2008 Dream Team

USA Basketball just announced its team for the 2008 Olympics.

The roster, broken down by positions:

C: Dwight Howard
PF: Chris Bosh, Carlos Boozer
SF: LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Tayshaun Prince
SG: Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Michael Redd
PG: Jason Kidd, Chris Paul, Deron Williams

One question remains: could we have put one more swingman on the team? We definitely need more scoring at the 2 and the 3. (Yes, that is a joke.)

To me this roster shows what we've learned from our past few Olympic teams: absolutely nothing. I especially like the choice of Tayshuan Prince, which is clearly just a nod towards the general direction of the idea of building an actual "team". Don't get me wrong; there's a ton of talent here. But so much of it cancels other players out. For example, I love Carmelo (see below), but does a team with Kobe, LeBron, and D-Wade really need the scoring he brings to the table?

Having three point guards is actually justifiable, because you have a starter and a backup even if someone goes down. Plus, unlike in past years with guys like Scottie Pippen, none of the twos and threes on this team can really cover at point. Overall, though, this team is very perimeter-heavy.

I worry about the lack of inside depth. Some jerk might tell you this is a wise move because international ball is different or something. Well, that's the whole reason we need inside power! It's one area where the U.S. can still have an advantage. Unfortunately Amare Stoudemire withdrew himself from consideration, and I think Tim Duncan said before that he's done with international ball. Still, what about a David West or even Antawn Jamison? I'm not a huge Tyson Chandler fan, but he makes some sense, too: what will this team do if Howard gets in foul trouble against a team with some inside presence?

I worry that this edition of the U.S. Olympic team will still be too inclined to go one-on-one and doesn't have a good balance of depth. I've always rooted for the U.S., even when it was somehow considered unfair to send our best players (where did that come from, anyway?). This team will be no exception. I hope they get the gold, but I wonder. What do you think?

Nuggets not trading Anthony (?)

I don't know whether to be excited or horrified.

Calvin Andrews, the agent for Denver Nuggets star Carmelo Anthony, said today that the team has assured him that they will not trade Anthony.

Anthony has been the subject of trade rumors since the Nuggets' season ended with a quick first-round playoff exit. In his five seasons with Denver, the team has never made it past the first round of the playoffs.

To put that in perspective, the team didn't even make the playoffs for eight years before Anthony arrived, part of a span in which the team reached the postseason only twice in thirteen seasons.

That's why I'm only slightly disappointed the Nuggets haven't done better, even with the addition of future Hall of Fame guard Allen Iverson. The scars of an 11-71 season (1997-98) run deep.

The reason I'm scared, though, is this sentence from the article:

Anthony, who does not want to be traded, is bothered by his name being mentioned in rumors and upset because the Nuggets have not come out publicly and denounced a possible trade, the sources said.

Makes sense to me. And now that I think about it, the Nuggets still haven't come out publicly and denounced a possible trade. I can't help but wonder if the team is trying to keep its options open. (After all, if they do trade him but only lied to 'Melo and his agent, who's really going to care?)

I absolutely do not want the Nuggets to trade Anthony. He's 24, scores in bunches, and is improving his all-around game, particularly his rebounding. Because of age (he's almost nine years younger than Iverson), he's the most valuable/important player on the Nuggets' roster. Think about it: he'll be the age Iverson is now in 2017. There's no way the Nuggets can get fair value for that many (potentially) prime years.

Furthermore, though Iverson recently decided not to opt out of his contract, it runs for just one more year. If the Nuggets trade Carmelo and don't get better, would Iverson even consider re-signing with Denver?

The Nuggets of the nineties were as bad as they were in large part because of the terrific players they let get away. Please don't take us back to the way we were.

I close with two quotes about Carmelo. First, the remarkably-optimistic words of Bill Simmons, who wrote recently:

Before the Nuggets trade Carmelo Anthony this summer -- and it sure seems like we're headed that way -- they better take a long look at the way Pierce performed in these playoffs. Then they should remember how many ups and downs Pierce had over the past few years, how many times Boston fans wondered if he'd ever "get it," how many times he acted like a kook or a head case and how many times they discussed trading him. (During the summer of '05, they had a deal in place with Portland for the No. 3 pick and Nick Van Exel's contract that Pierce squashed after the trade was leaked to the media. The guy Boston would have taken with that pick? Chris Paul. A fascinating "What if?") In my humble opinion, if 'Melo ever matures as a person and a player -- and that seems like a fair bet -- he could have the same all-around impact on a contender that Pierce had on these 2008 Celtics.

Or, as Pierce himself told the Denver Post:

"Well, I never have gotten a DUI," Pierce said Saturday with a smile, "but I guess you can say there were similarities. A 6-8 forward who can go inside and outside. Still learning the game. He's still a young player and has a lot more room for improvement. The way he's looking, the way he started his career, he can be a lot better than me when he's all said and done."

Flashback: Game 6, 1998 NBA Finals

The tenth anniversary was Saturday, but the DVD of my favorite NBA game ever didn't come in the mail until today. That game was Game Six of the 1998 NBA Finals, Michael Jordan's last game as a Chicago Bull.

(Quick sidenote: you may remember I already did a tenth-anniversary retrospective on the Denver Broncos' first Super Bowl win. And in a few months I could write a look back on Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa's home run record chase. Has any year in sports ever come close to 1998?)

So I just re-watched the game and this is my report.

1. I knew this game was a classic, but forgot just how classic until I saw the NBC logo's feathers lighting up right before the "NBA on NBC" music kicked in. Yes, I bought a version of this song on iTunes a couple years back, but there's nothing quite like the original in context. (For the record, the song is by John Tesh and is called "Roundball Rock".)

2. Our announcers for the game? Bob Costas, Doug Collins, and yes, Isiah Thomas. Could there have been a better trio? Absolutely.

3. Some pregame stuff: I'd forgotten, but Utah had won Game Five in Chicago to force this Game Six back in Salt Lake. Karl Malone had scored 39 points, while Jordan had shot just 9-of-26 from the field. Worth mentioning after I just ran Kobe through the ringer, though to be fair, Jordan didn't play like that three games in a row. Also in Game Five, Jazz reserve Antoine Carr had hit five shots in the second half, so the announcers talked about him throughout Game Six like he was going to come in and do it all again.

While announcing the starting lineups, the Utah PA guy called out Karl Malone as the 1996-97 NBA MVP. I know you can't say that during the year the guy wins it, for obvious reasons, but didn't they learn their lesson about upsetting Michael the year before? It was sort of funny because Jordan had already received the 1997-98 MVP award, too.

4. Though it's considered a more-recent trend, the Bulls started two foreign-born players in the game: Toni Kukoc and Luc "Skywalker" Longley. With the Breakfast Club (Jordan, Scottie Pippen, and Ron Harper) making up the other three, Dennis Rodman starts the game on the bench. Apparently this was normal because no one says anything.

5. The first quarter had a few interesting moments. Early on, Costas plugs NBC's website, and they show a screenshot of it running on a museum-piece version of Internet Explorer. Noteworthy is that the shot contained no ads. This was back when people just coming to your website was supposed to make you money somehow.

As for the game, Rodman checked in and quickly tangled with Malone for a rebound, followed by Malone immediately falling to the floor. Yesterday I was discussing the new flopping rules with co-workers and we agreed that Vlade Divac is the grandfather of the problem. But after watching Malone in action for a night, I'm tempted to change my vote. He fell several times in this game for no apparent reason. (Divac was around throughout the '90s, of course, but I recall he wasn't notorious until he was with the Kings.)

It's also worth pointing out how young everyone looks, especially the guys you still see occasionally—Jordan, Malone, and Phil Jackson. Okay, Jackson never looked young, but younger. Jordan was 35 and Malone was 34 at the time. Both were considered old then but they really didn't look it.

In the first half, the Bulls were called several times for illegal defense. (At the time, of course, zone defense was against the rules.) Chicago's defense in Game Three, as I mentioned a post ago, held the Jazz to the lowest scoring output in the shot-clock era. But I remember the broadcasters during Game Four showing instances of when Chicago had played illegal defense in that third game. I mostly remember Pippen setting up just below the foul line when he was still supposed to be above it. It was fascinating how such a small change could throw off the offense of one of the NBA's best scoring offenses so badly. Of course, there was probably more to it, but it's a textbook example of how complaints about officiating end up shaping how games are called later in a series.

6. Most notably in the first quarter, Pippen left the game with a lingering back injury. Before he left, the announcers wouldn't stop talking about how much pain he was in. Throughout the rest of the half we keep hearing that he's stretching so he can try to get back and play.

7. Stylistically Malone was a bit unique, and still no one plays quite like him. In this game he did some post moves that were more like drives, and also took a few runners. He always kept his legs under him on the running shots, something no one else does. And, believe it or not, in their twelfth Finals game together he wasn't letting Rodman get under his skin. With his terrific Game Five, it almost makes you wonder how it would have gone if the teams had played in the Finals one more time. Then again, he wouldn't exactly close out this game well...

8. Early in the second quarter (I think), Howard Eisley hit a long three as the shot clock buzzer goes off that gets waved off, though he definitely got it off in time. Harper later made a basket in the fourth that probably should have been waved off, but wasn't.

Later in the second, Phil Jackson argued vehemently that Malone should have been called for traveling on the other end, though the Bulls now have the ball. Jordan then gets called for traveling. Malone catches the ball on the other end, travels egregiously and scores, but all anyone said is how hard Malone is to guard when he catches the ball that close to the basket.

9. Also in the second, Costas makes a brief mention of something written by some guy named Skip Bayless of the Chicago Tribune...kind of cracked me up.

10. Jordan finished the first half with 23 points. He barely dribbled and was incredibly decisive with the ball. Though he's blamed for all the one-on-one that happens today, in this game it really doesn't feel like he's dominating the ball because he chooses his move so quickly. On defense, you'd say he was playing very lazily except he's never caught napping. Jordan was definitely conserving his energy, and in this game he raised it almost to an art form.

11. Pippen started the third quarter, and ended up grimacing through most of the rest of the game. He was used mostly as a decoy on offense, though he would go on to hit some key baskets in the fourth.

12. Two exchanges between Collins and Thomas in the third quarter were interesting, especially when I found myself siding with Thomas. At one point Luc Longley got beat, I think by the Mailman. Collins said Longley's just not quick enough to guard him. Thomas immediately jumped in and said that Longley was not guarding Malone smart enough. Later Chris Morris checked in to the game, and Collins suggested Carr wasn't checking in so he could be fresh for later. Thomas said he wouldn't mess around with Morris and would just play Carr now. Good points if you ask me. And let's not forget Collins talking earlier in the series about how he'd give the Jazz a day off after their horrible performance in Game Three.

13. One of my favorite moments from the Utah-Chicago rivalry, and I didn't even know it was in this game: Rodman and Malone get tangled up as the play continues at the other end, then knock each other to the floor three times. Eventually Malone got the call and two free throw attempts. Meanwhile Bryon Russell was bumping Jordan, who gives him a hard shot to the chest with his shoulder. Russell pushed Jordan, who stareds jawing at him. Great sequence.

14. It's at this point I notice that NBC shows WAY fewer graphics than we are used to today. It's almost shocking. Even the clock and score are rarely shown. And they NEVER use ridiculous camera angles, but occasionally have great shots of the action from different vantage points on the replays. It totally makes the game the focus, and I love it. However, I'm now so used to seeing the score that it's almost unnerving. Sort of like how I always knew the yardage to go in football until the yellow line came along.

15. Jordan took two hard shots on drives in the third. He made no effort to sell it and, aside from Malone tripping over himself, almost no one in this game did. Part of that might just be that these were two veteran teams and that the pace of the game was sort of slow to begin with. Jordan had 29 points after three, but Costas points out that he had hit just one of his last nine shots. Around this time he mentioned that Jordan had played the most minutes and in the most games that year of any season in his career.

16. The epic fourth quarter stands out the most. Early in it, Rodman got the ball to the left of the top of the key, and sunk a 20-footer. He ran up the court with his hands up and asked, "Who knew?" On the next play, someone passed to a cutting Adam Keefe, who completely blew an open dunk. He complained that he was fouled, but even Costas admitted he should have made the shot.

17. With about seven and a half minutes to play, Jordan was at the line and hits two free throws. They had to stop after the first as the camera focused on Jordan chewing gum. Costas told us the game was stopped because of an offensive sign. But remember, Jazz fans are all class!

On the other end, Costas said Rodman was the only one to protest the sign's removal, and I can't tell if he's kidding.

18. With four minutes to go, the Jazz were in control. The Bulls kept tying, but the Jazz kept going ahead. Jordan had missed three shots in a row.

19. Make that four, but when Hornacek tried to push a long pass to Russell, Jordan jumped and intercepted it. It was 81-79 Utah with three minutes to play. Jordan passed the ball in to Rodman, who's cutting down the lane but is called for an offensive foul. Jordan argued that Rodman was catching the ball and should have been allowed to land. He's ticked but not losing his head. At this point Jordan had 37 points on 13/32 shooting.

20. The next time up the floor, Malone scored on a long jumper off the pick-and-roll. Jazz 83-79. Jordan gets fouled on the other end and makes both with just over two minutes remaining. Stockton missed. Russell grabbed the rebound, but threw the ball away to Pippen. Jordan missed on the other end.

21. On the next trip down, Stockton passed in to Malone on the left block. Rodman slapped it away and the ball went out of bounds. He and Jackson argued the call but I can't understand why. On the replay, though, it looks like Stockton may have discretely swiped the ball away from Rodman and tipped it out. Pretty crafty if I saw that right. Stockton took and missed a three-pointer and Jordan got the rebound. He immediately took the ball up and drove baseline on Russell, but Stockton jumped in front and was called for blocking. Jordan hit both free throws to tie the game at 83 and was then eight for eight from the line for the quarter.

22. The Jazz take the ball up, and Stockton passes to Malone on the left block again. Pippen comes over to double, but Stockton runs around to the right side, where he catches a pass from Malone and hits a huge three to put Utah up 86-83. The Bulls call a timeout with 41.9 seconds to go. And that's where the fun begins.

23. Pippen inbounds the ball to Jordan at the Jazz logo, and Jordan immediately drives right for a lay-up to cut the lead to one.

24. The Jazz run a play to set up Malone on the left block again. This time Hornacek (Jordan's man) is in the key to set a screen on Rodman. Unfortunately for Utah, that decision leaves Jordan in the key. He stays for a split second, then quickly slaps the ball away from Malone for the famous steal. Malone falls to the ground for no apparent reason, but to his credit at least gets up quickly.

25. The Bulls don't call timeout. Instead, Jordan takes the ball up, drives on Russell, pushes a little, and then pulls up for the winning shot. He hits it. Utah calls a timeout with 5.2 seconds left.

It's hard to tell how much of a difference the push made. At first it was barely noticeable, and Russell falls pretty far, but with Jordan's coordination it's possible he pulled off a decent shove while on the move. I recall thinking when watching the game live that Jordan had posed for a second on the shot, but I later read that he was just following through because his shots had been short. (And, indeed, they had been.)

26. The Jazz inbound to Stockton, who has to shoot his three just a little too fast and misses. The Bulls win. Again. With Pippen's injury and Jordan's obvious fatigue it called to mind Tiger's recent win in the Open, only more impressive.

Jordan would go on to play for the Wizards, of course, and his star has diminished a lot the last few years, but he'd definitely given himself an ending straight out of Hollywood. He finished with 45 points, a sixth ring, and a sixth NBA Finals MVP award. And that, my friends, is as good as it gets.

And now it's time to watch the Flu Game.

Celtics win the NBA championship

The Boston Celtics just won the NBA Finals with one of the most dominant performances in a closeout game in any sport ever.

The final tally had the Celtics winning by 39 points, just shy of the all-time record for winning margin in any Finals game. The Chicago Bulls beat the Utah Jazz by 42 in Game Three of the 1998 Finals (a game in which Utah was held to the then-lowest scoring output of any team in the shot clock era).

Paul Pierce just won the Finals MVP award after his tenth season, fitting for the man who slipped so famously to the tenth pick in the draft. He was outstanding in the Finals, getting to the line at will and playing with incredible poise throughout.

The best part of any championship, though, is watching the long-time veterans who finally broke through. For Boston, that was Ray Allen (26 points on 12 field goal and 3 free throw attempts) and Kevin Garnett (26 points, 14 rebounds,  four assists, three steals, and a block), both of whom turned back the clock with vintage performances. It was awesome to see them play so well, especially Garnett, who played poorly in Game Five and has received so much criticism in his career (some from me). Now instead he'll be remembered for his ferocity, intensity, and consistent team mindset. It was a relief that Allen continued shooting so well even after getting poked in the eye.

As far as the game itself, the most impressive part was how Boston never let off the gas. No matter how big a blowout is, there's always a moment when the loser starts making it interesting...except for tonight. Sometimes teams with leads that huge even lose. As a Nuggets fan, I learned not to relax when the team blew a 70-34 lead to the Jazz once in the late-'90s. But tonight I never had reason to doubt, and though the bench cleared out, the intensity didn't. The Celtics dominated completely. They got it done as a team, though several other individuals had memorable nights (like Rajon Rondo's 21 points, seven rebounds, eight assists, and six steals, or James Posey's "You KNOW these are going in" three-pointers).

Mike Breen just said the Lakers are a young team and will be back next year. (I know the league has already decided next year's Finals matchup, I just didn't know they'd announced it.) I'm not so sure about their returning to the Finals, especially the way their star played his way out of the "best player in the league" discussion. (Of course, he didn't really, but like KG says, "Anything's possible!")

And I can't wait to read the Sports Guy tomorrow. What a terrific game!

Woods wins Open

Tiger Woods won the U.S. Open in dramatic fashion today, defeating Rocco "The Mediator!" Mediate in the playoff.

Woods and Mediate went back and forth on the first eighteen holes today, but neither could pull away. Mediate was up by one stroke going into the 18th, but Woods made birdie to force sudden death, which is much less frightening than it sounds.

To us, anyway. It did look to be a little much for Mediate, who looked simply worn out as he walked out to his ball on the sudden death hole, though he hadn't blinked all day before that.

Woods had an opportunity to win with flair when he nearly sunk a long putt for the championship. He knocked it in on his short second attempt, then won the Open when Mediate couldn't sink a difficult putt of his own.

The win gave Woods his 14th major victory. Jack Nicholson himself is just four ahead. It's widely believed, and has been for years, that Woods will break the record easily before all is said and done.

What that means is that the moment may not be fully appreciated when it arrives. Setting a career mark like that requires so many key attributes—skill, of course, but also mental toughness, longevity, and a level of personal commitment rare even among superstar athletes. And what it really requires is winning a major tournament nineteen times in your career, enough to mean you can't let a single opportunity slip through your fingers.

Woods, of course, is the complete package, but it's impressive that even despite his gifts his march towards immortality is paved with victories like today's, when his knee hurt and his challenger refused to back down. The physical demands of golf are so small compared to many other sports, but playing nineteen playoff holes clearly requires a serious amount of concentration. And Woods delivered.

Rick Reilly, now with ESPN, wrote before the tournament that the Open meant less to Tiger than to Phil Mickelson, in part because Tiger's place in history is already secure. Reilly, like many of those rooting for Mediate today, almost seems to be taking Tiger's eventual career totals for granted. But part of being the best ever, as Woods aspires to be, is winning like Tiger Woods even when you don't feel like Tiger Woods or when you're not quite swinging like Tiger Woods. If or when Woods does break Nicklaus' career record for majors, don't forget that though this tense victory counts only as much as the others, it showcased the passion that got him the rest in the first place.

Lakers win Game Five

The Lakers just pulled out a sloppy Game Five win over the Celtics. The Celtics lead the series 3-2.

From what I saw, a.k.a. the second half, the Lakers were sort of lucky to win, but the Celtics certainly didn't play well enough to close out a championship series on the road.

I think it would be inaccurate to say the Celtics relaxed after their huge comeback a game ago. It was more that they just blew the opportunities they had in this game to take control. The biggest example came with 2:31 remaining, with the Lakers leading 95-93. Pau Gasol, going for an offensive rebound, went over the back on Kevin Garnett. So Garnett got two foul shots and a chance to tie the game, but he missed both. It was stuff like that. Boston's defense was solid enough, but their offense needed work.

The Lakers played solidly enough to defend their home court. Kobe Bryant had another poor shooting night, finishing 8-for-21. (And he made his last two shots, meaning at one point he was identical to the previous game's 6-for-19.) He did poke the ball away from Paul Pierce, then caught a long pass from Lamar Odom for a breakaway dunk, at a key point late in the game. Nevertheless Michele Tafoya was unashamed to praise him in the postgame interview for being the man who made the win possible.

The rest of the Lakers played all right, I suppose. Lamar Odom appeared ready to throw down with James Posey at one point in the fourth when Posey fouled him hard after a whistle; sort of reminded you which of the pair had had the focus to win a ring already. Pau Gasol did a terrific job maintaining his obnoxious, whiny look when he didn't like a call. So grating. Derek Fisher was solid and fills his role well, but he wasn't exactly shooting the lights out in the fourth quarter. If both teams give the same effort in the next game, which I sort of hope doesn't happen (this wasn't really a great game to watch), the change in venues could be enough to yield Boston the championship. While all I really want is a trophy presentation Tuesday night, hopefully Game Six is more entertaining.

P.S. It's friggin' hilarious in my book that "Knick" Bavetta reffed tonight's game and the Lakers won, but there was absolutely nothing fishy about the officiating.

Did the Celtics just win the Finals?

The Celtics are up 3-1 now, but as Bill Russell told me during the 2001 Finals, every game's a new game.

So in other words, no, they haven't won it all yet.

But Boston made a huge move towards winning the NBA championship with a win tonight at the Staples Center. They fell way behind, down at one point by 24, but made enough clutch baskets to keep the pressure on L.A., and eventually to take control of the game and win.

There was Eddie House's jumper to take the lead. James Posey's three to extend it. Ray Allen had a pair of fabulous drives, the first a reverse lay-up, the second a late-in-the-shot-clock left-hander that his defender, Sasha Vujacic, saw about two minutes before the sound reached him. Kevin Garnett connected on two big shots when he made power moves going left. And Paul Pierce hit that beautiful jumper from the top of the key over Kobe Bryant, as well as three crucial free throws at the end.

Before the Celtics completed their comeback, it was amazing how symmetrical the series was. Each team cruised to a pretty easy victory in its first home game, then blew a huge lead in its second; only Boston held on to win Game Two, while the Lakers couldn't do the same tonight.

Though all five Lakers starters finished in double figures, the team couldn't sustain its pace for the whole game, in large part because of lackluster bench play. Vujacic and Jordan Farmar, two shooting specialists, were a combined 2-for-15, for example. But it wasn't just the subs. Bryant scored just 17 points on horrendous 6-for-19 shooting. For an MVP, that's awful.

Anyway, it was a terrific game. Of all the games I wanted to turn off after one quarter (when it was L.A. 35, Boston 14), this ended up as one of the best. Even if you don't like the Celtics, it's nice that they won, because it's absurd that the supposed road team actually has homecourt advantage over the first five games.

Plus, after seeing that clip at halftime where David Stern said the poor old NBA is going to have to reinvestigate and reinvestigate, even though one key ref has said he was never questioned in the first place, I was craving some good basketball news. Tonight's comeback by Boston definitely filled the bill.

Lakers take 1-2 series lead

Have you ever heard the saying that it's not a series until a team wins on the road? If not, good for you, because it's stupid. By that logic, the Hornets-Spurs second round series this year, which went to seven games, was not a series until the Spurs won Game Seven. In other words, it was not a series until it was over.

In any event, the home teams have won the first three games of the NBA Finals, but still plenty has happened. Boston struck first, taking Game One by ten points. Paul Pierce went down (briefly) with an injury, and it appeared the series was over, but he came back, hit some memorable threes, and his team cruised.

In Game Two, the Celtics appeared well on their way to a blowout before the Lakers almost stole the win. It was one of the craziest games ever. I've never seen a team give up such a brain-dead easy basket as Leon Powe's coast-to-coast dunk and still threaten to win the same game in a championship series. I still can't make sense of it.

Finally, tonight in Game Three the Lakers returned home and defended their home court. Boston's offense was terrible, but give credit to the Lakers. Not sure if they mentioned it on the broadcast for a nine hundredth time, but it helped a lot when the Lakers had Kobe on Rajon Rondo. That made it hard for the Celtics to defend Kobe in transition!

I actually liked the Celtics' chances after a quarter, when they'd faced down the Laker onslaught and remained firmly in a game, but the offense never got on track. Ray Allen shot very well, but Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett certainly didn't, going a combined 8-for-35 from the floor. I feel bad for Cagey but he really has no excuse for not shooting better. Also, I saw quickly why the Sports Guy hates when Sam Cassell plays so much—it's like Sam wants the Lakers to win.

Kobe played well, not perfect but well, and the fact that the Lakers won despite such an unimpressive showing from other key players is a bad sign for the Celtics. But the biggest upset for me so far is how wrong I was about this series—I do care about it, and so far it's shaping up to be a good one.

Tim Donaghy's new claims

I quite enjoyed ESPN's halftime coverage of the disturbing claims found in a letter written by the lawyers of disgraced former NBA ref Tim Donaghy. Stuart Scott presented the brief-but-necessary research that let us know which series were probably being discussed (the Lakers-Kings in 2002 and the Rockets-Mavericks in 2005). Jeff Van Gundy responded with a little editorializing and his confusing-as-ever distinction between NBA officials and NBA referees, but he made a fantastic plea for more transparency in these affairs. And the network didn't edit any of the self-satisfaction out of David Stern's response.

ESPN.com also has a good article and legal analysis up on the situation.

All caught up now? Good. What bothers me most about the situation is that Stern can afford to speak so smugly, because he knows the fans have short memories.

Of course there's no way I can prove any official corruption. But the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Lakers and Sacramento Kings, which the Kings led 3-2 before losing the series, was the absolute worst officiating I have ever seen in my life. It was complete and utter garbage, and whether or not it was rigged, the NBA should be ashamed for ever allowing it to happen.

I was rooting for the Kings, and yes the Kings were floppers, and yes I hated the Lakers even more then than I do now. None of that matters. If you don't remember the series, you'll just have to trust me that L.A. got every single call those last two games. I don't remember any specific examples (it's been six years), but there are some in the article. Also, Ralph Nader, who would never do anything just for the attention, called for an investigation.

The irony? The referees were so bad in that series that since it happened, I take almost no complaints about refereeing seriously. Sure, your team might have it rough...but as the Kings proved, it can always be much, much worse.

You can say the Kings blew the series and frankly, that's true. They allowed Robert Horry to knock down a game-winning three at the end of Game Four. Despite the refs, they had a chance to win Game Seven, and only point guard Mike Bibby stepped up and played well. In the end, they still had a shot, and they lost.

I disagree with the implication that that makes any and all reffing errors excusable, though. Clearly the Kings weren't going to be a dynasty either way. But the peak for teams in many sports is to be good enough to win just one title—take the recent Pistons or Heat championship teams, for instance. Maybe the Kings were only good enough to beat the Lakers once, and maybe the Nets would have beat them in the Finals. None of these excuses or rationalizations affect the truth, though many fans will repeat them anyway. I don't get it, but people make excuses for leagues, especially in retrospect. I remember hearing once from a Michael Jordan supporter that Jordan was so good that he earned the bad calls that went his way, such as when he pushed off Bryon Russell to win his sixth championship and no whistle was blown. Hey, I love Jordan, but that's insane.

In 2002, I felt the league wanted the Lakers to win, but then as now I had nothing but circumstantial evidence. The Lakers were the two-time defending champs, and the franchise's resurgence was good for the NBA, as far as that goes. The league certainly favored them the next year, when they extended the first round of the playoffs in the middle of the freaking season because the Lakers looked like they'd only last a round.

I would love for some sort of investigation to prove that the league conspired to help the Lakers win, if only to confirm my suspicions. Of course, that won't happen, in large part because no one else in the country cares.

All I remember from 2002 is being so distraught that I couldn't watch the NBA Finals. That was a definite first since I'd started following the NBA. Like in baseball, the playoffs in basketball are the best part, and the NBA's, where the brightest of stars could have such an impact, always seemed like the purest for me. And they've never been the same since.

Finals prediction

The T.V. says L.A., but my heart says Boston in six.

Why is the everyone so sure about the Lakers? The Lakers do have Kobe Bryant, who is the best...shooting guard of the decade, maybe? Bryant has three rings, but Allen Iverson has won three scoring titles, won an MVP trophy, and been the star of a Finals team during the '00s, so it's at least close between them.

Bryant, who really ought to switch back to jersey number 8, is the undisputed best player in the series. The team with the best player almost always wins the Finals. Take last year's Spurs, or the Heat before that. Or the Lakers with Shaq. Or the Bulls with Jordan. Throw in Phil Jackson, the best coach in the series, and it looks like L.A. should get by easily.

The Lakers are missing only one ingredient: an outstanding No. 2 guy. I don't know if they need one, but championship teams typically have at least one other good clutch player. Like Shaq with the Heat, The Admiral/Tony Parker with the Spurs, Kobe with the Lakers, Scottie Pippen with the Bulls, and various other name players throughout history. Yes, I would take all of there guys over Pau Gasol. Of note are the 2003-04 Detroit Pistons, who didn't have the best player in the Finals, but who had a lineup of five outstanding No. 2 guys.

The Celtics fit the typical championship mold worse than the Lakers do, but are still an impressive team. They have a pair of stars in Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce. Garnett, like Kobe, will end up in the Hall of Fame. He's one of the few professionals with a truly well-rounded game: Garnett can score, rebound, and defend, and is also a talented passer. He's also a ferocious competitor and the consummate performer who gives his all in every game. His biggest failing is the bizarre need to goaltend every shot taken after the whistle; like Pete Rose sprinting to first after a walk, it's something I just don't get.

Pierce is a more conventional modern star whose strength is his scoring. He takes a lot of three-pointers for someone with his percentage (.363 career), but he can get hot. He can rebound and pass, but doesn't post especially-high totals in either category. I'm intrigued by how he'll play defensively in this series as well.

The Celtics do have some advantages, though. They have better depth than the Lakers, whether it's the three other capable starters, or reserves like James Posey. The Lakers seem to have a bunch of guys who can do exactly one thing (usually it's shoot) and Luke Walton, who is a credit to fundamental basketball, though not in quite the same way Tim Duncan is.

Plus Boston was awesome this year, with the best record in the league and an outstanding scoring differential. They won nine more games than the Lakers and won the average game by three more points. And they had a terrific defense this year, which won't do much to bottle up Kobe but which can easily frustrate the rest of his team.

So yeah. That and I'd hate to see the Lakers win.

Bonus programming note: I'll be out of town for a few days and probably won't be back posting until about Game Three or so, but feel free to comment here as I plan to respond.

Celtics-Lakers: I Might be the Only Guy Who Doesn't Care

The NBA Finals are set, and in several days they'll even begin. The match-up, of course, is a classic: the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers.

The Celtics and Lakers have met in the Finals 10 times. The rivalry is best-known today for Larry Bird and Magic Johnson's encounters in the 1980s, though they only faced each other for the championship three times, with the Lakers winning twice. But the Bill Russell/Sam Jones-era Celtics faced the Lakers seven times in the Finals (including in 1959, when the Lakers were still in Minneapolis), with the Celtics winning every single time. And yet Jerry West is the guy who ended up with the "Mr. Clutch" nickname and his silhouette on the NBA logo.

West did win the first-ever Finals MVP award in 1969, which made sense, because even though the Lakers as always lost to the Celtics, at least they dragged it out to seven games that time.

That series is one of my favorite Finals ever. Though the Celtics had beaten the Lakers in the Finals the year before, they were getting old: it would be the last season for Russell and Jones. The Lakers had the homecourt advantage for Game Seven and, anticipating a victory, owner Jack Kent Cooke had thousands of balloons hanging from the ceiling, waiting to be dropped when the Lakers won. The Celtics, as proven as proven winners come (Russell already ten rings at this point; Jones had nine) were incensed and jumped out to a quick lead. Though the game was close at the end, the Celtics held on to win the championship. See awesome quotes from Red Auerbach in this story on NBA.com, and from Bill Russell in this Wikipedia article. (There's no source for those quotes that I can see, but I swear NBA.com used to have an awesome interview with Russell where he talked about that series and the balloons, but I can't find it.)

That's history. And Bird and Magic you know about, too. (I think I heard Bird say once that he considered Philadelphia to be Boston's true rival in his early years, though.) Terrific players, outstanding teams, and fantastic games. This year what do we get? Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett.

No disrespect to those players—actually, yeah, a very slight disrespect intended. Garnett's fierce, a great worker, and one of the most memorable players of this era; Kobe perhaps even more so. But has either one reached the Bird/Magic level of greatness, let alone the Russell stratosphere? With a ring or two of his own, Kobe could perhaps belong in the picture near Magic, though let's see him earn it first.

Will Kobe get that ring? The odds are probably in his favor. The Lakers have the best player and coach in the series, a formula that's helped the Bulls, Spurs, Lakers, and Heat win titles in recent years. The only recent exception is the Detroit Pistons, who interestingly were aided by Kobe's selfishness/overconfidence, though I don't anticipate that being a problem this year. There's a ton on the line for Kobe—only the validation of his whole career, if the Lakers win—and he'll relish the opportunity.

The Celtics have a chance, too (they won more games than the Lakers this year), and I'll be pulling for them like crazy. I think a lot of their hope comes down to what Paul Pierce can accomplish. He's a talented enough player, and a basketball junkie by all accounts, that he could be the X-factor Boston needs to counter Kobe. He's surely fired up for his big chance, as well. I hope to see Garnett play well on the game's biggest stage, too. But that won't make him Kevin McHale.

This could be a terrific series; just don't expect the franchises involved (the laundry, as Jerry Seinfeld would say) to have much to do with it.