Best Ever: Otto, or Else...

The analysts who warned that the Cavaliers just didn’t match up well against Orlando (Charles Barkley chief among them) appear to have been onto something. Anything could yet happen in the Eastern Conference Finals, but, if the first four games are any indication, Orlando will advance. Cleveland simply hasn’t devised an answer for the Magic’s incredible three-point shooting arsenal. Seriously: 17 three-pointers in Game Four? That’s ridiculous.

And yet, the Cavs lost by just two points. In overtime. And LeBron James had the ball in his hands for another buzzer-beating attempt that would have won the game. That’s why anything could yet happen. The Magic have the upper hand, but every game has been a battle.

Predictably, with the luster wearing off of James’ star for the moment, people are coming out of the woodwork with the “best ever” banter. The party line goes like this: LeBron is great, but he’s not an all-time great. The true test of greatness is championships. Minus championships, no one can be the “best ever.” Michael Jordan is the best ever because of his six NBA titles. Joe Montana is the best ever because of his four Super Bowl victories. Babe Ruth is the best ever because of his seven World Series titles....

And that’s the sentence that begins to reveal the folly of the argument. No, Babe Ruth is the best ever simply because he was…well, the best ever. He revolutionized the game. He established the benchmarks against which hitters would forever be measured. Not just those 714 home runs, but also an insane .342 lifetime batting average. And, before all of that, he was one of the sport’s premier pitchers, winning 78 games for Boston over a four-year span – 18 of those in 1915, at the tender age of 20! The Red Sox won three World Series titles during that time. Ruth was, by any account, Herculean. Bunyanesque. Did I mention larger than life?

I bring all this up only because I read something this morning that left me scratching my head. A blogger on the ESPN Sportsnation website, who goes by the moniker “Pastor Troy,” blasted away at LeBron – apparently because the good reverend just had to get something off his chest. You can read the entire entry here, but he basically takes James to task (now that Orlando’s up 3-1) for not bringing out the best in his teammates; says Jordan did it, LeBron hasn’t, so ya’ll be hatin’. Something like that. And then he slips back into the championships-are-the-one-true-measure-of-greatness line.

Fine. Then I am here to proclaim, once and for all, that the greatest athlete in the history of professional team sports in the United States is not Michael Jordan…is not Joe Montana…is not Babe Ruth…is not Jose Mesa (ahem)…but is, without question…

…Otto Graham.

The man played 10 seasons at quarterback for the Cleveland Browns. His team was in the league championship game all 10 of those seasons. And they won seven of those 10. He was four-for-four in the brief history of the All-America Football Conference. Lest we be tempted to poo-poo that league as one minor (that’s the first time I’ve ever written “poo-poo” in a sentence), the year after the AAFC folded Graham led the Browns to the NFL title in their first year in the league. And then he led them to two more over the next five years.

Ten seasons. Ten championship games. Seven victories.

Take that, all you title-touters.

Bill Russell’s eight straight NBA championships (and 10 in 11 years) don’t count, because…it messes up my argument for Graham.

But not really. I’ve never bought the championships-as-benchmark line of reasoning. Of course titles matter. But Terry Bradshaw has four Super Bowl rings – and he did it first. Why isn’t he as great as Montana?

The aforementioned Russell’s 10 championships outdistance Jordan’s six (and everyone else's). Why isn’t Russell the greatest?

In hockey…OK, I don’t know anything about hockey.

But you get my point. I have no problem with people taking the Cavs to task for the way they’ve performed against Orlando. But the problem isn’t LeBron. He’s once again exceeded expectations. He’s making 30- and 40-point games routine – routine – and that hasn’t happened since Oscar Robertson was running roughshod over the rest of the NBA in his prime.

I don’t know whether Otto Graham was the best quarterback in history, or even in the top 10. I know he was unsurpassed as a big-game player. And he won more championships than any other.

But the greatest? There are too many factors to consider. And those who insist on titles first are missing out on the intangibles that make the greatest athletes truly great.

LeBron has those intangibles. Yes, I’ll accept that he needs to win a championship or two to fully secure his place in history. But Pastor Troy has jumped too quickly into the LeBron-taunting fray. Number 23 is everything he was cracked up to be, and more. And the series isn’t over, although the Cavs are admittedly on life support.

This is LeBron’s sixth season. He’s 24. Michael Jordan didn’t win his first championship until his seventh season, at age 27. LeBron’s time will come. The fact that he’s accomplished so much so soon is cause for celebration, not degradation – no matter what happens Thursday night, or for the rest of this series.

Look! Up in the Sky! It’s Falling!

Dwight Howard may be Superman, but that’s not what basketball fans and the media are seeing up in the sky these days. They see it – the whole sky – falling squarely on the heads of the Cleveland Cavaliers.

A little early, don’t you think? Yes, we can conclude that the Cavs aren’t perfect, after Rashard Lewis's late three-pointer (left) helped Orlando beat them in Game 1 of the NBA Eastern Conference Finals, 107-106.

But before the hand-wringing gets out of hand (is that possible?) – and believe me, I’m tempted to wring them digits right along with you – let’s think this through.

1.) Orlando is a very, very good basketball team.

2.) They’ve been playing and in sync. The Cavs had another long layoff, and looked like they wore down a bit toward the end of the game. (That they would be tired strikes me as being nonsensical at this point in the season, considering these are some of the most finely honed athletes in the world. But the commentators said it on TNT, so I’m going with it.)

3.) The Cavs went cold from the field just as Orlando got hot. It made the difference in the game.

4.) It’s one game.

5.) The Bulls of Michael Jordan’s era lost a few playoff games every year.

It’s that last point that I take solace in. Six times in the 1990s, Jordan’s Bulls won the NBA championship. Fewest playoff losses in any one of those seasons? Two, in ’90-91. The most? A whopping seven, the very next year.

The year the Bulls won a league-record 72 games, they lost three playoff games, including two in the finals against Seattle. In ’91-92, when their record of 67-15 was almost identical to this year’s Cavs, Chicago lost those seven playoff contests I spoke of earlier – three in the second round, two in the conference finals, and two more in the NBA Finals against Portland.

In other words, when you win the title, nobody cares how long it took you to do it, or faults you for losing a few games along the way.

The Cavs have now lost exactly one game this playoff season. To a very, very good team. They have the MVP. They have the Coach of the Year. And they have a solid roster that earned the best record in the league.

The sky isn’t falling. They let one get away. They let down in the second half, and they know it. They’d better not let it happen again, and here’s betting they don’t. I think they’ll win this series. I think LeBron James is sick of the doubters and the naysayers. I think his teammates are tired of hearing that the Cavs are “LeBron and everyone else.”

Give Orlando credit. They came in and stole Game 1. But I don't think they're deeper and more talented than Cleveland, no matter what all the pundits keep saying. They were bound to collect at least one victory this series. There’s also a lot of basketball left.

If the Cavs are the championship-caliber team we all think they are, they’ll evaluate this loss, suck it up, and get back to business the rest of the way.

The alarm has sounded. Let’s see what happens next.

Bored with the Playoffs? Try...Cavs vs. Cavs

Former Cavaliers center Brad Daugherty, now a NASCAR analyst on ESPN, stirred the pot this week when he suggested that his Cavs team of the late 1980s and early ’90s could beat the current version.

Did I say stirred the pot? Seems like he was smokin’ it, actually.

Daugherty’s teams were exceptional. There was a sense, in 1989, that they were about to be championship caliber. Daugherty. Price. Nance. Williams. Harper. It was an exciting young team. Magic Johnson called them “the team of the ’90s.” Few disagreed.

But a guy named Michael Jordan had other plans, and the rest is history.

Daugherty joked in an article on ESPN’s “Water Cooler” website that his team would win by “20 or 30” – before admitting that it would be much closer than that. But he still claimed his group would win.

Key reasons:

1. While he admitted there’s no denying LeBron James’ greatness, he suggested that former Cavs Larry Nance and Hot Rod Williams could alter some of LeBron’s shots and thereby affect his game. (My take: Could be. But from what I’ve seen, you can alter one of LeBron’s shots one moment, then be watching as he dashes away from you on an unobstructed path to the basket for a monster dunk the next. In other words, the guy simply keeps coming at you until you break.)

2. Daugherty believes the pick-and-roll play he ran with point guard Mark Price would have given Zydrunas Ilgauskas fits. “If you don’t guard Mark coming off the screen, he shoots a 3-pointer instead of just pulling up and shooting a two or passing the basketball, so that would put a lot of pressure on them,” he said. (My take: Okay, but who would guard Ilgauskas at the other end? Let’s not overlook Z’s ability to step out and hit 15-to-20-footers with ease. I think Ilgauskas would give as good as he got.)

3. Ron Harper. “Ron was a very, very difficult opponent for anyone,” he said. “You can ask Michael Jordan. When we traded Ron, Michael said that’s the best thing we could have ever done for the Bulls. Ron was very good at moving and defending the basketball, he was a good rebounder, and he could score at different angles, outside or inside.” (My take: He’s right about this. I was always a Harper fan, and think things would have been different had he stayed with the team.)

To be fair, Daugherty acknowledged that it’s easy to sit where he does now and claim his team would win. He’s obviously having fun with it. And you can’t blame him for taking pride in that team and believing they could win.

Had Jordan not hit “The Shot,” there’s no telling how history might have treated that Cavaliers team.

But he DID hit the shot, and that’s an important part of this debate. Sometimes, one player makes a difference.

I wrote last time about why LeBron James matters. It’s because he’s a bonafide superstar. He has the same larger-than-life persona that Jordan did.

And that’s what would make the difference if the current Cavs played the team of Daugherty’s era.

I have to admit, I wonder to this day what might have been had Wayne Embry not traded Harper away in 1990. Harper made the All-Rookie team in 1987 and was a 20-points-per-game scorer. Some even called him “Baby Jordan,” because his game so resembled MJ’s.

But he wasn’t LeBron. Nobody on that team was.

LeBron James would give those guys fits the same way he does every team today. His breathtaking combination of speed, strength and court vision more than makes up for any deficiencies in his game. Yes, he has off nights. But he imposes his will on each and every game in which he plays.

And to suggest the overall cast in the ’90s was better, as Daugherty and ESPN’s Mark Jackson and Jeff Van Gundy recently did, is to overlook the quality of the current Cavs team.

Think about it. Daugherty’s Cavs were outplayed in the 1990s by Bulls teams that sported Bill Cartwright and Luc Longley at center. I used to scratch my head over that one. How could the Bulls win championship after championship with guys like that in the post?

Michael Jordan, that’s how.

Likewise, the current Cavs have LeBron James. And that’s why they would beat the Cavs of old.