Lakers End Season on Sour Note

The Lakers 2006-2007 season ended last week with a poor playoff performance against the Phoenix Suns. It has taken me a few days to digest the season, the playoffs, and the aftermath. I'm sure it will take the Lakers organization the better part of off season to recover and adjust from a disappointing year. While the regular season was up and down, the playoffs were just down, and the reality of the Lakers true standing in the league was hard for many fans, players, and staff to take.

Kobe Bryant said "Do something and do it now, I don't know what to do, but it is extremely frustrating. We are going on three years of still being on ground zero." We share your frustration, but being at "ground zero" is a bit of an exaggeration. The Lakers missed the playoffs three years ago and ended the season on a horrible losing streak that made them look like one of the worst teams in the league. Odom looked like a bust, they had virtual no prospects, and no salary cap space.

The team they have today is much better then the team of 2004-2005 under head coach Frank Hamblen which missed the playoffs. Unfortunately, the team of 2006-2007 is not championship caliber and that is what all of us expect. Is it possible to go from the low of 2005 to the upper echelon of the NBA in only a couple of years? Having the best player in the league gives you a shot, but you also need to make all of the right moves and get a little lucky. Everyone's leaning on Kupchak now, but he was looking like a genius when the Lakers came out of the gate strong earlier this season. For all the God-like qualities of Jerry West, the Memphis Grizzlies are horrible, so cut Mitch some slack. But he's gotta know the clock is ticking.

Phil is only under contract for one more year and Kobe can opted out in 2009. Plus Kobe is old beyond his years, so he feels like he needs to win now. "Do something and do it now." We hear you, but will the extra pressure help? I doubt it. Although many people say that the Lakers are in a rebuilding mode, I disagree. They are just a young team that's missing a piece or two. Mitch doesn't need anyone to tell him that he needs add new players to the squad. I trust that Jerry Buss and his son, Mitch, Phil, and Kobe are all on the same page. An objective analysis of the situation seems obvious to me.

At center, Bynum is still a kid at 19 and doesn't appear to have the best work ethic in the world. He's got a lot of potential, but I don't know how long the organization is willing to wait. If this was a better team, I think they would take the time to nurture him, but right now he looks like their most viable trade bait. If they do trade him, it must be for another big who is an all-star like Kevin Garnett or Jermaine O'Neal. Those names are much rumored but only a real GM in the NBA knows the reality.

At point guard, Farmar was a pleasant surprise and I really like his game and attitude. He's young and should be the point guard of the future, but can be an all-star and how good is his defense? Smush is a defensive liability and has a bad work ethic, so he's basically gone. The Lakers need to pick up a quick defensive stopper at the guard position, whether it's at point or shooting. This can, hopefully, be done with their mid level exemption in the free agent market. If not, it might have to be part of a package trade.

The forward position seems OK to me if you address your issues at the big and small end of the spectrum. Odom had a good year despite numerous obstacles, but Kobe and him are not the championship one-two punch. You might have to trade Lamar to get a proven all-star caliber big man. If you trade him, then you can keep Bynum. Trading both of them is not a good idea unless you get two all-stars in return. Ideally, you pick up another dominant big man, a poor man's Shaq, to compliment Kobe then Lamar is the utility player that fills in the gaps.

Walton had a up and down season, but he's a smart player that fits in well with the triangle. It would be nice to have a little more depth at the small forward. They went from having a log jam, to only a couple players in the course of one off season.

Finally, let's address the issue of Vladmir "Borat" Radmanovich, the big signing of last off season. He has been a major disappointment and Kupchak gets a lot of heat for signing him to a long term contract. That big contract will keep him from being traded, so I think we're stuck with him. If he can stay away from snowboarding, then he should be able to knock down some open looks next season. He's got the size of a power forward but plays like a shooting guard, I trust Phil and his Zen ways can make that work in the triangle.

Phil seemed visibly frustrated most of this season. His face express how most true fans felt. Another season like this and it may all come crumbling down, so let's hope a couple of smart moves will make a big difference. Hey, at least we got as far as the Dallas Mavericks this season.

Lakers End an Up and Down Regular Season

The Kobe Bryant-dominated Lakers go into the Playoffs following a season of injuries, historic losing streaks, over and underachieving, and some truly incredible performances by the new number 24. The Lakers finished the 2006-2007 Regular Season at 42-40 with the 7th seed in the Western Conference Playoffs. Last season the team finished 45-37 with the 6th seed in the West.

So are they worst than last year? On paper, they still look better to me. I gave Mitch Kupchak above average marks for his off-seasons moves and they Lakers looked improved at almost every position on the floor. The first 30 games of the season, the team played like one of the elite teams in the league. Jordan Farmar appeared to be the point guard of the future with impressive moves for a rookie, Andrew Bynum was much improved over last season and had All-Star stats for the first twenty games, Maurice Evans played solid and looked like a steal, Borat Radmanovich hit a few big shots, the bench had its moments, and they seemed like a team that was progressing and building off of the relative success of the previous season.

However, the second half of the season exposed the inconsistencies and weaknesses of this young team. Injuries to Kobe, Lamar, Kwame, Vlad, and others definitely hurt, but all NBA teams experience injuries during an 82 game season. The Lakers looked horrible towards the end of the season, producing a losing streak that coach Philip Jackson had never encountered. Even with the injuries and the young players, the team really lacked determination and relied too heavily on Kobe. Kobe, for his part, did not lack determination and went on the streak of scoring 50 points or more that was truly astonishing. It may have salvaged the season for the Lakers and put them in the playoffs, but it won't get Kobe the MVP award that he clearly has the ability the win. For that coveted honor, the Laker Team will have to win a lot more games.

So, where do the Lakers stand now, with the playoffs starting this weekend? A rematch from last year with Phoenix, who LA surprised by jumping out to a series lead before losing in 7 games. The Lakers would be lucky to take Phoenix to 7 games this year, but you never know when you have Kobe Bryant. Like the past few seasons, it will be the other key role players that will determine LA's success. Lamar will have to be aggressive and consistent, Kwame must be a solid presence in the middle and either Roni or Drew will have to step up against Amare Stoudemire who didn't play last year. As for the guards, you know that Bryant will bring it, but Smush and Jordan will have to be solid contributors and help contain Steve Nash who has a shot at winning his 3rd straight MVP, although it will probably be Dirk Nowitzki. The other guards besides Kobe will be key to the competitiveness of the team against running and gunning Phoenix. I would like to see Farmar return to his early season form and do for the Lakers what he did for the Bruins last year. It remains to be seen, but Phil did insert him into the starting line-up for the Lakers last two games which were both well-needed victories.

If the Lakers can take the Suns to 6 or 7 games it will be viewed by most as a minor moral victory and seemingly a repeat of last seasons results. In the event that the Lakers beat Phoenix, they would be looked upon as overachievers. Then they would have to get through the likes of Dallas and/or San Antonio to make it to the Finals. That, of course, is highly unlikely, but they would be considered contenders if they could do it. In all likelihood, this season will look like a repeat of last year.

Is Kupchak building a championship team? At some points in this season, they looked like contenders that were maybe just one small piece away from being championship caliber, but at other times they looked like one of the worst teams in the league and most of the players seemed expendable. Kobe was the only All-Star, even though Lamar has the talent to be one every year, and the rest of team are basically role players with no bona fide star. Hopefully, one of the younger players will develop into the reliable, All-Star quality teammate to compliment Kobe's Super Stardom. If not, Mitch will have to make a trade or sign a big free agent to get this team to the next level.

I think this Laker squad can pull it together and do a little damage in the Playoffs if they get back to early season form, but I'm anticipating essentially the same outcome as last season. Maybe it will be like when the Lakers lost to the Jazz two years in a row and then came back the next season and won the first of three championships in a row. Next year is Phil's last season under contract, so I'm expecting big things.

Check out this Flash Intro for the Lakers-Suns series (It takes a minute to load on broadband)

Dick Cheney’s Daughter is a Lesbian

Am I the only one who finds that frighteningly ironic and somewhat amusing? The manner in which he deals with this “personal issue” exposes the hypocrisy of his rhetoric. He is a Family Values Conservative who cannot fully support his own daughter’s right to get married and raise children. He is the father of a Lesbian who cannot publicly condemn a lifestyle that he and his Neo-Conservative colleagues privately despise.

For a Vice President who is currently experiencing Spiro Agnew-like dismal poll numbers the last few weeks have really plunged him into the depths of historic job failure. His confrontation with Wolf Blitzer questions about his daughter having a child and the gay marriage issue were reminiscent of his passive-aggressive silent treatment to John Edwards when he brought up the “L” word in the VP debates. Somehow, this overly arrogant public servant thinks that he is the sole arbiter of what is proper public discourse and polite behavior. He is the policy maker who won’t discuss policies that affect his family.

From muted honesty to delusional recklessness, the Blitzer interview uncomfortably shifted to Iraq and Cheney’s insistences that the war is still going well. With Nixon-like Paranoia he blamed the Press for not reporting the good news. I thought that policy was abandoned following the American people’s awakening during the 2006 election. Apparently, our VP is either still in denial or he really believes Karl Rove’s political tomfoolery.

Recently, the PBS series Frontline report on the “Dark Side” exposed the depths and lengths that Cheney and Rumsfeld plotted to change the Federal Government. Bits and pieces of their Dr. Evil-like plan have been coming out in press reports, but it seems that recently the information has been more incriminating. Although Cheney as a sitting Vice President won’t be forced to testify in the Scooter Libby trial, there has already been some damning allegations presented. Obviously, we will never know the entire truth and even the legal truth won’t be revealed until the end of the trial, but it is clear that Cheney knew more about the CIA leak then he originally admitted.

His corruption and hypocrisy appear to make him uncomfortable in his own skin whether he is talking about his daughter or trying to stand behind his President. In last month’s State of Union, Cheney was seen with his usual scowl behind Bush and it even turned to a noticeable frown when the President admitted that man-made forces affect “Global Climate Change.” The watered down recognition of Global Warming by the most anti-science President in recent history could not even be supported by his VP with at the very least a neutral facial expression.

I guess that little George went a little too far for the most powerful Vice President that this nation have ever experienced. In 1999, Bush hired Cheney to head the exploratory committee to select a running mate and he chose himself. I can’t think a more power hungry and calculated maneuver. Talk about chutzpah. The plan that he hatched with Rumsfeld back in the Ford Administration was now poised to come into full fruition.

In the 2000 VP debates, Joe Lieberman made a point of how good the economy was under Clinton’s Democratic Administration and how Cheney prospered as head of Halliburton. Cheney countered with a sharply worded response that the government had nothing do it, implying that it was his hard work and forces of the free market economy that led to his windfall profits. The audience rewarded Cheney with polite laughter and a bit of applause which won him the debate point. Lieberman never countered and the topic was changed.

The reality of Halliburton’s financial success is that it was completely and utterly government funded in a most non-free market manner. Cheney was instrumental in changing military expenditure policies during George HW Bush’s administration to allow private sector companies to profit by providing the services that were previously in-house. Cheney actually took public office for a personal gain. He took a pay cut in government, only to reap massive amounts of compensation from Halliburton, then went back into government to continue the cycle of war profiteering.

In contrast, former Vice President Gore, who is passionate about preventing Global Warming, brought the issue to the forefront in the last few months for apparently altruistic reasons and a voluntary need for to do civic good. Besides selling a few books and his documentary, he received very little personal gain. Although it was speculated that this would be his springboard back into Presidential Politics, at this point it does not appear that he has any ambition to seek higher office. He merely uses his name recognition and prestige to affect public policy in a way that can only be admired by friend and foe alike.

I cannot see a starkest contrast to the unmitigated disaster of Dick Cheney’s Vice Presidency. If it wasn’t for the debacle of the Clinton impeachment and Republican control of Congress for the first six years of Bush/Cheney, I believe the call for impeachment would have been much louder. It’s probably still on the table for the next couple of years depending on how the various congressional hearings pan out. If it ever gets close to impeachment, resignation seems to make more political sense for the Republican Party. Cheney could blame it on health problems and the new sitting VP would be an asset to the 2008 ticket rather than the albatross that Cheney is.

Bush could nominate Condoleezza Rice making her the first Black and the first woman to hold such a high office. It would follow the patter of rewarding poor job performance; Rice ignores terrorism threats as head of the NSA then gets rewarded with Secretary of State. With a less than exemplary record of diplomacy at the State Department, she looks ripe for promotion in Bush’s eyes because loyalty is more important than performance. Just as faith is more important science, in this oligarchy of hypocrisy.

A “Surge” by Bush

I don’t know any troops in Iraq, or any of the 21,500 that will be deployed, so my outrage is tempered. Congressman Charles Rangel proposed a draft recently and it met with disregard by his colleagues. However, a draft would affect almost every family in the country and at the very least cause the people to speak up in a more proactive manner. The election of 2006 allowed many of us to voice our opinion at the ballot box, but Bush seems to be disregarding the people’s voice.

Bush suffers from an overcompensation of his father’s “wimp factor” label. George W. is the Ivy League educated cowboy that wants to appear strong and decisive. He is the recovering alcoholic that wants to be the righteous born again ideologue. He is the Draft Dodger and National Guard Deserter that wants to be the Commander in Chief that knows military strategy better then his generals and non-partisan advisors. He is the “C” student that thinks he knows better than the people he was “elected” to serve.

George and Barbara’s son underachieved for the first 40 years of his life and now he is the man with the grand Neo-con vision to remake the entire Middle East over a long term plan of spreading freedom and democracy. It is a bold venture, indeed, for a person with limited cultural understanding, virtually no knowledge of Middle Eastern current events or history and a general lack of intellectual curiosity.

After 9/11, many Americans, as well as myself, believed in the notion of “draining the swamp.” The terrorists needed to be rooted out and any country that harbored them was culpable. Hatred of the West and the fomenting of violence against American interests around the world were advocated by these Middle Eastern dictators and thrived in their closed minded and oppressive societies.

The solution seemed simple in theory but we feared it would difficult to implement. The coalition of the willing, lead by the US of A, would spread freedom and democracy to the heart of darkness. It would go down in history as Bush’s great “Crusade” of giving Judeo-Christian values to the “lost” Muslims of the Arab World. We all remember those ones that hate us for our freedom don’t we? Well, the country was vulnerable with open wounds in 2002, and we had already lowered the bar in 2000 to allow the remedial President to be brought into office, so many of us didn’t question of complexity of the Bush’s “Crusade.” We had been dumbed down and scared out of our wits, so we bought a simple solution for a complex problem. Oh yeah, we still get the tax cut with no spending limitations and the heavy lifting is done by the all volunteer military. Let’s Roll!

Before the Iraq invasion, many experts warned that toppling Saddam would make our security situation worse not better. Most people dismissed these skeptics without much consideration to their qualifications or any examination of their predictions. We as a nation were going with the grand vision of dominance and an arrogant disregard to the value of the realist's arguments. We’re the strongest nation in the history of the world, we can do anything if we are united. So dissenters were labeled as cowards and their views were not even part of the equation.

There were, however, supporters of the policy that had concerns about the overall implementation. These optimistic pragmatists saw the Iraq War as winnable and it had the potential to be a beacon of freedom and hope in the Middle East, but it would have to be pulled off flawlessly. The potential problems were numerous for anyone who cared to educate themselves on the issues. How many Americans knew about the Shia versus Sunni feud in 2002?

In early 2007, we find ourselves suffering from the worst of both worlds. We disregarded the majority of the world community and a minority of Americans to invade and occupy Iraq. Rather than administering the post invasion occupation flawlessly, it was wrought with errors of ignorance and arrogance from the beginning. Political spin and divisive partisanship allowed our mistakes to flounder and compound over the last 3+ years. Hurricane Katrina shed some light on how governmental incompetence can make a bad situation worse. Misguided leadership led to disastrous consequences that couldn’t be undone with an army of devoted TV pundits and spinmeisters. Would 20,000 more FEMA workers made a difference in the initial Katrina relief? I think that Katrina revealed that the problem was not a lack of resources but incompetent leadership and flawed policies.

That brings us back to Bush’s proposal to add more 21,500 troops to Iraq. 80% of those troops will be support and logistics, while 20% or roughly 4,000 will be combat forces. Most experts say that small amount won’t make any tactical difference and the most Hawkish generals and political leaders say we need 100,000 to 200,000 more troops to do the job right. We don’t have hundreds of thousands troops ready to deploy to Iraq and recruitment goals have been decimated by the ongoing conflict. A draft would be the only way to get enough troops to secure Iraq, but that is a political nonstarter.

So Bush was left with a decision of adopting his opponents view and the recommendations of the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton report or taking the only other feasible alternative. True to his stubborn nature of overcoming his father’s “wimp factor” he chose to go with the maximum troop surge that was logistically possible.

When I think of those 21,500 troops that I do not know, I keep hearing the echo of a young John Kerry that once pleaded “Who is going to be the last man to die for a failed policy?” They were fighting to stop the spread of communism and today’s troops are fighting to give the new government “breathing room.” Who will be the last American soldier to die for Iraqi “breathing room?”

How to Make a Mass Murderer Look Good

A few days ago, I turned on my TV to see grainy images of portly masked men dressed in casual leather jackets attaching a noose around Saddam Hussein’s neck. The video stopped short of showing the inevitable demise of the hated tyrant, but the internet had a plethora of images with the full death sequence complete with audio. It was a grim spectacle of victor’s justice that almost everyone in the world knew was unavoidable since the day Saddam was plucked from his hiding place by US Troops. No one doubts that the “Butcher of Baghdad” was responsible for crimes against humanity and that he should pay the ultimate price for his transgressions. What that price should be, can be debated, but the debacle of his trial and execution were symbolic of the Bush Administration’s mismanagement of the war.

Whether you are for or against the death penalty, the Saddam trial hardly looked like any “justice” system that freedom loving democracies around the world enjoy. In a country that is in the midst of raging sectarian violence, the trial did nothing to heal the wounds of the past or restore order to the fractured society. The legal process was inefficient and unprofessional with threats and acts of violence against judges and attorneys. The courtroom proceedings were filled with uncontrolled outbursts and the hateful tint of sectarian prejudice. The same lack of order this “young democracy” has on its streets were also found in its legal institutions.

The execution carried out by Shiite Iraqi guards on US gallows did nothing to strengthen the illusion of due process. The executioners wore no uniforms and looked more like terrorist kidnappers then prison guards. The grainy video, both the official edited version and the unofficial phone camera feed looked eerily similar to terrorist ransom demand videos. The US military wouldn’t release Saddam to Iraqis until last minute for fear of that they would humiliate him prior to his hanging.

Once the Iraqis had Saddam in their hands, they proceeded to taught and degrade him which showed a complete lack of respect for the American concerns and also showed the depth of Shiite vs. Sunni hatred. Saddam looked dignified while the executioners and the witnesses seemed like the criminals. The US found itself in a lose-lose situation with the world blaming us for the oversight of the Saddam lynching while we didn’t even have the power to delay the execution until after the religious holiday which was our publicly stated objective.

The vast majority of Europe is against the death penalty, the Kurds wanted Saddam alive for the ongoing nerve gas crimes trial, the Sunnis think the whole trial was a fraud, and the US seemed to have little control over the situation except for the curious timing of the verdict. I’ll leave it up to the conspiracy theorist to debate whether the verdict being announced just days before the US midterm elections has any political corruption related issues, but it was certainly suspicious.

It seems like the law of unintended consequences was in full effect in this Middle Eastern fog of war. Even the execution of a vicious mass murderer didn’t garner the type of triumphant reaction that George W. Bush thought it would when Centcom first announced “We got him” Sure, there was a modest crowd of Iraqi-Americans celebrating in Dearborn, Michigan, but most Americans felt more anxiety about the current quagmire then joy of witnessing the demise of an evil dictator. If Osama Bid Laden had been executed, would the American reaction have been as equally apathetic? I seriously doubt it. There would be nationwide celebrations and a sense that our troops sacrifices in Afghanistan were worth it.

What would have to happen in Iraq to give the majority of Americans the sense that it was worth the sacrifice? It’s a very hard question to answer and I don’t think many people would agree on the same answer, much less a way to get there from where we are today. Clinton and later Bush stated that the official US policy in Iraq prior to 2003 was for regime change. Mission Accomplished.

Bush’s case for going to war was predicated on the notion that we needed to preempt a rogue nation with terrorist ties acquiring and developing WMD’s. Almost 4 years later no significant stockpiles were found, nor the ability to develop them in the near future. Mission Accomplished.

Saddam Hussein was a war criminal that needed to be brought to justice. Mission Accomplished.

Iraq should be one of the few democracies in the region. “Mission Accomplished” Does an unstable, violence ridden democracy count?

The reasons for going to war have been redefined so many times, that most of us don’t why we’re still there and what does a victory in Iraq mean? Killing Saddam should have brought us closer to an elusive victory, but in reality it just ramped up the fears of Sunni reprisals and an intensification of the cycle of sectarian violence with our troops caught in the middle.

Based on our execution of the post invasion administrating of the country and the execution of the Saddam Hussein, both the Iraqi and the American peoples have little confidence in George W. Bush executing anything successfully in Iraq. I wish I had the solution, but I know that our stubbornly cloistered and culturally ignorant leader does not. I pray that God will give him a sense of humility and the wisdom to lead the coalition of the willing to “victory.”