I’ve spent the last two weeks cheering maniacally for a Boston team, something I normally don’t do out of principle. But, with the Celtics loss to the Heat on Saturday night, they exited the postseason, likely dooming the original Big Three to a break-up we all knew would come eventually. While Rajon Rondo took control of the team this year as point guard, the core of the Boston Celtics played together five seasons, won it all once, and almost won it all once. But, the way a few of them went out on Saturday was, in a word, classless.
Three years ago, LeBron James left the court after losing a postseason series to the Celtics without congratulating or shaking hands with the opposing players. While allegedly he did follow up in the locker room, the sports world erupted in outrage. I was one of them, telling folks at the time he was just a punk and clearly, a very sore loser. Well, before the end of regulation on Saturday night, Kevin Garnett and Rajon Rondo left the floor without speaking to any Heat players, guys who beat them in two straight games. It doesn’t matter what sport…being able to accept your losses and congratulate opponents on their victories is part of sports from year four of your life. Guys like Rondo and Garnett, professional athletes and alleged emotional leaders for their team, need to act like professionals and understand the proper response accordingly.
Of course, no one wants to lose and no one likes losing. Especially not at the highest level, where the last loss doubles as the last game of the season, an abrupt end to bitter effort put in throughout the preceding six months. Competitors fight and want to win. And when they win, they shake hands, at the very least giving testament to the efforts of the losers. And that has to feel good or else winners wouldn’t keep shaking the hands of losers. Why wouldn’t it? You won. But, if you are willing to give credit to losers at the end, admit when roles are reversed that winners deserve the same credit. Mutual acknowledgement of toughness, effort, and talent permeate the sports world, even in the fiercest competitors.
But for Kevin Garnett to tell Doris Burke “I take a lot of pride in my craft” after Game 5 and consistently making headlines as someone who won’t back down from the rigors of the game, he deserves severe criticism for, in effect, acting like a 5 year-old. He may hate every member of the Heat organization, but nothing allows him to leave the floor like that without giving credit to a team that beat his Celtics. He could be the most competitive man in the world, but KG is a professional, not some JV player who can go home to Mommy after a loss. He speaks often of playing hard like a true NBA player, but then isn’t man enough to be out there after a loss in which he scored 12 points?
Many in the media want to use this as a cultural fight, upbraiding Garnett and Rondo because kids will watch that behavior and react in the same way next time they lose. That’s also true. My argument for Tiger Woods’ on-course behavior applies…the world, including the futures of sports, are watching these games. Acting a quarter of your age does nothing to keep the sportsmanship of the game and, by extension, the integrity of golf, basketball, or whatever sport you play. Younger athletes learn from the best and act like the best do.
And that’s what bothers me about this: the lack of integrity on the parts of guys who spent the whole series talking trash then lost a 3-2 series lead. If you want to talk trash admit you lost fair and shake LeBron’s hand. In Garnett’s case, speak to the media afterwards…justify the faith they put in you as an emotional leader of possibly the most prestigious NBA organization in history. The media wrote tons of fluffy pieces about Garnett this series. And yet, when the team lost, its two best postseason players, ostensibly the heart and soul of the team and city of Boston, were nowhere to be found.
Also strangely absent are the Boston media outlets in general. Where is Bill Simmons on this? Where’s Jackie MacMullen? Where’s Bob Ryan? These scions of the Boston media world have nothing to say other than the old Boston adage “we didn’t get enough foul calls.” Heaven forbid they mention the Boston bench scored a grand total of two points on Saturday and couldn’t defend James the entire series. Also, let’s not forget the Celtics could have won Game 6 at home to advance and threw a dud. Paul Pierce couldn’t shoot the whole series, refusing to drive to the basket (a big reason, I should add, for some disparity in foul shots on Saturday) mainly because he’s not quick enough. Boston fans will hate this, but the refrain continues to be the same: blame the officials for everything without understanding your team can’t seem to win when it matters. This will be the third 3-2 lead given up by the Big Three Celtics in as many postseasons. Yeah, that must be on the officials as well.
I dearly hoped the Celtics would win this series. I loved watching KG turn back the clock and Rondo finally proving he can play with anybody out there. But the ending of this series deals a harsh blow to the image of those two guys as leaders for the team who can weather the storms and take everything the game has to offer, win or lose. We the sports world tooled on LeBron when he did it, so standards should stay the same. I wonder if the Celtics had done this to the Magic or a team fans actually like, if more people would have injected personal disappointment into the situation.
All in all, however, the Big Three were immensely successful in Boston. Reports to the contrary miss the mark of how much these guys revitalized a flagging franchise, winning a championship and contending every year deep in the playoffs during the last five years. Before the Big Three, the Celtics had very few high points during this decade, all but evaporating from the competitive map except for one conference finals berth in 2002, the team’s first since 1988. It’s a shame the era had to end, but end it shall.
Bit #1: Something very fishy in boxing
In my last post, I gave Timothy Bradley no chance of beating Manny Pacquiao. Amazingly, however, Bradley won on Saturday night through split decision, in which two of the judges gave the fight to him by a score of 115-113.
Sounds great and all, except ESPN, HBO, and other ringside observers gave the fight to Pacquiao at least 116-112, meaning those unofficial judges gave two rounds or so to Bradley out of 12. There are two things shocking about this. First, that Bradley won at all given the seemingly unanimous observations by ringside folks. Second, and most fishy, however: the judges all saw this as a close fight. The third judge who awarded to Pacquiao, also scored the fight 115-113, a veritable eternity in the world of boxing scores.
The stats for the fight show an even wider difference: Pacquiao landed 34% of his punches to Bradley’s 19% and landed more power punches than Bradley by the margin of 190-108. The percentage numbers are somewhat misleading, since Pacquiao landed about 100 more punches total than Bradley, but still lost the fight.
I admit boxing isn’t in my knowledge wheelhouse, but after the sport’s fall from network in favor of pay-per-view, I have to wonder on nights like these if something’s going on. That wide a disparity between analysts and judges reminds me of the 2002 Winter Olympics ice skating debacle, and those judges were found to be corrupt. Boxing needs a popularity boost…the two biggest names in the game won’t fight each other so we must submit to the parade of dunces. In addition, very few casual fans know anyone outside of the Mayweather-Pacquiao welterweight division, a far cry from the days of heavyweights Ali, Frazier, Tyson, Holyfield, Foreman, etc. Is it possible they wanted to generate some buzz and thus gave the fight to Bradley for dramatic effect? Far-fetched certainly, but after the decision on Saturday, it seems regrettably plausible.
Bit #2: U.S. Open starts Thursday
Golf’s toughest test starts on Thursday, a four day affair replete with low-hanging trees, deep bunkers, and the longest rough of the season, all deceptively beautiful and treacherous. The big name grouping of Tiger, Phil Mickelson, and Masters champ Bubba Watson will certainly grab headlines, but I’m betting on two Englishmen to play well this year.
Lee Westwood comes off a win in Europe last week and played the last three rounds last year almost as well as eventual champion Rory McIlroy. Westwood also ranks #1 in green in regulation accuracy on Tour this year, meaning if he can keep his drives in the fairway and out of the rough he should be in contention. He’s played well at this tournament in years past, and I’d expect to see him on the first page come Sunday.
My other favorite will be Luke Donald. He comes in playing well but also doing the things necessary to win at a tournament like this. Donald is #8 in driving accuracy, a serious boon at the Olympic Club which will surrender close to nothing in the way of opportunities and, as I said, will punish those who can’t find the short grass. Even then, however, Donald ranks #1 in scrambling, a state meant to show what players do when missing fairways or greens. Throw in his #3 rank in strokes gained from putting and I’d say he has a good shot to make noise this weekend.
All that said, one guy could just bring it all together this weekend and come from nowhere.
Bit #3: NHL Finals will be historic tonight
In one way or another, Game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals will be historic. On one side, the Kings need one win to capture the franchise’s first Cup since it entered the league in 1967-68. On the other, the Devils are the first team since World War II to force a Game 6 after falling down 3-0 in the Finals.
One trend in the NHL rarely disappears once it starts: the first goal. Multiple series this year have been decided by the team that scores first and that trend rarely breaks after three games. In the previous five games, the team scoring first won. That will be the key tonight…the Kings hit the post a few times in Game 5 and outplayed the Kings in many ways, but being able to score first will separate them from a resurgent New Jersey squad. With no NBA or fixed boxing matches on TV, Game 6 should be good on Monday night.
Bit #4: My Euro predictions don’t look too good
When Poland’s keeper, a guy I touted last Wednesday as key to their success, left the game against Greece after a red card, I should have known. Follow that up with my eventual champ Holland losing to a Danish team that I thought would only draw one group game and the shellacking Ireland took from Croatia yesterday, and it’s not looking so good for my Euro predictions.
But, the tournament thus far has been great. The Poland-Greece match provided some high drama as both teams played with only 10 men during the second half after red cards. The game between Germany and Portugal also was hard-fought, but the true fun came when the two previous World Cup winners, Spain and Italy, drew 1-1 on Sunday. The Spanish came into the game and didn’t play a striker, relying on six midfielders to make runs towards the goal. Tactically, you will rarely see something like that, especially on a team like Spain, but Coach del Bosque tried it and didn’t see a loss because of it. It will be interesting to see if Spain continues to use that scheme.
Bit #5: June 11, 1974 – Washington Capitals founded
I would love to mark some other occurrence, but the advent of my favorite franchise in sports cannot go unnoticed. These sports history Bits are fun mainly because they are meant to expand knowledge, show that many events we see in sports now are revivals of historic trends and tropes. Unfortunately, this Bit will do you no good other than my reminding you the Caps are
No comments:
Post a Comment