Basketball

Avoid if you're uninterested in basketball

So a long time ago, at the beginning of the season, I made a series of predictions about what was going to happen, who was going to go to the playoffs, etc. Adjusting for several major trades, I'd rate myself at about 60% correct (which is, in my opinion, just on the right side of respectable). Other than not realizing how awful the Celtics were going to become under Danny Ainge this year, my biggest error ends up having called the Spurs to win the championship. I really thought they were going to do it. And if Derek Fisher doens't make that improbably shot with 0.4 seconds left in Game 5 of the Lakers series, they probably do (I want to try catching and shooting in 0.4 seconds; I'm skeptical).

So, starting with the East, here's my take on the Conference Finals -

Detroit is going to win in five or six. Probably six, but that depends on Jermaine O'Neal proving for once and for all that he's made the leap into greatness. Because he's going to match up with Rasheed Wallace, who is longer, at least as strong, probably quicker, and a lot more experienced (if less intrinsically stable). And if Jermaine can outbattle Rasheed, there's still Ben Wallace, probably the best off-the-ball defender in the league, hanging around. Jeff Foster, the other Pacers bigman, is probably not going to occupy a lot of Big Ben's attention. O'Neal may prove better than one Wallace, but not both of them. At point, Chauncey Billups ought to just devour Jamaal Tinsley. And I think the Pistons have a matchup advantage at the wings as well. Say Artest matches up with Tayshaun Prince, shuts him down. There's NO WAY Reggie Miller can keep up with Hamilton. So Artest matches up with Rip: he's not going to shut him down, just slow him up a bit, and Tayshaun is just going to smother Reggie Miller. I don't think Miller can defend Prince better than adequately, and Prince's wingspan will just take Reggie out of the game. This might all be moot (or at least subject to change) if Miller is benched in favor of Al Harrington, but the latter Pacer hasn't played well, and I don't have any clue of what happens when Prince drags him to the perimeter.

I'm not laying out a games prediction on a series that's already begun, but the Lakers are winning this one. Sam Cassell's foot just hurts too much for him to explode the way he has all season, which means that it's on KG and Latrell. Only one of whom showed up to play last night. If KG doesn't shrink into oblivion, and if Wally gets his shit together, I believe they can score with the Lakers - especially on the run. But I don't see them being able to defend LA...there's just too many weaknesses. No one on the Wolves can stop Kobe, unless Trenton Hassell has the game of his life. Shaq is going to toy with whatever big man the Wolves send at him; Olowakandi is probably the best option, but he's not stopping the Diesel. And when the Wolves overcommit on doubleteaming Shaq and Kobe, the other guys spot up and knock down the jumpers. If I were Flip Saunders, I'd say: Fuck it, the one way they're NOT going to beat us is with Shaq (since he's the most dependable Laker weapon, when he wants to be. And right now he wants to be). And then I'd go well at KG and tell him he's going to guard Shaq. Yeah, he gives up a lot of weight (has an edge in wingspan, I'd say). Yeah, he's not as strong. But KG is clever, he's a good defender, he's going to do as good a job or better on Shaq as Olowakandi is. He just needs to believe (like Webber, like the other O'Neal, like Duncan and Rasheed) that it's his job and his place to step into the middle and start bodying with O'Neal. And let's say he doesn't stop him? Well, if KG's playing center, the Wolves have a smaller lineup, which means a faster lineup, and in Minnesota's case a more effective offensive lineup on the floor. Even if Shaq still gets his, wouldn't it be better to be able to match that with some steady contributions from (the surprising) Fred Hoiberg? Plus, I really want to get to watch Mark Madsen play Karl Malone. It's just a funny idea.

In An Interstellar Burst...

As best as I can tell my previous post happened on March 25th. That's quite a hiatus. Although I certainly continued to spend far too much of my time on the internet in that period, I otherwise sort of retired from online life - no AIM, no blogging, no LiveJournal, no nothing. Such an experiment (not that I began it as a conscious experiment) would undoubtedly be more successful if I could similarly walk away from the websites I tend to read, but...

In any case, at least one person has expressed regret that I refrained from posting even when The Virginian resumed the blogging, so here we go. In particular, I'm somewhat curious to see what amount of coherence or balance will be maintained as I continue to be an undergrad at Chicago, and my associate heads off to graduate school.

A few comments on recent posts:

(1) I highly recommend this website; I've rather enjoyed trying to figure out how the parents of people I've gone to school with have distributed their money, and checking whether or not I was surprised by the results. People I've gone to school with tend to not donate much money to just about any cause as of yet, although that hasn't stopped either my high school or the institution where I did eighth grade from hitting me up for cash I don't have. If I ever donate money to one of my former schools, UHS will get some. Cathedral will not. (Among other reasons, Cathedral is far more aggressive.)

(2) As The Virginian states below, I do not care for square-toed shoes (or squares in general; I have a decided negative preference towards boxy automotive design, boxy architecture, boxy people, and boxy clothing). My position on ties and collars is not an equally vehement affirmation of the joys of the wide collar and the Windsor knot - I merely don't object to the wide collar, think in certain situations and on certain people it is flattering, etc. And when confronted with a wide collar, it is necessary, lest one risk looking entirely foolish, to respond with an appropriately beefy (but not boxy) tie knot - namely, the Windsor. I myself have only an intellectual knowledge of how to execute the Windsor, relying on the more pedestrian four-in-hand, since my personal shirt collars tend to be sufficiently narrow in angle. As to the neckerchief, though: no. An ascot is one thing (and in this day and age I'd certainly feel inclined to mock anyone I saw wearing an ascot for non-theatrical/ironic purposes) but a neckerchief demands an equally piratical puffy blouse. Just unbutton your damn shirt and let it go. Or, like me, you could sport what my roommates charmingly refer to as my "Jesus bling".