Recently in Sports: NBA Category

I haven't checked but I would bet that a number of bloggers and sports fans are upset by this Charles P. Pierce attack piece on Michael Jordan posted at Slate. Here is Pierce:

Michael Jordan was a great player. He also was a great salesman. And that was all he ever was, and that seems to be all that he ever will be. There's nothing wrong with that. He made some great plays and some pretty good commercials. Has anyone so completely dominated his sport and left so small a mark upon it? From the very beginning of his professional career, and long before he'd won anything at all, Michael Jordan and his handlers worked so diligently at developing the brand that it ultimately became impossible to remember where the logo left off and the person began. He talked like a man raised by focus groups. He created a person without edges, smooth and sleek and without any places for anyone to get a grip on him. He was roundly, perfectly manufactured, and he was cosseted, always, by his creators and his caretakers, against the nicks and dings that happen to any other public person. He held himself aloof from the emerging hip-hop culture that became—for good and ill—the predominant culture of the NBA. Remember, he once warned us, Republicans buy shoes, too. He always sold himself to people older than he was.

All I can do is respond in the same kind of lame, immature, insult orientated, hackneyed style: Charlie Pierce is a talentless hack jealous that an athlete doesn't live up to his ridiculous standards.

It is rare to see such a stupid an pointless article in Slate not connected to George W. Bush. What a waste of pixels! What is Jordan's crime? Making money and not being more socially conscious. Pierce is completely caught up in the anti-corporate zeitgeist. He acts as if Jordan has a responsibility to be something other than an athlete or ex-athlete. Pahleeze. Pierce misses the entire point of a phenomenon like Jordan, or Tiger Woods for that matter. I watched the NBA because of Michael Jordan and so did millions of other people. BTW, I don't watch it anymore. Same goes for Tiger and golf. Call me a bandwagon fan or whatever, but these men attracted me to the game; they made the game more compelling by their dominance and athleticism. To say Jordan left no impact on the game is asinine. The number of young men and women who watched and decided to play the game at a higher level because of his career is probably beyond counting. Many of the thugs and punks who play the game now don't deserve to carry his gym bag.

Charlie Pierce may think he is some sort of clever iconoclast, but he is really just an arrogant prick.

Okay, this is a little weird: Larry Bird fired Isiah Thomas. ESPN:

Bird wasted little time in making his first major move, firing Thomas on Wednesday and immediately targeting former assistant Rick Carlisle as his successor.
"I just had a gut feeling this wasn't going to work," Bird said of a surprise move that came only two months before the start of the season.

Watching these two play ball as I was growing up I never contemplated one firing the other. Bird is right though, the Pacers need some shaking up. They have played mediocre in a mediocre Eastern Conference. Perhaps Detroit's loss will be their gain.

Just for the record, I still hate the Lakers. Oh sure their failure to win another title this year felt good and took the sting off their success a little bit but my hate continues. I don't care how many "hall of famers" they sign they are the devil's team and they must be opposed.

I bet they don't even win the Championship next year with their so called Dream Team. Egos and expectations will weigh them down, you watch.

I still hate the Lakers. But you know what is a bit ironic? With no one to hate in the NBA Finals I really can't get all that excited about it. I neither strongly dislike nor particular like the San Antonio Spurs or the New Jersey Nets. As a result I just don't feel like watching. I guess I am not a big enough basketball fan to watch without a little drama or some strong personal feelings about the matchup. I wish I could watch the Lakers lose again . . .

I just realized that a huge chunk of the NBA playoffs have been a on cable. I guess I assumed once we got to the conference championship games they would all be on network TV. That is a problem because I just cut back my cable channels so I don't have TNT. That mean I can't watch tonight's Dallas Mavericks/San Antonio Spurs Game. Which is a bummer. Why did the NBA go this way and why did I miss it?

I am really starting to worry now folks. I had high hopes this year that the Los Angles Lakers would not make a return trip to the NBA Championship. They struggled early with Minnesota but then pulled it out. The looked pretty bad the first two games against San Antonio but today they again managed to come from behind and even the series 2-2.

The problem so many teams have with the Lakers is the inability to put them away. They build up leads but they can't hold them. Today San Antonio led by as much as 16 but when it was crunch time they couldn't hold on:

The Spurs led 64-55 when Duncan went to the bench with 2:54 left in the third quarter after picking up his fourth foul on Bryant. Duncan would say afterward he didn't touch Bryant. The Lakers quickly took advantage, outscoring the Spurs 16-3 for a 71-67 lead.

You can't give the Lakers any hope. I always think that if you don't have a double digit lead with a couple minutes to go you are in trouble in L.A. So many teams let the Lakers eat away at the lead until their once large lead is down to a couple of possessions. Once L.A. knows they are within striking distance they play with the pose and ability that won three championships. If they have a 12, or even better 16, point deficit they seem to press more and are a lot less likely to pull off the comeback.

It is very important that the Spurs knock off the Lakers because with Chris Webber out I am not confident that Sacramento can do the job. Heck Dallas might even beat the Kings and I am pretty sure the Mavs don't have the defense to stop the Lakers in the playoffs. If Dallas beats the Kings I will root for them to win it all but I just don't have the confidence with the relatively inexperienced Mavs as I would with CWebb and the Kings. I am nervous but I still believe that my dream of a Laker-less finals will come true.

Before I go to bed, a few words about the NBA Playoffs:
- Spurs beat the Lakers: hope srpings eternal.
- Kings beat Mavs. This series could be interesting or it could be a blow out. Remind me to watch more of it.
- Detroit tops Philliy. Can Detroit's defense contain Iverson and return the city's tough guy rep? Again, worth watching to find out.
- Celtics vs. Nets? I'll be honest I couldn't care less. Sorry, IRB.

I must admit I have a hard time really following the NBA until the playoffs start. This year I haven't even been able to follow much of the Playoff action. Of course my goal remains to see a new champion crowned; anyone but the Lakers. If the Timberwolves can knock them out in the first series all the better. If not, then I will hope for help from the Mavs, Spurs, or Kings. If that fails I will have to hope and pray that something magical (but not neccesarily THE Magic) comes out of the East to slay the dragon. I would prefer the Pacers win the East but deep down all I reallt care about is the Lakers losing. Right now the Mavs and Kings look like the cream of the crop in the West. Out East who knows.

I hope to catch up on b-ball this weekend but I will really start to watch when the playoffs move to the second round. Then we should see some really good matchups. In the NBA the regular season really is just filler. The real season is now.

My Sports Central article on Reasons For Hating the Lakers has been posted if you are interested in such things. Here is the teaser:

Every year, SC's Kevin Holtsberry begins the NBA season with a dream. What is it? Hint: it invloves a deep hatred of a certain team out West. Well, at least he's honest about it. Here are one fan's reasons for hating the three-time champion Lakers.

Hey, I know it's not Pulitzer material but it's the truth and mildly entertaining . . .

In case you have been wondering I am not going to talk about a certain teams victory last night. It is just my way of dealing with it, OK?

On a related subject Slate has offered a cautionary defense of NBC basketball commentator Bill Walton: Bill Walton, Broadcasting Genius - The NBA's most hated announcer is also its best.

Bryan Curtis feels that Walton "has taken the dreariest NBA Finals in years and made it weirdly gripping." While Curtis admits that Walton can act like "a loon" but argues that "minus all the bluster, he's the best NBA color man out there."

I know this may be controversial but I agree. The key is that Walton actual offers strong opinions about the game. I could do without what Curtis calls Walton's "trippy '60s nature-speak " and his tendency to overstate the importance of a particular move or subject but overall he at least brings a little energy and knowledge to the game. I also give him credit because, while he praises Shaq with abandon like everyone else, he at least mentiones it when the refs call ridiculously stupid calls in Shaqs favor. Walton, having been a center, knows that when a defender is simply standing in position and Shaq runs him over, that it is wrong to call a foul on the defender. Walton has time and time again asked the question and no one has answered: Why is Shaq allowed to knock down stationary defenders whenever he wants and the refs call the foul on the guy who is not moving? Bill Walton may be arrognat and wierd but he knows his basketball.

Well, I for one am going to try and forget about the tragedy that was the NBA playoffs this year. I will think about Bill Walton again in about 11 months.