The 5 Most Polarizing Athletes of this Era

Polarize (v) - "To cause to concentrate about two conflicting or contrasting positions."

In my previous post about Kobe Bryant, I called him the most polarizing figure in sports. With some inspiration from Knee Jerk, I put a little more thought into this claim, identifying the professional athletes who have elicited the most bipartisan reactions from fans in recent years. I started by brainstorming the historical players who met this criteria, but quickly learned that that was far too difficult an exercise. There is no way I could create a responsible list of the all-time most polarizing/controversial players when I either: a) wasn't alive or b) wasn't coherent enough to really get a feel for the reactions they brought forth in fans and the media. Consequently, I've narrowed this list to the 5 most polarizing athletes of the past twenty years.

Honorable Mention: Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling, Ron Artest, Dennis Rodman, Allen Iverson, Charles Barkley (retired), Randy Moss, Chad Johnson, The Manning Brothers, Pete Rose (retired), Mike Tyson, Jose Canseco (retired).

5. Shaquille O'Neal
The Diesel didn't make this list because he is the center of controversy (like Roger Clemens or Ron Artest). He made this list because ever since he has entered the league there have been two camps: one camp calls O'Neal the best center and most dominating force of his generation (or even all-time), the other says he was simply bigger than anyone else and did not dedicate himself to the game (pointing to his free throw percentage and lack of conditioning). Perhaps the biggest factor in including O'Neal on this list is his media-fueled feud with Kobe Bryant. Since Kobe is the most polarizing athlete in the game, anything Kobe creates a rift amongst fans. Stemming from the Kobe-Shaq feud, Kobe's supporters generally dislike (or even hate) O'Neal and Kobe's naysayers generally praise O'Neal and his accomplishments.

4. Terrell Owens
T.O. stirs up self-inflicted controversy every year. From calling out every quarterback he has ever played with, to crying after a playoff loss, to overdosing on pills, to contract disputes, to self-proclaimed greatness, to crunches in his driveway on ESPN, to trend-setting touchdown celebrations, he is constantly the center of attention. The only reason T.O. isn't higher on this list is that there is a sizeable disparity between the amount of fans who love him and the amount of fans who hate him. Every sports fan with a pulse in San Francisco, Dallas, or Philadelphia dislikes him. Older generation fans generally dislike him, and younger generation fans are split. At one time or another, most fans have at least admired his on-field accomplishments or physical attributes, even if they later made the switch and became T.O.-haters.

3. Alex Rodriguez
Any time a player is dubbed the next big thing, there is bound to be a mixed reaction. That's exactly what happened when Rodriguez came into the league as a protypical young talent. Any time a player gets those types of accolades and clearly believes them to be 100% true, the eaction is even stronger amongst fans. When that player suits up for the most polarizing team in professional sports, these reactions are only further magnified. Rodriguez's record-breaking contract, postseason struggles, MVP trophies, relations with Madonna, and steroid admissions have all elicited mixed reactions and been the focal point of the media. Just like the team he plays for, you must love him or hate him -- there is no middle ground.

2. Barry Bonds

Barry has never been a media darling, even while compiling some of the most prolific stats in his sport's history. There isn't much debate as to whether Bonds is a "likeable" public figure -- he is standoffish, arrogant, and unapproachable by fans. The debate, and the cause of the mixed reactions to Barry, are his statistics. The general assumption is that Barry took steroids for at least a portion of his career. In the process, he broke baseball's most hallowed record and took it from a former player who was endeared by the fans and was still around to witness the feat. Many fans have embraced Barry despite the controversy and have recognized him as a top-5 player of all-time, many others have chastised him and called his statistical contributions fraudulent. In a way, Barry personifies the greater steroid issue that has plagued baseball over the past decade. The rampant use of steroids has created a divide between baseball fans of old and new, where records and history play a bigger role than any other sport. For these reasons, Barry Bonds is the second-most polarizing figure in sports.

1. Kobe Bryant
Kobe wins the top spot on the list by a wide margin, in my opinion. Shaq receives more love than hate, and the other three athletes on the list receive more hate than love. What makes Kobe the most polarizing figure, in the true sense of the word, is that he receives equal parts love and equal parts disdain. For every attribute praised by a Kobe-lover, there is a rebuttal for a Kobe-hater. For every accomplishment, a caveat. Kobe ran Shaq out of L.A. /Shaq couldn't handle sharing the spotlight. Kobe is a "ballhog" / Kobe is the best scorer in the game. Kobe can't win without Shaq / Kobe hasn't had the supporting cast to win without Shaq. The list goes on... and on... and on. The love/hate divide began when Kobe came into the league and grew when he was compared to the most sacred name in hoop history: Michael Jordan. Like A-Rod, Kobe plays for the most polarizing team in his sport, which only intensifies opinions about him. No matter how you slice it, Kobe is the most loved, and hated, player in the NBA. Winning both of these imaginary awards simultaneously makes Kobe Bryant the most polarizing athlete of this era.

Kobe Bryant and His Coat of Many Colors

As Kobe hones in on title #4, his supporters are applying the tanning oil in preparation of basking in his glory. It has been seven long years since title #3, and the non-stop chatter about his failure to win a championship without big brother can finally come to an end. To rest can go the argument that his supposed me-first attitude would preclude his teams from winning the ultimate prize. To them (or us, depending on how you see it), Kobe's greatness will finally be undeniable even to the harshest of critics.

Kobe's naysayers, meanwhile, are plotting their angle of attack, brainstorming the ways to undermine his accomplishments and deny his greatness. In actuality, denying his greatness has never been an approach of the naysayers. The chosen approach has generally been to attack Kobe by claiming others are, or were, greater. Even as an outspoken pro-Kobeist, I have never been bothered by this form of "criticism." To me, attacking a player because he falls just short of the greatest ever (M.J.) or the to-be greatest ever (Lebron) isn't criticism at all. It is actually cleverly-disguised praise. To even include Kobe in that conversation with the Jordans, the Magics, the Lebrons, is to concede that he is one of the greatest players to ever play this game.

To reuse the most overused descriptor of Kobe's blossoming legacy, Kobe is downright polarizing. The most polarizing player in all of professional sports, in fact. Ever. In my tenure as a fan, which has included tedious study of the game's forefathers, I have never witnessed or heard of a player who elicited such extreme reactions from fans, who commanded such love & respect while also giving rise to such ill will and hate. He is the individualized New York Yankees.

Since the day Jerry West took that prophetic leap of faith in bringing the young Kobe Bryant to L.A., I have watched closely. As I have studied Kobe Bryant the man, Kobe Bryant the player, Kobe Bryant the public figure, I have witnessed the most primitive yet remarkable transformations. His career thus far can be broken down into four chapters, each of which I feel compelled to expand upon below.

Growing Pains (1996-1999)

When Kobe entered the league as a confused, young kid with a crater-sized chip on his shoulder, I found him to be immature (even for his age). He was at one moment an innocent prototype and the next a conceded egoist. Young Kobe fumbled over words in interviews but had the confidence to seize the moment before his game was polished enough to do so. The commingling of his confidence and his insecurity was perhaps summarized best by his three airball performance in the waning moments against Utah in the 1997 playoffs. A bench player at the time, Kobe stepped into these shots like he was a go-to-guy and singlehandedly wrecked the Lakers' season.

In the early years, Kobe's childlike charm was often overshadowed by an unwarranted arrogance. This was the formula for his polarizing effect on fans. This set the stage for the two camps we are familiar with today: the Kobe-lovers and the Kobe-haters. What made him endearing to many made him despicable to many more. The lovers voted him in as an all-star starter when he was the sixth man for his own team. The haters provided boos and mockery at each opposing arena he set foot in. Nearly thirteen years later, most people haven't wavered from their initial loyalties to these camps.

As Bryant's game developed in seasons two and three, we were exposed to the monster that lived within him. His unquenchable thirst for perfection and unhealthy need for acceptance isolated him from teammates and fan base. Kobe was not misunderstood by the fans so much as he was misunderstood by himself. He tried so desperately to win the favor and respect of the basketball world that he failed to understand what it would take to be embraced. The failure to make ends with humanity meet did not come without effort. Kobe was beyond impressionable, to the point that he released a rap song when he heard he had no street cred, praised M.J. when he heard he was a two-three imposter, and fed Shaq when he heard he was a ballhog. Sometimes too much is not enough -- Kobe dug his own public relations grave through these futile attempts.

Blemished Supremacy (1999-2003)

By the time the 1999-2000 season rolled around, Kobe had exhausted all efforts to be the NBA's poster boy. Kobe turned his cheek to the criticism, embarking on a journey to prove all naysayers wrong. In the process, he had built a mini-dynasty on the cape of a in-his-prime Shaquille O'Neal.

Bryant must have thought that winning would bridge the gap between unimpressed fan and devoid Kobe. Kobe the competitor was birthed out of his undisguised worship of Michael Jordan (trust me, Kobe's mannerisms and career track offer undeniable proof that his steps were paved by the observance of His Airness), and he saw the fan-filled fruit that was cultivated by Jordan's championships. I can't say I blame him.

Three championships later, Kobe's public persona had only experienced subtle changes. The three-peat stimulated talk of basketball immortality, but his character flaws and the looming shadow of Shaq dwarfed the level of respect that he should have received. Winning soon became habit more than fulfilling, and a rift between the two stars left most on the lovable giant's side. This was the beginning of the end for the Shaq-Kobe duo and the Lakers' spot at the top of the hill.

Failure (2003-2007)

After the threepeat, winning was not enough for Kobe. He had to be revered as the best player in the league, but first he had to be revered as the best player on his team. For the first time since pre-2000 Kobe, we saw his stubborn side again. Consequently, Kobe's Lakers were upended in the NBA Finals by a far less talented Detroit squad. Team's triumph over individual led many to believe that Kobe was a cancerous presence for the purple & gold. Upon Shaq's departure and subsequent success in Miami, these beliefs were strengthened and perpetuated by the media. By this time, he held the undisputed title of best two guard in basketball, but was excommunicated after legal troubles and a lack of winning without the Diesel.

Despite all of his individual accomplishments, Kobe was also without the ultimate individual accolade: an MVP trophy. It is hard to say whether he was more bothered by the losing or by watching Steve Nash hoist back-to-back MVP trophies. His "look-at-me-now" performances over this period suggest the latter was equally important as the former. Kobe put up an astounding 35.4 ppg in the 2005-06 season despite his team's meager 8th place finish. Along the way, he scored over 60 points twice, including the absurd 81-point outing. Inexplicably, Bryant decided to refuse shots in game seven against Phoenix in the same season, proving a point at the expense of his team.

During this middling period between championships, Bryant took on a me-against-the-world attitude. It was a strange phenomenon where Kobe was so much better than anyone else that he actually controlled his own statistical output. He was anything but reactive to the defense, opting instead to oscillate between deadeye scorer and facilitator. This was done partially as an experiment, to determine the best formula for winning while playing on team with many imperfections. But more than anything else, it was done to prove that he was just that good. Rather than channeling his superiority in a fashion that would better the play of his team, Kobe channeled his superiority to engage in Kobe vs. Media, Kobe vs. Fan, Kobe vs. Lakers, and Kobe vs. Kobe battles. In the process, Kobe blasted his teammates when they failed and was jealous when they succeeded.

By the summer of 2007, Kobe appeared half-ready to give up. He had failed to win a championship without Shaq, had failed to win an MVP by his own devices, and had failed to win the affection of the basketball world by being jagged. His trade demands and public criticism of Andrew Bynum were an ugly display of his selfishness and frustration, and I thought he was destined for a general admission ticket to the hall of fame when he could have sat courtside.

Redemption (2008-Present)

After the near-implosion of the Lakers in the summer of 2007, Jerry Buss delivered in a big way by stealing Pau Gasol. By doing so, Buss showed Kobe that he was still more concerned with building a present-day winner than developing young talent for the future. This transaction in and of itself breathed new life into Kobe, and for the first time since Shaq's departure he was confident in the team's direction.

With this new confidence, Kobe matured overnight as a player. Until then, all of Kobe's efforts to put the team ahead of himself were visibly fabricated, unauthentic. In early 2008, Kobe passed because teammates were open and shot because he was open. His predetermined game approaches were no longer, and this translated to more wins than losses. Adding a player of Gasol's caliber surely didn't hurt the Lakers' on-court performance, but Kobe's transformation was the most important factor in the equation.

Although his statistics in 2007-08 were similar to the numbers he posted in the previous two seasons (maybe even worse), Kobe's transformation into an authentic leader did not go unnoticed. Kobe received his first NBA MVP award at the conclusion of the regular season, and was showered with praise until the Lakers' six-game failure to the Celtics in the NBA Finals. Even in ultimate defeat, the majority of the external blame was placed on the Lakers' lack of toughness inside rather than Kobe's inability to win the big one.

While Kobe's athleticism has slightly deteriorated over the past several months and Lebron has been ushered in as the newly crowned king of the league, we have witnessed the most effective basketball of Kobe's career during this year's playoffs. He has taken over in stretches and looked mortal in others, but for the first time in his career he appears to be playing reactive basketball without reacting to his critics' faulty logic. His focus has been nothing short of mesmerizing, and his movements calculated but improvizational.

In 2009, it has all clicked for the Mamba -- just in time to put a cap on his legacy with his fourth championship as a player and his first as a true leader. When he hoists that trophy as an NBA champion later this week, his lovers will still love and his haters will still hate. That's just the way it's always going to be. I just wish that in love or in hate, we would look at him for what he's become and not what he hasn't.

Game One is Here!

Game one has finally arrived, and I couldn't be more excited. Even though the Magic wrapped up their series with the Cavs just 5 short days ago, it feels like it's been months since the last NBA telecast. So long, in fact, that I felt compelled to pick up the pencils and create some artwork of the Finals' two best players (see above).

For game one, I'll keep the predictions short and sweet. The first half will be a "feeling out" period for both of the teams, and Finals jitters will show through uncharacteristic turnovers and overall sloppy play. By the second half, the teams will have locked in and good basketball will be played. I'm predicting unexpected contributions from Sasha Vujacic (9 points, all from the three-point line) and Courtney Lee (15 points). I'm predicting a down game from Rashard Lewis, who will finish with 12 points and shoot below 40%. The Staples Center crowd will prove to be too much for Orlando in a seesaw battle. Lakers by 8.

2009 NBA Finals Preview

I am about to step into the realm of NBA blogger redundancy. Over the next few days, every armchair expert in the blogosphere will be detailing his/her failproof assessment of how the Finals will be won and lost. Nevertheless, I'll add to the e-pile of meaningless analyses by giving my own two cents. Here goes, position by position (Note: with the way the NBA is played today in terms of zone defenses & double-teams, position-by-position analysis is kind of silly but it still provides the best basis for player comparisons)...

Point Guard: Rafer Alston/Anthony Johnson vs. Derek Fisher/Shannon Brown/Jordan Farmar

Neither group is among the NBA elite, which begs the question: does a team really need an upper-echelon point guard to win a championship? I did some research, and the answer is often times "no." In fact, the league's three best true point guards haven't won a title yet (CP3, Nash, & Deron Williams). What a championship team does need is a serviceable point guard who knows his role and doesn't make dumb mistakes (see all Bulls point guards of the 90's and Laker point guards earlier this decade).

The Lakers and Magic both have role players for point guards, but Alston is the only one in this group who has proven that he can score 20+ any given game in these playoffs. The Lakers' most visible weakness during these playoffs has been their defense at the point of attack and have been burned perpetually by quick (or savvy in the case of Billups) point guards. Sure, Derek Fisher has the experience and will knock down a couple of momentum-changing shots and should have an easier time chasing around Rafer Alston (or, rather, monitoring him on the three point line) than he did Williams, Brooks, or Billups. However, the Magic have a decisive advantage at the point guard spot in my opinion.

Advantage: Magic by a decent margin.

Shooting Guard: Courtney Lee/Mikael Pietrus vs. Kobe Bryant/Sasha Vujacic

Lee has to be the best player in the NBA with a girl's first name. I love the way he plays and has been the x-factor in a few games during these playoffs. Pietrus did a terrific job of holding Lebron James to 38.5 ppg in the Eastern Conference Finals (sorry, I had to throw that in after the TNT crew consistently pointed out how tough he was making things on King James). In all seriousness, both of these players bring athleticism, three-point shooting, and defensive toughness to the Magic's backcourt. They are perfect role players for a championship-caliber team.

I'll limit the superlatives in describing Bryant and take a plain vanilla, fact-based approach. Kobe is the best shooting guard in the world. He has already played in four NBA Finals and won three championships. He is the most competitive man playing this sport, and the most feared late-game shooter on the planet. Vujacic and his other backups are terrible, but that doesn't matter since Kobe will be playing 40+ minutes per game this series.

Somewhere, Dahntay Jones is smiling

Advantage: Lakers in a landslide.

Small Forward: Hedo Turkoglu/Mikael Pietrus vs. Trevor Ariza/Luke Walton/Lamar Odom
Turkoglu has been nails in the fourth quarter during the regular season and in the playoffs. In late-game situations, he seems to always come up with a big bucket or assist. In fact, he averaged more assists/game than Alston against Cleveland in the playoffs as a whole. Turkoglu created mismatches against Cleveland when Lebron wasn't guarding him, using his rare combination of size (6'10), outside shooting (1.5 threes/game), and vision (6.7 apg) to score or set up teammates. Pietrus was mentioned earlier in the shooting guard analysis, but with the Magic's lack of depth (8-man rotation), he gets many minutes at the three. He's Orlando's best spark off the bench and a versatile defender. I'm expecting big minutes out of him to match up with Kobe or Ariza.

Trevor Ariza has been a media darling this postseason. Adding a three-point shot to his already-imposing defensive presence and athleticism, he has been the perfect complement to Bryant (namely because Kobe doesn't have to expend as much energy on the defensive end as in years past). Odom is one of the biggest enigmas in the league, no-showing one night and looking like the most talented player on the court the next. His back problems have been well-chronicled, but a little cortizone should do the trick this series. After all, it is the NBA Finals. A lot will be discovered about Odom's heart and competitiveness in this series, and I see him doing a better job on Turkoglu/Lewis than Cleveland did. Luke Walton will get limited (but valuable) minutes in this series with his headiness coming at a premium in crucial junctures of the games.

Advantage: Toss-up. I like L.A.'s depth, but Turkoglu has been the most consistent player in this group.

The Pride of Turkey

Power Forward: Rashard Lewis vs. Pau Gasol

There is nothing "power"-ful about Rashard Lewis, but he could create some problems in this series. He has been lights-out in the clutch, upstaging Lebron with his late-game heroics in game 1 and game 4. The Lakers will be forced out of their traditional gameplan that includes heavy minutes with Bynum and Gasol on the court at the same time. Neither of these Laker bigs can stay with Lewis on the perimeter, and I'm guessing Jackson will have to adjust his strategy after Lewis drains a few uncontested threes. This should be the most intriguing chess match of the series, as Lewis also won't be able to match up with Gasol or Bynum down low.

Gasol is the league's most skilled 7-footer outside of Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitzki. He is adept around the basket with either hand, can put the ball on the floor, shoots the 15-footer efficiently, and is an excellent passer. For what he lacks in brawn, he makes up for in skill and finesse. If the Magic put Dwight Howard on him, Howard is sure to get in early foul trouble. If the Magic put Lewis on him, Gasol will score at ease in the post. If Gortat guards him, all of the above apply. The Lakers would be foolish if they avoid Gasol in the post like they did for much of the Denver series as the Magic clearly have nobody (outside of Howard, who the Magic will be protecting from foul trouble) that can even pretend to guard him. This is probably the biggest matchup nightmare for either team in the series.

Advantage: Lakers.

Center: Dwight Howard/Marcin Gortat vs. Andrew Bynum/DJ Mbenga/Josh Powell

Howard is an absolute beast. He drove, elbowed, and dunked his way to forty points in the series-clinching victory agains the Cavs. Illgauskas looked like Robert Swift trying to guard him. I listed three Laker centers, including two who rarely see the court, because Bynum will be in foul trouble early in the first quarter of every game. Phil will be forced to dig deep into his bench and play hack-a-Dwight during parts of this series. While the Lakers may be the best-equipped team (aside from Boston) to guard Howard, there is no stopping him. In fact, there probably isn't even slowing him down. The only hope the Lakers have here is that Van Gundy and his band of perimeter shooters will forget about their stud in the middle. That, or he'll be watching the game from the bench with foul trouble.

Andrew Bynum hasn't looked very good this postseason, on or off the court. He has showed little desire to block out or play sound defense, opting instead to wait in the paint for rebounds and chase blocked shots. He will look terrible in this series. If Bynum continues to watch rebounds instead of blocking out (which I think he will), Howard will eat him for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. If the Nuggets could dominate the offensive glass against L.A., what will Howard do? Scary thought for Laker fans. The Lakers can take some comfort in knowing that their bench is loaded with big bodies to foul Dwight. A foul-fest is exactly what I foresee in this series, and the Lakers should hope that it results in early foul trouble for Howard.

Advantage: Magic by a mile.

Keys to Winning -- Orlando:

The Magic's keys to winning are quite simple & obvious. For Orlando to win, it must keep Dwight Howard out of foul trouble. That means keeping him on Bynum and in position to challenge shots without fouling. The Magic's weakside help defenders (other than Howard) must do a better job than they did against Cleveland, because L.A. has more than one player that must be defended.

The Magic also have to knock down the three-point shot with regularity. They have lived & died by the three all season, and this series will be no different. If Orlando can hit three-point shots with consistency, the Lakers will be forced to play honest defense and leave Howard in one-on-one situations in the post. Nobody on the Lakers (or in the league for that matter) is strong enough to keep Howard out of the paint by himself. Howard needs to have a few 20-20 games for the Magic to win this series.

Keys to Winning -- Los Angeles:

The Lakers' keys to winning are also quite simple, and they revolve around Dwight Howard. L.A. must get Howard into early foul trouble. If they can do this, the Magic will become one-dimensional with the three-point shot as their only source of scoring. The Lakers have the quickness & depth to play the Magic on the three-point line if they aren't forced to double-team Howard.

The Lakers also must be disciplined on the defensive glass. Denver's offensive rebounding is what made the Western Conference Finals a series. Possession after possession, the Lakers' bigs turned their heads and watched the ball coming off the rim instead of blocking out. This same mistake cannot be made against Orlando, as Howard feasts on putback opportunities. If the Lakers are smart, they will put two guys on Howard's body on every shot attempt.

Lastly, the Lakers have to keep the tempo up. The Magic only play 8 guys, while the Lakers prefer a 10- or 11-man rotation. L.A. must push the ball at every opportunity and get easy fast break buckets. They should trap and apply full-court pressure for the entire game, as Alston is sometimes turnover-prone and Anthony Johnson doesn't have his wheels anymore. Six guys will be playing 30+ minutes for the Magic, and 7-8 (Johnson and Gortat) will be used sparingly. A fast-paced game will tire out the Magic and play into the Lakers' favor.

Additional Thoughts/Analysis:

This should be a very interesting series. One of these teams is going to have to change their strategy, as the Magic like to put Dwight down low and play four-wide and the Lakers prefer power-ball with two seven-footers on the court. If the Magic can make their threes, the Lakers will have to respond by subbing on of the seven-footers. If the Magic miss their threes, the Magic will have to insert size into their lineup, an area that is a glaring weakness outside of Howard.

Cleveland lost to Orlando because nobody outside of James (who was asked to do everything on both ends of the floor) could cover Turkoglu or Lewis. While Howard's box scores stood out, those two guys were the difference-makers in the series. L.A. is much better equipped to match up with Turkoglu & Lewis. Between Kobe, Ariza, Odom, and to a certain extent Walton & Vujacic, the Lakers have the range and athleticism to give Lewis & Turkoglu fits.

On the other side of the ball, the Magic have a trio of defenders that will be charged with covering Kobe. Pietrus, Lee, and Turkoglu all offer distinct defensive skillsets to slow Bryant down. Lee has more quickness than anyone who guarded Bryant against Denver. Pietrus is your classic athletic defender a la Trevor Ariza. Turkoglu is too slow to keep in front of Bryant, but can use his body and length to alter some shots. At the end of the day, Kobe will be Kobe and probably average close to thirty in the series. If he chooses to absorb double teams and be a passer as he did in games five & six versus Denver, the Lakers will benefit greatly. If he chooses to be the hero and forces difficult shots, it could be a long series for L.A.

Overall Prediction:

The Lakers have too much depth and versatility for the Magic to make this a seven-game series. I foresee Orlando winning two games: one by virtue of a dominant performance by Howard and one by virtue of a barrage of three-point shots by the Magic's perimeter players. As discussed above, the Lakers have a wide range of weapons that can be deployed and have peaked at the right time during these playoffs. Although L.A. has shown a tendency to become complacent, I think they'll come out with a fire as they try to avenge their 2008 Finals defeat. If by some miracle this series does go seven games, I like the Lakers' chances in Staples Center and with all their big-game experience. Lakers in six.

Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs! Playoffs?

This year's NBA playoffs have taught us a number of things:

1) This is NOT your father's NBA.

In fact, this ain't even your sister's WNBA.

It's a shame these refs weren't around for the early stages of Enron, because their whistle-blowing would have saved public investors millions. A tongue flap gets a T, a hip check gets a flagrant-1, and an "Artest" on the back of a jersey gets a flagrant-2. The extraneous whistles and penalties have been so rampant this postseason that even Rajon Rondo has been painted as a thug.

I have yet to watch a game without at least one technical foul and one flagrant foul. In fact, most games have had ejections and been surrounded by league investigations. In years past, playoff refereeing has been heavily scrutinized; but mainly by losing fans who are attempting to blame their teams' shortcomings on inconsistent whistles or home cooking. This type of bellyaching has taken a backseat in 2009 as inconsistency has not been the problem. 2009 playoff referees have been consistently temperamental and borderline paranoid. It's as if the hangover from "the brawl" in the Palace has hit stage 4. "Playoff fouls" are a distant memory, and uncontested layups are the new black. Kevin McHale just rolled over in his lottery grave.

2) Rajon Rondo is good.

Just 11 months ago, the Celtics were said to have won an NBA Championship in spite of Rondo. Fisher was a roaming double-team while Rondo was left free to operate. While he made the Lakers pay on occasion, Rajon mostly looked like a deer in the headlights, like a teenage boy afraid to swoop for the goodnight kiss with Dad in the window.

Now we've got this terror, this unbridled mess of chaos and beauty. His foot quickness is in an elite class with the Parkers & Harris', and his hand quickness is rivaled only by CP3. Only Ason Kidd is a better rebounder from the point guard spot. His athleticism is criminally underrated (see this), and he has to be the lankiest 6-footer to ever suit up in Celtics green. His decision-making is remarkable considering the speed with which he plays the game; his assist-to-turnover ratio is a filthy 4:1 in the playoffs.

To truly understand his coming-of-age, one need only look at his playoff averages thus far: 18 ppg, 10.5 apg, 9.5 rpg, and 2.5 spg. On a team with three future hall-of-famers (albeit only 2 are playing), Rondo has been the most valuable player. He has been the glue holding together this fragile team that is clawing and scratching to stay alive. Not bad for a 23-year-old.

3) Ron Artest is even crazier than we had imagined.

Any man willing to throw punches at tipsy fans (in the stands, nonetheless) probably has a chemical imbalance. Ron once flirted with premature retirement to pursue a rap career. He has faced charges of domestic abuse and his jekyll & hyde personality creates priceless soundbites with every interview. Before the 2009 playoffs, however, we haven't gotten this level of coverage, this level of observation.

Artest started off this playoffs manning budding star Brandon Roy and called him "the best player I've played against"... outside of some guy named "Mike" from Queensbridge that went to jail at the age of 15, naturally. When asked by Craig Sager, Artest didn't back down from his asessment when asked if Roy was better than Lebron or Kobe (and you wonder why Kobe has taken this series' battle so seriously?). Artest capped the interview by calling Charles Barkley "a bit overrated."

In the second round, Artest got thrown out of consecutive games (although the second toss-out was a complete joke). His interview after game two was another seesaw battle between sanity and insanity. Ron nonchalantly made the transition from his team's clean play to the kid who was stabbed to death by a leg of the scorers table. Just when you thought things couldn't get any more random...

In my opinion, Ron's lunacy is what makes him so lovable. With the micro-policing of playoff referees, he adds spice and keeps fans on the edge of their seats. I used to think he was a hard-nosed player with bull-like strength (years with the Bulls). Then I thought he was merely a harmless self-promoter who idolized Dennis Rodman (note his promotional shoe campaign in the '04 All-Star Game). Finally, I thought he was in the midst of an identity crisis (failed pursuit of a rap career). Now, I think he's a combination of all of the above. Above all, he's entertaining and gives his team a better chance to win.

4) The NBA, where repetitive ad campaigns happen.

I've always thought of the NBA as the most innovative & progressive league in professional sports. From international expansion, to the NBA Cares campaign, to the "Green" campaign, the NBA has been a step ahead of its counterparts with regards to pop culture and globalization. While that opinion hasn't changed, I've been turned off by the "Where Amazing Happens" campaign. Last year it was new and interesting; this year, it's exhaustive and annoying.

My wife makes nightly alternative plans to avoid sitting through NBA playoff games with me. She has been quite successful in her elusiveness, but failed to plan appropriately the other night. In the waning moments of Game 3 between the Mavs & Nuggets, I caught her humming along to the piano bit in a "Where Amazing Happens" commercial. If the NBA is trying to create brand recognition, I suppose it's working. "The NBA: Where Dried Up Advertising Budgets Happens." How amazing is a slow motion layup by Jason Kidd?

Profit-Sharing in the NBA?

In making my daily visit to FreeDarko, I came across this tasteful morsel (FreeDarko Post). The post in reference was aimed at analyzing Lebron's interest in playing overseas and the potential impact it could have on the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). It got me contemplating the NBA and its current compensation structure and how this structure could be revamped in the near future.

The fact NBA stars Lebron, Kobe, & DWade have shown interest (regardless of their sincerity) in playing overseas has to have NBA heads talking. In an era where "Show me the Money" is a prevaling theme and stars (e.g. Lebron) are as much aspiring businessmen as they are aspiring NBA legends, this talk should come as no surprise. Sure, the Olympics are here, making the obligatory "I'd play overseas" statement en vogue. I get that. But these stars aren't idiots, or they're at least getting advice from people who aren't idiots. There is a load of untapped money & fame overseas, and basketball is quickly gaining popularity in these markets.

The Motivations of Superstars have Changed over the Years

If Josh Childress can become "the highest-paid player in Euroleague history," making ~$7M/year, what kind of money would be thrown at Lebron or Kobe? Lebron half-jokingly threw out an asking price of $50M/yr, but is that number really as ridiculous as it sounds? I'm not so sure. I am sure that there are international teams that would be willing to outbid NBA franchises, with salary cap limitations in place and all. Who's to say Lebron the businessman wouldn't take an offer of, say, $40M plus some sort of ownership stakes to play in China? If not James, how about a Lamar Odom-type player? A player like Odom could never be the face of the NBA but he could be the face of Croatian basketball or its equivalent. If a Croatian team threw $15M, profit-sharing, and endless endorsement possibilities at Odom, would he take it? I don't know if Odom would, but I'm fairly certain some players would.

Is this where international basketball is headed? In recent years, the migration of international stars to the NBA has been the trend. As interest grows overseas, who's to say the trend won't be NBA stars migrating to international leagues? While the NBA still has the premier competition, competition is no longer the primary movitator for all professional athletes. I could particularly see veterans who had reached the pinnacle of NBA fame & fortune making the move overseas. It would only take the movement of a few players (e.g. Lebron and/or Kobe) for an exodus of sorts to gain momentum.

The Chinese Love Them Some Kobe

So, assuming more players follow Childress' lead and move overseas, how would the NBA respond? If it were only a few players and none were All-Star caliber talents, Stern probably wouldn't bat an eyelash. If it were a handful of players and one or more of those players were cogs in the NBA's marketing machine, Stern would be sweating bullets. As soon as Greece, Italy, China, and Germany start flashing the dough, Stern and his cronies will have to take a hard look at the NBA's current compensation structure. This will be an absolute must-do if the NBA wants to continue to monopolize the world's best basketball talent.

In observing the Stern regime, I'm fairly certain he won't stand pat if basketball's balance of power begins to shift away from the U.S. Stern, in spite of all of his annoying tendencies, is an innovator of sorts. To date, he has embraced the globalization movement wholeheartedly -- and while you could argue that MLB had an influx of foreign players long before the NBA did, basketball is now leaps and bounds ahead of its American sports counterparts in terms of international appeal growth rate. It should be noted, however, that this was a calculated embrace. The progressive approach Stern has taken with regards to globalization has been aimed at growing the NBA's appeal (and revenue) overseas. I don't think he will be so eager to embrace the globalization of basketball if international leagues begin reaping the benefits at the expense of his NBA.

Without totally destroying the salary cap system in place, profit-sharing could be a solution. Lebron and others have already shown interest in participating in team ownership, so why not?While in the past I had been an advocate of the CBA, I'm beginning to think it may be too restrictive. The argument that players are overpaid can certainly be made, but foreign leagues (without salary caps or profit-sharing restrictions) will be able to overpay them even more. Furthermore, NBA franchises generate enormous amounts of revenue from ticket & merchandise sales. While marketing has improved and team management & coaches should be compensated for assembling & developing talented, cohesive, winning rosters it's hard to argue that the players are not primarily responsible for these revenues. Take the Cavs as an example: aside from winning the lottery and making the biggest no-brainer #1 selection ever, they have done virtually nothing to improve the franchise. In fact, they have probably been one of the worst-run franchises in the NBA in the past few years. Lebron has quite literally carried that franchise on his back. Players like Lebron transcend the game and sell merchandise, tickets, and the game's overall popularity on their own.

In any other type of American business, the compensation for Lebron-types would be more closely related to the overall success of the businesses they were employed by. They would get commissions, bonuses, and/or huge allotments of stock options. All of these forms of compensation reward the employee (or player) when their contributions positively impact the business's bottom line. Rather than adding variable (and minimal) compensation to be paid if the team makes the playoffs or wins the championship, couldn't some fraction of player compensation be tied to ticket sales, jersey sales, and overall profitability? Maybe not for all players, but at least for the players with the "franchise" label?

I realize this could get tricky really fast. Employing a profit-sharing system in the NBA would inevitably expose the league to the problems experienced by the MLB. Boston, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago would have bigger bargaining chips for the superstars due to the relative profit potential advantages in those markets. Small-market teams like the Trailblazers wouldn't be able to rely upon good management alone to build competitive rosters. The NBA has kept its structure intact to avoid these types of disparities. To be quite honest (even as a Laker fan), I'm not sure I'd be happy if profit-sharing brought these inequities with it.

So what, if anything, should be done if NBA players start bailing to play overseas? Would the assurance of the best players remaining in the league outweigh the consequences of profit-sharing? I'm torn. If this posting hasn't thoroughly confused you, I'd love to hear your thoughts...