Before I begin refuting a couple of articles I just read, I want to congratulate the Golden State Warriors. My wife, Melanie, and I watched through clenched teeth as the Warriors time and again withstood the Thunder attack. And make no mistake about it, OKC is an attack dog. Westbrook is the lead attack dog, Durant follows. But, this time the Warriors did some attacking of their own, and with some tough defense, after a failed Thunder attack, the Warriors were able to counter attack. If this is beginning to sound like something out of a West Point military strategy manual, so be it. This is how it is in the Post Season in the NBA. It has been that way since I played. If a team is not prepared to do battle in the playoffs, victory will not be theirs. Understand this: the refs will not give you a call; every rebound will be a struggle; there will a body on you all the time; prepare to be hit on every drive into the paint you make.
Victory in the NBA playoffs will come to the team that remembers General George Patton: "L'audace, l'audace, toujour l'audace. (Audacity, audacity, always audacity). Go Warriors.
I want to discuss Albert "kick ass" Burneko's recent article, The Thunder are What's Wrong with the Warriors. After watching the two games in OKC, one might say, "Well, duh?" I might remind you, Albert, that the Warriors "kicked the Thunder's ass" in game two at Oracle and defeated them in game four. And lost to the Thunder in a close game in game one. It's all well and good to be a predictor (a Geoge Bush type word) like Cassandra of Troy fame, but your predictions and "reasons" ie; cause and effect, might be better saved until the series ends. Don't you think?
If the Thunder perform the way they did in OKC, indeed, no one will argue with you. In my days playing in the NBA, I've taken ass-kicking and given ass-kicking. Frankly, from an athlete's point of view, neither is elevating, enlightening, nor amusing. The Warriors are great basketball players. So are the Thunder. Neither team deserves being described as having their "ass-kicked." It's low-brow. You can take that anyway you want to Albert the "Ass....kicker." We are pros. We do not need a lot of blather from the peanut gallery to tell us of our losses or our wins.
I further take umbrage with your referencing Deadspins' article by Kevin Draper: This is All Joe Lacob's Fault. To pin the recent Warrior defeat on Lacob's bit of braggadocio is nonsense. As in No Sense. Do you or Kevin have any idea how the mind of a professional athlete works? Have you ever played any sport at a high level yourselves? I can't imagine you have; otherwise, you'd know that the best pro athletes have tunnel vision, they're not going to be influenced by dubious outside forces. I find it laughable that you felt Joe taking credit for the Warrior's success could possibly effect the way the Dubs played or will play.
All Joe did was what Draymond Green does all the time during a game, showing off a little bit of his muscles. That Joe Lacob has some administrative and financial muscles to show off, hey, why not?
Allow me to be an English teacher again. In the study of rhetoric, there is something called Logical Fallacies. Joe Lacob bragging is the cause of the Warrior losing is called the Post hoc, ergo proctor hoc fallacy. It's like the inaccurate bullshit the conservatives like to blather--that welfare is the cause of child poverty. Sorry, dummy, not the cause at all. Neither are Joe's comments - The Cause. Both of you writers might want to take a refresher course in rhetoric before continuing your careers as writers.
I've blogged this poem before, but because free-throws seem to be an important topic these days in the NBA, I'll repeat it.
Penance by Sherman Alexie
I remember sun-
days when the man I
call my father made
me shoot free throws, one
for every day of my life
so far. I remember
the sin of imperfect
spin, the ball falling in-
to that moment between
a father and forgive-
ness. between the hands reach-
in up and everything
they can possibly hold.
What my musings are all about...
Blogging might well be the 21st century's form of journaling. As a writing teacher, I have always advised my students to keep a daily journal as a way of organizing their thoughts for future writing projects, a discipline I have unfortunately never consistently practiced myself. By blogging, I might finally be able to follow my own good advice.
The difference between journaling and blogging is that the blogger opens his or her writing to the public, something journal- writers are usually reluctant to do. I am not so reticent.
The trick for me will be to avoid cluttering the internet with more blather, something none of us need more of. If I stick to subjects I know: sports and literature, I believe I can avoid that pitfall. I can't promise that I'll not stray from time to time to comment on ancillary subjects, but I will make every attempt to be interesting and perhaps even insightful.