A One-Sentence Summary Of Game 4

When you miss that many free throws, when you don't foul when you're up three with ten seconds remaining, when you give Derek Fisher the three instead of forcing him to drive, when you can't get a defensive rebound on a key possession in overtime in four chances, you deserve to lose.

Congratulations to the Lakers and their fans. Your 2009 NBA champions, ladies and gentlemen. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go throw up.

Lebron's Miraculous Shot Masks Some Uncomfortable Questions

Wow. Just watch this again, will you?



Dude just saved a season. Saved a city, in fact. And the reaction of the night award has to go to Stan Van Gundy.

I do have one substantive thought though: didn't Orlando show that they're sort of better than Cleveland in these first two games? I mean, there were periods in the third and fourth quarter last night (as well as in Game 1) where Cleveland's much lauded defense had simply no answer for Orlando's deceptively simple go-to play: pick and roll at the top involving Howard, with three shooters on the wings for open threes if help comes. Cleveland's best five (Z, Varejao, Mo Williams, Delonte and Lebron) are too slow to stop that. But if Mike Brown goes small (playing Lebron at the 4 to guard Rashard), Orlando simply beats them up on the boards. And they really have no one to guard Hedo -- poor old Pavlovic looked so lost out there that I wanted to put my arm around him and tell him that it would be ok. I think if Orlando actually shows up to start a game, rather than just in the second half, they can take this.

Denver-Lakers tonight. Won't be able to watch it, but what a fascinating series it's been so far. Isn't it fun for us to see Kobe and his team struggle so much? Good times.

NBA Playoffs Preview

Wake me up for the Finals, will you?

After the three consecutive humdingers that were the '06, '07 and '08 playoffs, we're going to be treated to the basketball equivalent of a Nadal/Federer waltz to a Grand Slam final, which is when the real competition begins. As Simmons said, Vegas had the Cavs-Lakers prospective match-up in the finals at 4-to-7 odds...before the Garnett injury. Think about that for a second -- technically speaking, there could be 64 potential matchups in the Finals, and oddsmakers think one of them is so overwhelmingly likely that they will give you $400 if you put up a $700 risk. And again, this is before the only other team that could realistically challenge that has just seen its chances go up in smoke.

Be that as it may, here are my first round picks.

Eastern Conference

1 Cleveland vs. 8 Detroit

To anyone who thinks that Detroit can "cause the Cavs trouble" or "make this a long series" because of their "championship experience", I have two words: um, no. Have you seen Detroit play? Have you seen Cleveland play? Look at every single first-round series (including the West), and tell me this isn't the most lopsided matchup, the one in which one team has no shot to win. Come on, tell me. I'm waiting.

Didn't think so.

Prediction: Cavs in four.

2 Boston vs. 7 Chicago

Hmmm. Actually, let's add a few m's to that. Here goes: hmmmmmmmm.

This series is very intruiging. You have the wounded champs -- dealt a killer psychological and physical blow -- on the one hand, and an upstart team led by an insanely talented and heady rookie on the other. I'm tempted to go with Chicago, because (a) they have momentum, (b) they're not scared, and (c) for Obama's sake. But in my heart of hearts, I can't. At the end of the day, even if Boston with KG is a better team than Boston without KG, Boston without KG is a better team than Chicago.

Prediction: Celtics in six.

3 Orlando vs. 6 Philly

Well done, Stan Van Gundy. By running your mouth against Shaq, the Knicks, refs, the league, Chinese currency manipulators, the international non-proliferation regime, and Russian fiction, you succeeded in attracting bad karma. Now the whole world -- courtesy of that late-season swoon -- knows the following things:

1. Dwight Howard is not an offensive force in this league just yet.
2. If the 3s aren't falling in the first three quarters, it doesn't matter how hot you get in the 4th, because you've dug yourself too big a hole.
3. Despite the gaudy regular season numbers, your team is closer to the East's second tier (Philly, Miami) than the top (Cleveland, Boston).

We're about to find out just how close. I'm feeling an upset here.

Prediction: Sixers in six.

4 Atlanta vs. 5 Miami

The whole "the best player in a series usually wins it" argument is so overblown. If that was true, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant and Lebron James would never have lost playoff series. I'm willing to grant that Dwyane Wade is a phenomenal player with a phenomenal season behind him. I'm not willing to disrespect the very solid strides Atlanta have made this year. And please stop thinking of Joe Johnson as chopped liver. Dude can play. And can someone please tell me who Miami's second best player is?

Prediction: Atlanta in six.

Western Conference

1 L.A. vs. 8 Utah

What the hell happened to Utah? Weren't they supposed to be the proverbial "toughest team" in the West? The one team that could legitimately challenge all other heavy-hitters in the post-season? The team that would execute, execute, execute on offense and suffocate, suffocate, suffocate on defense?

Man, remember how tough Utah played the Lakers last year? Good, because it won't happen again.

Prediction: Lakers in five.

2 Denver vs. 7 New Orleans

What an insanely fun series this is going to be. You've got two highly entertaining teams, one of them highly combustible (no, I don't trust you yet Denver), one of them with the best point guard this league has seen in the last five years (not you, Chauncey), and some great individual match-ups.

It's going to turn on Chandler's physical health and the Nuggets' mental health. I think Denver takes it, but only just.

Prediction: Nuggets in seven

3. San Antonio vs. 6 Dallas

Can you imagine how fun this series would be if it were 2003? Sadly it is not, so we're going to see two teams past their prime trying their hardest not to lose. Though I have to say, I was really impressed with Dallas' rise from wherever the hell they were at the beginning of the season to number 6 in the West. As Ali G might say, respect.

As for the Ginobili injury, even though I hate him and the Spurs, I was really bummed when I read about it, because it meant the only viable challenge to the Lakers (whom I hate even more) were dead and buried. They'll survive this series, if only because Tony Parker is going to have a monster series (trust me), but after that, all bets are off.

Prediction: Spurs in five.

4 Portland vs. 5 Houston

The most compelling series for sure. Portland has more talent man-for-man, has home court, and has the best player. Houston as...I'm not sure what, but I do know that they're very much in this series. I don't know who's going to stop Yao in this series, and the Rockets can throw either Battier or Artest on Roy. If McGrady was playing, I would take Portland for sure. But now that his cursed body and mind have been removed from the premises, I think Houston might take this. But I'm not sure.

Prediction: Rockets in six.

UPDATE: One more day.

The Culture Of Informal Sports

I was thinking of writing a post on this topic for a long time, and this column by Stanley Fish finally persuaded me to stop being lazy.

For as long as I remember, I have played sports for fun and competition. I think I started playing cricket at about age 5 -- my eldest brother, then 13, taught me the forward defensive shot and the straight drive -- and basketball at about age 7 or 8 (not coincidentally, fellow by the name of Michael was about 28 years old then, and doing some pretty ridiculous things). Between the ages of 10 and 19, I would say I played some sport for some part of the day about four or five times a week. I stopped playing sports in college mainly because I was too nerdy and refused to leave my room for anything other than the library, but every now and then we would get a cricket game going amongst all the South Asians at our tiny college. Only when I got to grad school did I start playing regularly again -- basketball two or three times a week.

Leaving aside how much fun it was and is, I want to talk about the culture that pervades informal sports. My only experiences have been with pickup basketball and tape-tennis cricket, but I'm sure this applies to many other people's experiences with many other sports.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Here's the most interesting passage from Fish's column:

Why? Why continue to do something I wasn’t any good at nine times out of ten? Well for one thing basketball players are by and large generous. (There are exceptions.) If you’re not very skilled, if you’re old and slow, they will make a place for you in the game. In his recent book “Give and Go: Basketball as a Cultural Practice,” Thomas McLaughlin speaks of the ethical practices that emerge in the course of a game even though no rules have imposed them: “Every time one of the players in our game says to a weak player as he is taking an open shot that he will likely miss ‘Good shot,’ he is weaving the ethical fabric of the game.”

I have often been the beneficiary of that ethical fabric, even when those weaving me into it are perfect strangers. For one of the great things about being a basketball player (or pretending to be one) is that no court is closed to you which is why I always have a basketball in the trunk of my car. You can just show up wherever there is a hoop and a game and you will be included. (This holds also in foreign countries where there may be a language barrier, but never a basketball barrier.)

That's the most important and most amazing thing about informal sports: everyone gets a chance. I speak from experience: when I was in Pakistan, I was always one of the three best players on the basketball court; in Chicago, I am always one of three worst. In cricket, depending on the setting and the people there, I could be anywhere from the best player there to just barely in the upper quartile (top 25%). The point is, I've experienced informal sports from a variety of different perspectives, and the result is always the same: bad players are still allowed to play, still given the ball or bat ahead of someone who might deserve it; everyone is made to feel welcome and no one is shunned on the basis of their ability (the bigness of their mouths might be another matter entirely).

It really is unbelievable when you think about it. Economists from places like the University of Chicago would tell you that human beings act almost always as rational agents in their own self-interest, and most people's self-interest is to win. And yet, very rarely do teams and players act completely like they want to win. Note, I'm not saying people don't want to win. I'm saying they sometimes act in ways that makes their winning less likely.

In cricket, for instance, it is a time-honored trait that a player has to be given either at least one over (for Westerners, read: be allowed to bowl, which is cricket's equivalent to pitching in baseball) or bat in the top three or four. I've played a tape-tennis game of cricket about 4 gazillion times in my life. Almost every time, the team batting second makes its decisions on the batting order according to the following criteria: (a) how big a score are we chasing? and (b) who didn't get a chance to bowl?

Though these options are often in opposition to each other -- for the simple fact that if a player didn't get to bowl, it probably means he sucks, which probably would get in the way of successfully chasing the first team's score -- they are almost always handled pretty adroitly by whoever is in charge of selecting the batting order. Usually you'll send a really good player with the sucky guy (for Westerners: in cricket, two players bat at any one time, in effect in rotation), hope the sucky guy does something productive or gets out quickly, and take your chances by interspersing sucky guys with talented guys in the order.

In basketball, it's very similar. If a sucky guy is open, everyone will encourage him to shoot, even if the sucky guy's open shot is less likely to go in than the good player's contested shot. Good defensive plays (which rely less on skill and more on effort) are always applauded. And I've never been in a game -- ever -- where someone is made fun of for their lack of ability (unless it's between friends, in which case all bets are off).

Again, think about how weird that is. In every other walk of life, be it in an office building or a school or even a home, people with less skill are usually marginalized for (and by) people with more skill. And yet in sports, where winning and losing is a very discrete and binary outcome (you can't "sort of" win the way you can "sort of" be friends with someone or "sort of" be good at your job), where dog-eat-dog Darwinian logic should be in full play, where every minute should be a heroic battle for establishing one's manhood, we actually see something very different: empathy and the sense of unity. And the crazy thing is, it is often expressed by people who don't know each other at all -- by people who have almost nothing in common except a passion for the sport.

At the U of C gym where I play pickup basketball, for instance, there are white guys and black guys and East Asian guys and Hispanic guys and, um, one South Asian guy (guess who?). There are undergrads and grad students and people who work at the U of C hospital and people who simply live in the neighborhood here in the South Side of Chicago. There are rich guys and middle-class guys and poor guys. Occasionally, there's a girl too. And unlike Cheers, very few people know everyone else's name. They just shoot for teams, ones and twos to 11, winner stays, and repeat. It's a pretty simple formula, really.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

I know this is going to make me sound like one of those old dudes who hates that his time has passed, but I really can't believe kids these days. The amount of time they spend indoors on their goddamn Xboxs and PS3s and Nintendos and Civilization and Prince of Persia and whatnot is really beyond me.

Look, I understand there are a lot of virtues in playing sports that are replicated in video games: the idea of wasted effort, the idea of losing despite trying your hardest and having to accept it, the idea of camaraderie and team spirit, and the idea of using past failures to overcome future obstacles, to name just a few. But no one is going to convince me it's the same experience, and one of the main reasons is the stuff I've talked about in this post: the delicate balance between altruism and winning that is commonly struck in informal sports. If anyone under the age of 20 is reading this, please stop and get your ass out of the house and throw around a goddamn ball with someone your age. Trust me, it'll be fun.

Even if you suck.

Why Do Veteran Teams Hire Inexperienced Coaches?

This NBA season has seen the decline (and will see the fall) of two of the league's more consistent franchises in the last five years: Phoenix and Detroit. It has been painful to watch on many levels, and for me personally, it has been especially so: Detroit had to start sucking the year AI went there, and Phoenix went from the team everybody loved to watch to a team that's just sort of sad.

While we can say a lot about the trades (Shaq/Marion), draft picks (Darko over Melo/Wade/Bosh) and free agent decisions (letting Joe Johnson go) that have led these two proud franchises to this juncture, I would like to concentrate instead on the coaching hires that were made last summer, with Michael Curry going to Detroit and Terry Porter going to Phoenix.


Both of those decisions reflected a violation of one of NBA's core axioms: thou shalt not hire a young coach to lead a veteran team that has enjoyed success with a former coach. The issue here is simple: the NBA is a player's league, and unless the coach enjoys the players' respect as a coach and as a man (i.e. NOT simply because the coach has the GM's backing, as both Porter and Curry do), he will fail. And because young and inexperienced coaches by definition have enjoyed no prior success, they will not have the players' respect when he gets there.

Recall Shaq's contrasting reactions to when (a) his Lakers hired Phil Jackson and (b) Pat Riley fired Stan Van Gundy and hired himself as Heat coach. When Phil Jackson - then of the mere six rings - came on board, he instantly had Shaq's ear. Why? Simple: he had the rings, and the adulation of Michael and Scottie. Shaq respected Phil Jackson before he even got to the Lakers, which is why their relationship worked. By contrast, recall Shaq's reaction when Riley stabbed Van Gundy in the back. It was something to the effect of "A marquee team needs a marquee coach". Despite the fact that Van Gundy was (and is) a fantastic coach, he simply did not have Shaq's respect. Why not? No rings.

This phenomenon explains some - though by no means all - of the Pistons' and Suns' struggles this year. The Pistons don't play hard for a number of reasons, but one of them is simply the fact that they don't care what Michael Curry says (the way they did when, say, Larry Brown was around). Similarly, you get the feeling the half of the Phoenix team tuned out Terry Porter before Mike D'Antoni even left the building.

The question then becomes: why did the respective GMs of these teams hire these coaches? I understand Steve Kerr's philosophical differences with D'Antoni, and his desire to go in a different direction, but why not hire someone defensively-oriented with a sterling reputation with the NBA's elite, like Jeff Van Gundy or Larry Brown? Why did Joe Dumars go with Curry to coach a team of notoriously hard-headed and stubborn players? It really makes no sense.

Ugh

Kobe Bryant is a Barcelona fan? Why, dear Lord, why?

Seriously, what does this mean for me? Isn't this kind of like a Jewish fan of Schalke 04 discovering that Adolf Hitler supported them?

Ok, ok, maybe it's not that bad, but it's still pretty bad.

Quote(s) Of The Day (Joint Winners)

Both sports related.

First, Wizards coach Ed Tapscott wins the "Most superfluous and redundant comment ever made" award with the following, after a pasting from Boston (who are now an ungodly 21-2 by the way):

You saw the best team in the league. And in case you weren’t watching, it wasn’t us. It was them.

Right-o.

Next, we have the strangest sentence I have ever read in a preview of a football match. I am in that weird state right now, where your team is playing so well, and the upcoming opposition is playing so shakily, that you can't help but feel something is going to go wrong. Well I was snapped out of my sense of foreboding with the following:

Real Madrid against Sevilla on Sunday were refreshing attacking even with their myriad of injuries and so were Sevilla against Real Madrid. But sleeping with a whore is one thing, sleeping with a whore without a condom is quite another.

I have no idea what that means.

Quote Of The Day

Yao Ming lives up to every Chinese stereotype while thinking about Ron-Ron's arrival in Houston. Honestly, if Sun Tzu or Confucius played a team sport, wouldn't they have said something like this?

For some reason, I like him. Because in the games we play against him, I hate him.

As I told Nikhil in an email, this move is guaranteed to destroy the Rockets. Rick Adelman, his "player's coach" reputation notwithstanding, is not as able a people-manager as Phil Jackson. Tracy McGrady, moreover, is not the you-better-not-fuck-around-or-I'll-rip-your-goddamn-throat-out alpha dog that is Kobe Bryant. The result will be Ron-Ron being Ron-Ron, which ultimately means he will be involved in every single trade rumor in January and February.

Feminism Is No Longer Relevant

Not because equal pay in the workplace or a real division of labor at home is widespread throughout the world today, but because women have reached the true mark of equality: they have shown they can be as idiotically juvenile as men on a basketball court:





Anyway, speaking of great basketball videos, please watch this great 10-minute clip of Obama and his relationship with the sport. In particular, watch out for him telling us "My actual talent was my first step...I could get to the rim on anybody." Classic.

There's Always Next Year (Or Is There?): Thoughts On Barca And Phoenix

Really quick before I go to bed:

I watched the fourth quarter of Phoenix-San Antonio. There is absolutely, positively, no doubt about the reason the Suns lost: Steve Nash. He had three or four really costly turnovers in the space of about three minutes, missed a couple of shots, and didn't take command at crunch time the way we have grown used to him doing so. It wasn't just this game either; he was stymied this whole series by Bruce Bowen and his buddies. When considering Nash's place in the game, ask yourself this: do truly great players, I mean super-duper-stars, ever get taken out of an entire series? Right, didn't think so. I think it's time to face the facts, as difficult and sad as they may be: Nash and the Suns are done. He looked old, slow, and worst, incompetent in this series, and next year will only be worse. Thanks for an absolute blast these last four years, guys.

I also watched the whole of Barca-United. First, my heartiest congratulations to regular reader Asfand. United were the better team on the day and they deserved to go through, notwithstanding Barca's domination of possession. Barca simply lacked that cutting edge in the final third. Time after time, I found myself pining for Ronaldinho. Not this year's fat, lazy, and uncommitted version. I'm talking about the '06 Ronaldinho, the guy who got standing ovations at the Bernabeu and played the game with a mix of intensity and joy that I have never seen replicated by any other athlete in any other sport. In this game, Barca got a multitude of free-kicks in Ronaldinho territory; moreover they were times when Messi was looking to link up with someone up front, and sadly Eto'o simply wasn't up for it. Messi and Ronaldinho have shared a prolific, and poetic, partnership these last few years. It's sad that it wasn't there today, on the grandest of stages, and it's sadder that it won't be there at all next year, when Ronnie's in Milan, London, or Manchester (City).

Wallowing In Self-Pity Quote Of The Day

Poor T-Mac:

It's my fault. It's my fault we missed free throws. It's my fault we lost both games. Blame me. It's my fault we fouled to tie the game up. That's my fault. It's my fault they get easy layups. It's my fault we're not executing well on the offensive end. It's my fault a couple people in the stands ordered Heinekens and they got Budweiser. It's my fault. I'm sorry. I am serious. It's my fault. Everything is my fault. It's my fault. It's T-Mac's fault. Everybody's blaming me. The Suns (for being down 2-0 to the Spurs). I mean, everybody. That's what it seems like. It's my fault. I'm out there by myself.

I think he should just save himself the trouble next year and ensure his team doesn't make the playoffs.

The Inside Scoop On Isiah's Tenure In New York

More here.

San Antonio-Phoenix, Game 1

The Suns will be absolutely kicking themselves. They made five critical mistakes that cost them the game:

1. Up three at the end of regulation, there's no one you'd rather want with the ball than Steve Nash, whose combination of decision-making, free throw shooting, jump shooting, court vision, and dribbling skills make him absolutely invaluable. But he inexplicably forgot about the shot-clock, and turned it over, giving San Antonio enough time to...

2. I will never, ever, EVER understand why teams don't foul when they're up three. Why would you give anyone a chance to hit a three to force overtime? Why? Why? If they foul there, Phoenix turns the game into a free-throw shooting contest. Phoenix were 4th in the league in that category, San Antonio 15th. I'd take my chances under those circumstances. I mean you want to give credit to Michael Finley for hitting a HUGE three, but really, it should never have come to that.

3. Up three at the end of overtime, Nash hits Amare on a pick and roll, just below the foul line. Ordinarily he'd rise up and hit that, no problems at all. But he decides to drive into traffic, commit an offensive foul, give the Spurs possession, and foul out of the game. Just a brilliant all-round play by STAT. This gives the Spurs enough time to...

4. You know that old saying "Once bitten, twice shy"? Well, clearly Mike D'Antoni hasn't. WHEN YOU'RE UP THREE AND THE OTHER TEAM HAS THE BALL, FUCKING FOUL THEM BEFORE THEY SHOOT. Is this really that complicated? Again, to be fair, Duncan hit a fairly miraculous shot (his first three all season) but it shouldn't have come to that.

5. At the end of the second overtime, after Nash hit an amazing shot to tie it (one leg, falling out of bounds in the corner, three, nothing but net), the Spurs isoed Ginobili. Everyone and their mother knows he's going to go left. So what does Raja Bell do? Play him straight up. Again, completely inexplicable. Force him right into help, for God's sake.

Like I said, the Suns will be kicking themselves. They were up 16 in the first half, up 9 in the 4th, hell they were up 5 with a minute left in OT, and they lost. A golden opportunity, right there. Can they recover? Probably. But man...

NBA Playoffs Preview

Because I’m smack bang in the middle of preparing for the IR exam in June, I won’t be able to do as in-depth a preview of the NBA playoffs as I would like. So this is how this is going to work. I’ve going to write a few words about each series. This will be followed by three sets of predictions: mine, Nikhil’s and Zeyd’s. Each of us will receive 5 points for correctly predicting a series winner, and 3 further points for correctly predicting the number of games in the series. At the end of the first-round – and perhaps at the end of the playoffs, if we choose to carry forward this enterprise – we will have a winner, who will win a yet to be announced material reward and bragging rights. Understand? Good.

Without further ado:

WEST

1. L.A. Lakers vs. 8. Denver Nuggets

As a Nuggets (well, really, Allen Iverson) fan, there were only two teams that I absolutely, positively did not want to draw in the playoffs. The first were the Spurs. The second were the Lakers. This is because of my belief that if the talent levels of two teams are fairly equal, teams with a system will always beat teams without a system in a 7-game series. In the case of the Lakers, even the talent levels don’t really match up. Kobe’s playing the best ball of his career, they have the perfect second scorer for the triangle, a post-up guy who can hit the 18 footer for good measure, and the perfect cast of role-players, guys who can hit shots (Vujacic, Farmar), pass and generally make smart plays (Walton), hustle and bring the crowd into it (Fisher, Turiaf), and the ultimate enigma who’s perfect as the third best player on a team (Odom). Exacerbating all this is the fact that George Karl is not exactly a match for Phil Jackson, and I can’t really see the Nugs putting up much of a challenge in this series. I’m giving them two games, one in which AI and Melo carry them, and one in which Kobe tries to do too much in a close game, forgetting what got the Lakers to this point in the first place, and shoots them out of it.

Ahsan’s prediction: L.A. wins 4-2

Nikhil’s prediction: L.A. wins 4-1

Zeyd’s prediction: Denver wins 4-2

2. New Orleans Hornets vs. 7. Dallas Mavericks

I am completely torn about this series. There’re so many conflicting factors to consider. In New Orleans’ favor: they have the best player in the series, they have home-court, they’re younger, they’re hungrier, and they have a coach who, despite all his faults, went to the Finals twice going up against a coach whose team flamed out in the first round last year because he made bad decisions. In Dallas’ favor: they have the been-there-done-that feel, the pressure’s off them (hugely important for a team that folds under pressure), they’re playing a team which is extremely inexperienced at this level, they’ve finally figured out how to incorporate Kidd into their game, and their team defense sets are among the league’s best when playing a predictable half-court team like the Hornets. I think the longer this series goes, the more it’s going to favor New Orleans; my only fear for the Hornets is that the series won’t go long enough for them to get acclimated to the playoffs.

Ahsan’s prediction: Dallas wins 4-2

Nikhil’s prediction: Dallas wins 4-3

Zeyd’s prediction: New Orleans wins 4-3

3. San Antonio Spurs vs. 6. Phoenix Suns

My goodness, what have the basketball gods served up here? IR exam, Shy-R exam, I’m not missing a minute of this series. The history, the animosity, the star power, the prime-time factor: this series is the Leningrad/Moscow of this season’s Western playoffs – the cataclysmic struggle that only marks the beginning of a hellacious war.

So who’s going to take it? Well, if you’d asked me two months ago, I would have said San Antonio in a heartbeat. Watching the last game between these teams, however, has made me think differently. I know you should never put too much stock in one game, but Phoenix won a game they never would have pre-Shaq: a grind-it-out game, close in the fourth quarter, on the road. But they pulled it out, and did so in a methodical, almost-Spurs like manner. Furthermore, San Antonio has looked really old this year – all the big shots by guys like Finley and Horry that they’ve relied on for years past seemed to have dried up. The only reason I feel any trepidation is the fact that most of ESPN’s “experts” are picking the Suns too, and in a close series where there’s no favorite, going with what the “experts” say almost always leads to trouble. I’m going to have to take the leap, however, because (a) Phoenix wants it more, (b) Phoenix is pissed off from last year, and (c) the Spurs cannot stop Amare.

Ahsan’s prediction: Phoenix wins 4-2

Nikhil’s prediction: Phoenix wins 4-2

Zeyd’s prediction: San Antonio wins 4-3

4. Houston Rockets vs. 5. Utah Jazz

BORING! This was easily the most soporific series last year – despite going 7 games – and this year figures to be no different. It’s also the easiest to predict – I know of no sane, rational soul who’s picking Houston in this series, 22-win streak and all. Really, who’s going to guard Okur? Plus, Deron might conceivably average 25-13 in this series, playing three quarters. Utah is well-coached, well-led, have an incredibly efficient offense, and their troubles on the road – according to Nikhil anyway – are overplayed. Plus, it’s the playoffs, which means McGrady’s going to shoot 39% from the field and 31% from three, and then make everyone feel sorry for him in the summer by putting it all on himself. Well, whatever. There’s only so much sympathy I can have for someone of his stature who’s missed two legitimate chances to get to the second round, and blew it (against Dallas in ’05 when they won the first two on the road, and against Utah last year).

Ahsan’s prediction: Utah wins 4-1

Nikhil’s prediction: Utah wins 4-2

Zeyd’s prediction: Utah wins 4-2

EAST

1. Boston Celtics vs. 8. Atlanta Hawks

Not worth discussing.

Ahsan’s prediction: Boston wins 4-0

Nikhil’s prediction: Boston wins 4-0

Zeyd’s prediction: Boston wins 4-0

2. Detroit Pistons vs. 7. Philadelphia 76ers

I don’t think Detroit is losing this series, but I do think they’re in for a surprise. For one, they’re guaranteed to mail in at least a game, given their strange proclivity for overconfidence at every stage of the season (even the Finals…remember ’05?). For another, this Philly team was one of the league’s six or seven best over the last couple of months of the season, with some huge road wins. Plus Flip Saunders is a terrible coach, always good for one unnecessary loss per series. I say this goes six games.

Ahsan’s prediction: Detroit wins 4-2

Nikhil’s prediction: Detroit wins 4-1

Zeyd’s prediction: Detroit wins 4-1

3. Orlando Magic vs. 6. Toronto Raptors

Another tough series to figure out. On paper, Orlando should blow the Raptors away. But this is Dwight Howard’s first foray into the big time, and who knows how he’ll react? Toronto were in a hard-fought series against Jersey last year and I’m sure the experience helped them no end. At the end of the day, in a close series, you have to look at second-tier factors like home court and the coaching matchup, both of which favor Orlando. But this is a pick I am making with very low levels on confidence, let me tell you.

Ahsan’s prediction: Orlando wins 4-3

Nikhil’s prediction: Orlando wins 4-2

Zeyd’s prediction: Orlando wins 4-1

4. Cleveland Cavaliers vs. 5. Washington Wizards

This series will depend on one thing, and one thing only: Lebron’s back. If he’s healthy, I don’t care about the Wizards’ recent run, the Cavs’ being an average team after the trade, or Gilbert’s yapping: he’ll just take over in the 4^th every game, and that will be that. But his injury makes it more of a toss-up. And the Wizards are better than they’ve been the last couple of years, when they were bounced by this Cleveland team. On the other hand, when you factor in the fact that Caron is only just returning from injury, and that Gilbert still could shake their chemistry with some ill-advised shots at bad times…I don’t know.

Ahsan’s prediction: Cleveland wins 4-3

Nikhil’s prediction: Washington wins 4-2

Zeyd’s prediction: Cleveland wins 4-2

Let the games begin.

Quote Of The Day

Here's you-know-who on the Nuggets' impending matchup with the Lakers:

This is what it’s about. If you’re scared, get a dog. If you’re scared, go to church.

Even though they're going to lose, I don't think Iverson has ever - and I really do mean ever - gone into a game or series thinking his team's not going to win.

We'll have a mini-playoff preview up soon. Stay tuned.

NBA Awards

If there's one thing NBA players care about, it's this blog and the opinions contained herein. The following are how I would vote for the big end-of-season awards if I had a vote.

MVP: Chris Paul

You can go look at the numbers (statistically, the best season any point guard, ever, has enjoyed) but really, this is about more than that. Dude's not 23 yet, and put a team which features David West, Tyson Chandler, and Peja Stojakovic as its second, third, and fourth best players, and took it to the top of the most brutal conference in the game's history. Normally if the leader of a come-from-nowhere team is in the running for MVP, it's because his team exceeded expectations and got to, say, the 3rd or 4th seed with little or no help. Chris Paul has kept the Hornets on top of the West the whole goddamn season. Furthermore, in a rare show of unanimity, myself, Nikhil, and Zeyd all agree on something basketball related, which doesn't happen all that often, I can promise you.

Of course, Kobe will win it. But he shouldn't.

Coach of the year: Phil Jackson

As much for everything that happened off the court as on it. He had to (a) placate Kobe at the beginning of the season, (b) babysit Bynum at the beginning of the season, and (c) deal with the massive trade for Gasol in the middle of the season (I don't care how good a trade looks on paper; you've still got to make it work on the floor, and that responsibility falls on the coach). Throughout it all, his Lakers have played defense when they needed to, kept games close when they needed to, and gotten the hell out of Kobe's way when they needed to. And remember, they were atop the West before the Gasol trade.

If Mo Cheeks, Jerry Sloan, or Byron Scott win it, I won't mind terribly.

Rookie of the year: Kevin Durant

Everyone's saying Durant, so I might as well agree with them, even though his shooting numbers are atrocious, and Al Horford has helped his team to the playoffs. Oh well.

Sixth man: Manu Ginobili

No explanation needed, other than to say he's arguably their best fourth quarter player now. Still hate the cunt, though.

Defensive player of the year: Kevin Garnett

Really no explanation needed. If you don't know why, you don't know basketball.

Most improved: Hedo Turkoglu

What a story this guy is. Having exemplified all this soft Sacramento teams from earlier this decade, he's been reborn. Do you know he ranks among the league leaders in fourth quarter points this season? He's the crunch-time option for the ultimate dark-horse in the East. He's rejuvenated his career, and he deserves this.

All NBA first team:

Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Kevin Garnett, Amare Stoudemire.

All NBA second team:

Steve Nash, Deron Williams, Tracy McGrady, Tim Duncan, Dwight Howard.

All NBA third team:

Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, Manu Ginobili, Dirk Nowitzki, Marcus Camby.

Indecipherable Quote Of The Day

Here's Jermaine O'Neal on the playoff race in the East, after Indiana beat Atlanta and pulled within two games of the Hawks:

I was telling some fans yesterday I wish we had 10 more games, five more games, because we’re starting to get in a rhythm. We’re starting to take a disposition about ourselves on both ends of the floor.

There are two options here. First, I could choose not to be an asshole and not point out that dude didn't go to college. Second, I could choose to be an asshole and point out that dude didn't go to college. Oh, look! Fate made the choice for me (yes, I know...I'm an asshole).

I'm only joking. I actually love Jermaine - he's always been one of the more perceptive and self-aware guys in the NBA. But, man, does that sentence sound stupid.

Quote Of The Day

Here's Stephen Jackson, on the Warriors' style of play:

But after watching us all year, you should expect that we're going to do the opposite of the norm, you know what I mean? That's how we play, that's our team, that's what we're built on. Just making up our own stuff. You know Nellie, he does everything that you don't expect him to do.

Golden State cannot beat San Antonio or LA in a 7-game series. But everyone else in the West is fair game.

Thoughts On The NBA (Primarily The Trades)

Many of you (okay, probably two) will be wondering why I haven't posted anything substantial on basketball for a while. After all, I deem it important enough to be one of our categories over there in our little categories section. Plus those readers who happen to know me personally know that I'm a huge fan. So what happened? Well, a couple of things. First, there's just been way too much stuff to write about in the last few months. With the political turmoil in Pakistan and election season in the U.S., not to mention my real work (which for now constitutes working on my MA; I'll talk about the project here on Rs. 5 when it's done in a month or so), I simply haven't had the time.

For another thing, I'm simply down on the NBA right now. A lot of things have really frustrated me over the last few months. Consider the playoffs in the last two seasons. In 2006, the refs almost cost Phoenix the series against the Lakers when they made those atrocious non-calls in game 4 (when Kobe hit the game winner after Nash "lost" the ball). They then handed Miami the championship, repeatedly bailing Wade out against Dallas, sending him to the line when defenders had the temerity to breathe on him. It wasn't just the fact that the refs were deciding the game instead of the players, but that the refs were rewarding a certain style of play: put your head down, drive into the lane, flail your arms, and hope for a whistle. Just like evolutionary biology contorts itself to keep ugly people around, so too NBA refs were somehow making sure that ugly basketball lived on: if refs rewarded a certain style of play, you can be sure as hell that other teams would emulate it, thus reducing the aesthetic quality of the game.

[Just a quick interruption: conventional wisdom states that in team sports, coaches/managers/captains control the style of play. Get a different manager/coach/captain, the thinking goes, and your style will change. This is true, but only to a limited extent, and it masks a greater truth - that the greatest determinants of style in any team sport are referees. I guarantee that if refs in football start yellow-carding dives regularly and unequivocally, you'll see diving out of the game in a matter of months. Officials and referees are the most powerful people on the field/court/pitch insofar as the quality and content of the product concerned.]

Anyway, as I was saying, the 2006 playoffs were sort of a disappointment. But they were nothing compared to last year's Phoenix-Spurs series. San Antonio is one of those rare teams that manages to commit more infractions than any other team, and yet is held up as the standard, the beacon of light in a world of darkness, the Team That Everyone Respects. I never understood it. They have a guy who flops at least four times a game (Ginobili). They have a guy who is arguably the dirtiest player in the NBA and risks injuring people every time he guards them (Bowen). They have a guy who mopes and makes that puppy dog face every time a call goes against him, even though he's a supposed MVP and the greatest power forward of all time (Duncan). Their coach is a goddamn Cold Warrior. And their point guard married Eva Longoria. Can anyone please explain to me why this team has any fans? And speaking of fans, you know what else is really annoying? When in their home games, Spurs' fans start their stupid "Go, Spurs, go!" chant. Arrrghh! They sound like eleven year-olds at a birthday party playing musical chairs. I just want to strangle them.

So this team ends up beating the most aesthetically pleasing group in the NBA, the Suns. And they don't beat them because they're better, but because in David Stern's twisted logic, rules like "You can't leave the bench in case of a fight" have to be strictly adhered to, but rules like "You can't knee the opposing team's point guard and league MVP in the balls" and "You can't kick a guy in the heel when he's driving in for a dunk" are to be applied somewhat less stringently. Anyway, once the refs and David Stern handed the Spurs that series, I was beyond livid. Add that to the fact that Cleveland (!) got to the Finals beating a grand total of one good team (and even that team didn't play hard for three of the six games), and you can see why I was disheartened.

This year has throw up its own slew of problems. Consider the disparity between the conferences right now. As of today, February 15, Denver is out of the playoffs. A team with two all-stars and one which really should have had three (Camby's having another monster year), with a great supporting cast and a decent coach, is out of the playoffs. Not because they're underachieving, or not playing hard, but simply because right now, they're eight teams in the West better than them. They're 32-20! 32-20! 12 games above .500! Over in the East, Philly (Philly!) is in the eighth spot, with a...(wait for it)...23-30 record (I wonder how AI would feel about his new and improved team sitting home in April while his former team, led by superstars like Igoudala, Andre Miller, and Dalembert get into the playoffs). The disparity in their records doesn't even reveal the true gulf in quality, because Denver plays most of its games in the West and Philly most of theirs in the East. In other words, 32-20 in the West would probably be 40-12 in the East. That, for the record, would be 2nd place right now. And can anyone dispute that if Denver was in the East, as it is presently constitued, it would be behind Boston but ahead of everyone else? Anyone?

What this means is that out of Phoenix, New Orleans, San Antonio, Dallas, the Lakers, Utah, Golden State, Houston, and Denver, five won't make the second round. Five of those teams will not make the second round. I'm sorry I keep repeating myself, but can you honestly blame me? I would venture to suggest that each of those five teams could be anywhere between best in the East to third in the East, but no lower. The difference in quality is just ridiculous.


Of course, the solution to this would be easy: just scrap the entire notion of conferences. Seed the best sixteen teams in the NBA by record first, head-to-head second, plus/minus differential third. If 12-13 Western teams make it, so be it. It would make for the most satisfying result anyway. That fact, by the way, guarantees that the NBA will never do it. Any time they can actually do something smart for the fans, you can be sure they won't bother trying. (Sometimes it's worse than not trying - sometimes the NBA actively discourages other people from trying. Witness their refusal to let Dwight Howard raise the rim to 12 feet for the dunk contest this Saturday. Why, you ask? Because the idea "clashes with their intent to apply as many standard NBA rules to All-Star Weekend contests as possible." Because, you know, nothing screams "standard NBA rules" quite like All-Star weekend).

Anyway, that's enough bitching for me. Here are my thoughts on the various trades and non-trades.

Gasol to the Lakers
For once, I actually agreed with Greg Popovich. Here's what he told SI after the trade: "What they did in Memphis is beyond comprehension. There should be a trade committee that can scratch all trades that make no sense. I just wish I had been on a trade committee that oversees NBA trades. I would have voted no to the LA trade." This was truly highway robbery. The Lakers got exactly the type of guy they wanted and gave up a bunch of liabilities in the process (really, you should try and watch Kwame catch the ball; it's a truly painful experience). Now they pair a 27 year-old Gasol with a 20 year-old Bynum with a Kobe in his prime with a young and hungry supporting cast (Farmar, Turiaf, Vujacic, Walton) with just the right amount of smart, heady veterans sprinkled around (Fisher, Odom). That's a championship caliber team. Only, they're not going to win it this year. Two reasons:

One, teams that pull a major trade in the middle of the season almost never win anything substantial the same year. The lack of familiarity dooms almost all of them. The only exception to this rule in the last ten years has been Rasheed to Detroit in '04. The only other exception I can think of off the top of my head is Clyde to Houston back in '95. That's it. You pull a monster trade, you do it in the off-season, so your team and coach can have a training camp together and build from there. This is especially true of a team with a complicated offense like the triangle.

Two, the Lakers need to pull another trade, and here's why. Bynum plays center. Gasol (a weak defender) plays power forward. And Odom will now shift to the 3. Now, do you really think Odom can guard small forwards? You think he's quick enough to stay in front of Carmelo? How about Ginobili? Josh Howard? Grant Hill? McGrady? You think Odom can guard these guys? I don't. I also don't think Gasol can guard the Duncans, Boozers, and Nowitzkis of the West. What this means is that the Lakers will have two weak links on the defensive end in the playoffs, and that usually spells doom (you're allowed one if you want to win a ring, but two is pushing it).

So in the off-season, after they're bounced in the second round, the Lakers need to trade Odom for a young athletic three who's happy playing defense (Igoudala would be nice, but they can't get him, not for Odom). And then their team will be complete, and they'll be favorites next year. But not this year. Not yet, Laker fans. Not just yet.

Shaq to Phoenix
Dear Lord, what a disaster this will turn out to be. What's been truly funny to me is the reaction to the trade. First, everyone came out and said they hated it. Then, following Rule Number 178627 of Punditocracy (Thou Shalt Stake Out A Position Completely Contrary To What Logic Dictates If It Means That Thou Standst Alone), everyone shifted their opinion, saying "hey, maybe it could work after all!". Of course, all the pundits made the exact same move at the same time, thus defeating the purpose of the original move.

This will be terrible. Mark my words, this will turn out to be unmitigated disaster. First, Shaq will clog up all the space in the middle. The reason the Suns are so devastating on offense is that they can put three three-point shooters on the perimeter, and let Nash and Amare work the pick-and-roll in the middle of the floor. The opposing team has to decide if it wants to give up a thunderous Amare dunk, a short jumper by Nash, or an open three. That option is now gone. Second, Shaq is a terrible defender. If Phoenix thinks he's going to help their defense, they're in for a rude shock, because he's going to get beat by any center who can move his feet. Third, he's a terrible rebounder. You have to be able to jump to get rebounds, and Shaq, sadly, can no longer jump. Fourth, for all the talk about chemistry, wait until Shaq gets grumpy at not getting a touch for three or four posessions. This is still an immensly proud man, and he's not going to be happy with merely starting the break, as everyone seems to think he will be. Fifth, dude's going to be hurt all the time. The guy has played more than 67 games just once in the last seven seasons. Whatever you say about Marion, at least he showed up to play more than once a week.


I feel bad, primarily because I love Nash and I think he deserves a ring. But he's not getting it with this team. Not in a million years.

Kidd to Dallas?
Call me crazy, but I think a non-trade will work out best for the Mavs here. Really, what do you get with Kidd at this point? A 35 year-old dude who shoots his age, that's what (well, almost - his FG% is 36). He's not going to run and gun because that's not Dallas' style, and really, he's too old to stay in front of the Parkers and Iversons, who are the type of people he'll be asked to guard. So what exactly is the point? I have absolutely no idea why Dallas would pull this trade, especially given all they're giving up. It's just not worth it.

I'm convinced that Dallas, if it doesn't pull this trade, will become along with San Antonio and Utah the favorites in the West. My reasoning, outlined earlier, is simple: the playoffs favor teams that know and trust each other. Continuity is good, not bad. When you have a core that's been together a while, and has played heated 7-game series in raucous atmospheres, and has won and lost together, then you stand a chance. If Dallas stands pat, I say they become the favorites, notwithstanding the damage to their chemistry this non-trade would have wrought. I mean, shouldn't Devin Harris' feelings be considered in our calculations?


Webber to Golden State, Damon Stoudamire to San Antonio, and Korver to Utah
Inconsequential and stupid, realtively inconsequential and not bad, and very smart and unheralded, respectively.

That's it for me. Enjoy the weekend, guys.

Quote Of The Day

I could have taken LSD, hallucinated AND been a great writer and I still couldn’t have made this stuff up.

An unnamed team executive on the Knicks/Isiah/Marbury imbroglio.