Jack’s Blog

Yesterday, both Boston and the Lakers were down 0-3.  It was apparent that neither was going to win its series.  Yet the Celtics won Game 4 in Boston, knowing that all they have to look forward to is the Knicks’ inevitable series-clincher in New York.   Meanwhile, the Lakers lost to San Antonio in LA.  Can we conclude anything from these two performances?  Even though, without Rondo, the Celtics had almost no chance of advancing, they were well aware they didn’t dare let their long-time, ticket-buying fans down in an elimination game.  Apparently, the Lakers’ relationship with their fans isn’t quite as intimate as that of the Celts.

On TNT’s pregame show, Kenny Smith even exclaimed that he’d heard Jack Nicholson gave his tickets to his cousin.  Which, of course, was absurd.  Because Jack has a relationship with the Lakers that’s stronger than a series sweep (against - he’s witnessed the flip side), even if it’s his favorite team getting blown out twice in a row.  He remembers the past - and looks forward to the future.  Whatever (and whomever) it brings.

For the record: how many people who were criticizing the way Mike D’Antoni coached yesterday’s game would have wanted to switch places with him?  And for those foolish enough to say yes, do you really think the outcome would have been any different because of your brilliant bench manuevering?  If you do, there are talk show hosts and hundreds of callers waiting to abuse you on the Subway fresh take hot lines, #1-25.

Truthfully, Boston had a shot at winning yesterday and the Lakers didn’t.  For that game, they’d lost their their starting small forward and top four guards - one of whom happens to be one the top three players in the game.  They were so decimated with injuries, nothing could have been done against the Spurs.  Nothing.

Whether or not that is true for the entire season will remain a mystery.  The saddest part of the entire year is the truth behind Charles Barkley’s statement regarding the Lakers’ pitiful performance in Game 3:

“It’s not too many times you can take the Lakers +30 - and lose.”

Fan is short for fanatic.  It’s just that a fanatic gets fanatical about his or her team when the team is down as well as when it’s winning.  And that fanaticism can take on the form of sarcasm, negativity and disgust if losing persists - even if injuries turn a slim chance into a nonexistent one.  In the case of the Los Angeles Lakers, their fans should have their “fan licenses” revoked after the way they acted toward their team - or what was left of it - the past few games.

If any Lakers fan is asked to name the greatest player in the NBA, every last one of them will (still) yell, “Kobe!“  So, when your team loses its best player - who happens to be the best player in the NBA (according to you) - wouldn’t you think it would be normal (even for fanatics) - to tone down their expectations?  At least a little?  One of them was heard (on the air in Fresno) answering that question by exclaiming, “Maybe, but this is the Lakers.“  Meaning what?  That there’s a proclamation issued that your team is bequeathed wins?

First of all, before they lost Bryant, the Lakers were a seven seed matched up against the two seed.  The two seed that just happened to be the San Antonio Spurs, a team that’s used to post season pressure, having won its share of championships in the past, and a team that has a coach in Gregg Popovich who many think is the best in the business.  In addition to having the great Kobe MIA for the remainder of the year, Los Angeles had Steve Nash as its point guard.  He would have been the perfect lead guard had he not gotten hurt.  Some fans felt that it was a mistake to obtain Nash because it was inevitable he was going to get hurt - with his age and history of injuries.  Nevertheless, these fans still expected Nash to lead the team to a World Championship.  But, alas, Nash got hurt and wasn’t available last night.

Steve Blake is, ideally, the back up to Nash, so with Nash out, Lakers fans felt he was certainly capable to lead the team.  Then, he pulled his hamstring - and now he’s out indefinitely.  Jodie Meeks, a nice complementary player was next, but he sprained his ankle and is headed for an MRI.  Is there someone out there with a Los Angeles Lakers voodoo doll?  I guarantee if there was such a thing, they’d sell out in a hurry.

Still and all, Laker fans went into Game 3 with hope that, maybe the home crowd could pull them through.  Of course, if that were to happen, it would have to wait until at least midway through the second quarter because that’s when it’s fashionable to show up in LA.  You know, like, with the traffic and all.

When the game began, the Lakers got a few points from their big guys - Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard.  The fans, which include their announcers, actually thought, even though the game is 48 minutes, that they’d have a shot.  “Get it inside!” they yelled, because it is somewhat unrealistic to depend on a second year player and a guy just called up from the D-League to knock down enough shots to win.  And, because that’s what Kobe tweeted.  As if the Spurs didn’t consider it would be a good idea for the Lakers to try to score that way and had not game planned for it.

That’s when the cynicism begins.  All because the fan’s team is losing.  And they don’t want to be a loser.  A number of them are losers in what they do.  The Lakers give them meaning - and they think - respect.  Hey, they don’t need any more help being a loser.  While fanatic has the word “fan” in it, so does infantile.  Winston Churchill said a long time ago:

“A fanatic is someone who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

Heading to Monterey for the Cal State Monterey Bay men’s basketball awards banquet.  Will most likely spend a couple days on the coast.  This blog will return on Wednesday.

The Knicks beat the Celtics.  The Celts are going to have a tough go of it.  Don’t even try to say, as some have, Boston is better without Rajon Rondo.  In every game he plays, he’s extremely likely to have a triple-double and unless that productivity can be replaced by a player or players in some other area(s), it’s just too much offense to give up.  And he disrupts the opponent’s offense because of his quickness, anticipation and long arms.

In the Denver-Golden State game, Andre Miller showed old guys can still play - that an incredibly high basketball IQ can make up for what Father Time has taken away.  As the father of a son whose game is highly dependent on basketball intelligence, it’s refreshing to see winning is not all about the “wow factor.”

Bill Simmons showed why he is on the studio show.  He represents “Joe Fan” which he proved during the halftime segment of the Nets-Bulls game.  With the score 60-35 in favor of Brooklyn, Simmons incredibly said “Well, it looks like a sweep?”  Sweep?  He sounds just like a guy sitting at the end of a bar who is pissed off because he has $20 on the Bulls plus the points.  Knowledgeable sports people understand that a 25-point halftime lead in Game One only guarantees you one game in the series.  Maybe.  Sure the Nets might sweep, but it’s a tad premature to give up on Chicago at least winning a game just yet.

Simmons again displayed his less-than-brilliant insight when he claimed at halftime that, while Chauncey Billups was having a great game (10 points), it wasn’t wise for LA to play him because in the next round they’ll need the quickness of Eric Bledsoe.  It was subsequently mentioned by one of his colleagues - and probably 90% of the viewing audience - that playing Billups this series would be fine because Bledsoe could replace him in the next series.  Duh.

As extra added bonus analysis, Simmons oh-so-cleverly brought to the viewers’ attention that, “Kobe Bryant’s twitter feed is going to be a very interesting subplot,” inferring Mike D’Antoni ought to be worried about what his injured star tweets.  As if trying to beat the Spurs, without Kobe and possibly, Steve Nash, isn’t enough to keep him up at night.  Simmons has a huge following because there are so many fans out there like him, i.e. guys who never played and who love to criticize guys who do.  Or idolize them.  His sport has always dealt with a pen and paper.  He’s taken his game to the next level by mastering the computer and social media.

For ESPN’s halftime studio show, he serves as comic relief.  He has had run-ins with the station (according to his Wikipedia page) over censorship matters, among other issues.  Maybe the best advice he could receive is:

“Don’t take yourself so seriously; no one else does.”

Headed up to the Bay Area this weekend as Cal State Monterey Bay opens league play.  Younger son Alex is currently the team’s scoring leader at 17 ppg.  He gets his first collegiate start tonight.  The blog will resume on Tuesday.

The San Antonio Spurs were on a six-game road trip, having won the first five games when Spurs’ head coach Gregg Popovich decided to rest his Big Three - Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker (plus Danny Green).  He sent them home to rest because they had a big game coming up tomorrow (Sat) with Memphis and he wanted them at their best.

“Pop” is the longest tenured NBA head coach with the same team and is one of only five coaches who have won at least four championships.  No one doubts his ability to put a quality team on the court and give them every possible chance of winning.  Be it strategy, motivation, in-game and halftime adjustments or late game situations, he understands his job as well or better than anyone.

And therein lies the point of contention between his actions - which he sees as doing his job in the best possible way, i.e. win games and have a rested team free of injuries (if anyone can figure that out) come playoff time.  Even his title of President of Spurs Basketball connotes that his ultimate job each and every year he’s in charge is to win it all.  So what’s the problem?

David Stern is commissioner of the NBA and, as such, has no affiliation with any particular club.  His job is to build the NBA brand.  That’s why there are regular season games in Europe.  That’s why there’s so much individualization (even though, technically, it’s a team game), i.e. endorsements and commercials being encouraged.  It’s a league of stars - so put your stars front and center.  That’s why the NBA picks up the tab for the WNBA - even though that’s a losing venture year after year after year.  Stern realizes the WNBA losses are (relatively) insignificant compared to having the image of (financially) promoting women’s basketball.  Since women make up half of the population, why not cater to them too?  (Or at least don’t upset them).

That’s exactly the point.  David Stern is a servant to the public.  He needs giant corporations to buy luxury boxes and huge blocks of tickets.  He needs television and its _illions (fill in the first letter or two) of dollars - which they can give because the demand to see games is so high because of its superstars.  He needs the family of however many to take in a game.  He needs fans purchasing NBA souvenirs, memorabilia and gear (which mainly happens to be that of the superstars).

The argument I’ve heard why Pop was wrong is because of the young kid who whose dad saved up so they could go to one game - to see the boy’s idol.  Sounds nice and that’s true - in fairy tales.  What about the guy who’s head of a multi-_illion dollar company, who’s trying to seal a deal with another guy who owns a multi-_illion dollar company, and knows the guy has a man crush on whomever (Duncan, Ginobili, Parker) and says, “C’mon, let’s go to the Heat-Spurs game.  I’ve got a couple court-side seats.  We’ll check out these guys up close.”  That is what Stern dreads.  All of it is what Stern dreads.

It’s “Stern needs to keep the game as pure as the driven snow” vs. “Popovich needs to figure out the best way to win it all.”  Harken back to the days of yore when guys flew commercially - or went by train - and for a lot less dough.  The NBA Players Association has a strong union.  Players are making enough money that 90% of them ought to be able to retire comfortably if they had a morsel of decent financial advice.  They must stay at luxury hotels.  There have been stories about guys bitching because they had to stay at a Marriott - of all godforsaken places - when they first went to Oklahoma City.  Per diem is $125 even though some meals are catered. e.g. on the (private) plane.  It is written in the collective bargaining agreement that, during the season, players must have so many days off.  This is, obviously, an injury-prevention measure and a wise one.

What Pop did was not against the rules.  At the very least, though, he should have had communication with Stern prior to making the move.  Nearly ten years ago, I heard an educator, Dr. Bertice Berry, say something that I think applies here - because in the end, it’s the consumer who’s paying for the way for the NBA:

“There’s a big difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.”

Sure, the NBA has a great rivalry in the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers but that only occurs when they meet in the NBA Finals.  OK, a regular season game between the two is exciting but everyone knows it’s nothing more than a preliminary to the real games, i.e. if they play in the finals.

If other good teams play each other, there is a modicum of interest, e.g. Miami vs. any of the top clubs but that’s due more to the players than the teams.  Well, the NBA has a true rivalry now and it doesn’t matter who’s playing for which squad.  The New York Knicks and the Brooklyn Nets.  For those people who aren’t from that area, New York City is composed of five boroughs: Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island.  Ask residents of each and they’ll tell you they’re from New York (as in New York City).  All except the guys from Brooklyn.  They’ll say they’re from Brooklyn.  Kenny “The Jet” Smith (a native of Queens) acknowledged as much last night on TNT’s studio show.

Another former Tarheel point guard, Raymond Felton said he felt the Knicks-Nets rivalry could become like UNC-Duke.  He said the Nets talk “a lot of blather.”  This type of comment is not heard from anybody about any other team until the playoffs - and when it’s said then, it just seems to be a rallying cry to somehow squeeze out a victory.  The Nets and the Knicks make it personal because living in NYC (Brooklyn or elsewhere) hardens guys.  Or crushes them.

There are other states in which there are multiple teams but while Houston, San Antonio and Dallas all have winning franchises, Texas will always be a football state.  Florida has a clubs in Orlando and Miami, both with very good teams for years (save last year’s debacle in DisneyWorld), but Florida is a place you visit.  Although people are now from Florida, their parents (definitely grandparents) are from somewhere else.  That’s a similar situation to California, the only state that is home for four pro basketball franchises (only because Kevin Johnson governs with the same never-say-die attitude that he played with).  The Kings, and for that matter, the Warriors, haven’t been good enough to warrant a rivalry with anyone.  Those guys are struggling for survival, hoping to snatch a playoff spot (and exit after round one).

LA has two very good teams but the overall atmosphere is too laid back.  Besides, the Lakers have been king for so long and Clips have been bad for so long that the Clippers resurgence is just now being recognized.  As a matter of fact, the Lakers had better recognize it real quick or they’ll lose the tie breaker (which may or may not be significant) since they already dropped one to the Clips earlier in the season.  Right there is the difference between NY and LA.  In New York, if one team beat the other, fans of both would know it.

In New York, things are different.  People from New York are . . . from New York.  Their parents and grandparents too.  Maybe their great- or great-great-grandparents weren’t from New York.  If not, they were from Europe.  NY fans show before the tipoff, not LA style, are loud knowledgeable, intense, sarcastic and obnoxious.  Basketball is not just a game - it’s something that’s taken much more seriously.  It’s one of the items discussed at every bar, restaurant, barber shop (not hair styling salon) and dinner tables.  Depending on the time of year, maybe the only one.

What about college ball, you ask?  That is supposed to be a religion in New York.  It is.  So is high school.  The basketball is what’s worshiped.

Someone very close to me said there would only be one other NBA rivalry fans would love to see as much as the Knicks and the Nets:

“It would be the Washington Wizards  . . . but only if the Harlem Globetrotters had a franchise.”  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Every year there is the argument as to which is the better spectator sport, college or professional basketball.

Those who prefer the college game claim the intense loyalty of the fans is what makes it so attractive.  People who live and work in the city and those who attended good ol’ State U have a strong attachment to the team.  The make up of the team (notwithstanding the plethora of one-and-dones and transfers in recent years) remains intact,e.g. no free agents, no in or out of season trades.  In addition, college fans feel the style of play is more “team” oriented.  The guys on the team, it’s said, play for the name on the front of the jersey whereas the pros play for the name on the back.

Fans of the pro contest contend it’s made up of the best athletes in the world, that watching a pro game gives spectators action they won’t see anywhere else.  And there’s no denying that.  If pure talent is what fans want to see, there’s no disputing the NBA is the cream of the crop.

For people who want it all, they just need to watch the Oklahoma City Thunder play.  If ever there was a “college” team in the NBA, it’s Oklahoma City.  Fans make signs, paint their faces and cheer loudly - even when the team is way behind.  In Game Two the Miami Heat jumped out 18-2 and when many pro arenas would be raining boos, the home crowd chanted “Dee-fense” when the Heat had the ball and “O-K-C” when the Thunder was on offense.

The fact the team is based in Oklahoma City certainly has a large part in the equation.  OKC is the ultimate in small market city and while the ABC’s corporate execs must have considered jumping off a tall building, true fans - not the guys who pay thousands to sit courtside - absolutely love seeing the Thunder in the Finals.  The blueprint for their success was constructed mostly by GM Sam Presti, who built the team in a similar fashion as another successful small market club, the San Antonio Spurs, his former employer.

Being a fan of both the college and pro game, watching the Thunder - or for that matter the Spurs - suits me just fine.  The prototypical NBA player - or at least his agent - seems favor the larger markets since that’s where the endorsements, big-city life and “toys” are.

While the fans of each probably wish the other would come around, each should heed the words of Ulysses S. Grant:

“Live life the way it is, not the way you want it to be.”

After the Orlando Magic absolutely destroyed the Atlanta Hawks in an elimination game in Orlando, Charles Barkley, in his postgame comments said the Hawks made a big mistake.  Sir Charles said that, although the Hawks were up 3-1 in the series and heading to Atlanta for game 6, they never should have mailed it in. They needed to keep it close because they had the Magic doubting whether they could actually beat them.  Allowing the Magic to blow them out gave Orlando confidence they didn’t have.

The Memphis Grizzlies had the San Antonio Spurs on the ropes in game 5 of their series, caught a break when Manu Ginobli hit an apparent game tying three-pointer but, following review, it showed he had his toe on the line, making it only a two, giving the Griz a one-point lead with a couple seconds to go.  Two free throws later, with noly a couple seconds to go, they chose not to foul and got burned by a three at the buzzer, subsequently losing the “sure win” - in an elimination game!

The question posed to the talking head former pros in the postgame analysis was about what the pshychological effect would be on Memphis.  The overwhelming opinion was the favorite phrase. “They need to have a short memory.”

Yet, both the Hawks and the Grizzlies managed to defeat their opponents in the next game.  True, each victory was on their home court, but the point is a simple one.  And it’s surprising former players wouldn’t verbalize it in this manner.  One the ball is tipped, no one is thinking about the previous game - or any other for that matter - but the one they’re competing in . . . because of the total focus necessary to compete. 

Far be it from me to overrule the experts, i.e. the guys who were actually in the arena, but the extreme increase in the level of the intensity during playoff games requires everything a player has.  Watching these guys, it’s so evident that nothing could possibly be going through their minds but the task at hand.  

How can I be so sure?  Naturally I can’t but to even think a professional basketball player would be thinking of a past game in the middle of a present one just defies credulity.  It’s just so surprising that the guys who were there don’t see it that way.  

 Maybe this enigma can be summed up by Burton Hillis who said:

“There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons that sound good.

In order for a company to be successful, everyone needs to be on the same page, pulling in the same direction.  With that thought in mind, it’s mind boggling that an NBA franchise, any franchise, can actually pull it off.  Or maybe it’s because . . . someone has to win.

Consider the makeup of an NBA organization:  First, there’s the owner.  If you’re not sure where the owner’s priority lies, allow me to direct you to the current NFL (and inevitable, future NBA) lockout.  It’s about money.

Then, there’s the front office, made up of, but not limited to, a president, a general manager, a director of player personnel and various other titles, e.g. scouts, assistants or vices.  Since in most cases, they are the ones who decide which players are drafted and which trades are made, i.e. which players are expendable and which others are necessary to acquire, their number one interest is in the production of those individuals.

Of course, there’s the coaching staff whose goal is simple: win - and as much as possible whether that means the whole thing (Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Heat - this year), advance as far as possible (the next level clubs) or just get into the playoffs (the rest).

Finally, there are the players.  What, you say, isn’t their goal to win too?  Yeah, but each guy is also more interested in getting his numbers.  They play for pay at this level.  Big pay.  Since their agents get 2 or 3 or 4% of that pay, well, suffice to say, that a small percentage of a very large number is significant.

A team that’s winning, say 55% of its games, team but has a combined salary deep into the luxury tax - and is not selling out - doesn’t have a happy owner. 

A club that’s winning and whose arena is packed on a nightly basis, but whose draft picks are buried deep on the bench and whose newly acquired players aren’t performing well (especially if those who were given up in the trade are excelling at their new locale) has front office personnel squirming.  It could get so bad that on a road trip to Toronto, after seeing the “Drink Canada Dry” billboard, they try to do just that.

Coaches are easy to figure out.  If their squad’s not winning, keep them away from sharp objects.  Particularly if they’re in the last year of their contract - or if another current or former “hot” coach owns a house in their city.

One night in the ’90s, when I was on the coaching staff at USC, I stopped by the Sports Arena to visit with a couple of NBA coaching  friends whose team was in town to play the Clippers.  The name of a Pac-10 player who was a notoriously bad defender was brought up and I asked them why a team wouldn’t simply isolate on that guy every time he was on the floor.  They told me that I didn’t understand the NBA game.  That strategy would never fly in their league because everybody needed their “touches.”  

“Even if it meant you’d win?” I asked.

They just laughed and told me to go diagram some new plays.

According to coaches I know who are in the league today, that way of thinking is even more prevalent as agents have become stronger influences toward their “clients.”

They’re the greatest athletes in the world but the product will never reach its maximum effectiveness as long as all the participants don’t adhere to the cliche:

“It’s amazing how much can be accomplished when nobody cares who gets the credit.”

Early in the NBA season we were hearing the experts pontificate about the Spurs and how their advanced age would preclude them from a(nother) championship, i.e. that their run on titles was, unfortunately, a thing of the past.  The fact that their Big Three, Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli, were all past the prime age it takes for an extended number of playoff games.

After Duncan’s 26 point, 18 rebound, 8 assist performance in a 104-95 victory last night (after trailing by 11 at halftime) against the Toronto Raptors some of those comments may have to be rescinded.  The Spurs know how to win, have a coach who understands pacing during the regular season and possess the necessary chemistry among new players, veterans and coaching staff.  Yet, they’re on (to date) such a roll, they’re the owners of the best record in the NBA as we approach the mid-season All-Star break.

Parker continues to knock down back-breaking shots and Ginobli, while continuing to go balder, hasn’t seem to have lost any vital component of his game.  Richard Jefferson understands his role better and DeJuan Blair is the perfect complement to this seasoned crew.  Meanwhile, Duncan’s skill set hasn’t gotten older as much as its matured.

They’re too old?  San Antonio probably views that question with the same perspective Madame de Stael did:

“As we grow in wisdom, we pardon more freely.”