Indiana? Let it go.

Tonight, elderly sportswriters around the country will soil themselves in unison as the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers take the court to kick off this year's NBA Finals. This will mark the 11th time that the two franchises have met in the Finals, which we admit is remarkable given that the league has only had 62 championships in its history.

But in their rush to hype the series--which really doesn't need any hype, given the quality of the teams and players involved--nearly every major media source has gone out of its way to run columns touting the "historic rivalry" between the two teams. This trend culminated in Sports Illustrated's decision this week to run a two-page pictorial spread of nut-hugger-shorts-era meetings between the two teams.

But all of these maudlin reminiscences do raise a question that we here at the GRBG love to ask when we notice a pre-event hype meme: Who cares? Why should we care about this historic rivalry? The answer is that we probably shouldn't. Because the NBA has no history, and at this point the Celtics and Lakers don't have a rivalry.

History is Dunk

As the blank verse all-stars over at Free Darko have alluded to, the NBA is among the least history-obsessed of the North American sports, and that lack of historical focus has trickled down to the way fans perceive the game. When's the last time you heard anybody (other than Bill Simmons) cite the historic implications of an NBA matchup as a reason to watch? Or indeed seen any media reference to any person or event from the pre Larry-Magic NBA era?

Let's face it: in the collective mind of the general sporting public, the NBA does not exist prior to 1979, giving it an institutionalized sporting memory only slightly longer than that of street luge. Appeals to championship rivalries before that time are as meaningless as baseball references to the dead ball era--Sam Jones might as well be Old Hoss Radburn for all most people care, and peach baskets and flannel uniforms are of limited mass appeal.

So, this recent rash of historical perspective from the eight people on the planet who give even a fractional shit about the pre-Magic era is roughly as useful as tits on bull for 99% of the sporting public. It's useful mainly to keep Bob Ryan off the streets, and does nothing to deepen the average fan's anticipation for or appreciation of this year's series.

Some Learning and Growing May Occur

"But," we hear you say with impeccable straw man timing, "What about the 3 post-1979 Finals between Boston and L.A.? Doesn't that make coverage of the C's-Lakers rivalry relevant to this year's Final?"

Well, no. Because it's not a rivalry if nobody gives a shit about it for 20 years.

Let's perform a little thought experiment: Other than Celtics-Lakers, what are some other great '80s rivalries? And do those rivalries live on in the present?

1. U.S.A-U.S.S.R.

The big one, obviously, as in the '80s the U.S. spent billions of dollars and untold psychic energy to battle an artificial, polyglot empire of potato farmers and goat herders. The average Celtics fan hated any random Soviet hurdler more than they hated anyone on the Lakers (except Kurt Rambis). But as of about 1991, we all stopped caring. The next time the U.S. plays Russia in hockey, we confidently expect a total television audience of 2.

2. Royals-Yankees

Remember those playoff battles? Those were great, right? No, we're seriously asking, because we no longer remember.

3. Tiffany-Debbie Gibson

You get the idea.

Rivalries need regular tending in order to have continued resonance. Celtics-Lakers has been limited to generally meaningless bi-annual meetings for the past 2o or so years. That's an awfully long time to have to nurture memories of the halcyon days of yore. We all grew up and stopped caring. And who can blame us?

So please, media, let's have a little more about this year's teams--stuff like Kevin Garnett's competitiveness, Luke Walton's pedigree, Paul Pierce's stab wounds, Kobe Bryant's assault history . . .

On second thought, let's just stick to the box scores.

Great Moments in Betting History, Part 348

With under a minute to go in tonight's Celtics-Pistons conference championship game, the Pistons were inbounding the ball with a three-point lead. As the teams broke the huddle, the staff at the Undoubtedly Soon To Be Merged Financial Institution Garden tried to fire up the crowd by spinning the opening to Guns 'N' Roses timeless classic "Paradise City." Presumably, the song choice was intended to create an environment intimidating to the visiting Pistons, and coincidentally throw fear into the hearts of those in the betting community who had Detroit on the money line this evening.

However, any trepidation on the part of those bettors was undoubtedly quelled by the sight of Detroit forward Rasheed Wallace singing along to the G'n'R track as he took his position for the inbounds play. This was not the reaction of an intimidated player; indeed, 'Sheed went on to draw a foul and sink what was for all intents and purposes the game-clinching free throw. You'd have to think that the live line on betting futures on the game clicked to 1:1 on the Pistons at that point.

In any event, note to the Garden staff: Be Professional. Take the extra step and check the iPods of opposing players before making end-of-game musical selections. As a hint, we understand that Chancey Billups is deathly afraid of show tunes.

Goofy But True: The Boston Celtics Should Be Black America's Team

Are you a black American? Are you friends (or at least on casual nodding terms) with a black American? Then spread the word: black folk must support the Boston Celtics, or just come out and admit that to the world that they own a Wayne Newton album.

Yes, yes, I know. The Celtics? The team whose mascot and traditional fan base are each tiny drunken Irishmen? The team from the whitest large city in America? The team of Larry freaking Bird?

Yes. And here's why.

1. The Celtics are the Blackest Team in the 2008 Playoffs

"Blackness" is a slippery concept, especially in the context of athletics. "Black" basketball has often been associated with a high-tempo, offense-first, individualist mentality, despite scads of counter-examples both now and throughout the history of the post-integration NBA (about which, more later). But we're avoiding all that and characterizing the Celtics as the blackest team in a much simpler way: counting the number of black Americans on the team.

Along with Philly, the Celtics are one of only two teams in this year's playoffs with a black head coach and an all-black rotation (Brian Scalabrine is the only white guy on C's who plays at all, and he's 11-deep on the chart and hasn't gotten into a game yet in the playoffs this year). Every other team has at least one non-black guy in the rotation (Walton, Kirilenko, Nash, Dirk, Scola, Peja, Manu, Zaza, Turkoglu, Songaila, Calderon, Big Z), or a non-black coach (Flip Saunders).

Hell, the Lakers, who for years served as the unofficial team of black America, are running out the son of the whitest man in America (Luke Walton, son of Bill), a Euro (Pau Gasol), and a guy who speaks fluent Italian and yet is neither Euro nor in the waste disposal business (Kobe). Kareem and Magic aren't walking through that door, people. Time to adjust to the new reality.

2. The Celtics Are the Blackest Team in NBA History

For anybody who came of age in the '80s, the above statement no doubt seems like gibberish. What about the frontcourt of Bird and Kevin McHale, and the backcourt of Danny Ainge and . . . I dunno, Jerry Sichting? Well, those guys were around, no doubt. But look back beyond those guys, to the teams that created the Celtic mystique in the first place, and what do you find?

• In 1950, you find Celtic forward Chuck Cooper, the first black player ever drafted by an NBA team, and thus the first black player associated with an NBA team (the undrafted Earl Lloyd actually got into an NBA game before Cooper that following season, though only because his team started the season a day earlier that the Celtics)

• In 1964, you find the World Champion Celtics running out the first all-black starting five in NBA history, which included three future Hall of Famers in Bill Russell, Sam Jones, and K.C. Jones. This happens two years before Texas Western's all-black starting five famously wins the NCAA title over an all-white Kentucky squad.

• In 1967, you find the Celtics hiring the first black head coach in NBA history (Russell), who later that season also becomes the first black head coach to win an NBA title.

• In 1984, you find K.C. Jones coaching the team to another title, thus making the Celtics the only team to have won championships with two different black head coaches.

• In 1986, you find another Jones-led team putting up banner number 16 in the old Garden. No black head coach has won an NBA title since.

It's possible to go on by, say, listing the approximately three zillion black players who have had their numbers retired by the C's, but this is a blog post, not a novel. So know your history, know your lineups, and pull for black America's team to win title number 17 this year.

[Braces for comments . . .]

A Brief Note of Caution

So, the Celtics have jumped out of the gate at 6-0, with an absolutely goofy +16.3 per-game average point differential, reminding Hub hoops fans of the good old days when these kind of starts were taken almost for granted. Fans are returning in droves to the Whatever It's Called Now Garden/Center/Arena to watch the new Big Three of Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Jesus Shuttlesworth slap around the weaker children of the Eastern Conference. All is sunshine and rainbows and fluffy puppy heads on tiny kitten bodies. But . . .

What we haven't seen mentioned yet in many places is that each of the Big Three are (1) on the wrong side of 30, and (2) currently above their career averages in terms of minutes per game:

----------------Age--------Career Average---------Season to Date-------

Garnett:-------31-----------38.3 min/g-------------39.7 min/g----------
Pierce:---------30-----------37.8 min/g-------------38.8 min/g--------
Allen:----------32-----------37.5 min/g-------------40.5 min/g----------

I can see the rationale behind working these guys harder than usual early on--this is the time of year to build on-court familiarity, and to rebuild the public and internal perception of the C's as a franchise. Plus, the Sox and Pats have pretty well monopolized the market over the past few years, so a little buzz would be good for everyone involved with the C's.

But somebody in Boston needs to be taking the longer view, which is that the team isn't going to do anything in the spring or summer unless all three of these guys are healthy and rested. Doc Rivers needs to stop setting the rotation in the way that maximizes the chances of him saving his own behind in the short term, and move to one that gives the C's a chance to win during the probably two-year window that they have with these three near their peaks.

Perhaps We've Been Too Subtle . . .

As we draw towards the close of 2007, two trends have become increasingly apparent to observant Americans: (1) the country is going to hell in a handbasket, courtesy of a cabal of deranged Southerners; and (2) Boston sports teams are threatening to dominate as they have never dominated before. What most Americans don't seem to have realized, however, is that these two trends are inextricably linked. Consider the following:

For many years, Massholes had a disproportionately large voice in the federal government. From JFK and RFK in the executive branch, to Teddy Kennedy in the Senate, to Tip O'Neill in the House, prominant Bostonians drank and philandered their ways through years of power and influence in Washington. The country responded by strengthening civil rights for women and minorites, expanding the social safety net, winning the Cold War, and implementing new rules designed to liberalize the passing game in pro football. Life was good.

The tradeoff, however, was obvious: in return for heightened political influence, Boston agreed to throw the athletic competitions that mattered most to conservative yahoos. Thus, for forty years the Patriots were incompetent, the Red Sox infuriating, and big-time college sports non-existent. Even the Celtics agreed to use only white players, though that one backfired. (The Bruins were left alone, because nobody cares about placating the Canadians.)

Now, however, we've been subjected to seven years of governance by residents of the South and Mountain West, who have done much to reverse the works of the Masshole years. Boston's influence at the federal level is at its lowest ebb. The result? The Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls in the GWB era, and are in prime position to win another. The Red Sox have won a World Series, and have a good chance to win another. The Celtics have added many large Negroes. (The Bruins remain anonymous. Still don't care about Canada.)

Still, the Southerners appear not to have noticed that Boston is trying to take away all that they hold athletically dear. Therefore, we've been forced to install Boston Freaking College as the #4 college football team in the country. Think about it, yahoos. College football is all you have left. Don't make us take that away as well. We're willing to let BC sink back down into the comfortable anonymity of Sweet 16 appearances, Frozen Four runs, and Meineke Car Care Bowl titles. But we need some reciprocity.

This is your last warning. If stuff doesn't start changing, and soon, not only will BC win the national title, but we'll be sending down Tom Brady to perform gay marriage ceremonies for your sons, Matt Ryan to perform abortions on your daughters, and Kevin Garnett to expand every single one of your wives' horizons. Let no one say they were not warned.

Pass the Rock on the Left Hand Side

From Blender magazine via TrueHoop comes this item from an interview with John Chevy Mellancamp, which I defy anyone to characterize as anything other than awesome.

I've known Larry Bird since we were kids. When he was on the Celtics and I was playing in Boston, he and Kevin McHale would come to my dressing room after the show and smoke me under the table.

Stop and ponder that for a second.

Now try your best to push the image of John Mellancamp in next to Bird and McHale out of your head. Resist the urge to spin out elaborate theories as to what McHale must have looked like when he was baked. Those are but mere tributaries feeding into the majestic stream of consciousness one embarks upon considering what the back of the 1986 Celtics team bus must have been like.

For instance, while Bird and McHale may have been smoking rock stars under the table, it's extraordinarily hard to believe that they were putting away more than convicted weed possesor and dime store Indian Robert Parish. Yeah, no doubt, Parish had to have been the big-time stoner in the '86 C's front court, so that makes three weed fiends in the back of the bus.

Except wait just a minute, because that '86 front court also included Bill Walton (shown here in his salad days as a TrailBlazer). Bill Walton, people. The man who currently broadcasts NBA games while ripping bingers from the t-shirt cannon during commercial breaks. The man who has the biggest smoker in every room he's walked into since he moved into the athletic dorms at UCLA back in the day.

.

Those of you keeping score at home will have noted that we've now identified roughly 28 feet worth of stoners on that '86 team, and we haven't even gotten past the active big men yet. What about the guards? We can probably rule out Mormon Danny Ainge, but you gotta figure Dennis Johnson dipped his toe into the water every so often. Hell, at this point even Jerry Sichting is guilty until proven innocent.

The real shame here is that nobody on that team thought to call Len Bias after draft day to tell him that the secret to NBA success wasn't going out and buying questionable coke, but rather hitting the KB with enormous, goofy white men in hotel rooms in places like Milwaukee and Indianapolis. If he had only known.