Congratulations, Lakers

While I despise the Lakers and their fans as much as all right-thinking people do, I can't find the result of the 2009 NBA Finals all that disagreeable.

First of all, the Lakers are a great team. I know some people like the cinderalla team- an average team that gets lucky at the right time to defeat superior teams, but I don't. I feel like the point of competition is to determine which team is best. If the championship goes to a team that isn't the best, isn't the system of competition a little screwed up? This season, there were only two candidates for team of the year, and the Magic weren't one of them.

I'm not using the term "great" lightly, either. The Cavs and Lakers each had gears that no other teams had. Between Jordan's last championship in 1998 and the Celtics' championship in 2008, the poster-team of the NBA was the Spurs, a very good but not legitimately great team (except for 2007) that took advantage of the absence of great teams to win four championships. The only great teams between 1999 and 2007 were the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, who repeatedly thrashed the Spurs, and the 2007 Spurs. In the last two seasons, there have been three great teams, and it's only appropriate that two of them went on to win championships.

Secondly, putting aside Phil Jackson's douchiness, and Kobe's superdouchiness, the Lakers play how basketball is supposed to be played- tough defense and a frenetic, uptempo, and improvisational, non-micromanaged offense with constant moving and unselfishness.

To the extent that basketball is a beautiful game, it's because it showcases individualism, creativity, improvisation, and of course, mesmerizing athleticism. While Phil Jackson doesn't make players more athletic, his offensive philosophy doesn't involve micromanaging automaton players like a football offense. His players are not chess pieces to be manipulated by the master strategist a la Larry Brown's boring-ass teams. Instead, they work in a flexible structure where players work together to create shots and read and react to the defense.

Thirdly, Kobe. Kobe's detestable characteristics are less severe than they have been in the past. He still has his flaws (shot selection, horrible teammate, etc.) all of which are rooted in the same personal defect (he's a narcissist sociopath), but he is very good. Basketbawful regrets living in a world where Antoine Walker and Sasha Vujicic are NBA champions, but can anyone say that Kobe is not a worthy NBA champion? Given my own avowed distaste for lucky teams and players, and my appreciation of worthy ones, I can't help but congratulate the Lakers on their 10th championship.

Cleveland Steamers

To sum up the Cavs-Magic series, Lebron averaged 38.5/8.3/8 on 48.7% shooting, including 41.2/8.6/8.2 on 50% shooting over the first five games, which would have been enough to win the series if any of his teammates had shown up. What did they have to do? Play a modicum of defense and hit some wide-open shots.

Defense: In four losses, the Cavs gave up 106.3 points per game on 48.8% shooting, including 42.3% from three(at 11 3-pointers per game) in six games, compared to the Magic's season averages of 101 points on 45.6%/38.2% shooting. Fail.

Hitting wide open shots: In four losses, Lebron's teammates (steamers) shot 41.8% from the field including 29.5% from three. Particularly pitiful were the shooting performances in Games 1 and 4, a one- and two-point loss, respectively. In Game 1, the steamers shot 39.7% from the field and 26.3% from three (5-19), wasting Lebron's 49-6-8, 20-30, 3-6, 6-10 performance. In Game 4, the steamers shot a somewhat low but respectable 44.8% from the field, but a very low and unrespectable 16.7% from three (2-12), wasting Lebron's 44-12-7.

Obviously, the numbers don't always tell the whole story, but let me assure you that in this case, they do not lie. The steamers had lots of open shots and falled to hit them. They also failed to offer any resistance to Orlando's offense.


What a waste of one of the best individual performances ever.