Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

    OK, here is game 2

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print...213&type=story


    C's and the city: Both looking very good

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By Bill Simmons
    Page 2

    BOSTON -- For all intent and purpose, the Celtics played a perfect Game 2. They shot 53 percent from the field and made nine of 14 3-pointers. They had 31 assists on 36 field goals. They outrebounded the Lakers and shot a whopping 28 more free throws. They were given an ongoing boost by favorable officiating (that's an understatement) and a lively, joyous crowd that brought back memories of the old Garden and the Bird era. They even submitted an Exclamation Point sequence that stretched through the end of the third quarter to the beginning of the fourth, when their lead swelled into the 20s and everyone started thinking, "Holy crap, these guys might not even come back for a Game 6."

    So you can understand our confusion. Within something like 15 seconds, Boston's 24-point lead was whittled down to … (clearing my throat) … (slapping myself in the face a couple of times) … (peeing a little bit in my pants) … two.



    I wish I could explain what happened, but L.A.'s comeback defied explanation. The Celtics relaxed, the Lakers made a couple 3s, the Celtics missed a couple shots, Kobe shifted into 17th gear, the Lakers made a couple more 3s, and somewhere during this stretch, everyone went into "Oh no!" mode and my buddy Hench texted me, "Will this be the worst loss in Boston sports history?" (Yes, actually. And NBA history. And sports history.) Once Kobe willed himself to the line for two freebies with 38 seconds left, the Celtics were suddenly leading 104-102 with 38.7 seconds left, and my frozen father was only missing a coffin and a touch-up makeup job from a mortician.

    That's when Paul Pierce (28 points, eight assists) saved us, barreling to the basket with one of his patented old-school, herky-jerky, zig-zag drives, drawing a foul and nailing both free throws with 22 seconds left. The Lakers called timeout and set up a new play called "Let'shandbostonthegame," ignoring Kobe in lieu of an unspeakably atrocious Sasha Vujacic 3-pointer that Pierce blocked with his left hand. Game over. Even when the buzzer sounded and Gino started dancing, the fans filed out of the Whatever The Hell The Garden's Called Now the same way somebody would leave a police station after they had been falsely imprisoned for a few hours -- happy to be out, but racking their brains trying to figure out what just happened.

    I was more relieved than anyone. Why? Because the two Lakers fans sitting to my left apparently had this conversation in California on Friday night.

    Fan No. 1: "Dude, I got us tickets for Round 2. Wanna fly to Boston with me?"

    Fan No. 2: "Dude, I'm in!"

    Fan No. 1: "Let's wear Kobe jerseys, get drunk during the game, argue with people in our section and see if somebody will take a swing at us."

    Fan No. 2: "Dude, I said I'm in. You bringing your designer man-purse?"

    Fan No. 1: "Absolutely! Are you going to trim your beard so you look like Crockett during the first season of 'Miami Vice'?"

    Fan No. 2: "You betcha!"

    Look, every fan base has a worst-case scenario stereotype -- for Boston fans, it's someone with a shortened Irish name (Murph, Sully or Fitzy) who looks like a 295-pound Mike O'Malley, only with a shaved head, a comically ridiculous Baaaaa-stan accent, a T-shirt that's two sizes too small and a blood-alcohol level of 0.27 at all times. Few Boston fans are actually like that, just like few Lakers fans resemble the guys sitting next to me Sunday night. I'm just telling you, what would have been the worst collapse in Finals history nearly happened as I sat next to two drunken douche bags in Kobe jerseys, one with a man purse (the exact same color of my mother's Louis Vuitton purse, by the way), the other with a Crockett beard. I feel like you need to know these things.

    (Here's an idea before Game 6, should it happen: The Celtics send out a news release that, if they see anyone sitting in a season-ticket seat for Games 6 or 7 wearing a Lakers jersey, a Lakers T-shirt or a Lakers hat, then the person who owns those season tickets will lose them next season. Period. End of story. It's not technically legal, but then again, a franchise should have the right to control who owns their season tickets, right? I like this idea.)


    The Truth answered any questions about his knee in Game 2.
    >Fortunately, there weren't that many Lakers fans in the crowd, nor were there many suits or pseudo-fans. This was a different crowd from Game 1 -- almost entirely Boston diehards, all of them wearing green or white -- which pushed the atmosphere to old-school Garden heights and unquestionably affected the officiating. There were also an unfathomable number of current Boston stars and former stars spread throughout the building, including Bill Russell, Doug Flutie, Curt Schilling, John Havlicek, David Ortiz, Kevin Millar, Mike Lowell, Josh Beckett, Wes Welker, Vince Wilfork, Adalius Thomas, Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, Coco Crisp, Antoine Walker, Cedric Maxwell, Jon Lester, the Red Sox owners (John Henry, Tom Werner and Larry Lucchino), Tim Wakefield, Jacoby Ellsbury, Tedy Bruschi, Jo-Jo White, Ty Law, M.L. Carr, Tommy Heinsohn and many more.

    For God's sake, look at that list again. It's like the Ghosts of Boston Sports Past and Present. That's a phenomenon unique to this particular city -- an unusually high level of fraternizing between the Red Sox, Celtics and Patriots that started a few years ago and eventually reached the point that players show up to support the other teams. Basically, the Boston sports scene has turned into a giant college campus.

    So how did that happen? After decades of universally impersonal/enigmatic/unfriendly/anonymous/loathsome Boston sports owners who failed to mine a ravenous sports market, things turned when the Krafts bought the Patriots and proved that a local family could own a Boston-area franchise, interact with the community, listen to fans, build a state-of-the-art stadium and legitimately give a hoot about making everyone happy. A few years later, the Henry/Werner/Lucchino group purchased the Red Sox and shrewdly turned a notoriously fan-unfriendly franchise around, renovating (and even re-inventing) Fenway Park and maximizing every potential penny from that franchise. That was quickly followed by the new Celtics ownership (Wyc Grousbeck, Steve Pagliuca and their minority partners) making a concerted effort to get involved with the community, build relationships with sponsors and heavy hitters and everything else.

    Now the three relevant Boston franchises seem like mirror images of each other. They're all winning. They're raking in cash and increasing the value of their respective teams to the point that it's almost absurd. They hired intelligent, successful, innovative executives who keep pushing their teams forward. They have owners who are visible and accountable, owners who proved they will spend the requisite amount of money (and then some) to field winning teams. Beyond that, the top executives for all three franchises know one another, lean on each other for advice and hit up each other for favors; it's a working relationship in the best sense, and it's the kind of thing that just didn't happen 10 years ago. Team A and Team B are always pulling for Team C. Anyway, that's how you end up with a legitimate renaissance for Boston sports, as well as 40-50 stars and former stars at Game 2 of the NBA Finals.

    Digging a little deeper, the revival of the Celtics, Red Sox and Patriots mirrors something that's happening to Boston as a whole. Quite simply, the city that I left behind in 2002 doesn't exist anymore.

    Once upon a time, Boston was a pretty easy place to understand. Things never changed and, more importantly, we liked it that things never changed. Life revolved around the weather cycles (often brutal), the sports teams (often disappointing) and those occasionally fabulous days in April or October when the sun was shining and there wasn't a prettier place to be. We dealt with traffic, snow, construction, parking problems and sports letdowns year after year, and that's just who we were. Everything was symbolized by the Big Dig, a project that promised to rejuvenate the city and put our highways underground, only it fell years behind schedule and bled billions in cost overruns, rendering Boston impotent for a number of years. I graduated from college in '92 and spent the next decade living in the city (mostly in Charlestown) dealing with jackhammers and detours the entire time. After a while, you stopped thinking about it and assumed that's the way the city would always be -- mangled, ugly and messed up. Nobody could conceive of life after the Big Dig. It just seemed incomprehensible.

    Well, the project finally ended two years ago. Remember the reality show "The Swan," in which someone gets an extreme makeover and tons of plastic surgery and family members stare at him or her in complete disbelief? That's how I feel every time I come back to Boston. If there was a defining trait for the Causeway area other than the old Garden, it was the Green Line, which ran above ground (you might recall seeing the shot of the train rumbling toward the Garden before every Celtics game) and right over Causeway Street. Scattered around the area were a number of bars, including some classic ones (Harp, Sullivan's Tap, Four's) and a never-ending group of bars in static locations that always seemed to change names every 18 months. On paper, this seems kind of cool. In reality, it meant the tracks hung over the street, blocked every inch of sunlight and dripped smelly water every time it rained or snowed, and on top of that, you had to hear the deafening screech of the train rumbling by every few minutes.


    Even though they're down 0-2, the Black Mamba is far from finished.
    Here's why I'm telling you this: The Causeway of 2008 has zero in common with the Causeway of 1998. Once the construction was finished, you could have blindfolded me, spun me around a few times, dropped me in the middle of Causeway and asked me where I was, and I wouldn't have had a clue until I noticed the Harp or Halftime Pizza, and even then, I would have been confused. You wouldn't call the area beautiful or anything, but it's sunny and happy, and in an implausible twist, you can stand at the old North Station stop -- flanked by a ghastly and unsafe I-93 ramp once upon a time -- turn toward Faneuil Hall and actually see Faneuil Hall from a distance. What was once highway ramps, bridges, "T" tracks and construction has been replaced by grass and sidewalks. "Incredible" isn't a strong enough word. In fact, you could walk from Quincy Market to the North End to Causeway Street to the Red Hat to the top of Charles Street and (A) remain in the sun for the entire time and (B) actually enjoy the trip without feeling you might get mugged.

    It's just a different city. The Baby Boomer generation keeps drifting from the suburbs into Back Bay, the South End, the North End or Beacon Hill, leading to a peculiar situation in which real estate prices keep climbing in a market in which prices are swooning everywhere else. And thanks to relaxed tax laws, Hollywood has descended on downtown in droves; instead of nonstop construction, you're more prone to see trailers, lights and policemen blocking off a brownstone or a building. On Friday night, I went to pick up my friend Willy at his place on Commonwealth Avenue; across the street, something was happening but I couldn't figure out what.

    "That's where they're filming the new Bruce Willis movie," Willy said matter-of-factly.

    Oh.

    Living here from day to day, it's probably tougher to realize how much Boston has changed -- how many nice restaurants, clubs and bars are scattered throughout the city, how much easier it is to get around, how much happier and efficient and sleeker things seem -- but it's something I couldn't stop wrapping my head around for six days, from the moment I arrived at Logan Airport (no longer a travesty of a dump, by the way) and found myself in one of those secret handshake tunnels that cab drivers use now to get from Logan into the city. Crazy. The whole thing is crazy.

    The dramatic shift in fortunes is symbolized by one piece of turf in Beacon Hill, right next to the Storrow Drive West ramp, about a block from the top of Charles Street, formerly the home of Buzzy's Roast Beef. For the uninitiated, Buzzy's was the 24-hour place you went after a night of drinking for some unhealthy food; if you were lucky, you might run into a couple of girls there and strike up a conversation, only there was nowhere to go because the bars closed at 2 a.m., and besides, both parties were covered in cheese and barbecue sauce, so nothing would have happened, anyway. It was located right next to the Charles Street jail and Mass General Hospital, in a stretch of Beacon Hill that always seemed to have stabbings and muggings. As the old adage went, it was OK to stumble out of the Beacon Hill Pub and walk straight to Buzzy's, as long as you never took a right.

    Where's Buzzy's now? It's in Roast Beef Heaven. The jail has been turned into a boutique hotel called The Liberty that happens to have the hottest bar in town, a place called Alibi that's unlike any Boston scene I can remember. There's a doorman, valets, celebrities, $12 drinks and dressed-up women hoping to hook up with rich guys, as well as an extensive line just to get into the hotel to drink upstairs in the Bar That Nobody Really Wants To Be At Because They'd Rather Be At Alibi. Back in the mid-1990s, the hottest place on Wednesday nights was the Warren Tavern in Charlestown -- a relatively dark pub that didn't have one cool thing about it other than that it was built in the 1780s and Paul Revere allegedly drank there. People waited in line for 25-30 minutes just to get inside a hot room to order some draft beer in the same place that Paul Revere allegedly ordered a draft beer. And not to sound like a grumpy old man, but we LOVED IT! Back in 1995, had you shown me a clip of the Liberty Hotel's bar scene 13 years later, I would have kept shaking my head and saying, "No, no, no way … it's impossible … not in Boston … no way …"

    Of course, I would have said the same thing about anotherLakers-Celtics Finals. Leading by two games, needing only two more victories to clinch a 17th banner, the Celtics took the same things that worked for them in Game 1 (energy, rebounding, home court, some timely 3s) and pushed it to another level. For three quarters, the team peaked as the Lakers seemed frazzled by lopsided officiating and each other. During the first quarter, there was one sequence when Kobe threw a bullet pass through Gasol's hands for a turnover, then shot Gasol one of his patented Michael Corleone, "You disappointed me, don't be surprised if I have you killed later" glares, only Gasol fired right back and told Kobe that he should have thrown a bounce pass, followed by Kobe staring at Gasol intently and trying to make Gasol's head actually explode on the court.

    Yeah, maybe it was a minor moment, and maybe these things happen during a basketball game. But it symbolized what happened with the Lakers in these first two games; they looked rattled, they couldn't get calls, they couldn't protect the rim, they couldn't keep Boston off the boards, they shot way too many jumpers and 3-pointers, and on defense they seemed one step behind except for the fourth quarter in both games. For Game 2, they had a valid excuse … an unspeakable 38-10 free-throw disparity that I won't even attempt to defend. At one point, my dad pointed to referee Bob Delaney, who was practically wearing a Celtics jersey and joked, "I like that guy. I want him for every game!"

    If you're a Lakers fan, take solace in the fact you'll get every call at the Staples Center if the crowd shows up; not only do these things have a way of coming around, but if Bennett Salvatore doesn't officiate Game 3, it will be the biggest sports upset of this century. Still, the Lakers shouldn't be pardoned for never driving to the basket and failing to play with enough intensity on the defensive end. Yeah, the calls were one-sided, but you can't expect to get calls when you're reaching in from behind, trying to strip guys after they beat you and trying to block shots after your guy already grabbed an offensive rebound and he's standing between you and the basket. For the first seven quarters of the series, honestly, I can't think of a single thing the Lakers did well.

    When they started playing with desperation in the fourth quarter, pressured the ball full-court and bombed 3s in a wild small-ball attack, you could see the lightbulb flickering over their heads. Hmmmmm, maybe that's how we should have played this whole series. In particular, Kobe pushed himself to remarkable heights, flying around the court like Lawrence Taylor after an 8-ball, a force of nature covering chunks of the court at once. What an incredible athlete to watch in person. You can't say enough about it. Had Kobe brought that frenzied intensity to the rest of the series, the Lakers would have won at least one of the games. He didn't.

    As for the Celtics, they're peaking at the perfect time, submitting some really good stretches in the Detroit series and hitting new heights Sunday. I'm starting to wonder if they simply got rusty after they clinched home court, lost their way a little bit, battled some severe confidence issues in the Atlanta and Cleveland series and ultimately found their way again. These things can happen with an inexperienced team, even a team with this many veterans. When you think about it, none of their key characters could be considered "playoff experienced" except for Pierce (and even that's dubious), and they have a coach who has been learning as he goes along.



    For all the grief that Doc Rivers has taken (and yes, I'm one of the grief-givers), he has gotten better throughout the playoffs. Other than the ongoing House/Cassell tragedy (don't get me started), I haven't disagreed with anything Rivers did in the Lakers or Pistons series except for burying Leon Powe against Detroit, which was inexplicable at the time and seems twice as perplexing after what happened Sunday night (21 points, two roof-shaking dunks). I thought Rivers coached the best game of his career in Game 2, calling timeouts at the right times, shortening his rotation, making the right adjustments and even keeping an on-fire Rajon Rondo (16 assists) in the game for the entire second half. I didn't disagree with a single move, except for playing Cassell, who is obviously blackmailing him, so we'll let it slide. As I've written in the past, I'm a big believer in "getting reps" in life, whether it's speaking in public, driving a race car, performing in a porn movie, coaching a basketball team or whatever. Maybe Doc just needed to get some playoff reps in. I keep telling myself this.

    Regardless, the Celtics are heading to Los Angeles with a 2-0 lead, a healthy team and a coach who has figured out how to not be a liability. Life is good. I'd feel more confident if Kobe wasn't playing for the other team. Even Sunday night, with the Lakers trailing by 20 and showing less chemistry than John Travolta and Kelly Preston, Kobe remained terrifying and I specifically remember glancing at the Jumbotron every so often and hoping the clock would move faster. As the series continues to unfold, he remains the most intriguing person in it, pressing for the first seven quarters but dominating the eighth. He's not going down without a fight, nor do we expect anything less.

    But even Kobe can't stop the sun from shining in Boston today. Everyone is wandering around a rejuvenated city with hoarse voices, talking about the game and trying to figure out what will happen in Game 3. There is nowhere I would rather be. The Celtics are back.

    Bill Simmons is a columnist for Page 2 and ESPN The Magazine. For every Simmons column, as well as podcasts, videos, favorite links and more, check out the revamped Sports Guy's World.





    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ESPN.com: Help | PR Media Kit | Sales Media Kit | Report a Bug | Contact Us | News Archive | Site Map | ESPN Shop | Jobs at ESPN | Supplier Information
    ©2008 ESPN Internet Ventures. Terms of Use (Updated 5/6/08) and Privacy Policy and Safety Information/Your California Privacy Rights are applicable to you. All rights reserved

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

      If the Celtics end up winning the series the worst thing will not be the fact that Reggie was almost on the team, it will be the fact that Sports Guy will be happy. (I can't stand that guy!)

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

        No doubt. I can't stand him either.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

          Originally posted by grace View Post
          If the Celtics end up winning the series the worst thing will not be the fact that Reggie was almost on the team, it will be the fact that Sports Guy will be happy. (I can't stand that guy!)
          If it makes you feel better, a couple months ago he was asked something along the lines of, "If the Celtics win the title, will it make up for the Patriots losing in the Super Bowl?" His response was an emphatic no. I found that surprising, since he's always been a bigger basketball fan, but that's how much he got caught up in 19-0.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

            Wow, I normally like his articles, but his last one was simply too much of a Boston lovefest. I had to take a break while reading it to keep my sanity.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

              I can't say I enjoyed game 2. It was one the worst officiated games I've seen in years. I've seen harder fouls in the WNBA and the ladies don't complain. I really don't care who wins the finals , so I'm far from bias. I do however want to see a good series and if you wanna let one team get away with fouls , then stop calling the little girl fouls. Let them play for pete's sake.
              Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

                If the Celtics were to go up 3-0 and then lose in 7, some people in Boston would seriously have to be put on suicide watch. The biggest upset in NBA history to go with the biggest upset in NFL history, in the same season no less, would be too much for some fans to take.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

                  ^ As much as that would be awesome to **** off Simmons, my dislike of the Lakers trumps any desire for that to happen.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

                    Simmons is an unabashed Boston homer but I love his articles.

                    The fact that we knew these articles were going to be a Boston love-in and we still read them anyway, proves the guy is an entertaining sports writer.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Sports Guy write-up on game 1 & game 2

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      If the Celtics were to go up 3-0 and then lose in 7, some people in Boston would seriously have to be put on suicide watch. The biggest upset in NBA history to go with the biggest upset in NFL history, in the same season no less, would be too much for some fans to take.
                      I'll have to keep this in mind if the Lakers somehow manage to win. I won't like it, but knowing that Sports Guy is miserable will ease my pain.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X