Wasif's World

Last week, we debunked the myth that Phil Jackson is “the greatest coach of all-time” as some erroneously refer to him. In Part II or our in-depth exposé, we take on one of the men who will remain tied to Jackson throughout history – Kobe Bryant, a.k.a “the Black Mamba.”

Now Bryant is another story and the media really, really want to anoint him "the greatest Laker of all-time." And Kobe wants it badly. As much as he says he doesn’t, you can see it in his eyes. And you can see it in Magic’s eyes when he says, “Remind me again who Kobe is.”

First of all, anyone saying this either didn’t watch Magic (or Jerry West or Kareem or Shaq) play or just doesn’t understand what they’re saying. They’re on the fringe, covering one end of the spectrum. We can eliminate them from the discussion. Están loco en la cabeza, as they say in LA. Then let’s eliminate those people that just don’t like Kobe because he’s an adulterer and an accused rapist. That’s immaterial in this argument.

I can even give him a mulligan for his John Starksian choke in Game 7. (If Kobe’s given the MVP, shouldn’t he have to share it with Ron Artest? Or how about Ray Allen for looking even more John Starksian?) Everyone’s allowed a bad game, though, in the biggest close-out of his life, he was more the problem than the solution. That never happened to Magic.

Kobe really looked out of sorts throughout the entire series. He has a tendency to get flustered and make a whole lot of bad decisions. Michael never seemed to sweat, even in his bad games.

One way that Kobe is like Mike, however, are with the “Kobe rules.” Michael had the “Jordan rules” and Kobe has them apparently tenfold. That’s one problem with the league is that they cater to the superstars. A travel isn’t a travel. Patrick Ewing never traveled, John Stockton or Larry Bird never clutched or grabbed, and Kobe never fouled out. (I used to think an elbow to the face was a foul until I watched Kobe play. Silly me.)

I have to hand it to the Lakers, though, as they really emulated the great Celtics and Pistons teams of the 80’s for never actually committing a foul. The begging and pleading they do after being called for one looks like they’re auditioning for a daytime soap ... or to play for a FIFA soccer team.

And considering the Lakers have been handed entire games by the refs (SEE: Great, Not Greatest, Part I), they are the team that should be complaining the least.

If you watched only the 2010 Finals, Kobe fouled out of at least two games. But there was no way any ref wanting to keep his job was going to whistle him for his sixth foul on any of those nights. ("I dint see nuttin'.")

If Paul Pierce drove the lane and Kobe literally took out a gun and shot him, the refs would’ve convened at midcourt and concluded that it was Celtics ball out of bounds ... or maybe a defensive three seconds.

The league and, more specifically, the officiating, were less blatantly bad during Magic’s era. And remember, Magic played only 12 years, winning virtually half the time and led his team. Kobe played second fiddle to one Shaq Man Du, a.k.a. (this season) “the Big Shamrock,” for nearly a decade.

The only thing upon which you could possibly base the argument that Kobe is as good as Magic is the number of rings Kobe has won. He has five and Magic has five. Okay, so does Derek Fisher. Does that mean Fish is as good as Magic too? Remember from last week’s post that Robert Horry has eight. Is he better than Magic?

Also, Kobe has been named the league Most Valuable Player only one time. He’s in that rarefied air of Allen Iverson (“the Answer”), David Robinson (“the Admiral”) and Charles Barkley (“the guy on TNT with an opinion on everything”).

As far as Lakers go, Magic has three MVP awards; Kareem has three on the Lakers alone (six overall); even Shaq has won the Maurice Podoloff trophy as many times as Kobe has. So Kobe’s the “best Laker of all-time?”

Look, the league has changed. Comparing the present to the past isn’t well-reasoned. Read a little bit about how the league used to be and you’ll come away very enlightened. It’ll be a chance to learn about when the league was on top of the world and not scraping for coverage with NFL team activities in the off-season.

Kobe may be great, and may be the “best closer in the game,” (perhaps because he’s frequently put in a position to launch ill-advised shots at the end of games, some which go in), but certainly not the best “of all-time,” in the history of his franchise, let alone the entire sport.

So let’s try to keep the logic in this discussion regardless of what the media and the “experts” are trying to spin. As we’ve already pointed out when speaking of Phil Jackson, it makes for better television to claim you’re watching the best of all-time. For this era, these icons are certainly and inarguably among the best, but let’s not go all loco en la cabeza here.

I'm Andy Wasif and I approved this blog post.

The NBA season is about to begin. If you’re in Miami, Boston or Los Angeles, you’re excited! Though in LA, you may be excited about the fact that the championship celebration fires in downtown Los Angeles are out -- ah, LA, I love you during a celebration (though you should let up a little bit; you’re making Detroit obsolete and it’s already trying to deal with its depressed economy).

The team is poised for another run at the championship and confident because they have the “Zen Master,” Phil Jackson, signed up to coach the Lakers for another season.

I’d like to take this opportunity to address an important point, one that will be met with some rancor: Now that Phil Jackson has coached his 11th championship and Kobe has his fifth ring, can we please stop talking about how Phil is the “greatest coach of all-time” and Kobe is “up there with Magic Johnson.”

“Did he say stop? [gasp] Blasphemy! Burn the writer!” (“Uh, dude, I can’t. I used all my lighter fluid on that taxi cab during the LA riots in June.”)

That’s right. I said stop. It’s easy to look at numbers and come to an ill-conceived argument that they are the best of the best. Fans love to be able to say they witnessed the best of the best. Many fans aren’t fans of history so that makes it easier to claim this point. But there are so many more points tailored to fit a dissenting opinion.

First, regarding Jackson, those who question his accomplishments look first to this fact: He coached Michael Jordan, arguably the greatest player of all-time. The Travelocity gnome could’ve coached Jordan and gotten the same thing out of him.

I know, I know. But Jordan didn’t win until Phil Jackson took over. That’s a combination of factors, one of which is certainly Phil’s ascension to the position. You don’t think the chemistry between the players didn’t have anything to do with that? The league was a watered down mess at that point (and still is pretty much) where any team with two superstars had one foot in the Finals.

How about the fact that Phil didn’t win when it was the same team during Jordan’s sojourn to the baseball diamond? No one seems to mention those years.

But forgetting the fact he won six with Michael and bunch (not winning the two without Michael), he then chose to pack up and take over another team, also with two superstars. It was a formula in the NBA that was the only way to win at that time. Besides a Phil Jackson-coached team, who else had won during that period? Hakeem then Hakeem and Drexler, and Duncan and The Admiral. With the proper role players surrounding the best of the best, it’s a lock.

Good coaching helps. I’m not saying he isn’t a good coach. I’m just questioning the use of the greatest coach of all-time moniker. It’s a real stretch.

Look at other sports. It’s odd that Joe Torre is constantly being provided the disclaimer that he didn’t win before he was on the Yankees, but then he suddenly became a great coach. It’s commonly believed that his talents were more in the handling of superstars than in coming up with game strategy (though he was good at that as well). But Joe is not lauded as the “greatest coach of all-time” in baseball.

Phil Jackson, in similar fashion, is good at dealing with personalities, as is Doc Rivers, George Karl, Larry Brown, etc. And that’s the characterization that most fits Phil.

Would the greatest coach of all-time blame the refs as much as Phil does? Yes, he’s the highest paid coach in the league, but after all the fines he earns whining about the refs, he probably takes home around a rookie coach’s salary.

Seriously, he’s the only coach who ever whined about the refs when his team had almost twice as many foul shots as the other team!

Again, look at other great coaches. Joe Torre won four World Series in five years with the Yankees. Then he lost his next two. Did he ever once say anything about the umpires? How about Bill Belichick? The 2007 Giants team beat his Patriots into submission and took down the undefeated juggernauts. Was he questioning the fairness of the officiating after the game? No, sir!

There are but three guarantees in this world – death, taxes and Phil Jackson’s complaining about the refs.

He’s also, through no fault of his own – unlike Belichick who sowed his own controversy – the focal point in what should be the greatest scandal in sports since 1919 – the league’s manipulation of playoff games (we’ll throw “alleged” in there just to make you wide-eyed innocents happy). Most notably, 2002 and 2003 have been called out and upon further review of those series, it’s pretty clear, the Lakers were “helped” into Game 7 during both of those Western Conference series by forces other than Phil’s coaching.

Hey, don’t shoot the messenger. Unlike the NBA refs, I’m just calling it like I see it.

Watch the games from this past Finals series and, with a straight face, tell anyone that he wasn’t outcoached by Doc Rivers ... again. Woulda shoulda coulda, yeah, but if Kendrick Perkins doesn’t go down depleting the Celtics bench and preventing them from having fresh legs late in a game they were up by 13 points, will you honestly want to make the argument the Celtics weren’t going to win? Do that at your own risk. (Pay no mind to the people mocking you in the background.)

It helps to be lucky as well as good and that’s a stroke of luck Phil was bestowed from the hardwood gods.

And speaking of Celtics, Red Auerbach was the greatest coach of all-time until Phil earned more rings as a coach. Red’s estate still has more in his name as coach and executive, but as we’ll continue to review in Part II of this hard-hitting expose, rings do not indicate everything. If they did, Robert Horry would be hanging out with Tommy Heinsohn talking about the eight rings they’ve each won.

First of all, didn’t Red invent the fast break, a play that, I believe, Phil Jackson put into his playbook? Secondly, Red coached fewer seasons than Phil. Thirdly, Red won about 99 percent of the time his team made the Finals (yes, he lost to the Hawks in the 50s). Jackson lost twice. His percentage is lower than Red’s. I’m sorry, but I’d take the guy with the higher percentage.

Fourthly, and this is not to be overlooked, Red did it with one team. Motivating the same team for years is no easy task. Ask any coach and they’ll tell you it’s hard not to run out of things to say to a team that is probably tired of his voice.

And fifthly, it’s a different league, different time now. With expansion, the league is watered down and the early-entry players present us with a game that’s less than stellar. (Why is David Stern talking about contraction as recently as yesterday?) It’s harder to win with fewer teams simply because they see each other all the time and knew each other’s strengths and weaknesses, game in and game out, year in and year out.

Dan Patrick characterized Phil properly -- not to say other people didn’t reiterate his phrasing, but I didn’t hear them -- he called Phil the “most-accomplished coach of all-time.” Fair, proper, no hyperbole, factual, and to the point. Bingo, DP! That characterization touches NOTHING BUT THE BOTTOM OF THE NET! (in true Dan Patrick delivery).

So let’s can the hyperbole that Phil Jackson is the greatest of all-time when he’s not even the greatest of his era. It’s a fun discussion to have, if you’ve got some time to kill, but don’t you think you could save your breath for a plan on how to make the league viable again?

Next week: Great, Not Greatest II – Kobe Bryant

Okay, so here it is, the Match Up of the Century! (again) This one is for all the marbles. The Big Three are making one final stand, a last chance to show their dominance. Kobe’s chasing Magic for five championships and the “greatest Laker of all-time” moniker, though playing with Shaq and having the allegations of Tim Donaghy render at least two of those championships iffy make this a moot point. Kobe will never be Magic. (And this from a guy who spent his childhood thinking Magic was overrated.)

The experts are all weighing in and forming their hypotheses based on sight analysis and statistics. And the fans are running with whichever argument best suits their cases.

Fans need to convince themselves of the outcome before it takes place. They call in to talk shows to say, “I’m really worried about the Lakers defensive lapses. Do you think they can beat the Celtics?” And if the talk show host responds in the affirmative, the caller will think, “Phew! I’m glad that’s decided” and they can sleep well at night.

But most of the arguments out there can be eliminated as they have nothing to do with the matter at hand. I’ll go over most of these and tell you who each point sees winning the series, why that is, the counterargument, and why it’s relevant or just a bunch of jibberjabber. (Yes, I said “jibberjabber.” I’m getting jazzed for the “A-Team” movie!)

So let’s begin:

Outcome: Lakers
Reason: Revenge
Chatter: The Lakers are upset that the Celtics beat them in 2008, in fact, humiliating them during the clinching game. Now, they want revenge.
Counterargument: Oh, now they want to win? In 2008, they were indifferent to winning? They weren’t sufficiently perturbed before? Why would you need excess motivation to win a championship?
Verdict: I do not wish to degrade my level of education and literary skills by just calling this argument stupid. Therefore, I will say it’s really stupid. When’s the last time you arm wrestled a guy who was stronger than you and actually won the rematch? If the Celtics are better, then no amount of wanting to win is going to help.

One parallel I find interesting is how the run of the last three years is similar to 1985 to1987. You might remember the peak of the Show Time Era when the two teams battled in 1985 leaving the Lakers victorious.

The next year, the Rockets snuck into the Finals, first beating the Lakers only to lose to the Celtics. But in 1987, the Lakers returned and caused a repeat of 1985.

Were the Celtics extra motivated to beat Los Angeles as revenge for 1985? Sure. Did it matter? No.

The Celtics believe the only reason the Lakers won last year was because Garnett was hurt. The Magic beat them and then went on to lose to the Lakers. Sound familiar?

Outcome: Lakers
Reason: Team Improvement
Chatter: The Lakers defense is better now with Ron Artest in the fold.
Counterargument: Yes, it’s better. The Celtics just beat the three teams that led the NBA in opponent’s field goal percentage. With or without Artest, the Celtics have already taken down tougher defenses.
Verdict: That same argument could be used to explain why the Celtics are going to win.

Outcome: Lakers
Reason: Age
Chatter: The Celtics are old. Garnett doesn’t look the same.
Counterargument: Garnett doesn’t look the same, but you have to figure a Hall of Famer like Garnett still matches up very well against Gasol. But the very claim acts as if the Lakers are composed of all these young pups. Their one superstar has logged almost as many minutes as the Big Three, if not more with his extracurricular play in international tournaments.
Verdict: Age is a push.

Outcome: Celtics
Reason: History
Chatter: This works on two fronts. First of all, this starting five, as currently constituted, has yet to lose a playoff series. Secondly, when the Lakers and Celtics face each other in the late spring, the Celtics win over 85% of the time.
Counterargument: This Lakers team has yet to lose a playoff series as well.
Verdict: If past history declared a winner, then the New York Jets would have almost 20 Super Bowl titles by now.

Outcome: Lakers
Reason: Coaching
Chatter: Phil Jackson is the greatest coach of all-time.
Counterargument: That is the dumbest argument of all-time. First off, Phil has already lost a Finals series to Doc Rivers. Wouldn’t that make Doc a better coach? Or perhaps Doc just had the better team, in which case Phil won past championships only because he had the better team. So if it’s the team that made Phil great, then one could reason that given the opportunity, Doc would’ve taken Michael and Scottie to six championships and then Shaq and Kobe to three more had he been there instead of the Zen Master. Counterargument: Michael didn’t win before Phil. Sure, but Scottie Pippen wasn’t his Sundance Kid yet. And you’ll add Shaq and Kobe didn’t win before Phil.
Countercounterargument: Yes, Del Harris is no Phil. But Gregg Popovich (a really valid argument for the actual best coach in the league) could have presumably taken Shaq and Kobe to three titles as well. He did it with less in San Antonio.
Verdict: Both coaches are excellent. Phil may be the most successful coach of all-time, but saying he’s the best is just for empty braggadocio and bar talk.

Outcome: Celtics
Reason: Pedigree
Chatter: The Celtics collectively have three Hall of Famers in their rotation. The Lakers have one, maybe two.
Counterargument: The Lakers can neutralize Pierce with Artest, Ray Allen with Kobe, and Garnett with Gasol.
Alternate counterargument: The Celtics are old. [See above.]
Verdict: The Lakers have been unable to neutralize all three on a consistent basis before. It’s not going to start this week as the Celtics are firing on all cylinders and see the prize put forth before them.

Outcome: Lakers
Reason: Home Cookin’
Chatter: This time, the Lakers have home court advantage.
Counterargument: A. The Celtics have taken home court advantage away from their last two opponents, who, it should be noted, finished with better records than the Lakers. B. The Celtics/Lakers series in 2008 didn’t go seven games because the Celtics won a game in Los Angeles.
Verdict: The Celtics may win in Los Angeles, but may also lose at home. That said, they are not intimidated by being in the visitors locker room.

Outcome: Celtics
Reason: Basketball is about matchups
Chatter: Going down the rosters, we see that Perkins can handle a hobbling Bynum, Kobe is better than Allen (but that’s closer than people think), Pierce is better than Artest, Gasol and Garnett may be a push, and that leaves the one dominating match up in the series – Rondo v. Fisher. If you want to further take it to the bench, Rasheed can handle Odom, Nate Robinson can counter Shannon Brown, and then Tony Allen can play Jordan Farmar, if that’s who it comes down to. That leaves Big Baby as someone off the bench the Lakers don’t have an answer for.
Counterargument: Even a hobbling Bynum is way better than Perkins.
Verdict: This argument makes a lot of sense. Basketball is about matchups (and shoddy refereeing and nonsensical scheduling). The only question is, who is hurt? Will the rest between games be enough for the Celtics? Can the Lakers play more physical than they did two years ago? Will it matter? Will the Big Four continue to alternate having big nights? Which Celtic role player will save the day like Nate Robinson did against the Magic?

(Okay, that’s more than one question.)

So soaking all this in like a Calgon bubble bath complete with rubber duckie, the picture becomes clearer, though still murky.

As I see it, the way the referees have been fix—er, calling the games these days, Perkins will be assessed one half of a double technical at some point this series (I’ll guess that it will be either Artest or Odom that does the honors) and thus, be forced to sit. If the Celtics can win the games Perkins plays, they’ll be the ones celebrating.

And if the Lakers can score more points than the Celtics on no fewer than four of the seven scheduled games, then they will win.

I hope this puts those minds at ease that have been held sleepless the last few nights waiting for the endless NBA Playoffs to continue. Now go tend to more pressing needs, like the electrical fire coming out of your wall socket due to the radio, television, and computer being plugged in at once while seeking as much info about the Finals as you can possibly get.

We’re getting close to the end of the NBA playoffs. You can tell because the Lakers flags are in full bloom in Los Angeles.

The phenomenon, known as “fakeritis” is like a sundial in the streets to the Gregorian calendar. They appear when the flowers are in bloom and the Lakers move deep into the playoffs. (Notice I didn’t say “make” the playoffs because that would be premature presentation. Sometimes you’ll see two on a car for those really, really die-hard fans.

With the Lakers in the conference championships, now natives start to show their fanhood by spending ten dollars on the chatchke, and proclaiming proudly, “I’m a huge fan. I watch both months of the NBA season. I’ll even watch all three quarters of each game.”

Let’s be honest, they are the sports fan equivalent of the high school senior showing up at the prom with toilet paper tucked into his pants hanging over his belt. They’re an embarrassment, but they don’t quite realize it, mainly because they keep getting rewarded for their efforts in the form of championships and contending teams.

Cleveland fans brave the wind, snow, and, well, living in Cleveland and what do they have to show for it? Bubkes!

All the other fan bases are sick of the disproportionate success-to-fanliness ratio for the Lakers. (Well, not Portland. Nothing really rattles them. They’re just so nice.)

Truth be told, no one really hates the Lakers. Aside from Kobe, the team seems to have a bunch of good eggs on it and Ron Artest is a nice sideshow, a poor man’s Rodman, so to speak. No one really cares about them at all. It’s the fans that get the people’s goat. Mainly from the use of the word “fan.” It seems a misappropriation of the term when describing them.

And what’s weird is, Dodgers fans don’t have the same reputation so, though there’s an overlap, there isn’t the same collective personality at Chavez Ravine as there is at the Staples Center.

Now, before you decry haterism, I’m trying to help here. Instead of just random stereotypes (like the one above), I intend to prove this epidemic with the help of first-hand experiences among living breathing representatives of Laketown.

Yes, it’s easy to generalize. I’m from the East Coast and we’re a more passionate fan base overall (though we have our own issues), but each fan base is comprised of individuals and this is about those that we mock as “fakers.”

Over the past few years, I’ve been surrounded by Lakers fans in “the Southland” as they call it; I’ve gone to games, I’ve spoken to them, and I’ve listened to radio. That’s a good place to start, because much of the attitude of the fans comes from sports talk show hosts.

Let’s deconstruct a typical talk radio show, such as that on the East Coast – there is a host that makes a point and opens it up to the audience who may call to revel in a good win, but there is always a segment of the population that approaches a topic this way – “Yes, we may be good, but there are still problems that concern us.” It’s the cynicism inherent in that region of the country.

But listen to a Lakers station and it is decidedly more “glass is totally full – “Here’s why our team is so great.” And then after they’re done pouring the bottomless cup of adulation, they have a guest call in – “Calling in now, we have so-and-so ... why don’t you tell us why our team is so great?

It’s such an LA ritual, the abundant praising. It’s almost like an infomercial.

“Hey, Gary?”

“Hi, Bob.”

“What if I told you there was a team that shot threes, pounded the ball inside, had the best closer in the game, had the best coach, and was unstoppable, what would you say?”

“I’d be dubious, Bob.”

“No, it’s true. The Los Angeles Lakers are that team. Order now and you can be a fan of the greatest team in the history of mankind. We’ll send you a team flag, a pamphlet with the names of a few of the greats on it, and another team flag.”

“Wow! That’s an incredible offer!”

It seeps into the culture of the fans. Case in point, the day after the Lakers won the trophy in 2009, a friend told me that the team would three-peat. That’s right, they’d win the next two! And he was so sure of this, that he bet me ... five dollars. Who does that?!

I felt like Randolph and Mortimer Duke’s butler in “Trading Places” after they gave him his Christmas Bonus. “Ooo, five dollars. Now I can go to the movies ... by myself.”

That’s misplaced confidence. But they weren’t always so confident; hence, their reputation for being fair-weather fans. The only problem is, they don’t understand the word.

Sometime around 2006, I heard this exchange on the frequency modulation dial:

Caller: "I believe I have the right to not root for my team when they’re not winning. If they’re not putting the best product on the court, I’m not being a fair-weather fan if I don’t show up to endorse that."

I waited for the talk show host to politely explain to him that he was wrong, that he could protest in other ways (See: wear a paper bag on his head at the game) or at least continue to support them from afar, but what he got was this:

Host: "You’re absolutely right."

WHAT?!

Actually, what he’s doing is the definition of “fair-weather fans,” guys. (At that point, the FCC should’ve revoked the host’s broadcasting license.)

These talk show hosts are enablers. I’m sure thousands of Lakers supporters driving around in their cars were nodding their heads in agreement at that time.

It’s this sort of disrespect for the unwritten rules of one’s fantitude that contribute to the hatredity towards them. They just don’t get it.

In 2008, when the Celtics were about to meet the Lakers in the NBA Finals, a Lakers fan, sure of his team’s ability, bet me that they would take the best-of-seven series in three games. (He was not kidding.) Though that would have been quite impressive, I didn’t have the heart to take that bet.

I did, however, take a different bet from another guy who bet the Lakers because, in his words, they had “the best defense in the league.” Evidently, he didn’t see the stats, which had them 11th ... or watch the games. That bet, I took.

Where did he get the idea the Lakers had a great defense? Maybe the talk show hosts or maybe it was the shills who called in to validate the phony claim. Either way, it was easy money.

Or maybe it’s their coach. Phil Jackson continues to whine about the star of each new team his team is facing in the upcoming round. First, Kevin Durant got away with too many fouls and now Steve Nash carries the ball when he runs.

“Hi, Phil, come over here, I’d like you to meet Kobe Bryant.” “Kobe, Phil, Phil, Kobe.”

It gets extremely frustrating when Lakers fans try to pull the smug card. We’re talking about a team, who, according to disgraced-referee Tim Donaghy’s book, were handed at least two championships, or at least the opportunity to play for them, and their fans try to bring up inequities against them. (The Lakers technically have 13 titles, while referee Dick Bavetta has two.)

Even Yankees fans know not to bash other teams for signing free agents. The only time they use it is when Boston fans try to bash them on spending and so they bring up Daisuke Matsuzaka. (That is a road uniform-gray area as the Red Sox didn’t technically overspend to sign him, but only to talk to him, which may seem ridiculous, but in actuality, it’s kinda ridiculous, but may have been necessary.)

Anyway, the knock on Lakers fans is legendary. They do get there late and leave early. I was at a game when they were down by three with 14 seconds left. Not since Charleton Heston tried to escape Yul Brenner have I seen such a mass Exodus. (I’m not referring to Jack, of course, as he had left long before halftime.) And the Lakers had the ball!

I’m not saying Boston fans are perfect, but you can have a decent basketball conversation with them. I mean, Lakers fans try to be like other fans. They talk trash, they look to point out the traveling violation on the other team, they clap in unison, etc. And with a team that wins, it helps their cause. They see no reason to improve.

Call it haterism, call it a fountain of bile being spewed, but it is what it is. I’ll open it up to the masses on this one. Although, please, for the love of Bill Russell, if Lakers fans are going to post, please say something intelligent. Your team is not the best defense in the league, Kobe is not better than Michael Jordan, and he certainly doesn’t get called for more travels and fouls than any other superstar.

There, I’ve said my piece, I can go back to complaining about deficiencies in the Celtics game even as they start the Eastern Conference finals against the Magic and whining that they shouldn’t have signed Rasheed Wallace.

The NBA has announced that it will use replacement referees during the preseason as it prepares to lock out the union. As the new charges will have a lot to deal with even outside of officiating the raging pituitary cases on the court, such as lunatic fans, manipulative coaches (don’t look behind you, Phil Jackson, I’m staring right in your eyes!), and the union themselves, which takes none too kindly to scabs of any kind (particularly those in your ear that you peel when they weren’t quite ready yet so they trickle a little bit and you don’t notice . . . but I digress), I thought I would give them a few helpful tips to catch them up to speed as quickly as possible.

Now I’ve never been in your shoes, but from my vantage point on the couch, these hints seem to make the most sense:

If you’ve just made a tough call during an emotional series against a player, go over to him and put your arm around him to explain the call. Psychologists prescribe to this method of being stern, yet affectionate. And though the players will probably fly into a rage and get you fined or suspended for touching them, after some time, they will realize that you made a lot of sense and feel a lot closer to you, probably sometime after you’ve both retired and run into each other at a Sizzler in downtown Phoenix.

Bet on the games. Officiating games can get redundant. You don’t want to get bored for fear that you’ll lose focus. So you should raise the stakes. Put some cash on the games. That way, you’ll be involved in every call. Tim Donaghy was one of the most energetic refs out there, never missing a call. Sure, the calls weren’t always legitimate, but he loved the game and it showed.

Everytime a head coach questions you, throw one of his favorite players out of the game. “What’s that, Van Gundy?! ... You think he traveled? ... That’s it! I’ve had enough of you! ... Howard, you’re gone!”

Give Kobe the benefit of the doubt. After all, he’s been in the league much longer than you guys have. If he tells you he didn’t travel, elbow his opponent, or goaltend, then he didn’t. Why would he lie to you?
And when he does his patented, I’m-not-getting-what-I-want-from-this-ref,-so-I’ll-go-plead-with-this-guy maneuver, well, the second ref should be sure to overrule the first ref.
That’s what every good parent would do. “Dad, Mom says I can’t go to the concert tonight. Can I?”
“I don’t see why not, son. Have a good time.”
“Thanks, Dad.”


If you’re bald, let a player polish your head with a towel. The fans love that.

Get rid of the zebra suits. I suggest fluorescent spandex so the players don’t accidentally throw the ball to you. Remember when Andre Agassi went with the bold t-shirts during Grand Slam tennis tournaments instead of the traditional white, collared garb? Sure, staunch purists were upset with him at first, but eventually, it caught on. Now players are routinely risking their manhood by hitting balls through their legs for winners down the line. History will view you guys as mavericks, ahead of their time.

Hold grudges on certain players. It forges a personalized relationship. Tim Duncan will never forget Joey Crawford. The two are forever linked. It’s a special bond you can’t teach and not many sports individuals have. The operative word to describe this kind of relationship is “special.”

Call the games as inconsistently as possible. I’m sure the league’s already told you this by now. It’s their No. 1 rule. And if it’s one thing that they want from you, it’s that you work to the level of the regular referees so that the fans won’t even notice a change. Call a “charge” one time up the court, then call “blocking” on a similar play. Keep the fans and the teams guessing.
If you can master this, you may actually earn yourself a full-time job, with benefits.

Overall, the message is that you want people to know your name. Being anonymous doesn’t serve anyone. High profile refs are the best refs. After all, the league wants ratings. So ratchet up the controversy whenever you can. Tweet during games. Blow your whistle, then ask a random fan what the call is. Better yet, make up a call! “[whistle blow] Shurling . . . No. 32. Ball goes the other way!” Shrug a lot when asked to explain a call.
If you adhere to these rules, with any luck, you’ll make us forget any highly trained referees were ever missing from the court.

I want to congratulate the Los Angeles Lakers on a hard-fought battle through the NBA playoffs. Over the past few years, I’ve had the opportunity to get to know their fans. And may I say, they are adorable. They try so hard to be good fans. It’s like watching a squirrel on a jet ski. (Okay, maybe not exactly like it, but there’s a sense of amusement with both.)

There’s a reason that the team is called the “Fakers” and other fans hate them. It isn’t because they’re the second-most celebrated franchise in the NBA. Boston has the greater history and more championships, but fans don’t hate Boston nearly as much as they hate the Lakers. (Though as a Boston backer, I know we can get pretty annoying with our self-adulation.)

It’s not the team. Who can hate Pau Gasol? He’s so ... uh, gangly. Okay, Kobe’s hatable, but he’s definitely almostas good as he thinks he is.

Nope, that's not it either. So what is it that makes them despised more than any other hardwood ballers?

It’s one aspect of the team --- the fans. And it’s not any one thing in particular, it’s just, well, ... everything.

On the outside, they act like typical fans. They make predictions. One fan told me the Lakers would beat the Magic in three. In three! A best-of-seven series in three! That’s so cute.

They complain about the referees. Mainly, this comes from mimicking Phil Jackson who complains about the referees so much, I’m not sure he isn’t using it for a euphemism about the government’s handling of the financial crisis or something other than actual refereeing. I’m actually shocked he didn’t complain about the refs during the celebration after the clinching game. Does he go into a restaurant where a waiter asks him, “Is everything here satisfactory, sir?” and say, “Are you kidding me? We haven’t had one call go our way the entire meal!”

And this is a man who coaches a team whose superstar has elbows that are actually wanted in several states for attempted murder!!! Phil Jackson’s a bright guy. He complains about the refs to gain an edge in the series. Sure, he gets fined, but he makes that money back in book deals. The fans haven’t realized this yet. Simply delightful.

They make comparisons. Talk of Phil Jackson being better than Red Auerbach started years ago, but now it’s “been proven.” Well, except for the fact that any conversation requiring the comparison of two different eras is inane and pointless. Marvelously naive.

They rationalize their fandom. I heard a fan call into a radio show and declare that he was not a fair weather fan, but rather a great fan because he didn’t think he had to root for the team if they were bad. He had, in fact, earned the right to expect a good team and should only root for them when they were good. And the talk show host agreed with him. It’s endearing. Don’t you want to just pinch their cheeks?

(Of course, if you want to get technical, that’s actually the definition of a fair weather fan. But we won't go there.)

They’re sore losers. Upon Boston winning last year, one Lakers fan told me the only reason Boston won was because Kevin McHale traded Kevin Garnett to the Celtics as a favor to his former team. Quite an observant little pip, he was. I didn’t have the heart to tell him who Jerry West was and how Pau Gasol got to the Lakers. It would have ruined his whole outlook.

And they’re sore winners. Anyone who didn’t root for their team is a “sore loser” and a “Laker Hater.”

They spread themselves thin. If the Clippers make the playoffs, they start following them as well. Kids will be kids, huh?

They make stuff up. One Lakers fan last year said that his team had the best defense in the league last year. Just don’t look at league stats. They would only confuse you. Trite!

They take quotes out of context to validate their points. During one particularly awfully officiated game versus Denver, announcer Jeff Van Gundy remarked how the refs were doing a great job. One Lakers fan pounced on that to me. Guess he missed the moment earlier in the same game where Van Gundy bashed the refs for a missed call. Ah, so spunky!

They put flags on their cars to announce their allegiances ... and that they had eight bucks lying around. It’s just that the majority of them don’t come up until the Finals begin. You guys are certainly welcome to start using them earlier in the playoffs. No one will get mad.

Oh, and they get feisty. One newspaper columnist made his case for the better team in an article about how Boston fans were not as good looking. Oof! You really showed those fans. There’s a “Key to the Game” I don’t anyone else had noticed.

Those are the Lakers fans. Take them or leave them.

It’s not that they’re totally to blame. There’s a lot more going on in Los Angeles to catch one’s interest. How many babies does Angelina Jolie have now? What did “The Watchman” gross? The Lakers really don’t have the cache of other subjects.

But the fans really do try. They’ll make it to two, maybe three quarters of a game during the season. (They’re similar to Dodgers fans in that sense. I went to a game at Dodger Stadium last week in which the Dodgers were down 3-1 and the stadium emptied in the seventh inning. Sure, their excuse is that they wanted to beat traffic. But when half the stadium leaves at the same time, you’re not beating traffic. You are the traffic.)

And there are fans that live, sleep and breathe Lakers, but that’s not what elevates them in the eyes of other fans to the status of good fans. Lakers fans are like in the minor leagues of fandom. A couple of solid seasons strung together or maybe an injury or demotion to a fan base such as Portland and they might just reach the big leagues.

But all seriousness aside, it is nice to see them trying. Los Angelenos, congratulations! You can hang your flags now to show everyone that you’re fans of the team ... or to just show them that you had eight dollars.