L.A. Story

A lot has been made about Kobe Bryant and his drive to win a championship on his own, without the likes of Shaq at his side. And there is also his egotistical desire to elevate himself past Jordan.

Well, last night the Lakers blew a 24 point lead. And as Bill Simmons at ESPN put it:

The Kobe-MJ thing ... done. Over. Jordan never would have let that happen in the Finals. Ever. Under any circumstances. Nobody is ever allowed to bring this up again.

As it was, last night's game was one for the ages. If the Celts end up winning this thing (because as the Red Sox have proven in 2004, its not over until its over), the impact of this game will grow exponentially.

Labels: basketball, celtics, lakers

The Dunk

I recently read a great article in this week's Sports Illustrated about the art of "The Dunk", how it has its own vernacular and culture and is still one of the most revered shots and experiences in sport. To praphrase the article, do we know another move in all of sports that can be collectively described as "boomshakalaka", "dipsy doo dunakroo", "windmill", "throw down", "360" and, the mother of all dunk descriptions, the "Chocolate-Thunder-Flying, Robinzine-Crying, Teeth-Shaking, Glass-Breaking, Rump Roasting, Bun-Toasting, Wham-Bam-Glass-Breaker-I-Am-Jam". And everyone would know what you are talking about!

Through the article, there are several seminal dunks that are described so in honor of them, here they are in all their glory:

Baron Davis dunking over Andrei Kirilenko


John Starks over Horace Grant and the Bulls


Tom Chambers over Mark Jackson


Dominique Wilkins


Henry Bekkering


Vince Carter over Fredric Weis


Dwight Howard Superman Dunk


Chocolate Thunder

Labels: basketball, dunks

Nah, He's Not Biased

A couple of nights ago, Duke beat Clemson at Cameron Indoor on a last second play that was very controversial because the refs screwed up the clock management at the end of the game, giving Duke additional time to score (which of course they did) and win the game.

So watching ESPN this evening, as always, they over analyzed the play and asked Jay Bilas, a Dookie from the late 1980's and their college basketball analyst, to provide commentary. And what did he do? He defended the refs! He had the audacity to imply that Duke would have won no matter how many seconds were on the clock and that Clemson never could have won the game.

Are you kidding me? How can you imply that? The ref's screwed up. Duke got away with one. Just admit it.

Naaah, no bias towards Duke from that journalist.

Labels: basketball, duke