouble - or just gets sick of having to guard LeBron James in one series, only to draw Kobe Bryant in the next one.

On offense, the prevailing thought has been to play inside-out.  The Lakers don’t want Dwight Howard to dominate, or to get their big men in foul trouble, whether it’s Andrew Bynum, Josh Powell, Pau Gasol or some unknown who might just have to be forced into action, lest Lamar Odom be put in and try to be kryptonite.  So, the big man in the middle for the Magic can expect a double team and, if he can find the open guy to hit a three, or to pass quicker than the defense can recover, until someone else hits an open three, a strength of Orlando’s club, they’ll have a chance to upset the guys from L.A.  Once again, don’t attempt to doa thing until you’ve spoken to Dwight Howard himself.  The staff may find out he has some pretty good insight from playing them before, watching them in other games or speaking with other big guys throughout the league.

When making out a game plan, it’s a basketball axiom that “whoever has the chalk last, wins.”  The most important thing in coaching - at any level - is to make certain what you, as a coach, wants, is executed by the guys on the floor.  And getting their input is, undoubtedly, the best first step in establishing a game plan. 

This takes me back to a story in the 1980’s when I was an assistant coach at the University of Tennessee.  I went to watch a prospect in a small town in Georgia and the only seat that was available was behind the bench of the opposing team.  I sat down and was so close to the coaches, I couldn’t help but hear everything they were saying throughout the course of the game.

Once, early in the contest, one of their players came down and threw a cross court pass that was picked off (by the prospect I had come to see).  He took it down and tomahawk dunked it at the other end.  This miscue caused the head coach to turn to his assistant and say, “Didn’t we tell them never to throw cross court passes?”  His assistant vigorously nodded.

On the ensuing possession, their guard dribbled the ball over midcourt and was met by aggressive defense from his counterpart, causing him to pick up his dribble.  Pinned in by the defender and the midcourt line, the ballhandler managed a weak pass which was stolen (by my prospect again and flushed at the opposite basket).  The head coach of the losing team was completely flustered.  He turned once again to his assistant and said, “Didn’t we tell them not to pick up their dribble right after they crossed half court?”  Once again, the vigorous nod from Tonto.

Finally, his team got the ball into a half court set.  The ball went to the wing and every fan in the gym heard the head man scream, “Give it to him!” meaning to throw the ball into the post player, who had his defender pinned on his back.  The man with the ball attempted to throw a pass into the post, but he telegraphed it and, without a fake of any kind, threw a overhead pass that was deflected by the player guarding him.  Another turnover.  The head coach was apoplectic.  “Didn’t we tell them to always use a bounce pass when feeding the post!“  Veins were actually bulging out of his neck and I wouldn’t have been shocked if “the big one” hit right then and there.  Naturally, his trusty sidekick shook his head up and down so hard, I thought he might loosen something and become the first living bobblehead doll.

It was precisely at that moment that I realized the problem he and many others like him had.  This coach knew the game; his problem was getting his kids to know it as well as he (and his assistant) did.  It’s the key to coaching.  Make sure the players believe in what you believe in, as strongly as you believe in it.  

As Colin Powell said:

“Plans don’t accomplish work.  Goal charts on walls don’t accomplish work.  It’s people who get things done.”

First of all, the Orlando Magic should be congratulated for beating thumping the Cleveland Cavaliers.  The public has learned a great deal about professional basketball from this series and many people will be feeling a major void with the upcoming finals and its participants.

1) There is no conspiracy.  If ever the NBA needed something to give it a boost, a match up between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Cleveland Cavaliers, or rather between Kobe Bryant and LeBron James, would rocket the television ratings skyward to a stratosphere never before believed possible.  You didn’t think those cute Nike commercials with the puppets or the Vitamin Water debate was coincidental to the season’s end, did you?  So, if there was ever a time for the league office to inform officials or scoreboard operators or whomever else comes into play in a conspiracy (maybe James Patterson), this last playoff series would have been it.  Therefore, the result should put to rest all doubts that the NBA is interested in anything other than playing it straight, Tim Donaghy or not.  Not that they weren’t rooting for . . .

2) Coaching matters.  According to none other than Charles Barkley, maybe not an expert, but someone from whom you are guaranteed to get a straight answer - with no punches pulled nor hidden agendas advanced - the offense employed by the Cavs made them and LeBron much less effective than if they had run more and, when they did get in the half court, if they’d have run something besides the 1-4 low (or “give the ball to LeBron at the nail,” as their coach, Mike Brown called it), so that James wasn’t saddled with a one-on-five situation 100% of the time Cleveland played in the half  court.  The mental and physical energy he needed to expend during every one of those situations had to wear him down. 

Stan Van Gundy, on the other hand, took the shots from outsiders - and even one from the ultimate insider, Dwight Howard, who complained he wasn’t getting the ball enough and questioned the coach’s substitution pattern.  Stan didn’t overreact, in fact, he barely reacted.  There wasn’t anything said, no one drawing lines in the sand, no internal voices of dissension.  Who knows who was right and what was done?  But, in the elimination game for the Cavs, Howard did have 40, so either the big guy got his way or Van Gundy got his players to realize that if they stayed the course, all would work out in the end.  The best part of it was, unlike most NBA coach-player arguments, nobody gloated, i.e. there were no “I-told-you-so’s” after the Magic won.  The team got it done and that’s the essence of coaching.   

3) Every time there would have been an isolation opportunity with Kobe on LeBron or LeBron on Kobe, the sporting world would have stopped to see who would have gotten the better of whom - and the chirping would sound like the woods were full.  And that was the reasoning behind the Vitamin Water ads. 

4) Even if the series only went four games, there are probably hundreds of missed photo op’s for posters, magazines, t-shirts, Fatheads (imagine fans of one or the other and the enjoyment they’d have putting a life size shot of their favorite player taking the other - either on a blow by, a dunk opportunity, a J with a hand right in the shooter’s face - or better yet, a block - pasted up on the wall for all eternity)?  Ain’t happenin’.  Not in this year’s playoffs, anyway. 

Seeing the Black Mamba dunk over Superman or the latter reject the former is exciting, but not the same as 48 minutes of mano-a-mano Kobe and Bron-Bron.  Maybe it wouldn’t have been 48 minutes, one or maybe both sides would rather not have their superstar expend that much energy at the defensive end, or risk foul trouble, but all of us know that when it came to crunch time, they each be on the other like brown on rice (the new healthy way to eat has brown rice replacing white).

5) Now the problem of which team to pull for?  Except for the die-hard Lakers fans, and their arch nemesis, the Laker-haters, and most people from Florida, at least the 80% of the population who are under 90 years of age, the remainder of the nation needs a reason to cheer for one team or the other.  After all, when the NBA Playoffs are over, all we have is Major League Baseball and the WNBA and I’d venture to say there is no more than a 10% crossover in terms of the fan base of each.

So pick a team and appreciate that what you’re watching are the best athletes in the world, playing a game that is the only team sport in which the defensive goal is not a shutout, meaning there will be what America likes best in sports - scoring.

And, as much as the pro game has become one-on-one, individual highlight material, it will be the better team which will, in all likelihood, win.  As Vince Lombardi said:

“Teamwork makes the Packers win.  People who work together will succeed.”

As many others who watched the Cavs-Magic game in complete awe of LeBron James and his exploits, especially in the fourth quarter, I felt the need to add my name to the ever-growing witness list.  I went directly to my home computer and, but the warnings the local television station had been giving us for the past half hour or so, actually had materialized.  First, we lost all power, then it came back on for maybe, three or four seconds, until, finally, everyone was left in complete darkness.  Witnessing LeBron was through - his display of immortal basketball skills to be shut down and locked up - until Mother Nature decided it was showtime again. 

Now, should anyone, Stan Van Gundy or Phil Jackson, for instance, want the inside scoop on what it takes to shut down this, as Pepperdine basketball coach Tom Asberry refers to such creatures, “pituitary freak,” I have the definitive answer: a major storm of Biblical proportions - like the one which caused a power outage in Central California Thursday night.

Except LBJ is not just any pituitary freak.  What he did in the fourth quarter of Game 5 (accounting for - either with a field goal, free throw or assist - 32 consecutive points) - was something I’d have said wouldn’t be possible if someone had asked, but because it would be such an absurd question, no one ever asked it. Thirty-two (32) consecutive freaking points!  This guy is to basketball what Eddie Feigner and his three guys (better known as “The King and His Court”) were to softball.

If we want to level the playing field, LeBron’s team should only be able to play with four players (total) when he’s in the game.  The fact that Orlando has held the upper hand in this series shows that basketball truly is a team game.  Even former players like the CNN analysts - Charles Barkley, Kenny Smith and Reggie Miller - great players all, with egos to match (usually the great ones have a big ego - the key is being able to keep it in check) marveled at the “perfect fourth” LeBron had.  Their theory is that, OK, he’s a great one, but there’s no way he can do that for three straight games.  Just the fact that those three have to talk like that is shocking to me - and shows how much better they think King James is than the rest of the NBA.

Should they get to the Finals - although I would imagine the line for that would be rather prohibitive - basketball fans would be treated to the absolute zenith in match ups: King James vs. The Black Mamba.  Talk about TV ratings.  I’ll go on record now and say that those games, should they materialize, would the most over-hyped, yet most watched, NBA Finals of all-time, maybe the highest rated sporting event show ever.  And worth it! A match up of the two most dominant scorers as well as prolific passers of our time - and two ballers who love to take the challenge and get after it on the defensive end, are you kidding me?  Don’t plan on calling me or asking if I’d like to get together that day.  I’m busy.  

A weaving instructor, Lucy Yepa Lowdon summed up the feeling that describes these larger-than-life figures have:

“(People) who work with their hands are laborers.  (People) who work with their hands and their brains are craftsman.  (People) who work with their hands and their brains and their hearts  are artists - and I am that artist.” 

  Â