The Best Ever?

The "Basketball for Thought" is a commentary by Kris Gardner.

May 2001

I have been told I'm a pessimist. I always have been; and, I probably always will be. (However, if you want to know the truth, I refer to myself as a realist, not a pessimist.) So, being a realist, I am long tired of any conversations which discuss so and so as "the best ever". How can such a question be answered? There is no correct or incorrect answer; so, what's the point? Well, since the LA Lakers are currently 9 - 0 in the 2001 playoffs; and, they are only 6 more consecutive victories from becoming the first NBA team to win a championship without losing a playoff game; the "best ever" nonsense has sprouted again. Why?

There are no guarantees in life or sports. The Spurs could grow some courage and get some good production from their point guards and Danny Ferry and make this an interesting series. Or Kobe could blow out his knee when he lands awkwardly on the court after blowing past Derek Anderson and dunking on Tim Duncan and / or David Robinson. Or the Philadelphia 76ers or the Milwaukee Bucks could defeat the Lakers. A lot of factors remain in the mix before any "best ever" talk should even begin. However, let's say the Lakers go 15 - 0, now what? Are they going to travel in a time machine and play the Jordan led championship Bulls' team that won 72 games in a best of 7 series or the 1986 Boston Celtics championship team or the '71 - '72 Lakers with Wilt, Jerry West, Gail Goodrich, and company. Wait, I know. Shaq and Kobe are going to travel forward through time and play all the future champions in a best of 7 and defeat all of them, too. You can call it semantics; but, that's what "best ever" means to me: past, present, and future.

The 2000 - 2001 Lakers are on a roll. They've won 17 straight games going back to the regular season. However, the same media who, in January and February, said LA would trade Kobe this summer if the Lakers don't repeat are now sparking "best ever" conversations. Have they forgotten those trade talks already? If the team finishes these playoffs undefeated, it would be a tremendous accomplishment; but, it would no more stamp them as the "best ever" than the 72 - 10 Bulls championship squad was claimed to be.

Winning a championship is a difficult task. Different types of adversity ranging from injuries to chemistry problems to difficult opponents all play a major role in the road to a title. Consequently, I don't denigrate a team for winning a championship in a shortened season or because a superstar retired to play baseball or because a starting backcourt suffered hamstring injuries at the start of the series. Those factors are a part of life and sports; so, if a team is able to take advantage of those situations, give them credit instead of saying "what if this?" or "what if that?". If "so and so would have been playing" or if "so and so wouldn't have been hurt", things would have been different. Well, whatever the reason, he wasn't playing; so, accept it and move on. Excuses and injuries are a part of life.

Good luck to the Lakers. If they go 15 - 0, my hats off to them. They would have accomplished a feat no other team has (so far). However, being the first to accomplish something does not necessarily make you the best at it. What if next year's Lakers go 73 - 9 and lose 1 playoff game, then what?