Shawne Merriman to Forego Surgery, Play Hurt:

And the "Dumbass of the Year Award Goes To . . ."

I can't even fathom the thought process that goes into this. It's a contract year, sure, but everyone knows what he can do when he's healthy and *cough* supplemented. Does he do the reasonable thing, take the year out, get paid a fantastic amount of money next season, and come back with a vengeance?

Nope. Instead, he does the insane thing and decide to play on a severely damaged knee.

One good shot to the knee, and it could be not just "bye-bye 2008," it could be "Lights Out" for Merriman's career.

Incidentally, the Chargers play the Broncos week 2, and the Raiders week 4. Two cut-blocking teams in the first month of the season. Anyone want to bet Merriman gets hurt in one of those two games?

RIP Gene Upshaw

I won't eulogize the man, since Patrick and Rob over at Thoughts from the Dark Side already did so, and well, but there is one thing that I want to point out:

The NFL's labor picture just became considerably cloudier and more inscrutable.

Rest well, Gene -- you were one of the true greats.

Speaking of Blogs and Sports

Apparently the package that the Pack was throwing at Brett to stay retired included his very own blog.

Gosh, it bloggles the mind that he turned that down.

Liveblogging Raiders at Titans:

This should be fun -- the first time I've done this:

- It's a bad sign to see a penalty on the opening kickoff return.

- First Raiders drive was adequate, but they're showing a bit more openness from within the playbook, and they're calling some quick rhythm passes to get Russell warmed up and mentally in the game. I love the first-down quick-hitch to Curry.

- I'd like to see both Fargas and McFadden play very little tonight; give Bush, Rankin and Echemandu the reps. Tennessee has a great run D, so why take the chance that either of your top two guys get hurt.

- Three blitzes on the first three defensive plays? Rob Ryan might be taking the training wheels off. Stanford Routt needs to work on his blitzing skills, since he was absolutely absorbed by a blocker, but Howard could be dangerous if they can hold the line enough to spring him to blitz more often.

- Good open-field tackle from Huff. A year ago, that play becomes a first down.

- Ok, so the quick-hitch didn't work a second time through. Poor drive, and the failure to take advantage of the first and five is somewhat discouraging.

- Haha, Chris Carr lost yardage on the return. Take that, you trash-talking loser!

- I love that play from Gibril Wilson. He gambled to get the tip, missed, but still recovered well enough to make the tackle. Great play out on the edge.

- Two special teams penalties in the first quarter. Good god . . .

- It'd be easy to overlook how good that one-yard run on first down just was. Good run, D-Mac, even if only netted one yard. Got the rest on second down, though.

- Great, great job on the checkdown, Russell. Smart decision to hit the back and see what can be salvaged. Great coverage back there, Titans, and great tackle, Finnegan.

- Still some problems with the Raiders run D -- there's a 20-yard run, and Morrison was ot of position to make the stop. That's the weakness of the Law Firm's collective games, and it clearly still needs work.

- Potentially lost in another poorly defended run play is Tommy Kelly getting well into the backfield. He looks exceptional thus far this preseason.

- TOUCHDOWN RAIDERS!

• The highlight of this drive is the pass protection: the line did an exceptional job on this drive of keeping a very good defensive line off of Russell. Highlight: McFadden in blitz pickup. That's a weak point in his game, but Rathman is obviously teaching him well, and McFadden is obviously learning well.


• Love seeing Zach Miller get involved in the offense like that. A couple of excellent catches, including a brilliant catch on the TD reception (on an equally brilliant throw from Russell).


• Russell displayed good presence of mind, rolling out when he needed to, and switching the ball from right to left when Haynesworth got close. Good play, and good touch on his passes.

- Another penalty? Damn it . . .

- Yet ANOTHER penalty -- Gallery holds, and a 3rd-and-2 becoes 2nd-and-15. Oh, and look, another penalty on the offense on 3rd-and-15. The Raiders have gone 7 flags for 50 yards thus far -- six minutes into the second quarter. That would be 21 for 150 projected over the game. It should sound outlandish, but it's happened before, in terms of yardage, if not in terms of actual flags. This must, must be worked on.

- Jesus, what a kick from Pakulak. That 71-yarder may have just gotten him a job somewhere before all is said and done. Unbelievable.

- Speaking of penalties, how about a block in the back?

- That was just a mind-bogglingly stupid play by Higgins. He may have trouble making the roster as it is, but a) to field on the six, then b) to run backward, risking a safety, and then c) to fail to recognize your mistake and just hit the ground, but rather put the ball on the ground and give the Titans a cheap tying touchdown is just unbelievable. Man, that was awful.

- McQuistain running back a kickoff? That was one goofy-lookin' return.

- Ok, I like Knapp's call, giving Higgins the ball on the end-around. A decent little run by JLH, but he's hanging the ball out far too loose.

- If Chris Johnson is running through the Raiders like a blowtorch through butter, what is LT going to do to them? Same thing he always does, from the looks of it.

- Far be it from me to begrudge points (man, nice kick, Aaron Elling -- another guy who is potentially kicking his way into a job), but am I the only one who wanted to see Russell kick back and just launch one?

- That should just about do it for Michael Waddell. Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you, dude.

- Schilens and Watkins are both showing something at WR. Both have been pretty impressive to this point.

- Last week, Rankin busted off a 72-yard run, only to be caught from behind. This week, Echemandu ripped off a 71-yarder, only to be caught from behind.

- And it doesn't matter, because OO just fumbled on the two. Great.

- That fumble turned out to be pretty significant, eh?

Some First-Quarter Notes, Raiders v. 9ers:

• God, it's good to have football back, even if it's only preseason.



• The Raiders are in midseason form with regard to penalties, I see. Ugh.



• Fargas and McFadden look pretty good in this first quarter. Here's hoping . . . and I want to see Michael Bush already.



• A sack on the first drive. Seriously?



• The first-team passing game doesn't look so great this first time out. At the same time, the first-team run D seems positively mediocre -- quite the improvement. That may be a positive, but what the hell, it's the 9ers -- a team unarguably in the same league as the Raiders.



• Gibril Wilson made his presence known. I am really looking forward to the starting back four getting some extended playing time -- they could be something special. And if the Raiders are going to win many games, they're going to have to be.



• If Tommy Kelly can get into game shape, he could begin to justify his contract. A good couple of series from him.

More after the game.

And the Oakland Raiders Make Another Mistake Heading into the Season:

It's been a less-than-stellar offseason for the Raiders, which seems to have continued into the weekend, if the rumors that Javon Walker offered to return his signing bonus and retire are true.

The rumors, which are coming from multiple sources, say that Walker offered to give the team back the $11 million he received in bonus money and walk away -- until Al talked him out of it.

This has all of the makings of a major, self-inflicted ass-biting in the making, considering that the consistent word is that everyone is outperforming Walker in camp, and that he is performing so badly that he may as well not even be there. And yet there he is -- and with that salary, does anyone think that he won't start, even if he's four or five on an honest performance chart?

Ugh.

Welcome to Los Angeles, Manny:

Manny Ramirez is now a Dodger.

This ought to be interesting, given the Dodgers' legendary chemistry problems in the clubhouse down the stretch last season, and Manny's penchant -- dare I say, legendary ability -- to create exactly those kinds of problems.

Too bad Andruw "Have You Checked for a Pulse Lately?" Jones is still in Blue. Would've been worth anything to move him. Keeping him and adding Manny just means one more body in an already-crowded outfield.

At least Manny can go yard, though, which is more than can be said for the rest of the Dodgers' roster. Maybe they'll steal the West from Arizona yet.

On the Idea of "Legacy," I:

The idea of "legacy" has been on my mind quite a bit lately, and for obvious reasons: the (seemingly endless) Brett Favre flap. Will he or won't he? When will he? When won't he? What about the other guy? Have they moved on? Should there be competition? And so on, almost literally ad nauseum.

Here's the question that keeps sticking me: What about Brett's legacy? Doesn't he care about that?

Short answer, admittedly speculative, from the outside: No, he doesn't. And more than that, he's right not to care about that.

Legacy is a funny thing, but what gets lost in the continuous, endless, generally self-important pontificating on the matter, in the constant parade of false-modest "gatekeepers" of the man's legacy, of the countless stream of Besserwissers and well-wishers seeking to protect the man from himself, is one simple truth:

Brett Favre has no control over his legacy, not anymore, not at this point in his career. None. Arguably, he had none at all, but somehow, this is overlooked in the crush of sports pundits eager to weigh in -- and catch a little attention themselves (he said, fully aware of the irony of the statement) -- and proclaim what should and should not happen here.

Brett's a quarterback, so let's think about other QBs. "Broadway" Joe Namath. Ken "The Snake" Stabler. John Elway. Joe Montana. Steve Young. What about them? Their legacies, or lack thereof:

• Joe Namath and Ken Stabler are so firmly identified with their respective teams -- the Jets and the Raiders -- that no one immediately remembers that they both finished their careers elsewhere (the Rams and the Oilers and then Saints, respectively). Sure, people know that, but it's trivia in the truest sense of the word: it's trivial. Unimportant. No one cares that these two were fairly mediocre in their final playing locations; what's remembered is their greatness, their great moments, the way they stood out and played the game at a level higher than virtually anyone around them. Their legacies are, as it were, intact, despite the fairly ignominious endings to their careers.



• John Elway is another guy whose legacy is largely intact, and most people remember that "he went out on top," a two-time Super Bowl winner who retired after winning The Big One, just as he should have.
  
  Not so fast. John Elway's legacy is largely intact, but he's also the three-time Super Bowl loser whose teams constantly got killed on the biggest stage, who, until the Broncos finally landed an elite running back in Terrell Davis, was a lovable loser, the emblematic forlorn visage of the loser; were the Wide World of Sports longer-lived, Elway's distant stare at the end of Super Bowl XXII could have been the end footage in the opening montage.
  
  Lest there be any complaint that a Raiders partisan is taking unnecessary shots at Elway, let me come clean: John Elway is my first-ballot choice for "G.O.A.T.": the greatest of all time. Not Montana, not Marino, not Unitas -- Elway. John Elway did more with less talent around him, and was more effective at maximizing the abilities and output of those playing with him -- at turning mediocre teams into great teams -- than anyone else in the history of the game. That is what makes him the best: He turned losers into winners . . . except when it came to the Super Bowl, when he needed help to get over the top. That's far from a knock -- it's just how it was. But the mere fact that Elway called it quits at the top doesn't impact his legacy, which includes those three ugly, ugly Super Bowl blowouts.



• Does anyone really care that Joe Montana finished his career in Kansas City, or that Steve Young began his in Tampa Bay? Does anyone ever even think of those two outside of the red and gold?

Let Brett play if he wants, let him stay retired if he wants. But let's not kid ourselves: No one writing about this, no one bloviating on one side or the other has any genuine interest in Brett's impact on his legacy, because they all know, or should have figured out by now, what is so nakedly apparent in all of this:

Brett Favre's legacy has already been determined, and nothing he can do, short of committing a felony, will change that.

Brett's legacy is securely where it always has been, in the hands of writers, fans and anyone who cares to opine. That's what a legacy is. A legacy is how you're remembered after you're gone. When all is said and done, who were you? What were you? What were you all about? Did you generally leave things better than you found them, as the greats did, or did you muck everything up, as Ryan Leaf did? Let's not kid ourselves -- each great had his Ryan Leaf moments, and each Ryan Leaf had his great moments. A truly fair assessment of each would take that into consideration, and determine their legacies based in part upon that determination.

That's not how a legacy works, though. It's never objective, it's never an unqualified, pure assessment. It's gut, it's emotion, it's love and hate, with some greater or lesser degree of factual support. (To be honest, I'm torn between factual and "factual" in the preceding sentence, for reasons that should be obvious.)


Just don't pretend that you're opining with Brett's impact on Brett's legacy in mind, because that's just about the furthest thing from the truth. His legacy is already written in the minds of everyone who will help write it. And, for the record, Brett is one of the Great Ones, one who was so great and so much fun to watch that it still seems mean-spirited and somehow wrong to point out how simply "above-average" he's been for the second half of his career.

Germany 0:1 Spain

Today's match wasn't all that great, but the result reflects the game as it was played on the pitch. Unlike the Portugal game, when Germany was able to stifle the attack and push it back and outside, this time, the more athletic team was able to work its will on the tougher, grittier team.

The ref . . . was horrible, absolutely horrible, and adversely impacted the game as it was played, which is to say, the ref had a discernible impact. Terrible officiating, no consistency in what was being called when, and it was so bad that the commentators felt the need to point out that hey, he's the ref, he has his credentials. A more backhanded slap at an official I've never heard; to be honest, I've never heard such a cutting comment about an official in any sport, anywhere, because the understated simplicity absolutely belied the intent, and left us laughing and saying something suitably articulate, such as "DAAAAAAMN!"

Spain played a better game, and utilized their superior speed and offensive creativity to keep the German side reeling. Once Torres' goal was in the net, you could see a conflict among the German players. They knew that the Spanish outclassed them in terms of speed, and the remainder of the game was a peculiar mish-mash of a strong desire to advance and attack, but always with one hip turned halfway backward, as if they were anticipating the mistake that would lead to the Spanish counterattack. The result was that in the second half, but for about an eight-minute span fairly early in that half, the Germans never committed fully to getting that equalizing goal they needed, until it was so late that they were desperately cavalier about how they went about attacking. Unfortunately, some of them chose the worst possible time to have an off-night. It happens to the best of them, but Schweinsteiger in particular could have played better. Sure, he was working hard, but he was much more false hustle and making mistakes than having a positive impact on his team. Klose . . . couldn't stay on (though I'll be hornswoggled if he were actually off on two of those -- from every replay angle I saw, he was on a couple of the times he was called off).

All in all, congratulations, Spain. The Spanish played a magnificent tournament, and played unquestionably the better game.

Shaq Raps (Sort of), Loses Badges:

By now just about everyone has heard that Shaquille "The Big Whatever The Hell I Claim To Be In This Particular Moment" O'Neal was videotaped rapping about Kobe Bryant kissing his ass, among other things.

First things first, and I say this as someone who never listened to Shaq rap before, but my god, that was terrible.

Second, I lost a fair bit of respect for Shaq out of this. Dude, it's been almost five years, and guess what? You got a ring in Miami, while Kobe struck out on his own. If you're still that bitter about it, fine, but don't go all Dave Mustaine in public like that. Grow up.

I was on Shaq's side in The Big Divorce (sorry, Big Fella), but this is just juvenile. It'd be marginally less pathetic were the rap at least clever, but alas . . . "Kobe, how my ass taste?" just doesn't get it done.

Here's where the story gets really interesting, though: Sheriff Joe Arpaio, you know, the nutball who "goes dark ages on they asses" just so he can boast about being "the toughest sheriff in America," and who had made Shaq both The Big Special Deputy and The Big Colonel of the Posse, has fired The Big Rapper. The reason? Racially charged language used in the rap.

Pardon me while I have a good laugh over the stupidity of the whole situation.

Oh, hey, Shaq? How Arpaio's ass taste, Big Fella?

Netherlands 1:1 Russia 90th Minute:

However this game ends, one thing's for sure: this year, this tournament, Russia is no joke.

Good match today -- and if yesterday is any indication, then extra time could be a killer.

Germany 3:2 Portugal

Adequate game this afternoon. I had hoped for a better, more competitive match, because despite the score, this one wasn't really that close. I'm surprised both ways. As badly as Germany played against Austria, I'm somewhat surprised that they played so well against a much, much better team than the Austrians. At the same time, I'm surprised that the Portuguese played so poorly.

Part of that was a function of the different styles. The Portuguese are unquestionably quicker and more athletic than the Germans, but in this instance, power overcame finesse. Not always cleanly, of course -- reference Ballack's goal. Doesn't matter what sport it is, when you push off and extend that far, you've committed a penalty. Doesn't count unless it's called, and it wasn't, so the goal stood, but it's more emblematic of the toughness and grit and nastiness with which the Germans played, as compared to the finesse of the Portuguese.

Should be an interesting match tomorrow: Croatia v. Turkey. If Turkey wins, then the semi-final should be very interesting around Germany, what with Europeans being incapable of not resorting to violence in the aftermath of big soccer games and all.

Still, I kept seeing analogies between this game and the NBA Finals. For all of the Lakers' superior athleticism, they, like Portugal, fell victim to a meaner, tougher team that was willing to punch them in the mouth to get the win.

Congratulations Boston:

Normally I'd say more, but Jamie did it for me: to lose by 39 in a game like this is an absolute disgrace, and the Lakers should, individually and collectively, be thoroughly embarrassed.

Kobe, hit the FT line, and practice. Matter of fact, everyone do that -- with Shaq long gone, there's no excuse for such consistently poor FT%.

Gasol, learn how to attack and grab passes, rather than letting them come to you. Re-learn it, rather, because you did it up until the Finals.

Fisher, well, you're actually ok.

Odom, remember how you were aggressive, using your body, and making plays here and there? Do that more often. You weren't in foul trouble last night, so no excuses, buddy.

I do look forward to a rematch next season, though. I like the Lakers a lot better in a series with Gasol at F and Bynum at C, but this time, there's no denying the simple fact that Boston was better in every phase of the game and just stomped them down.

I'm halfway inclined to take a flyer on the Bruins next season.

You Have to be #$#$^$ Kidding Me!

I sincerely hope this changes and this game becomes competitive, but I have never seen a team look less like it belongs in a championship series than the Lakers do right now.

It's hard to believe that they are capable of getting this far, of winning the conference, of having the best record in the West -- and still sucking this badly in an elimination game.

Horrible.

Game Six Tonight:

Were I a betting man, I'd say Boston takes the series and the championship tonight, but the way they went after Game 5, they may try to postpone their celebration for a few more days.

This has turned into a poor showing from both teams. Boston has all of the advantages, and has probably been the best team in all five games thus far, but has only managed to close out three of them, and one of those just barely. Granted, the third of those wins was the biggest comeback in Finals history, this less than a week after the Lakers nearly accomplished what would have been the identical feat, but -- and not to put too fine a point on it -- that "greatest comeback in history" should have been the backbreaker.

It was more of a leg drop, it appears, or a maybe a turnbuckle drop kick. The Lakers were staggered and dazed, but in a way, it's hard to shake the feeling that they were blading. To drop the pro 'rasslin' metaphors, they were kicked hard where it hurts -- roughly where Lamar Odom took a knee on Sunday -- but managed to keep their feet and, barely, hang on to the top rope to keep from going down.

Sportscenter this morning posed a question of its panelists: Is Game 6 a must-win for Boston?

Allow me to take a crack at that one:

Yes, it is.

Much has been made -- rightly -- of the Lakers' ineptitude on defense. Let's call a spade a spade here: the Lakers have sucked defensively this series. Sucked, with a capital S. Oh, they're acting like they're working hard defensively, and in a way, they are, but what they're doing isn't playing defense, it's wasting energy. Jeff Van Gundy had it right the other night: it's fake-hustle defense. You know, run around extra hard, looking like you're giving it your all, but really, you're just out there burning calories.

No time for cardio, boys -- this matters. Take a charge, rather than swatting at a driving Celtic. Look at how you're being defended, and emulate it; the Lakers have formations where they have a size advantage, but they're failing to take advantage, on both ends. Which brings me to:

The Lakers have sucked offensively this series. Abysmal is too kind a word for a team that has undergone longer droughts than the Atacama. It gets so bad that it almost feels like they drop an accidental bucket in from time to time, just because the law of averages says some shots have to fall.

Why is Boston up 3-2? Because the Lakers have sucked at both ends of the floor, and Boston hasn't. They haven't been stellar offensively, except in stretches when offensively, they're executing almost flawlessly (not coincidentally, these stretches tend to take place when the Lakers couldn't hit the ocean from a damn boat). Defensively, they have some periodic breakdowns, but they're much, much tighter -- and tougher -- on defense than the Lakers have been. (That said, allow me to gripe about two Lakers being tackled in the paint the other day -- if that's not an offensive foul, then nothing short of blatantly punching or kicking someone can be.)

The Celtics have been the better team in each game, with the possible exception of Game 3, but let's be clear about something: as great as Kobe was in Game 3, Sasha Vujacic is the reason the Lakers won that game. Kobe was more of a footnote to the sharpshooter, who seems inexplicably to recalibrated his sights after that game.

The Celtics have been better because they've been sharper and more coordinated, and while it's easy to blame Kobe for not facilitating, the fault only lies so deep with him. The rest of it is just poor play from his teammates, all of whom -- Kobe included -- disappear for long stretches of time and then start to play frustrated. When they play frustrated, they play poorly -- or engage in fake-hustle play.

The Celtics have been better because they've been tougher. Pau Gasol, where have you been? Apart from doing your best Dirk Nowitzki impersonation, I mean. Lamar Odom, where are you?

Kobe Bryant, couldn't you play tougher, too? Paul Pierce is taking charges; you're committing fouls.

You cannot always force a team to run with you, but when you can't, you darn well better match their intensity and toughness. In 2004, only Shaq was able to do that against Detroit, in the five-game sweep. In 2008, the Lakers collectively have only managed to match Boston's toughness for stretches at a time. Unsurprisingly, when they match Boston's toughness, their superior athleticism allows them to take big leads or make big runs . . .

. . . precisely until Boston dials up the toughness, then it all falls apart.

And yet, here we are, in Game 6.

Boston took LA's best punch in Game 4, then took them down. That should have ended the series. But it didn't. And we're here, looking at Game 6.

Don't get me wrong, I expect Boston to win this game, and I'd be lying if I said I even expected it to be close; it may be close on the scoreboard, although I doubt that, but it'd be one of those "deceptively close" scores.

But if they can't finish the deal . . . if the strain of playing an extra third of a season catches up to them . . . if they can't overcome the injuries . . . if the Lakers manage to elevate their game to anything approaching the way they played in the conference playoffs . . .

. . . then we could be looking at a Game 7. Smart money would probably have to be on Los Angeles then.

Let's see how the shots drop tonight, and let's see why.

My Father's Day Present:

Behold:



Unbelievably cute. Real kids do indeed wear black, even if they're drooling feverishly (a couple more teeth en route, apparently).

Some more recent reasons it's great to be a dad:

Looks Like This One Is Just About Over:

I can't believe the Celtics won this game, but it looks like this series is over. The only question is whether the Lakers can get it to the weekend and Game 6.

Something that troubles me about this series: where the hell is Gasol? I know it's his first time on the big stage, so it may be unfair to judge him based on his total, absolute absence this series, but he's starting to give off a Dirk Nowitzki "loser" vibe.

I'd love for him to show up Game 5 and prove me wrong. Even if it doesn't impact this series, it'll help going into next season.

I won't congratulate the Celtics yet, but god, have they been good.

Kobe Bryant: The Great Facilitator?

I'm curious about something: the announcers this evening keep referring to Kobe as "the Great Facilitator."

Is it just me, or does that smack of all of Shaq's various "The Great X" nicknames?

That's gotta piss Kobe off.

Cedric Benson Released By Bears:

Yet another idiot screws up one too many times and is now in jeopardy of not having a job.

Unlike Chris Henry and Odell Thurman, however, Benson hasn't displayed the talent and on-field ability to compensate for his off-field stupidity. Could be tough getting another job any time soon, and I can't imagine any owner dumb enough to offer him more than a minimum contract loaded with escape clauses. Even then, I doubt he's worth the risk.

Here's the potential upside: what would the Bears be willing to part with for, say, LaMont Jordan?

Just sayin'.

MSSM With Good Things To Say About the Raiders?

Perish the thought!

It's a weird time when ESPN.com and NFL.com BOTH have articles saying nice things about the Raiders generally, or specific Raiders.

Over at NFL.com, they've a feature on the best free-agent signings of the last 15 years. The pick for 1999?

Rich Gannon. As well it should be.

Gannon's numbers in the four years he was the full-time starter in Oakland?

2,155 attempts
1,367 completions
63.4% competion rate (59.0% at the low end, 67.8% at the high)
15,787 yards
105 touchdowns
44 interceptions

An average season?

342 for 539, 63.4%, 3,947, 26, and 11. Oh, and he was good for a bit over 300 and 4 on the ground in any given season, too. OH, and one MORE thing -- his completion percentage and rating both improved annually.

You know what? I'd take that as a long-term average for any duration, any amount of years.

Is it any wonder that of all of the Raider QBs I can remember watching -- starting with the downside of Plunkett's career through Russell -- Gannon remains my favorite? Any wonder that I have a signed, framed Gannon jersey on my office wall?

Over at ESPN, meanwhile, there's a very, very curious little projection, a "Five Teams That Will Surprise You" sort of thing. Number five? Oakland.

Here's the money bit:

Sure, the Raiders look to still be the most dysfunctional team in football. But they have plenty of talent on the roster and, no matter what Al Davis thinks, Lane Kiffin can coach.

When's the last time the Raiders were spoken of as having "plenty of talent on the roster," by someone now physically in that very moment wearing some combination of silver and black?

Good times ahead, maybe, finally . . . here's hoping.

Meanwhile, my Lakers are one game away from the NBA Finals. Here's the upside there: we're flying back to the US tomorrow, which means from Game 5 on, I can actually watch the games.

Good times ahead, maybe -- depends on who wins in the East, but either way, should be a good Finals, but here's the real link:

When is it appropriate to start talking about the Gasol deal in the category of "best-ever trades"? Not yet -- the Lakers need a ring or several out of the deal, and he needs to stay healthy and complete his career at the level he projects at -- but if both of those happen, it's a given that this trade will be high on any all-time list.