The Stuff of Legend -- Maybe

It was an amazing shot.

It literally saved the Cavs' season.

It added to the Legend that is LeBron James. Perhaps.

Look, I was as stunned as anyone when LBJ lifted Cavs fans from their funk, and his team from the brink of what would have been a long summer, by nailing a mind-bending, desperation, fadeaway three-pointer as the buzzer sounded, winning Game Two of the NBA Eastern Conference Finals.

It was one of those legend-defining moments, forever etched in the annals of league history. It will be shown on replays over and over and over again.

If the Cavs go on to win the series, it will erase Cavs' fans memories of The Shot, plain and simple.

But that's the catch. Michael Jordan's shot in 1989 won a series. LeBron's simply saved this one.

So there is much more to do before this shot ranks as high.

Yes, it was just as dramatic, just as sensational, and even more improbable than Michael's. But again, Jordan's buzzer-beater drove the final nail into the coffin of Cleveland's Cinderella season.

So here's hoping the Cavaliers can ride the crest of this wave and get at least one win in Orlando, then close things out and advance to the NBA Finals.

Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see how this affects the Magic. There's no question they pose serious matchup problems for the Cavs' defense. Wednesday night, Cleveland led by 17 and lost. In Game Two, they led by 23, and almost lost. That's not good. It's clear that this is a series Orlando can win.

But will the dagger of LeBron's miraculous shot drain the life out of them? If so, that one play may well be remembered as the moment of LeBron's career, the moment that propelled his team to the next level, and his status to one of truly legendary proportions.

Nothing he does surprises anyone anymore. It will be fun to watch the drama of this series, and this wonder child's career, continue to unfold.

But, for one moment: Wow.

(The photos are Getty Images.)

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.

Why LeBron Matters

With today’s announcement that LeBron James finally won the NBA’s Most Valuable Player award, it’s worth reflecting on why he is such an important figure, particularly on the Cleveland sports scene.

I remember back in the late ‘90s, when my friend Bob Dezso was a volunteer assistant on Keith Dambrot’s coaching staff at Akron St. Vincent-St. Mary High School. Bob coached the JV team in addition to assisting with the varsity, and he told me about a freshman playing for the Irish who had catapulted past everyone to become the standout player at the school. “His name is LeBron James,” Bob told me. “Remember it, because he’s the real deal. Best I’ve ever seen.”

Within two years, James was on the cover of Sports Illustrated. Within two more, he was the number one pick in the NBA draft, the much-anticipated savior of the woeful Cleveland Cavaliers.

In his first game as a pro, LeBron exceeded expectations. Nervous? Forget about it. Intimidated? Hardly. And, for six consecutive seasons since then, he’s continued to silence the naysayers and redefine excellence on the basketball court. In so doing he has single-handedly made the Cavaliers relevant in Cleveland, no small task in a town so devoted -- for so many generations -- to the Browns and Indians.

That devotion is understandable, given the fact that in the 1940s and 1950s, both teams were perennial championship contenders. But Cleveland and Northeast Ohio have never had an athlete to match LeBron’s stature.

Mind you, Jim Brown was as good as it gets as a fullback for the Browns in the ’50s and ‘60s, and is still widely regarded as the best running back in the history of the sport. Before him there was Otto Graham, who deserves a mention of his own in the “best-ever” arguments at quarterback.

But theirs was a different era, a simpler, more romantic time in our nation’s history. And neither Brown nor Graham was called upon to do what LeBron has been asked, even expected, to do: Lift a franchise and, for that matter, an entire city, on his shoulders, and take them to the promised land.

It’s a role he has embraced. Lead the team? Check. Strive to be the best in the game? Check. Accept the challenge of becoming the best ever? Why not -- check. Whether he earns that status or not isn’t the issue. The fact that he’s willing to go for it fascinates us. And the fact that he rarely disappoints amazes us.

A few weeks ago, on an NBA telecast, ABC’s Mark Jackson said that the Cavs teams of Mark Price, Brad Daugherty and company -- the teams of the late 1980s and early 1990s -- were better overall than this year’s model. Boothmate Jeff Van Gundy agreed. As I heard that, I thought, “Wha-a-a-a-a-t?”

Jackson argued that the Price-led Cavs were deeper, and better at every position -- except LeBron’s, of course. But that’s precisely the point. They didn’t have anyone close to him in ability. Nobody does. And that ability alone tips the scales in the current team's favor.

He still has holes in his game, but they are becoming increasingly few. James is like a runaway train, physically overpowering his opponents with strength and speed. He has the look of a man on a mission. His teammates are on board, and so are we.

Anything can happen on the way to the NBA Finals, and in sports, as Yogi Berra once famously intoned, “It ain’t over till it’s over.” The Cavs dare not look past the Atlanta Hawks -- their second round opponent -- or anyone else. But the stage is set for something dramatic to happen this year, and smart money is on LeBron James making it so.

There’s simply never been anyone like him on the Cleveland sports scene, and there may never be anyone like him again. We should enjoy it while we can, and expect the best. Because you just get the feeling that, of all the great ones, The Chosen One will finally be the one to deliver.

Rondo May Not Be Dirty, But His Play Was

Look, I played basketball, OK?

I don't care if it's school ball, travel ball, YMCA ball, playground ball, college ball or pro ball. When you've played, you know the difference.

In Tuesday night's NBA playoff game between Boston and Chicago, Rajon Rondo got away with a mugging. Big-time. And it changed the game, and, perhaps, the series, in Boston's favor.

With Boston leading by two, Chicago's Brad Miller took an in-bounds pass near the end of overtime and drove down a ridiculously wide-open lane toward the basket. As he rose to take the shot, Rondo swept his hand across Miller's face, altering the momentum of the 290-pounder and sending him crumbling to the floor, his shot suddenly an afterthought as it fell harmlessly to the floor.

Miller's upper lip swelled to the size of Angelina Jolie's, and he appeared dazed and in pain as he stepped to the free throw line and proceeded to miss the all-important first shot.


As the Boston faithful cheered and jeered wildly, Miller (shown at left in an AP photo, trying to stop the bleeding after Rondo's right cross) tried to miss the second shot intentionally, with the hope of Chicago grabbing the rebound and putting in the tying shot. But he missed the rim completely, resulting in a turnover, which all but sealed the win for the Celtics.

"I'm a little guy, so I had to go for the foul hard," said Rondo after the game. "I wasn't trying to go for his head, but I think he went up with his right hand and I tried to make sure he couldn't finish or get an and-one. It's as simple as that. I think I hit him in the head or something, but I went through his arm first, trying to get to the ball."

"I think I hit him in the head or something." OK, whatever. Except there was no chance for Rondo to get the ball. None. It was obvious when the foul occurred in real time, and far more evident once the replays were shown.

What the referees working the game saw from those replays, logical people will never know. Bulls coach Vinny Del Negro protested that Rondo's foul was flagrant -- which it was -- which would have given the Bulls the foul shots plus the ball. Replay after replay confirmed that Rondo whacked Miller across the face in a last-ditch, desperate attempt to prevent the easy shot.

But there's no way he went for the ball. Like I said, anybody who has ever played the game knows the difference. Doesn't take a genius.

It was the second time at that Rondo got away with robbery at a crucial point down the stretch.

At the end of regulation, as Chicago's Derrick Rose blew past him down the left side of the lane in an attempt to convert what might have been a game-winning shot, Rondo stuck his knee, ever so subtly, into Rose's thigh, sending Rose sprawling toward the end line. The ball rolled out of bounds, and the intermittently blind NBA refs ("Wait, who's the home team?") rewarded it to the Celts.

OK, that was a small thing, and Rondo pulled it off. But the clobbering that he got away with at the end of overtime never should have been allowed. His team is now up, three games to two, in this hard-fought series.

Playground players know what happened. The NBA needs officials who know it, too.

Ohio State's Sustained Excellence is Underappreciated

An article in today’s Cleveland Plain Dealer pointed out the apparent ongoing resentment directed at the Ohio State Buckeyes football team, mostly by the media, but also by college football fans around the country.

I don’t get that.

The rationale is that the Buckeyes are typically overrated. They beat fair to average teams. They lose to top-tier teams. And so on, and so forth, blah, blah, blah.

Except, dear critics, answer me this: Other than USC, which has far outpaced any college program for the last decade, name me a school that has consistently outperformed Ohio State in recent years.

You can’t, because there isn’t one.

Remember when all this overrated talk started, back when, somehow, the Buckeyes topped the darling Miami Hurricanes to win the national championship? That was at the 2002 Fiesta Bowl, and I guess the nerve of Ohio State to actually topple “The U” was more than the whiners could take. Since then the Buckeyes have been the target of the college football world’s wrath.

OK, let’s look at where things stand.

Here are Ohio State’s final BCS rankings for the last seven years, beginning with 2001, the year they went on to win the national title: 2 – 5 – 25 – 4 – 1 – 1 – 10. Six out of those seven years, they were ranked in the top ten, and their only slip was the 25th place ranking in 2004.

Skipping over USC for the moment, the only other team who can boast similar numbers for the past seven years is Oklahoma: 7 – 1 – 2 – 23 – 10 – 4 – 1. The Sooners, like the Buckeyes, slipped to 23 one year, but have remained in the top ten otherwise, including two #1 rankings – just like Ohio State.

And that’s it. For the past seven years, USC, Ohio State and Oklahoma have been the most consistently high-performing teams in the nation.

Florida won a title two years ago, and is back in the championship game this season. But the Gators finished out of the top ten five of the past seven years. LSU, mighty winners a year ago, didn’t even make the top 25 this year, and was nowhere to be found in the top ten four of the last seven seasons.

Miami, Michigan and Notre Dame? O, how the mighty have fallen. Georgia? Not bad, but their best finish – third – came seven years ago. Texas was strong this year, and won the championship three years ago with Vince Young, but followed that up with two 19th place finishes in a row. They’re similar to Georgia – strong, but not consistently elite.

Oregon? Oregon State? Auburn? Tennessee? Please.

Which brings us back to our point. Yes, the Buckeyes were a disappointment in two consecutive national championship games. You can’t change that. The games were embarrassing. But they didn’t negate the fact that Ohio State was there, and has been at or near the top for this entire decade.

The fact is, Jim Tressel has run a superb program during his eight years at the helm, and is one of the top college coaches in the land. His game plans against Florida and LSU in the last two national championship games left much to be desired, but his overall record of 83-18 at Ohio State speaks for itself – including four Big Ten championships and a 7-1 record against archrival Michigan, which elevates him to near god-like status among the Buckeye faithful.

Everyone’s entitled to his or her opinion, but the notion that the Ohio State Buckeyes are consistently overrated is ignorant of the facts, plain and simple.

Random Thoughts as December Dawns

Limping to the Finish

The Browns have shot this season all to you-know-where. No news there. It was sad to see Brady Quinn sidelined for the year with a broken finger, just when he was getting the chance to play. It was just as sad to see Derek Anderson go down with a season-ending knee injury in Sunday’s loss to Indianapolis. That some fans jeered as he was helped off the field is distasteful, but then, Browns fans are so frustrated and fed up after 10 years of mostly blatant ineptitude that some of their wrath is bound to be misdirected. It was reminiscent of several years ago when Tim Couch left a game to similar derision, a scenario that was the beginning of the end of Couch’s run in Cleveland.

That said, I was struck by something Anderson said after the game. When asked if we might see Josh Cribbs at quarterback, Anderson responded with a jeer of his own and said anybody who thinks that would have to be “on crack.” You don’t put a receiver at quarterback, he said tersely.

And I thought, why not? First of all, he was a quarterback all the way through his playing days at Kent State. Furthermore, we’re talking about the one guy on the entire roster who consistently, week in and week out, makes plays. Every kickoff or punt return is cause for excitement when the ball is in Cribbs’ hands. Every opposing kickoff or punt return is cause for excitement when Cribbs has a shot at making the tackle -- which, more often than not, he does.

When the Browns started this long downward spiral, Cribbs was one of two players (Jamal Lewis being the other) who dared to say what others only thought: That perhaps some players were guilty of quitting. He later apologized, sort of, because it was the politically correct thing to do, but his words carried weight because, well, he never quits. This on a roster with too many people who seemed to be going through the motions.

This week Cribbs was quoted as saying yes, he could play quarterback, because he did it all his life before the NFL. He admitted it probably wouldn’t happen, but the point was made. “I want the ball in my hands,” he said.

So do the rest of us. I understand turning to Ken Dorsey to steer the sinking ship and I wish him well, but I couldn’t disagree with Anderson more when it comes to Cribbs. If you ask me, if there were 22 guys with number 16 on their jerseys, or at least number 16’s heart in their bodies, this franchise would be a lot better off.


On the Cavaliers…

Earlier this year I bemoaned the presence of Ben Wallace in the Cavs’ starting lineup, because of his age and his offensive shortcomings. It’s early, and the long season could yet take its toll, but I’m happy to admit that, thus far, Big Ben has made me eat those words.

The Cavs are playing championship caliber basketball, and Wallace is a big part of their success. His defensive intensity and rebounding prowess have helped fuel their recent run. I was concerned that perhaps he’d lost the one aspect of his game that had made him so formidable -- that being his intensity. My concern was misplaced. He’s been a one-man wrecking crew at times, and his teammates have picked up on it. That’s leadership, and I tip my cap to him.

Momentum is a funny thing in sports. As miserable as the Browns’ performances have been -- and as much as one lousy game fuels another -- the Cavs’ performances have been dominant. Players are feeding off of one another, and Mike Brown is doing a remarkable job of getting people their minutes.

Give credit to LeBron James on that count. His minutes per game are finally down to a reasonable level, and he’s not complaining at all. He’s getting much-needed rest because the Cavaliers are simply overpowering most of their opponents, and he’s not needed in the fourth quarter of many of those games. As his minutes decline, Brown can spread them among the Cavs’ bench players, and everybody’s happy. You get the sense that LeBron is less interested in accumulating personal stats than he is in getting the ring, and when your leader exhibits that approach, the rest of the team will follow.

Mo Williams and Delonte West are quickly becoming one of the best guard tandems in the league. And Zydrunas Ilgauskas just keeps rolling along, giving other teams fits with his offensive rebounding and outside shooting. Meanwhile, the bench is the deepest it’s been in years -- maybe ever -- and continues to make meaningful contributions night in and night out.

This team is good. Very, very good. I’m already looking forward to May and June.


High school football

I was treated, along with the rest of our town in North Canton, Ohio, to a remarkable season by the Hoover High School football team. The Vikings defied most preseason forecasts by losing just one game in the regular season, winning the Federal League title with a perfect 7-0 league mark, and going on to three straight playoff wins and a regional title.

That’s where it ended, of course, as the Vikings ran into the buzz saw that was Cleveland St. Ignatius in the state semifinals. The Wildcats went on to win the state championship in Division I, but Hoover’s overachieving roster will go down as one of the best teams in school history.

St. Ignatius is to be applauded, but I was struck during the postseason by all the talk of their 10 state championships in the last 20 years. I was reminded of a column last May by Bob Dyer of the Akron Beacon Journal, in which he wrote of the disproportionate advantage that parochial and private schools have over public schools in athletic competition. The stats that he cited were undeniable.

The playing field isn’t level by any means when it comes to private and public schools in Ohio. It’s not the private schools’ fault, of course. But, on the whole, it’s tough for public schools to reach the highest rung on the ladder on a consistent basis. A look at St. Ignatius’ web site reveals that it’s run more like a college than a high school, complete with a sophisticated advancement office that is only too happy to share information about annual gifts, capital gifts, and planned giving. Families pay tuition for their children to attend there. Even the web site suffix, “.edu,” is the one typically used by colleges and universities.

The two schools featured in the Ohio Division I championship game -- Cincinnati Elder being the other -- are both private, all-boys schools. And, unfettered as they are by geographic restraints, they welcome any student who can make the daily drive to their often glittering campuses -- and who can afford their rather hefty tuition fees.

Before Hoover’s game with St. Ignatius, Viking coach Don Hertler put it as politely, and plainly, as it can be put: “They’ve got kids probably from five counties, and we’ve got them probably from five neighborhoods.”

Officials from the Ohio High School Athletic Association acknowledge the disparity, but also lament the complexities involved in operating separate tournaments for public and private schools. I can understand their dilemma, but anyone who saw the St. Ignatius-Hoover semifinal and didn’t come away scratching their head over the issue just wasn’t paying attention.

Again, it’s not St. Ignatius’s fault. The system is what it is. But schools like Hoover only get so far every so often. Perhaps they can find some consolation in the fact that, among public schools in Ohio, they were one of the top two -- the other being the Pickerington Central Tigers, who were a perfect 13-0 before losing to Cincinnati Elder in the other state semifinal game.

Hoover’s football team wasn’t the only one of the school’s squads to make it so far this fall. The girls cross country team, a remarkable collection of talented runners from a small town of 15,000 people, was edged out at the state meet by the perennial powerhouse team from Magnificat High School in Rocky River, a suburb of Cleveland.

Magnificat was nowhere to be found in the boys’ race. That’s because it’s a private, all-girls school.

I checked their web site, too. They have five people in their advancement office.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

And so it goes.