Simmons' Finals preview: One for the ages
Alson Wong
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Finals preview: One for the ages
By Bill Simmons
ESPN.com
Maybe it wasn't shocking that "Hot Tub Time Machine" became a surprise hit,
but did you ever imagine it would set the tone for an entire year? Just this
month, Hollywood is releasing movies called "The A-Team" and "The Karate
Kid"; MTV is preparing a "Teen Wolf" series; Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair might
wrestle soon; Bruce Springsteen is rumored to be playing another Super Bowl
halftime show; Michael Jackson's concert special is available on
pay-per-view; Eddie Murphy is hitting comedy clubs to test material for
another stand-up tour; and the Celtics and Lakers are playing in another NBA
Finals.
In other words, it's great to be back in the mid-'80s again. And if it leads
to a studio asking Josh Holloway to bring back Sonny Crockett in a "Miami
Vice" TV pilot, it will have all been worth it. For now, we'll have to
settle for two weeks of Celtics-Lakers battles that could end up being
remembered as one of the best Finals ever.
It's a dirty secret, but the Finals usually aren't very good. The last
entertaining start-to-finish series of the past two decades? Pacers-Lakers
in 2000. The best start-to-finish series? Suns-Bulls in 1993. Number of
Finals since 1990 in which you said to yourself heading into Game 6, "I have
absolutely no idea who will win this series"? Just three: 1994
(Knicks-Rockets), 1998 (Bulls-Jazz) and 2005 (Spurs-Pistons). The last
phenomenal individual performance? Just one since Tim Duncan's near
quadruple-double to close out the 2003 Finals (Dwyane Wade in 2006). The
most evenly matched Finals between really good teams? Probably 1993 (unless
you wanted to talk me into 2000). The Finals with the most amount of bad
blood festering between the teams and between the fan bases before Game 1?
Good Lord, we'd have to go back to 1988 (Pistons-Lakers) for that one.
Quick story: I went to the Dodgers game Monday night. Attending a Dodgers
game is like climbing into a "Mad Men" episode -- old-school venue, gorgeous
landscape, nice weather, stripped-down game presentation -- and I always
expect the fans to be wearing fedoras, smoking Marlboro Reds and eating food
with tons of bacon on it. It's an extremely supportive, loyal, mellow crowd.
So to hear them suddenly start booing like a 1970s WWF crowd that just saw
the Iron Sheik . I mean, it's pretty jarring. That happened in two random
moments in Monday's game. The offending culprits? Two different fans wearing
green Celtics shirts and sitting near home plate; they made the mistake of
simply walking up the aisle to get drinks.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Just the sight of these guys made Dodgers fans furious. Again, no small
feat. That's when I realized how much has changed since 2008: It's not just
that Boston embarrassed the Lakers in Game 4 (the 25-point comeback) or blew
them out of the building in the deciding game (131-92) or that local product
Paul Pierce climbed out of a wheelchair to save Game 1 (for some reason,
that moment drives Lakers fans absolutely insane) or even that their hero
Kobe struggled so mightily that they quickly agreed to pretend his entire
stink bomb never happened (as they did after the 2004 Finals). We've had
some time to let this rejuvenated rivalry breathe again.
Think about the whirlwind setup for 2008: Boston's nucleus was hastily
whipped together the previous summer, and the Lakers came together only that
February after the Pau Gasol hijacking. The Finals were like a microwave
pizza we threw in for four minutes, then quickly chowed down. This one feels
more like a prepared meal. The teams know each other now. There will be no
strategic surprises along the lines of Phoenix's gimmicky zone. The fan
bases worked up a healthy amount of mutual bad blood -- really, these are
the only two Eastern/Western conference franchises that loathe each other to
this degree -- and even the media have gotten involved, as we witnessed
earlier this week when an L.A. Times columnist incredibly mocked Paul Pierce
for nearly getting stabbed to death in 2000.
During the Athletics-Red Sox game Tuesday night, Boston's crowd chanted
"BEAT L-A! BEAT L-A!" intermittently throughout the game; every time it
happened, the TV cameras found two drunk guys wearing Celtics jerseys and
belting out the chant like opera singers. The city is ready. Same for Los
Angeles. It's just the 2008 champ and the 2009 champ playing for the 2010
title. Rubber match. If the Lakers win, it avenges 2008, gives L.A. the
upper hand in basketball's longest rivalry and boosts Kobe historically to
rarefied air (more on this in a second). If the Celtics win, Boston fans can
play the "Your 2009 Title Is Now Meaningless," "We Own Kobe," "Our Starting
Five Still Hasn't Lost A Series When Healthy" and "We're Still The Best NBA
Franchise Ever" cards.
One other reason to love this series: It's basically the 2008 Finals all
over again, only if you switched Ron Artest for Vlad Radmanovic, Nate
Robinson for James Posey, Slightly Limping Andrew Bynum for Ronny Turiaf,
Slightly Limping And Two Years Older Kevin Garnett for Kevin Garnett, and
Quite Possibly The Best Point Guard Alive Rajon Rondo for Hit-Or-Miss Young
Guy Rajon Rondo. Translation: major upgrade.
The crunch-time fives (Perkins, Garnett, Rondo, Pierce and Allen versus
Gasol, Odom, Artest, Bryant and Fisher) are as loaded as for any Finals
since 1993 (Barkley, Chambers, Majerle, Johnson and Ainge versus Jordan,
Pippen, Grant, Paxson and Cartwright). The Celtics might have four Hall of
Famers at varying points of their career; the Lakers have a top-10
all-timer, as well as the league's second-best big man (Gasol), most
flexible forward (Odom) and best power perimeter defender (Artest). The
ninth and 10th guys? Only one of the best low-post defenders in the league
(Perkins) and someone who improbably has evolved into a mildly Horryian
veteran who isn't afraid to take big shots (Fisher). There isn't a lemon out
of the 10.
(Note: It's incredible that we're saying that about Fisher, who looked so
washed-up in the regular season that I tried to get the nickname "Low Tide"
going for him. Didn't take. Any Lakers fan who claims he knew Fisher would
rally for the playoffs is lying. Same with the Celtics fans who said that
about Rasheed "I Used The Regular Season To Begrudgingly Play Myself Into
Reasonable Shape For The Playoffs, Season-Ticket Holders Be Damned"
Wallace.)
I don't want to jinx it, but crap -- when you throw in the quality of
Boston's bench, Bynum's X factor, the way L.A.'s backups play at home, the
coaching staffs, the histories, the personalities, the contrast of styles,
the fact that Sasha Vujacic has turned into such a villain that even his own
fans openly hate him, the colors (the green and yellow always look great
together) and the Russell-Bird-Magic-Kareem-Hondo-West-Baylor-Cousy shadow,
it would be a major disappointment if this series didn't turn out to be
memorable in some way.
Back to the contrast of styles: These teams are bad for each other. The
Celtics are better than anyone at defending scorers, frustrating them at the
perimeter, disguising their looks and knocking them down on every
potentially free basket. Just ask Wade, LeBron and especially Vince Carter,
who had post-traumatic stress disorder by Game 3. (It's part personnel and
part Tom Thibodeau, the team's Belichickian assistant who will finally get
hired as a head coach this summer.) The Celtics are also going to make Kobe
play defense this series. (Either he takes Rondo or chases Ray Allen around
double screens and moving picks for two weeks . which would be stupid, and a
waste of his legs, which is why I think he'll be taking Rondo. Either way,
he won't get to be a glorified DH the way he was against Utah and Phoenix.
Also, you'll have point guards chasing around Allen. Win-win for Boston.)
And they're going to try to beat up, intimidate and frustrate Gasol (which
they did successfully in 2008).
On the flip side, the 2010 Lakers have Artest, who eats up herky-jerky
high-post games and should prevent Pierce from going off the way he did in
2008. As a Celtics fan, I'm terrified of crunch time this series: Let's say
Artest swallows up Pierce; let's say Rondo continues his trend of becoming
passive in the last five minutes because he doesn't want to get fouled (the
biggest hole in his game); and let's say Garnett's legs continue to look as
tired as they looked in the Orlando series. Where are the Celtics getting
points other than Allen? Every time I think about this series, I think about
Boston's offense grinding down in the last five minutes. The other big
advantage for the Lakers: home court. They're 28-3 in their past 31 home
playoff games, and it's no secret that home cooking brings the best out of
Kobe.
So that's the setup. I have no idea who will win and refuse to make a pick;
I've been wrong about everything this playoffs, anyway. Let's talk about
legacies. More than any recent Finals that I can remember, there's a
historical bent to the various subplots and characters of this particular
series. To wit .
THE GARNETT-ERA CELTICS
If they win the title, they would .
1. Join the 1978 Bullets (21-24 in their last 45 regular-season games) and
1995 Rockets (12-16 in their last 28) as one of the most improbable "where
the hell did this come from?" NBA champs ever. The 2010 Celts went 26-24 in
their last 50 regular-season games, were 3-7 in their last 10, and couldn't
have looked more lifeless and discombobulated down the stretch. Believe me,
I watched them all season. There were no signs of life. Fans were more
depressed than whipped husbands walking out of a "Sex and the City 2"
screening.
2. Become the all-time "Here's why you can never give up on a veteran team
with a championship pedigree no matter how much they're sucking the life out
of you" example. Please know that I have no regrets for ripping the Celtics
in the regular season; they deserved every ounce of it. My father, a
season-ticket holder since 1974, told me in April that it was one of the two
worst regular seasons he ever paid for, along with the 1978-79 season (the
one before Bird), just because he couldn't believe how many home games the
team mailed in. Now that we're in the Finals? Dad says, "Yeah, paying for
[all the mailed-in home games] was worth it. We're here, and that's all that
matters. And it's clear now that we just needed to get healthy. Still, I
don't know how that excuses Rasheed for needing six months to play himself
into shape or hustle on a fast break." Good point. Regardless, I will never
count out an old team again. You just never know.
3. Go down in history as the first team to wipe out the league's four best
players in consecutive series (Wade, LeBron, Howard, then Kobe); a
juggernaut that possibly could have three-peated had Garnett not injured his
knee last season; and a two-time champ with four potential Hall of Famers (I
know, Rondo has a loooooooooooooooooong way to go, but it's not an
unreasonable statement), which, by the way, hasn't happened since the 1986
Celtics. So . yeah.
THE GASOL-ERA LAKERS
Three straight Finals appearances (only six teams have done that since
1970); two straight titles (hasn't happened since 2002); and, really, they'd
be the favorites for next season, as well . unless LeBron goes to Chicago,
brings Bosh with him and persuades Atlanta to sign-and-trade Joe Johnson for
Luol Deng. (And only then.) And what if the Lakers won, then flipped Bynum
to Toronto in a sign-and-trade for Bosh? Yikes.
DOC RIVERS
Coaches who won two or more NBA titles: Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Gregg
Popovich, Rudy Tomjanovich, Chuck Daly, K.C. Jones, Red Holzman, Tommy
Heinsohn, Bill Russell, Red Auerbach, Alex Hannum, John Kundla. Did I ever
think Doc could make this list when Rick Carlisle was coaching the pants off
him in the 2005 playoffs, or when we were blowing 18 straight in 2007, or
even when he was playing an 11-man rotation in Rounds 1 and 2 in 2008? No.
To say the least. For the record, I think the Rivers/Thibodeau combo has
been fantastic this spring: rotations, strategies, in-game timeouts,
motivation, everything. I have no complaints. Never thought I would say that
about a Doc Rivers-coached team.
PHIL JACKSON
If the Lakers win, 11 rings . two more than Auerbach. And he might have a
$100 million, five-year offer waiting for him from Mutant Russian Mark Cuban
for all we know.
KEVIN GARNETT
Limped around all season, looked washed-up, got his legs back for the
playoffs, enjoyed a monster Cleveland series, then faded noticeably against
Orlando. I have no idea what to expect from him in the Finals. None. But he
hasn't gotten enough credit for reinventing himself in the playoffs as a
complementary asset -- a little like Pippen on the 2000 Blazers, David
Robinson on the 2003 Spurs or Karl Malone on the 2004 Lakers -- something I
never thought his ego would allow. I had him ranked No. 21 in my NBA Hall of
Fame Pyramid, with Barkley at No. 19 and Malone at No. 18. If he wins a
second ring? I think he leapfrogs both of them.
PAU GASOL
His 2009 and 2010 playoff stats (39 games): 19.0 PPG, 10.9 RPG, 1.9 BPG, 58
percent FG. Let's say the Lakers win a second title and he holds his own
against the Garnett/Wallace/Perkins/Davis big man armada. We'd have to throw
him in the Great Championship Sidekicks Discussion: Maybe not on the
Frazier/Pippen/McHale/2000-02 Kobe level, but definitely on the
Worthy/Ginobili level. His willingness to give up shots/touches for the sake
of the team -- but thrive anyway -- separates him from everyone else. I'll
pass on the obligatory Chris Wallace potshot. Only because we're at
capacity.
PAUL PIERCE
Blessed by the great Bob Ryan as the best one-on-one scorer in Celtics
history, and with reason: He has played some transcendent playoff games,
with Game 6 of the Orlando series being the latest addition to the list. His
past three postseasons: 57 games, 20-6-4, 44 percent shooting, and he slowed
LeBron down just enough in two series. I had him ranked No. 54 in my book;
if he can score consistently on Artest and lead Boston to a second title,
I'd have to bump him to the 44-47 range. A big "if." And by the way, the
collective venom of Lakers fans toward Pierce will be one of the single best
subplots of this series. Just wait until he gets belted on a drive at the
Staples, goes to the ground and takes an extra 2-3 seconds to get up.
RON ARTEST
So much going on here, including .
1. His relationship with Kobe has become a mirror image of Jordan/Rodman in
the mid-'90s: He's so deferential to Kobe, and so desperate to please him,
that it's endearing and even a little comical. (I thought it was telling
that, instead of sprinting toward his bench after his Game 5 buzzer-beater,
Artest whirled around, found Kobe and jumped into his arms.) For everything
bad Kobe ever brought to the Teammate Table (and there's been a ton of it),
you can't discount the effect he has had on Artest, who lost some bulk,
stopped caring about shots and became a defensive pit bull again.
2. If he shuts down Pierce, the Lakers win the title and he officially
buries the Artest Melee. Well, unless you're a Pacers fan.
3. There isn't a Lakers fan who isn't abjectly terrified of (A) Artest
taking a terrible shot at the worst possible time or (B) Artest melting down
at the worst possible time. It's been an exhilarating ride for fans --
Artest never ceases to be interesting, and he has had some legitimately
inspired moments, but if you've attended a big Lakers game this season,
you'll notice a peculiar vibe any time he's dribbling, filling the lane on a
fast break, toying with the idea of launching a 3 or arguing with an
official -- it's a little like the vibe on the "MTV's 25 Lamest Videos" set
right before Vanilla Ice sent everyone scattering with a baseball bat. And
maybe we'll never reach the point that things are getting broken while Chris
Kattan screams "No, Vanilla!" -- but the possibility exists.
4. I spent two hours with Artest in January when he was considering a
reality show or documentary (ESPN was a potential suitor). He said a million
things that fascinated me, but here was one of them: Last summer, he wanted
to play with Cleveland, Detroit or the Lakers. Why? Because those three
teams would have made for "the biggest story." (His words.) He reminded me
of Mike Tyson and Allen Iverson in that he was painfully aware of how people
perceived him. He understood the ramifications of the melee; he understood
why it happened; and he felt as if he had had enough therapy, and done
enough soul-searching, to make sure nothing like that would happen again.
At the same time, he enjoyed the notoriety and had no problem milking it for
his own purposes. He wanted to play in Los Angeles because of Kobe, but also
because that's where Hollywood is, and that's where the celebrities are, and
really, he wanted to be a celebrity like them, just a famous guy on a famous
team (and not The Guy Who Started The Melee). When he explained it, he
didn't sound like a complete lunatic or an egomaniac. There was something
innocent and, yes, sweet about his logic. You could say his goal as a Laker
was to go from infamous to famous. And if the 2010 Lakers win the title, he
will.
RAY ALLEN
Leapfrogged Reggie Miller on my Hall of Fame Pyramid with yet another
underrated/efficient/clutch playoffs highlighted by Game 5 of the Cavs
series (six 3s), and Game 1 (25 points) and Game 6 (consecutive
third-quarter 3s that effectively iced the game) of the Orlando series.
Considering the Celtics did everything but put him on Craigslist in
February, calling his play a "resurgence" would be an understatement. If
you're measuring 2010 NBA players simply by who terrifies opposing fans most
when he's lining up an open shot in a tight playoff game, Kobe is first .
and Ray Allen is second. At age 34. Relatively amazing. Throw in his rivalry
with Kobe (they hate each other) and L.A.'s difficulty matching up with him
and here's your long-shot Finals MVP bet (20-to-1).
DEREK FISHER
One more clutch shot in a big moment from upgrading from "Homeless Man's
Robert Horry" to "Very Poor Man's Robert Horry."
RAJON RONDO
Put it this way: If the Celtics win the title and he's their best player,
how can we not consider him to be the best point guard in the league? What's
the point of having a season then?
I've already gushed enough about Rondo this spring, but there's one thing we
haven't touched on in this space: his surging popularity in New England.
Starting with the 2009 playoffs and carrying over to this regular season,
when Rondo's electrifying play was the only reason to watch the Celtics, he
quietly became the most popular player on an increasingly depressing team.
Then they turned things around in the playoffs, Rondo went to another level
in the Cleveland series, he clinched temporary icon status with the
Cowens-like dive in Game 3, and his willingness to play in obvious pain (bad
back, leg cramps) has made everyone who ever cared about this team immensely
proud. He's a true Celtic. And potentially, one of the best we've ever had.
Now here's where it gets interesting. David Ortiz's star lost its luster in
New England because of his declining play (although he's been scorching hot
lately) and the alleged 2003 positive performance-enhancing drug test fiasco
(unrecoverable to some degree). Tom Brady's star lost its luster -- just a
little -- because more than a few locals feel as if marriage softened him,
he has gone Hollywood, he has too much on his plate, he is too concerned
about his image and he's not around Boston enough. (Note: All that crap will
fade as soon as the Pats start 8-1 next season and he hits that
Manning-Brees level again, but for now, that's where we are.) So there's a
door open here, and if the Celtics win the title with Rondo leading the way,
as crazy as this sounds, Rajon Rondo -- the 21st pick in the 2007 draft, the
guy who couldn't make a 12-footer, the head case who was being shopped
around before the June 2009 draft, the upstart young buck who was resented
by the three veteran stars on this team until two months ago -- absolutely
could grab the championship belt as The Athlete With The Highest Approval
Rating In Boston. Even if it lasted only a few months, it would be a bigger
upset than a Republican's taking Ted Kennedy's Senate seat. I don't know how
we got here.
KOBE BRYANT
Allow me to play devil's advocate to the whole "Kobe's Never Been Better"
argument: His past two series (admittedly fantastic: 33-6-7, 52 percent FG,
39 percent 3FG) happened against the ideal opponents for him. Neither Utah
(an average defensive team) nor Phoenix (below-average) had shot-blockers,
nor did either team have the frontcourt depth to knock him down every time
he drove. Defensively, he didn't have to waste energy defending anyone,
allowing him to reserve his legs for offense. In the Finals? He'll have to
play both ends. He'll have to defend Rondo or Allen. And he will get knocked
down.
Playing "angel's advocate" to the same argument: It was the finest stretch
of all-around basketball we've seen from him in nine years -- since he and
Shaq combined to eviscerate San Antonio and Sacramento in 2001 (Kobe:
34-8-6, 49.5 percent FG, eight straight wins) -- and the degree of
difficulty of some of his buckets had to be seen to be believed. Hell, these
were the same shots he bricked in the 2004 Finals, only this time, they were
going in. Again and again. By the end of that Phoenix series, his
confidence/swagger was a 9.8 on the MJ Scale. If he remains at that level
and upends the 2010 Celtics, here's what happens to him historically:
. By any calculation, he passes Oscar and Jerry and becomes the third-best
guard ever (trailing only Jordan and Magic).
. In my book, I had him ranked No. 15 as a Level Four guy. Last season's
title moved him to Level Five; I thought he'd move into the top eight if the
Lakers made the Finals again. Which they did. But if they win again? Now we
have to talk about Duncan's No. 7 spot. And that argument comes down to
this: (A) Can Kobe pass Duncan even though, from 1997 to 2007, there is no
way in hell that San Antonio would have considered a Kobe-for-Duncan offer?
(B) Would you rather have had the best power forward of all time or the
third-best guard of all time? And (C) how can we reconcile Kobe's winning
35, 45 and 42 games in the prime of his career (2005-07) when Duncan managed
57-63 wins every season despite some similarly shaky supporting casts (2001
and 2002 in particular)? Sorry, I'm still taking Duncan. But if Kobe gets to
six rings, enjoys one more MVP-caliber season and starts approaching some
career landmarks (such as 35,000 points), I think the argument shifts.
. He still can't touch Magic, who could have played with Zac Efron as his
shooting guard and still won 50-plus games. (Same for Bird, Jordan, Russell
and Kareem, by the way). But going back to the longevity thing: Magic played
only 12 seasons (not counting his ill-fated comeback in '96), whereas Kobe
just banked his 14th . and he's still going strong. Yeah, it's still not an
argument, but you're also not getting laughed out of the room anymore.
. He will never be greater than Jordan. So drop that thought. Hell, even
that 10-game stretch we just witnessed wouldn't have cracked Jordan's top-10
playoff hot streaks. But still . he can beat Jordan on years. Let's say Kobe
enjoys two more top-5 MVP seasons, then settles into a "Duncan 2009/2010"
type phase for the next two, then he's washed up. The sheer volume of
numbers will add up: rings, All-NBAs, All-Star appearances, points scored,
games played -- it will be like nothing we've ever seen. At the very least,
it will be a debate. And I will get angry and tell you to shut up, and that
we need to stop comparing people to Jordan, but still, it's a debate. And
there's going to come a point when someone can ask the question, "If you
were starting a team and could have either guy for his entire career, would
you rather take MJ from 1984 to 2003 (with the five missed years of games
thrown in) or Kobe from 1997 to 2016 (with 0 missed years of games thrown
in)?"
So those are the stakes for Kobe Bean Bryant. A fifth ring gets the ball
rolling on every argument you just read. It's certainly been a startling
transformation the past three years, when he remade his career in the late
stages of his prime thanks to a fortuitous trade and a breathtaking amount
of hard work. He's the toughest player in the league. He spends the most
time on his game. He has the best footwork of anyone. He plays the hardest.
He only cares about getting better and keeping what he already earned. He
has learned to trust his teammates -- not totally, but enough. I'm not sure
I would have enjoyed playing with Kobe Bryant, but I certainly will remember
watching him.
And with all of that said . he still hasn't beaten the Boston Celtics.
Bill Simmons is a columnist for ESPN.com and the author of the recent New
York Times best-seller "The Book of Basketball." For every Simmons column
and podcast, check out Sports Guy's World. Follow him on Twitter at
http://twitter.com/sportsguy33.
VicXnews
$Gx2....@newsfe20.iad:
>
>
is this the article were he says red has ten rings???
Alson Wong
>
> is this the article were he says red has ten rings???
No.
VicXnews
earlier it said something like if Phil wins he will have 11...one more than
Red...someone must have pointed it out ot him =8-)
RzR
did red also have the best player in the league in every single of his
championships?
HS
Probably not. Neither did Phil.
Alson Wong
>
> did red also have the best player in the league in every single of his
> championships?
He had a guy who won five MVP awards.
Jackson's four championships with the Lakers came with only one
regular-season MVP for his players (Shaq in 2000).
VicXnews
$h57....@newsfe22.iad:
won't do any good Alson....that why everyone boycotting him
RzR
let me see:
jordan, jordan, jordan, jordan, jordan, jordan, shaq, shaq, shaq, kobe
looks like he did have the best player every single year
obviously his 10 rings were easier to get than reds 9 if red didnt have all
9 times the player that was regarded as the best in the league
RzR
regular season MVP?
lol...dirk was regular season mvp...do you think he is a better player than
kobe bryant?? or shaq?
were talking about playoffs here...the part of competition that has
ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to the regular season games, apart from deciding
who will open at home
so i take it jackson had much better players than red did...
Alson Wong
>
> regular season MVP?
>
> lol...dirk was regular season mvp...do you think he is a better
> player than kobe bryant?? or shaq?
>
> were talking about playoffs here...the part of competition that has
> ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to the regular season games, apart from
> deciding who will open at home
>
> so i take it jackson had much better players than red did...
How do you define "best player in the league?"
Who was the best player in the league last year?
If Jackson had coached the Cavs to a championship last year, would have said
that he did it without the league's best player?
Who was the "best player in the league" in 1999? If Jackson had taken over
the defending champion Spurs in 1999, and coached them to three more
championships, would you have said that he did it without the league's best
player?
Red coached nine Hall of Famers during the championship years. And Russell
won two championships without Red, coaching the team himself.
zcar...@gmail.com
from Larry Brown and the Pistons. Just a masterful game plan.
Alson Wong
>
> regular season MVP?
>
> lol...dirk was regular season mvp...do you think he is a better
> player than kobe bryant?? or shaq?
>
> were talking about playoffs here...the part of competition that has
> ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to the regular season games, apart from
> deciding who will open at home
>
> so i take it jackson had much better players than red did...
Who was the "best player in the league" in the 1960s?
Terraholm
> The most unexpected and greatest coaching job for a championship was
> from Larry Brown and the Pistons. Just a masterful game plan.
Most unexpected was likely Ramsey and the Blazers. Still a young
expansion franchise on their first trip to the playoffs, and coming back
in the finals from being down 0-2.
Alson Wong
>
> regular season MVP?
>
> lol...dirk was regular season mvp...do you think he is a better
> player than kobe bryant?? or shaq?
So who was the best player in the league that season?
zcar...@gmail.com
Didn't see this. I hadn't emigrated to the U.S yet....lol
HS
Whatever. Its debatable who's the best player in the league. Last
year, many people said it was LeBron. When the 2001 Lakers won, they
weren't even the favorites to make the finals (it was the Spurs -
until it became clear that the Lakers were on a mission and sweeping
away everyone in their path). In many of the early 2000s seasons you
could have made a very strong case for Tim Duncan being the best
player in the league.
Seems like you're grasping for straws here.
mayner
<ra...@yahoo.com._b_l_o_c_k_> wrote:
>http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100602&sportCat=nba
>
>Wednesday, June 2, 2010
>Finals preview: One for the ages
>By Bill Simmons
>ESPN.com
>
<snip>
When I read Simmons' stuff I'm reminded of a really nice casserole.
Would have been a nice eating experience but that little bit of shit
in it ruins the whole thing.
He just cannot help himself.
mayner
RzR
aha...now all of the sudden it is lebron...oki :)
> When the 2001 Lakers won, they
> weren't even the favorites to make the finals (it was the Spurs -
> until it became clear that the Lakers were on a mission and sweeping
> away everyone in their path). In many of the early 2000s seasons you
> could have made a very strong case for Tim Duncan being the best
> player in the league.
>
> Seems like you're grasping for straws here.
nah...shaq was unstoppable
RzR
> RzR wrote:
>>
>> regular season MVP?
>>
>> lol...dirk was regular season mvp...do you think he is a better
>> player than kobe bryant?? or shaq?
>>
>> were talking about playoffs here...the part of competition that has
>> ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to the regular season games, apart from
>> deciding who will open at home
>>
>> so i take it jackson had much better players than red did...
>
> How do you define "best player in the league?"
>
well its the ability to constantly, game-in game-out, make the difference,
the ability to singlehandedly take over the game, and while he isnt, then by
just being on the court his teammates play better..im sure there are a quite
few candidates, but i think we know who comes on top...i thought it would be
lebron, but it ended up being kobe, although he still has 5-7 games to mess
it up ;)
> Who was the best player in the league last year?
>
im inclined to only count the playoffs, since everyone pretty much agrees
its the only time it counts as real basketball without any stops
> If Jackson had coached the Cavs to a championship last year, would
> have said that he did it without the league's best player?
>
are you saying jackson makes them the best players?
> Who was the "best player in the league" in 1999? If Jackson had taken
> over the defending champion Spurs in 1999, and coached them to three
> more championships, would you have said that he did it without the
> league's best player?
>
its a good case for duncan, but being compared to shaq+kobe on the same
team, duncan has no chance :)
Neil Cerutti
Funny. To me, that shit smells like roses.
--
Neil Cerutti
*** You found a dead moose-rat. You sell the hide for $200. ***
Super Derekfisher
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 18:33:28 -0700, "Alson Wong"
>
> <ra...@yahoo.com._b_l_o_c_k_> wrote:
>
> >Wednesday, June 2, 2010
> >Finals preview: One for the ages
> >By Bill Simmons
> >ESPN.com
>
> <snip>
>
> When I read Simmons' stuff I'm reminded of a really nice casserole.
> Would have been a nice eating experience but that little bit of shit
> in it ruins the whole thing.
The saying "Who shit in your casserole?" has now been added to my
lexicon.
And btw, who the hell has been cooking you casseroles, because they
obviously don't like you.
--
SDF
All the right people agree with me.
Super Derekfisher
> http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100602&sportC...
>
> Finals preview: One for the ages
> By Bill Simmons
> ESPN.com
<snip>
>Any Lakers fan who claims he knew Fisher would
> rally for the playoffs is lying.
Au contraire, mon frère!!!
Alson Wong
>
> well its the ability to constantly, game-in game-out, make the
> difference, the ability to singlehandedly take over the game, and
> while he isnt, then by just being on the court his teammates play
> better..im sure there are a quite few candidates, but i think we know
> who comes on top...i thought it would be lebron, but it ended up
> being kobe, although he still has 5-7 games to mess it up ;)
> im inclined to only count the playoffs, since everyone pretty much
> agrees its the only time it counts as real basketball without any
> stops
Well, it seems that you're defining "best player in the league" as "best
player in the playoffs that wins."
So who was the best player in the league in 2008?
> are you saying jackson makes them the best players?
No. I'm asking if your definition of "best player in the league" would
change depending on who wins the championship.
> its a good case for duncan, but being compared to shaq+kobe on the
> same team, duncan has no chance :)
Shaq and Kobe vs. Duncan is really comparing apples and oranges. You claimed
that Jackson had the best player in the league every single time he won a
championship, not that he had a better team overall. If he coached the Spurs
to three championships it could be argued that he had the best player in the
league. In 1999, Duncan was generally considered to be the best player in
the game, and the choice of GMs in a poll, over Shaq. Shaq was ridiculed for
saying, "I've won at every level but college and pro," ridiculed for being
swept out of the playoffs every year, and ridiculed for spending offseasons
making movies and recording albums.
mayner
Huh...
Had a dandy of a casserole last week. Had pasta, cheese, onions, and
some finely chopped jalapeno.
Yummy!
VicXnews
@mid.individual.net:
>
> Funny. To me, that shit smells like roses.
>
not unual up in Boston =8-)
Neil Cerutti
Heh. I was reading Simmons as The Boston Sports guy for many
years before he broke out as an ESPN writer. His NBA Draft diary
was the highlight of the year, pretty much every year. He's
overexposed now, and probably writes more than he ought to, but I
still read it all.
What else am I supposed to read? The crap in The Boston Globe?
VicXnews
@mid.individual.net:
> On 2010-06-03, VicXnews <ne...@news.com> wrote:
>> Neil Cerutti <ne...@norwich.edu> wrote in news:86pl8uF29nU2
>> @mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> Funny. To me, that shit smells like roses.
>>
>> not unual up in Boston =8-)
>
> Heh. I was reading Simmons as The Boston Sports guy for many
> years before he broke out as an ESPN writer. His NBA Draft diary
> was the highlight of the year, pretty much every year. He's
> overexposed now, and probably writes more than he ought to, but I
> still read it all.
>
> What else am I supposed to read? The crap in The Boston Globe?
>
u r right...more trash there
Super Derekfisher
I interpreted what you wrote about simmons to be: "really nice
casseroles have a little bit of shit," but I guess you intended "this
article was like eating a good casserole and then finding a piece of
shit which ruins the whole experience."
--
SDF
Fish is the anti-Iverson
Neil Cerutti
>> Had a dandy of a casserole last week. Had pasta, cheese,
>> onions, and some finely chopped jalapeno.
>>
>> Yummy!
>
> I interpreted what you wrote about simmons to be: "really nice
> casseroles have a little bit of shit," but I guess you intended
> "this article was like eating a good casserole and then finding
> a piece of shit which ruins the whole experience."
Maybe a good writer will become a Laker fan someday. For now, you
still have the genius responsible for "Kareem Abdul jabber."
Alson Wong
>
> Heh. I was reading Simmons as The Boston Sports guy for many
> years before he broke out as an ESPN writer. His NBA Draft diary
> was the highlight of the year, pretty much every year. He's
> overexposed now, and probably writes more than he ought to, but I
> still read it all.
>
> What else am I supposed to read? The crap in The Boston Globe?
What do people think of Bob Ryan in New England?
Neil Cerutti
He's washed up.