Jack’s Blog

It’s always amusing to me when fans hit the panic button after the first game of the season.  Well, for supporters like that, the Lakers just forced a major run on panic buttons.  The only thing about that is this time, it might just be the proper move to make.

It’s widely known the Lakers went 0-8 in the preseason.  LA coach Mike Brown even said his team might go winless in the preseason.  The staff was trying to put in the Princeton offense.  Ding!  Ding!  Ding!  There is the problem.  Pete Carril, the inventor of the Princeton offense when he was head coach at - duh - did so for a couple of reasons.  One was, being at Princeton, he had guys who were extraordinarily bright.  This isn’t always a formula for success in athletics as book smart doesn’t necessarily equate to ball smart.  But Pete’s guys were both.  Secondly, Pete knew that when his teams played the “big boys,” the only chance he had was to slow the game down and frustrate better players.

Certainly, running the Princeton offense wasn’t going to be done because the Lakers were smarter than their opponents (even though their starting five might just be).  The Lakers have better players than their opponents (maybe not all of them) and need to be doing exactly what Pete Carril was doing at Princeton, i.e. taking advantage of his players’ abilities.  Like pushing the ball first and foremost, then running pick and rolls with Steve Nash, pounding the ball inside to Dwight Howard, isolating Kobe Bryant - putting all their guys in positions to do what they do best - exactly what Carril’s offense did.

Defensively, one issue they have is that they have to doubleteam every pick and roll because of Nash.  They obviously can’t switch.  He also has a tough time staying in front of quicker guards and as he gets older, there are A LOT of quicker guards (while attacking him wears him down, so has Father Time).

One question lingers: did Brown really not care if they went 0-8 in the preseason because, as Vince Lombardi said, “Winning is a habit; so is losing” and we all know basketball (as are most sports) is a game of habits.  Sure, all the guys weren’t playing in preseason games so it’s tough to get in sync.  But this was a home loss, to a Mavs team without Chris Kaman.  And, oh yeah, Dirk Nowitzki.  Charles Barkley wasn’t even commenting on the Lakers’ loss when he said post game, “You can’t judge the Mavs without their two best players - Dirk and Kaman.”  Ouch.

So is it time to panic?  Hey, it’s only 1 game out of 82 (at least they get in a whole season this year).  Can they come back?  Sure.  Although I am truly an admirer of the Princeton offense, Los Angeles is not the time nor the place to run it.  Except for maybe Cal Tech.

Mike Brown comes off as a pretty cool customer and is certainly an intelligent man but he ought to consider this one stat.  Last night was the only game in Steve Nash’s career in which he scored less than ten points and had fewer than five assists when playing at least 20 minutes.  There are many learned people who will tell you that stubbornness is an admirable quality.  Mike Brown seems to come off that way.   He would be wise to keep in mind Alexander Herzen’s thought on being stubborn, considering how many coaches’ careers have ended because of it:

“There is nothing in the world more stubborn than a corpse: you can hit it, you can knock it to pieces, but you cannot convince it.”

Dirk Nowitzki amazed everyone with his free throw shooting in the NBA playoffs.  In the finals, especially, he shot 97.1% (33-34)!  In Game 6, the Miami Heat, needing a victory to force a Game 7 (which would also be played at home), missed thirteen charity tosses (they shot an abysmal 20-33) - and lost by ten.

My wife, Jane, is a graduate of the University of Tennessee so, naturally, her sport of choice is football.  She’s come to appreciate basketball, however, having been married to me for 24 years and having watched our two sons play high school hoops.  Now that the younger one, Alex, is being recruited by Division I colleges, her interest in the game has peaked.  Yet, she still doesn’t have a thorough knowledge of it.

Sunday was not only Game 6 of the NBA finals (and the clincher) for the Dallas Mavericks.  It also happened to be graduation day at the University of California-Irvine for our older son, Andy.  This meant we didn’t get to watch the game.  Rather, we listened to the broadcast on our drive home. As Hubie Brown and Dr. Jack Ramsey kept mentioning the increasing number of free throws missed by the Heat, Jane made the comment that she couldn’t believe they kept missing.

Since I have a greater understanding of the game, I started to explain that it wasn’t as easy as people think.  She then said something that put all my knowledge into perspective and showed common sense might just trump intelligence:

“Shouldn’t guys who make it to the professional level be able to shoot free throws?”

During every NBA finals there are usually a couple camps interested in the outcome: one pulling for the Eastern Conference champion; the other rooting for the winners from the West.  This year produced another group: those who watched the Miami Heat, hoping they lost.  The reasons are numerous.

First and foremost, was The Decision.  LeBron James is simply a product of this generation.  A huge ego, an overblown self-importance, a necessary feeling to publicize and promote himself.  Of course it was a long time ago but I don’t recall anything other than press release when Wilt Chamberlain joined Jerry West and Elgin Baylor with the Lakers.  Maybe it’s because of when I was born but in a 3-on-3 game, my money would be on the Lakers, each team being in their prime.  More recently, Karl Malone and Gary Payton took their respective talents to Hollywood to combine forces with Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal. No pyrotechnic celebration.  And when Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen chose the Celtics as their next home, there were no guarantees of championships by those three guys - just an intense work ethic - which got them a championship (and nearly another).

Another reason stoking the fires of, in today’s vernacular, the “haters,” was the constant “everybody is against” sentiment repeated by the Heat throughout the year.  Unless my memory is even worse than I think, I don’t recall any other of the power groups above constantly feeling so unloved.  Giving them the benefit of the doubt, the information superhighway has magnified any statement anybody ever utters.  Then again, the Internet isn’t something Miami’s Big Three isn’t aware of.

The Heat’s super three did themselves no favors with some of their actions, the latest one being Wade and James joking about Dirk Nowitzki’s illness in Game 4.  Nowitzki called it “childish” and “ignorant,” showing Dirk not only has talent but can evaluate tomfoolery too.

In addition to childish, ESPN’s Michael Wilbon labeled the Heat as frontrunners.  After watching them in the playoffs, he certainly has a point.  The three guys from Miami would be better served living by the code:

“Don’t tell me how good you are, let me find out.”

Each of the last three games between Dallas and Miami weren’t decided until the final shot, none of which dropped.  Nearly every point in the final minute - of each game - has been scored by either Dirk Nowitzki and Dwyane Wade.  The game winning plays are set up for those same two guys as well.    In Game 2, Nowitzki scored the last points of the game - and Wade missed.  It was Dirk’s turn to miss the last shot in Game 3.  Last night Nowitzki, playing on fumes with a temperature above 100 degrees, took advantage of being overplayed to his left and scored on a right-handed drive, albeit a little early in the clock.  The last play looked to be set up for D-Wade who might have committed the cardinal sin of trying to make the move before he had possession of the ball.While those two are the closers, the other guys (and not just LeBron James and Chris Bosh) are extremely talented.  Obviously, the Heat has a greater margin for error than do the Mavericks.  The reason for the series being so close is the Heat allow the Mavs to claw back after opening what, in relatively low scoring games such as these, are significant leads.  Maybe Miami gets complacent; maybe Dallas has, as Rudy Tomjanovich said, “the heart of a champion.”  Maybe both.  One example last night was during the first quarter Miami had nine offensive rebounds, yet managed only six the remainder of the game.  Much has been made of Miami’s Big Three and Dallas’ Big One.  To make it even more unbalanced, of the four, the player who was sick was the One.  In a case like that (unless the guy taken ill has the initials MJ), the others on the team have to approach their maximum potential - and last night that’s exactly what the rest of the Mavs did.  As far as “stars,” take the advice John Wooden:“The main ingredient in stardom is the rest of the team.”  P.S. Regarding yesterday’s blog, I guess Jason Terry isn’t crazy after all.

After Game 2 all the talking heads were letting audiences know how giving up a fifteen point lead with seven minutes to go would be a crushing psychological blow for the Miami Heat, that they had a chance to go up 2-0 and gave it away.  It’s not surprising to hear it from people like Michael Wilbon or Stuart Scott who represent most fans, but for Magic Johnson, Jon Barry, Tim Legler, Jalen Rose and even Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith (earlier in the playoffs following a semifinal meltdown) to forget how quickly players put losses behind them is shocking.  Sure, games like the one Miami dropped sting - a lot.

But, and the magnitude of that but is quite significant, because they’re in a win-or-go-home series, they have no choice other than strapping it on and getting back to business.  Game video is poured over and positive feelings are reinforced after seeing that the game was yours for the taking (and every team thinks the same way).  After Game 2, LeBron James and Dwyane Wade mentioned they were headed to the video room to see what adjustments needed to be made.  That was hint #1 the Heat wouldn’t suffer emotionally from the previous contest.

Beyond video study, the reason “the game before” emotions matter little is very easy to understand.  How much energy and focus is necessary to simply compete against the greatest athletes in the world leaves no time for self-pity or reflecting on lost opportunities.  If a player is matched against Dirk Nowitzki, his total attention better be on the task at hand.  Ditto for . . . everybody else!  The game is too hard at that level to worry about anything but giving all-out effort.

Heat coach Erik Spoelstra probably said it best at the post game podium last night in his opening comments:

“What’s needed now is amnesia.”

Which finals coach has the make up of a champion?  Neither Rick Carlisle nor Erik Spoelstra has been to the mountaintop of coaching.  How can they be evaluated then?  The following is a blog from last June.  Does it shed light on which guy will be hoisting the Larry O’Brien trophy?  Decide for yourself.

Much has been made of the fact that in the last 20 years, only six coaches have claimed the NBA championship (neither of this year’s contestants are a member of that group).  So what ingredients go into making a championship basketball coach on the professional level?

Great player?  Doubtful (Carlisle was the better player but neither would be considered great).  There have been many more great players who’ve tried their hand at coaching and haven’t won than those who have. Of the six latest NBA championship coaches, Rudy Tomjanovich would probably rank as the best player, with Gregg Popovich being at the bottom of the list skill-wise (Doc Rivers, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson and Larry Brown are the others who’ve won titles in the NBA since 1990).  Moot point this year.

As far as coaching in the college ranks prior to taking on an NBA job, only Pop and Brown had done so, Larry having a great deal more success (winning an NCAA title with Kansas) than Pop (who struggled mightily at Pomona-Pitzer).  If I’m not mistaken, of all the coaches who’ve ever won an NBA championship, only Chuck Daly, Jack Ramsey, Dick Motta, Paul Westhead and Bill Fitch were collegiate head coaches before going on to win an NBA title.  Once again, non-factor.

In fact, there doesn’t seem to be any blueprint for NBA coaching success other than the obvious: having a whole lotta talent (advantage Spoelstra).  But even with that, a championship isn’t guaranteed.  Within the past two decades, communication has become of vital importance in leading any type of organization.  The authoritative mentality, e.g. “He treats us all the same - like dogs” used so successfully by Vince Lombardi would meet with resistance (probably to a man) now, unlike in the heyday of the Packers.  Neither fits the bill.

The one common denominator each of those championship coaches had was a very focused leader on the floor, one who commanded the respect of his teammates.  At the risk of upsetting some, let’s say these leaders are named Dirk Nowitzki and Dwyane Wade.  Of course they all possessed overwhelming talent, but beyond that, each superstar had his own style of leading, some more vocal than others, but each displaying one common theme - leading by example (put each in that category).  From MJ to Hakeem to David Robinson and Tim Duncan to Kobe and Shaq (granted, it was difficult to follow Shaq’s example - he, among all of these guys, could truly be categorized as unique) to Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton to KG, they were comfortable in their roles as the go-to guy and were, for the most part, players who set good examples.

So, to make one of the greatest understatements of all-time, it seems like the coach isn’t nearly as valuable as the best player (much more apparent this year).  As long as that player doesn’t flaunt his power. In all, acceptance of leadership is what’s necessary for a championship club (and this year - THAT could be the key) and in the words of Nathaniel Branden:

“Accepting does not necessarily mean ‘liking,’ ‘enjoying,’ or ‘condoning.’ I can accept what is - and be determined to evolve from there.”

Heading to Stanford for a radical procedure I’m hoping will bring some relief to my chronic back pain.  The blog will return on Friday.

Is it true that good offense beats good defense as so many NBA players contend?  Or, as the baseball adage goes, does good pitching stop good hitting?  Coaches have always been proponents that good (team) D will overcome good (individual) O? 

The NBA finals match an offensive club against one that hangs it hat on defense (although they score in transition better than any team we’ve seen on some time).  The Miami Heat haven’t yet seen anybody in the playoffs like Dirk Nowitzki.  Conversely, Dirk hasn’t had to deal with a defender as strong, quick and long as LeBron James - a matchup that, if it didn’t take place would astound many.

The Heat will have its hands full with Jason Kidd, aka the anti-Derrick Rose.  Kidd won’t be blowing by anybody and finishing at the rim but Miami better not count on him turning the ball over a whole lot either.  No one runs a half court offense better than J Kidd (with the exception of Steve Nash).  Nowitzki scores in bunches but has shown a willingness to hit open men for what amounts to “warm up” threes.  The Mavs ought to have a decided advantage at center as well with Tyson Chandler and Brendon Haywood.

On the flip side, the matchups for the Mavs at the defensive end are a nightmare.  Even if Caron Butler plays (his absence is the equivalent of Udonis Haslem’s so, if things play out as they did with UD, expect one good outing), who guards James and Wade are questions with frightening answers.  If anyone thinks DeShawn Stevenson and Shawn Marion can even contain LBJ & DWade, they are certain to be on the guest list at Mark Cuban’s next party.

My guess is the winner of the series will be the offense.  Sure, there will be some defensive gems throughout the series, but this is a finals the fans ought to love.  High scoring.  Each game’s top 10 plays will be 80% at the offensive end.   The Heat have looked invincible, but my wish is the veterans (Kidd, Nowitzki, Terry, etc) can prevail.  If it goes the other way, look for the NBA (as much a copycat league as the NFL and MLB) to become a 6-7 team league of superpowers, with another half dozen average clubs and the remainder a bunch of dogs. 

Go Mavs.  The alternate would mean for the NBA:

“A sign of the apocalypse.”

A week ago I was speaking with a friend of mine and brought up a list of NBA basketball players whose physical attributes made it unlikely for them to succeed or who broke barriers regarding traditional thinking.

In no particular order, here are the guys I came up with (readers are more than welcome to add to, or comment on, the list):

Charles Barkley - I was an assistant coach at the University of Tennessee during Charles’ career at Auburn.  It was mind blowing to see a guy of that bulk jump as high as he did.  I remember commenting that it was like he was made of helium.  Recently, he admitted his true height: 6′4 3/4″  And this guy was a dominant, i.e. Hall of Fame, Dream Team post player!

Spud Webb -How a guy 5′6″ could jump as high as he did (NBA Dunk contest winner) was incredible.  He didn’t have helium, more like springs in his shoes.  Plus, he could play!

Mugsy Bogues - When Mugsy was in high school, I recall recruiting another player from his team and when I went to see them (Baltimore Dunbar) play, this little, bitty guy led them onto the floor.  My first thought was what a nice gesture it was for the coach to have this kid on the squad.  Then, when the guys lined up for the opening tip, he was a starter.  Once the game began, it took only two trips up and down the floor for me to realize this kid was completely dominating the game - at both ends.  He couldn’t jump, wasn’t a particularly good shooter, yet he never made a mistake on the fast break and the opposing team’s point guard couldn’t dribble the ball more than twice without Mugsy picking his pocket.  That summer, he did the same thing at the prestigious Five-Star camp, then at Wake Forest and, finally, in the NBA.  Inch for inch, the most dominant player the league has ever seen.

Larry Bird - Quickness and jumping ability are supposed to be vital in the game of basketball.  Bird had neither yet I’ve never heard anyone say that if they had to pick a team, for one game, that Larry Bird wouldn’t be on it.

Dennis Rodman - Forget the off the court shenanigans (a difficult task), how about a guy who possessed two skills: defense and rebounding - and rode them into the Hall of Fame.

Magic Johnson - Point guards had always been pigeon-holed in terms of size and role.  Never has anyone shattered a stereotype the way the 6′9″ Johnson did.  Then, just to let people know he knew what players his size were supposed to do, he went into the post, replacing the injured Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and won the NBA championship - in his rookie season.

Steve Nash - A short guy who can’t jump and isn’t particularly quick, Nash dominates an NBA game on the offensive end the way Bogues did on D.

LeBron James - simply a freak of nature.  Size, strength, quickness, ball handling ability, vision, ability to finish, a quality rebounder, a lock-down defender - and now he’s become a three-point threat.  A guy you don’t want to guard - and someone you don’t want guarding you.  And supposedly, he hasn’t bothered ever visiting the weight room.

Dirk Nowitzki - Will Perdue, 7′ retired NBA center, told a story of how he interviewed Nowitzki and noticed Dirk was taller than he was.  When he mentioned it to the Mavs’ franchise, the big guy said, “Please don’t say that to anyone.  People already criticize me for not going down on the block and slugging it out.”  The fact he takes - and makes - so many “fundamentally unsound” shots drives coaches of young players mad.  Until they started showing his workouts - and how he actually practices every one of those over and over again.

In the NBA, they’ve been doing for years what the world is encouraging everyone to do now:

“Celebrate diversity.”

Much is made regarding the maturity of Dallas compared to Oklahoma City’s youth.  This can’t be understated (unless OKC comes back to win - then we’ll all be hearing about “young legs” and how the NBA is a young man’s game).

There is one area in which experience is overwhelmingly in the Mavericks’ favor.  That area is the point guard position. While Russell Westbrook is a marvelous talent - and can physically do things Jason Kidd never could - at the end of the game last night, first during the Mavs’ comeback, then in the overtime, one guy gave the other a clinic in how to control a basketball game.

Certainly it didn’t hurt to have the German scoring machine that is Dirk Nowitzki but recognizing when and where to get him the ball is something Kidd inherently understands.  Although we may never know, I’d bet Jason Kidd would never have let a lead like the one the Thunder had evaporate so rapidly, independent if one of his major offensive weapons had fouled out (like James Harden did for OKC).

Mark Jackson, on record as one of Westbrook’s biggest fans, made a poignant comment during that stretch.  Jackson, the NBA’s all-time assist leader, said that Westbrook is a terrific talent and will be sensational . . . once he understands how to be a point guard.  This isn’t something he should be blamed for as he never had a chance to hone point guard skills.  He never really played the position but was thrown together with some incredible young talent - who had the admirable skill of playing hard - and, more or less by default, was anointed point guard.  Tough position but Russell needs to understand:

“To whom much is given, much is expected.”

Following the first game of the Eastern Conference Finals, I heard, somehow, a Chicago radio station.  Mike North, the host, is an admitted homer for the Bulls.  He was going on and on about how the Bulls had a far superior bench to Miami, too much length and rebounding for them, play such good defense (they held both LeBron & DWade to under 20) that, at one time, he got so carried away, he had the nerve to mention a Chicago sweep.  Others commenting on the outcome had similar, if not quite so overboard, evaluations of game one.

Then something happened.  It was called game two.  The Heat were in control until a 17-6 run by the home squad tied the game at 73.  The guy the Bulls had bottled up, LeBron James, went for nine points in a game-ending 12-2 advantage that gave back home court to Miami.  Listening to the post game chatter was an entirely different experience.  The pundits talked about how the dynamic duo’s low point production in the first contest was an aberration, never to be witnessed again.  One such talking head even said he wouldn’t be surprised if the Heat won both games in South Florida and wrapped up the series in Chicago.

The prize for the greatest turnaround in player evaluation has to be what’s been said about Dirk Nowitzki.  For years, the talk was of how Dirk was “soft” and he bore the dreaded label - which people who “talk sports” feel they have to pin on someone - “the guy who can’t win the big one.”

On the broadcast Tuesday night, Nowitzki, due to his unique skill set for his size, was being lauded as “one of the top ten players in NBA history!”  It wasn’t because he got taller.  Or shrunk.  All he had to do was score 48 points on 15 shots and go 24-24 from the free throw line.

When it comes to sports analysis, Emily Dickinson’s quote is spot on:

“Fame is a fickle food - upon a shifting plate.”