Furious Typing: a poem

Sitting at his old typewriter
Raised a lover, turned a fighter
Fueled by rage, tapping keys
Sudden thoughts, desperate pleas

“Dying people on a dying Earth,
choked by those with high net worth,
hold a simple, moral right
Facing death, stand up and fight

Planet killers, hold your breath
Watch your back, merchants of death
Greedy ones, know your fate
The people will retaliate

Your end cheered across the land
A fact you fail to understand”

He stepped away, turned on his game
Surely tomorrow he’d feel the same

January 16th, 2025: a poem

Ten years ago, this very day
I tried to throw my life away
The poison failed to acquiesce
And I woke up a broken mess

Inch by inch I raised my head
Step by step crawled out of bed
Piece by piece put back together
Day by day I braved the weather

A decade passed, as decades do
Some years dragged and others flew
I crave some strong epiphany
Some life-affirming ecstasy

But no such answer did appear
Life gave only what I fear
Nothing

Life must go for its own sake
Ebb and flow, give and take
Three days from now I’ll be flying
A slight improvement over dying

In Loving Memory: a poem

In loving memory of some old geezer
Loving father and people pleaser
Eighty years on planet Earth
Bumbling, fumbling since his birth

Met his wife in New York City
He stood tall and she looked pretty
Made a living fixing cars
Accumulating minor scars

Taught his son to throw a baseball
Took his daughter to the dance hall
They grew up and he grew old
Felt his precious life unfold

At Plymouth Park he fed the fish
Was there he made his final wish
Seventy-nine got diagnosed
One final trip to the coast

When he takes his final breath
And passes swiftly into death
A marker left about his life
His happiness and charming wife

And so this bench sits at the park
In the light and through the dark

Canyon Girl: a poem

What happened to you, canyon girl?
What happened to that wild soul?
Once was young, in love with life
Free of spirit, born of fire

Traded for domestication
Suburban home, two weeks vacation
You used to paint a pretty picture
Now you help the rich get richer

Once had a heart of shining gold
All strong convictions cheaply sold
Spend your time with a rape apologist
Not exactly your older politics

Where have you gone, unquiet mind?
Is it dullness you now find?

What happened to you, canyon girl?

Top 10 Beatles Songs

10. Eleanor Rigby

Eleanor Rigby is a song about a person whose name, one might imagine, is Eleanor Rigby. So she hangs around and picks up rice in a church where a wedding has been. And Paul pronounces “been” how I would pronounce “bean.” Like that one part where Mrs. Weasley says “Where HAVE you BEEN?” The beds were empty, the car was gone, and no note was given.

Anyway, then there’s this other person called Father Mackenzie. Mackenzie is a selfish individual. Mackenzie writes a sermon that no one will hear because Mackenzie likes the appearance of doing great things and being a good person. But in reality, Mackenzie doesn’t care at all. Mackenzie only cares about Mackenzie. Mackenzie’s words are shallow and empty. When the time comes for Mackenzie to show some character, Mackenzie does nothing but wipe dirt from Mackenzie’s own hands, merely going through the motions to maintain Mackenzie’s status. Mackenzie is nothing but a hypocrite. Boy, am I glad I don’t know someone like Mackenzie!

Oh, and the vocals are pretty good in this song.

9. Taxman

The Beatles reference a few real people in their songs, such as Edgar Allan Poe (I Am the Walrus) and Sir Walter Raleigh (I’m So Tired). These two references, made by John Lennon, are a bit cheeky, a bit silly, they might even induce a sense of whimsy. Two years before, however, George Harrison referenced two contemporary political figures. They were Harold Wilson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland at the time, and Ted Heath, Leader of the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland at the time.

The Beatles were being taxed an astronomical amount, and George was rather peeved about it. So he wrote this song to express that sentiment. I like to imagine the Assistant to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland stepping nervously into Mr. Wilson’s office on the day Revolver came out. “Sir,” he begins timidly, “the biggest band in the history of the world have mentioned you in their recent album.”

“Oh,” Mr. Wilson replies Englishly. “Are they commending my leadership?”

“Erm,” the assistant says, “Yes.”

He doesn’t have the heart to tell Mr. Wilson that George Harrison is telling him to fuck off. 

This song is the most politically charged in the Beatles discography. George’s biting, satirical lyrics are his best work with the Beatles, and the bass/electric guitar combo really cooks. 

8. Octopus’s Garden

You know I had to include at least one Ringo song on this list. Well, actually, I don’t have to do that. I don’t have to write this at all, or write anything for that matter. But you know what? I want to, and doesn’t that count for something in this work-a-day world? Sometimes you gotta consider what you’d like to do or where you’d like to be. As for me, I’d like to be, you may have guessed it, under the sea, specifically in the garden of an octopus, specifically in the shade. That sounds pretty great. 

This is just a nice, pleasant song sandwiched between two heavier tracks. Before it comes the screamlike vocals and desperate lyrics of Oh! Darling, and after it comes possibly the heaviest Beatles song in I Want You (She’s So Heavy). So it’s a nice little break between those two. The Beatles [especially in the second half of their career] were great at sequencing their albums, picking the right order of songs. This is just another example of that. 

This song makes me happy, and that’s a good thing.

7. It’s All Too Much

It really is, George. It really is.

This song has one of the best intros in the Beatles catalog. What is John saying? “To your muh!” It’s like he’s about to say “to your mother” but he gets interrupted by this searing, wobbling guitar that fills you with gratitude that electric guitars were invented. When that has run its course, we are graced with glorious chords on a glorious organ. It’s so beautiful.

The drums kick in, and we step into the groove. George’s other-worldly singing is the cherry on top of this birthday cake of a song. So take a piece, but not too much.

This is a euphoric sounding song about euphoric feelings. “It’s all too much for me to take, the love that’s shining all around you.” It’s that feeling when you’re so filled with love, not just love for a person, though that may be involved, but love for life itself, as though every cell of your body is leaping for joy. That’s what this song feels like.

6. Helter Skelter

The Beatles are from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but they were very, very, very popular in the United States of America. 1968, when the White Album [with Helter Skelter] was released, was a very, very, very turbulent time for the U.S.A. There were protests and political upheaval and assassinations and racial tensions and riots and a Democratic President stepping down from his re-election campaign. Kinda like now. 

So now, in whatever year this is, I listen to this album, with Helter Skelter, and it speaks to me. It speaks to me like no other music ever has, as if the Beatles were singing directly to me. They’ve tapped into my spirit, you know? Like when Paul says “When I get to the bottom, I go back to the top of the slide,” he’s saying that life is a loop, repeating itself, and things are repeating themselves right now.

And when he says, “I’m coming down fast but I’m miles above you,” well, “down” means south, like on a map, so I gotta go to a ranch in southern California. The words Helter Skelter have a criss-cross quality to them. That means I should carve an “X” onto my forehead. 

Then there’s “You may be a lover but you ain’t no dancer!” That’s me to a T, whatever that phrase means. I’m not a dancer, I’m a musician! This whole album [and song] is telling me, personally, to make an album that will rock this country. Man, I really need to talk to a record producer in Benedict Canyon.

5. Why Don’t We Do It in the Road?

In the 15th song from the Beatles’ self-titled album, Paul McCartney asks a profound question, “Why don’t we do it in the road?” Most of us enjoy doing it, and we often find ourselves in and around roads. Yet, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone doing it in the road. So why don’t we do it in the road? It seems homo sapiens is the only species that has developed a sense of shame in relation to sex. Monkeys, as the songwriting story goes, saw no issue with doing it in the road.

Paul’s song harkens back to the very first story in the Bible, that of Adam and Eve. Those two ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and their immediate response is to hide in shame and cover their bodies in shame. Perhaps therein lies the answer to Paul’s question. It’s all about the relationship between knowledge and shame. The setting of the song answers itself. The very existence of a road implies some level of intelligence and knowledge. Roads don’t just grow on trees. An intelligent species has to build them. And perhaps any species that develops the intelligence to build roads would inevitably develop the shame to not “do it” in said road.

4. A Day in the Life

All Beatles songs that were written by either Paul McCartney or John Lennon were credited to Lennon/McCartney. Some were written entirely by Lennon, some entirely by McCartney. Others had varying degrees of collaboration between the two. A Day in the Life is a true Lennon/McCartney collaboration and a true masterpiece. 

John’s voice has a dreamlike quality to it throughout the whole song. It transports you into a parallel world. You feel like you’re in England, but not our England. England from an alternate dimension. The lyrics are sublime. Every successive word fits perfectly, as if no other word would work. For me, the song evokes both tragedy and detachment. It feels like listening to an impressionist painting, if it could make music. 

The building to crescendo just rocks your ears and mind. It’s terror-inducing, nightmarish, as life is. Then, suddenly, you wake up, and you gotta get ready for work. That’s just how it is. John’s part is amazing, Paul’s part is amazing, and this song is a masterpiece of their songwriting partnership.

3. Yesterday

Yesterday refers to the day before today. It denotes the past, an inaccessible, unchangeable realm. We can only contemplate it, we cannot touch it or change it. 

Sometimes everything falls apart on a single day. Your life exists in one way, then some single day comes along, out of the blue, out of left field, out of the left field whose grass has been dyed blue, some Kentucky left field. Get it? Bluegrass?

Anyway something comes along out of left Kentucky field and fucks up everything. So you’re just left a shell of who you were, and you don’t even understand why things fell apart, and you’re trying hard to figure it out, but even if you do figure it out, it won’t change the fact that it fell apart, and you’re unbearably desperate to change the past, but you can’t. I mean, that doesn’t really happen to me, per se, because I’m a well-adjusted, content human being, but it could happen to other people, and Paul encapsulates that feeling perfectly.

2. Tomorrow Never Knows

In 1966, the Beatles released this, Revolver, their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is Tomorrow Never Knows, a song so hypnotic, most people probably don’t listen to the lyrics. But they should, because they’re not just about the power of meditation and the importance of love, it’s also a personal statement about the band itself!

1. You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)

I just like the part where they go “you know my name, look up the number.”

The Greatest Basketball Player for Various Amounts of Time

0.4 seconds: Derek Fisher

In 2004 Derek Fisher proved that he’s the greatest basketball player in a 0.4 second timespan. In game 5 of the western conference semifinals, Tim Duncan made a long 2 pointer to give the Spurs a 73-72 lead with 0.4 seconds left. Classic early 2000’s Spurs score. The series was tied 2-2, so this was a very pivotal game. Either the Lakers or the Spurs had won all 5 of the post-Bulls-dynasty championships at this point, and they both had a legitimate chance at winning the title in 2004.

After 3 timeouts, 2 substitutions from the Spurs, and different inbound formations from the Lakers, they were finally ready to inbound the ball. Now, the Lakers had 4 all-time great players on the court: Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant, Karl Malone, and Gary Payton. Throughout the course of their careers, they would combine for 56 all-star selections. Their 5th player was Derek Fisher, a player who amassed 0 all-star selections. And yet, he was the one to rise to the occasion. Payton looked for Kobe, who was double-teamed. A long lob to Shaq seemed improbable, and Karl Malone was just standing around. So Payton threw the ball to Fisher, and in one fluid motion, Derek caught the ball, turned and shot it. The buzzer sounded, the ball went in, the Lakers won the game, and Fisher cemented himself as the greatest basketball player for 0.4 seconds.

1 second: Rasheed Wallace

There are many contenders for the greatest basketball player for one second. Kobe Bryant comes to mind, catching the inbound and making a fadeaway three against the Blazers to win the final game of the season. 

My pick is Rasheed Wallace. It was the March 26th, 2007 game between the Denver Nuggets and the Detroit Pistons. The Nuggets were up 3 with the  ball out of bounds, at halfcourt, with 1.5 seconds on the clock. That is a very good situation for the Nuggets. What would have to go wrong in order for the Pistons to win this game? 

Statistically speaking, NBA teams are extremely good at inbounding the ball safely when they absolutely need to. Teams are usually able to inbound the ball to a good free throw shooter. Good free throw shooters shoot around/above 80% from the line. So either the Pistons would have to immediately foul a Nuggets player, hope that he misses both free throws [4% chance], then get the rebound and throw up a 90 foot prayer at the buzzer, OR they’d have to steal the inbound pass and make a three in one clean motion. 

That’s exactly what happened. The inbound pass was tipped, Rasheed Wallace stole the ball beyond half court with 1.0 seconds left, turned and shot from sixty feet away, banking in the 3 to send the game into overtime. A beautiful play. A steal and 3 points in 1 second. That’s impressive. Ball don’t lie!

9 seconds: Reggie Miller

In game 1 of the 1995 eastern conference semifinals, the Knicks had a 105-99 lead over the Pacers with 18.7 seconds left. Mark Jackson passed the ball into Reggie Miller, who immediately launched a three, sinking it with 16.4 seconds left. The Knicks’ Anthony Mason couldn’t find any teammate on the inbound, so he made a weak pass, which was caught by Miller. He raced back behind the three-point line and drilled his second consecutive three, tying the game at 105 with 13.2 seconds left. That’s 6 points in 3.2 seconds, or 1.875 points per second.

Knicks guard John Starks gets fouled on the inbound pass. As commentator Bill Waton noted, there was “no need to foul in that situation,” considering the game was tied. Typically teams will just try to get one last stop.

Anyway, Starks, a 73.7% free throw shooter that season, missed BOTH free throws. That’s great for the Pacers! But then Patrick Ewing, the Knicks’ best player, secured the offensive rebound. He shot it, missed, and Reggie Miller was fouled on the next rebound with 7.5 seconds left. Reggie, an 89.7% free throw shooter, sunk both shots, thus scoring 8 points in 8.9 seconds. The Knicks failed to get a shot off, and the Pacers won the game. 

Reggie Miller was the greatest basketball player for 9 seconds.

35 seconds: Tracy McGrady

On December 9th, 2004, the Houston Rockets trailed the prime-Duncan-led Spurs 68 to 76 in the final minute of the game. Another classic 2004 Spurs score. McGrady made a three to cut the deficit to 5 with 35 seconds left. The Rockets intentionally fouled Devin Brown, who made 2 free throws. McGrady then brought the ball up, pump faked, and drew a foul on perennial DPOY candidate Tim Duncan, sinking another three in the process. McGrady completed the 4 point play, making the Rockets’ only free throw in the quarter. The score was now 78-75.

After running some time off the clock, Tim Duncan was finally fouled with 16.2 seconds left. Duncan also made his 2 free throws. After a timeout, the Rockets barely made the inbound into McGrady, who dribbled and drained another contested three over another DPOY candidate, Bruce Bowen. 

The Spurs passed the ball into Devin Brown, who fell to the floor, losing the ball. It was picked up by, you guessed it, Tracy McGrady. He dribbled up the court and made, you guessed it, another contested three pointer. The Spurs failed to score in the final seconds, and the Rockets won 81-80. 

It was incredible, amazing, phenomenal! It showcased how powerful offense can be. As good and as important as defense is, the best offense just wins. You can never really force a guy to miss a shot. If a guy like T-Mac is just gonna make four three’s in a row, you can’t stop it. 

Just for fun, if we extrapolate his 35-second stats to 40 minutes [what McGrady averaged that season], he would score 891 points and grab 68 steals. That’s a good game! 

1 quarter: Klay Thompson

The best basketball player in a one-quarter time frame was Klay Thompson on January 23rd, 2015. It was the third quarter of a game between the Golden State Warriors and the Sacramento Kings. Klay went off, to put it mildly. He scored 37 points in the 12 minute period, an NBA record. The man could not miss at all. He made everything. He went 9 for 9 from three point range, which would be an incredible feat for an entire game. He went 13/13 overall from the field and 2/2 from the free throw line.

We talk about players being “in the zone,” and this is the most “in the zone” a player has ever been. If this mystical zone does in fact exist, Klay Thompson has been there, and he’s been there more completely than any other basketball player. 

1 game: Wilt Chamberlain

The greatest basketball player over the course of one game was Wilt Chamberlain on March 2nd, 1962. The game took place in Hershey, Pennsylvania between the Philadelphia Warriors and the New York Knicks. The day before the game, Wilt stayed up all night partying with a young woman in New York City, as Wilt is inclined to do. He almost missed the bus to the Hershey Sports Arena, but once he got there, he cemented himself as the greatest basketball player for a single game. 

He scored 100 points, shattering his previous record of 78 from earlier that year. That 78 required triple overtime, whereas the 100 was accomplished in regulation. 

100-point game doubters/deniers are quickly becoming the most annoying subset of NBA fans. It’s always the same: “we have footage of ____ and not the 100-point game.” There are commenters who believe it’s “insane” that we have a lot of footage of World War II and none of Wilt Chamberlain’s 100-point game. And this is suspicious… somehow. It’s actually a brainless take. Yes, we have footage of the deadliest, most important conflict in the history of humanity, which lasted over five years, but we don’t have footage of a random basketball game in Hershey, Pennsylvania during a time when almost no NBA games were filmed. It’s not crazy at all. 

There’s a temporally illogical belief at the core of this, which is that, because the 100-point game is historically significant, it should have been filmed. Yeah, people  generally film historic things if we can. But you would only know the game is historic AFTER it happened. It’s not like Wilt went around a week before saying, “Hey by the way guys, next Friday I’m gonna drop a hundred points on those sorry-ass Knicks.” It just happened. 

Just think about it for more than five seconds. The game was not in Madison Square Garden. It wasn’t even in the Philadelphia Convention Hall. It was in Hershey, a town 95 miles away from Philadelphia. Why? Because the NBA was so unpopular that they were trying to garner fans from non-major cities. It was towards the end of the season, and the Warriors had no chance of catching the Celtics for the #1 seed, and the Knicks were completely out of the playoff picture. Even for an unpopular league [at the time], it was a particularly unappealing game.

And yet, Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest basketball player for one game, setting the game’s most famous record. It’s certainly Wilt’s most famous one, and ironically it’s one of the more breakable ones for the Big Dipper. No one’s touching 27 RPG, 48.5 MPG, or 50 PPG for a season. But someone could surpass Wilt in a single game.

1 4-round playoff run: Hakeem Olajuwon

In 1994, the Houston Rockets were the 2nd seed in the western conference, so naturally they faced the 7th seed Portland Trail Blazers. Olajuwon led every game in scoring, including a dominant 46-point, 6-block performance in game 2. It perfectly showcased his excellence on both offense and defense. They quickly dispensed with the Blazers.

In the second round, the Rockets faced the Phoenix Suns, led by Charles Barkley. It was a back-and-forth, seven game series between the two contenders. This included a 36-point, 16-rebound, 5-assist, 3-block performance in game 1, and game 7 statline of 37 points, 17 rebounds, 5 assists, and 3 blocks. Amazing stuff. All-around greatness. He helped clinch the series and he proved that he was worthy of that year’s MVP award. I know, it’s a regular season award, but you always like to see the winner do well in the playoffs.

Hakeem continued his dominance in the western conference finals against the Stockton/Malone Jazz. Unsurprisingly, Olajuwon had more amazing performances. It’s easy to just list the statlines again, and they’re remarkable, but you gotta just watch Olajuwon to appreciate his greatness. He had so many post moves, his presence on defense was undeniable, and his basketball I.Q. was top-notch.

In the NBA finals, the Rockets faced off against the New York Knicks. It was one of those finals matchups where the best player on each team played the same position. Patrick Ewing was probably the 4th best center in the league at a time which was rife with great centers. But as the finals played out, it became abundantly clear  that Olajuwon was #1, and Ewing was #4. 

Hakeem’s averages were fairly comparable to his MVP regular season, but Ewing’s dropped significantly due to Olajuwon’s stifling defense. His scoring fell by 5.6 points per game, and his shooting percentage fell by 13.5% to an abysmal 36.3% from the field. Hakeem Olajuwon was clearly the best player on the court, and proved himself the best basketball player for a four-round playoff run.

Side note: the broadcast of game 5 of the finals series was interrupted by footage of some guy driving a white Ford Bronco down the 405 freeway. Odd.

1 season: Shaquille O’Neal

Many great basketball players have had many great seasons. Even I had a great season in 11th grade. I was awesome out there. It was must-see high school basketball, in my parents’ opinion. But I wasn’t the greatest basketball player for one season. That was Shaquille O’Neal in the 1999-2000 NBA season. 

Now am I biased because Shaq is my favorite player and the Lakers are my favorite team and the early 2000s was my favorite era of basketball? No. I’m not biased. I’m the first non-biased, perfectly objective sports opinion writer who’s ever lived. It’s an amazing feeling.

So Shaq was objectively the greatest player for a season. He thoroughly dominated the game of basketball. It was not just that every team knew he was the best player, though that was true. Teams were lost about what to do with him. Should we double team him? Triple team him? Double team him without the  ball? Front him? Foul him? How often? There was no true answer because he was just that dominant. That’s why, when we talk about all-time hypothetical matchups between historic teams, or imaginary teams, you always hear the same refrain: who’s guarding Shaq? 

Shaq’s dominance culminated on his 28th birthday, when he scored 61 points, grabbed 23 rebounds, and shot 68.6% from the field. It was a joy to watch this season, to watch the greatest basketball player for one season.

5 years: Michael Jordan

Michael Jordan had the greatest 5-year stretch of any basketball player ever. The only challenge is picking between the 88-92 stretch or the 89-93 stretch. In 88, he won MVP and Defensive Player of the Year, but awards are just awards. People vote on them. They’re not handed down by God on stone tablets. We often use NBA awards to boost our arguments, then disparage the awards/voters when we don’t like them. When Kareem has 6 MVP’s, that makes him the greatest center, but when Shaq and Kobe only have 1 MVP each, that means that the awards and voters are stupid. It’s awesome.

Anyway, from the 1988/89 season through the 1992/93 season, Michael Jordan was the greatest basketball player over a five year period. He led the NBA every one of those years in win shares, VORP, and PER, if you care about those things. He also led the league every year in points per game, which is a much more understandable statistic. A player plays a certain number of games, they score a certain number of points, then you take the points and divide that number by the number of games. There you go! 

Late 80s/early 90s Michael Jordan had an incredible combination of skill and athleticism. He would fly through the air. He would make acrobatic, contested layups. He had the midrange. He led the league in steals per game in two of those years. His first step was lethal. His competitive drive was legendary, as we all know. He took things PERSONALLY. It’s an interesting quality because, in general, if someone takes everything very personally and gets offended by incredibly minor things, that’s not typically considered to be a good quality. In fact, it’s often considered to a non-masculine quality. BUT if you then kick everyone’s ass at basketball, it cancels out. 

And of course the Jordan-led Bulls won 3 straight NBA championships, and he gave three of the greatest finals performances ever. In 91, he averaged 31.2 points and 11.4 assists per game which is just absurd. Only Magic Johnson has ever had more assists per game in a finals series. It’s crazy to think about, considering how many great point guards/passers/assist-getters have played in the finals. Magic has the highest six spots, then the scorer Michael Jordan, not Isiah Thomas or Bob Cousy or Oscar Robertson or Walt Frazier or John Stockton or Jason Kidd or Lebron James or Chris Paul. Wild. 

In 92, he torched Drexler in the head-to-head matchup, and in 93, he set the still-standing finals record for points per game with 41. The three-peat was complete with MJ earning the finals MVP each time, obviously. He only won the regular season MVP twice in this five year period, but he was the best basketball player in the world throughout the entire five-year period. The NBA MVP award is a strange one.

Oh yeah, he also won an Olympic gold medal as the leader of the Dream Team [though Barkley did lead the team in points per game]. They totally dominated the international competition, winning by an average of 43.75 points over the course of their 8 games. 

MJ had the prolific scoring, the amazing defense, the dominant playoff performances, great handles, great finishing, and great passing when he needed to. He had the greatest 5 years of basketball.

1 lifetime: Lebron James

Lebron James was born in Akron, Ohio, just outside of Cleveland, on December 30th, 1984. That was just a few days after Michael Jordan torched the Cleveland Cavaliers for 45 points. Not sure why I bring that up. It’s not like the two players need to be compared incessantly. They’re just two NBA players among many. We can compare and contrast any of them. 

Anyway, as Lebron began his high school basketball career,  quickly became a phenom, a savant, a wunderkind of basketball. At the time, there were some straight-outta-high-school players who were achieving success in the NBA, notably Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett. It’s been speculated that Lebron may have been the #1 overall pick after his junior year of high school. Junior year! I was in some middle school “competitive” leagues back then and we all talked about him like we were fantasy RPG characters in a small town waiting for the hero to come and fulfill the prophecy. Sports Illustrated even crowned him the “Chosen One” in February of 2002. That was when he was a 17 year-old JUNIOR in high school. There was so much hype. The best NBA players in the world, like Shaquille O’Neal, were attending Lebron’s high school games.

He entered the league as the #1 pick for the hometown Cleveland Cavaliers. He and Carmelo Anthony both won the rookie of the month award every month for their respective conferences, and Lebron won the rookie of the year. He quickly became one of the game’s best players, and came in 2nd place in the highly contested 2006 MVP race. In 2007, at 22 years old, he put on a masterful performance against the mighty, defense-oriented Pistons. He was totally unstoppable, scoring 25 straight Cavalier points in the 4th quarter and overtime, making a game-tying dunk to send the game into another overtime and a game-winning layup in the second overtime period.

Lebron’s first stint in Cleveland was characterized by his incredible, Herculean efforts with a subpar supporting cast. The Cavs were never able to secure a true co-star for him. Even the big names they did sign [like Shaquille O’Neal and Ben Wallace] were well past their prime. It’s almost like great NBA players don’t really want to live/play in Cleveland, Ohio.

Speaking of which, Lebron left Cleveland, Ohio with 2 MVP’s under his belt and headed to Miami. There he won 2 more MVP’s, 2 championships, and 2 Finals MVP’s. His 2013 season was one of the best ever, a perfect mix of athleticism, IQ, and skill. Upon his return to Cleveland, fans, players, and analysts began to ask, “How long can he keep playing at an elite level?” and they’re still asking that 10 years later. 

Anyway, in 2015, he had yet another great season. This time he was teamed up with Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love. Both were better teammates than he ever had in his first stint in Cleveland. Naturally, they did pretty well in the playoffs. Unfortunately, in game 4 of a 1st-round sweep, Celtics forward Kelly Olynyk hooked Love’s arm and ripped out his shoulder. In game 1 of the finals against the Warriors, Kyrie Irving suffered a fractured kneecap and was ruled out for the rest of the series. Not great. The Warriors won the series, but Lebron did receive some votes for finals MVP.

Lebron had another great season in 2016, with similar stats to his 2015 campaign. The Cavs swept the Pistons, then swept the Hawks. In the conference finals, the Cavs beat the Toronto Raptors, which was very common in Lebron’s second stint in Cleveland. As we all know, they faced the Warriors in the finals again. That Warriors team had just won 73 out of 82 games [an NBA record], they had the only unanimous MVP, Steph Curry, and they were considered one of the greatest teams of all time. Predictably, the Warriors went up 3-1 in the series. 

No team had ever come back from a 3-1 deficit in the NBA finals. Teams in that situation were 0-32 at that point. It seemed incredibly unlikely that the first such comeback would be against a 73-9 team with the unanimous MVP and 2 games at home. Yet, in game 5, Lebron scored 41 points on 53% shooting, grabbed 16 boards, dished 7 assists, got 3 steals and 3 blocks in a do-or-die situation. But hey, Draymond Green was suspended [that’s what Draymond Green does], so that probably won’t happen in game 6 right? Actually it was the same story. James had another 41-point night, with 8 rebounds, 11 assists, 4 steals and 3 blocks, on 59% shooting. And in game 7, among other things, Lebron had the greatest, most clutch block in the history of basketball, preventing an Andre Iguodala layup. The Cavs completed the comeback, and Lebron led both teams in all 5 major statistical categories. He proved that, even though he wasn’t the MVP, he was still the best basketball player on the planet, which happened with several MVP winners.

As we all know, Kevin Durant joined that 73-9 Warriors team in the off-season, creating the greatest “super team” of all time. The two teams met up in the finals the next 2 years, with Lebron producing some of the greatest finals averages ever, but falling to the overpowered Warriors. One stat that encapsulates these finals is that in game 3 of the 2017 finals, Lebron James played 46 minutes. In those 46 minutes, the Cavs outscored the Warriors by 7 points. In the 2 minutes that Lebron was on the bench, the Cavs were outscored by 12, ultimately losing the game by 5. 

During his time with the Lakers, Lebron has experienced a slow but steady decline. He’s still an elite player, but not quite as good as he was in 2013, which is 11 years ago now. That being said, his longevity is unprecedented. His scoring at 39 is way above anyone else at 39. His scoring in his 21st season is miles ahead of anyone else in their 21st season. He became the 2nd oldest finals MVP in 2020. Lebron is the NBA’s all-time leading scorer and the only player to score 40,000 points in the NBA. Lebron’s basketball career speaks for itself.

But wait a minute… he kinda sucked in the 2011 Finals. Remember that? You know what, never mind. The greatest basketball player for a lifetime is actually Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Opinions on NBA Opinions

With virtually any human enterprise, we want to know who’s the best, the most influential, the greatest, and so on. We make  lists of the greatest films, greatest guitarists, greatest writers, and so on. The NBA is no different. We talk about greatest players, greatest teams, greatest coaches, greatest shooters, scorers, defenders, draft classes, big three’s, and so on. It’s fun. It’s fun to think about and talk about and read other people’s lists. 

Or, it should be fun. It seems to generate a great deal of anger in some people. Any list of greatest players or teams or point guards or whatever that I see is always followed by a series of infuriated disagreements. It’s fine to disagree, but the anger can get so strange and extreme. A pretty average “Top 10 Players Ever” list might look like this: 1. Michael Jordan 2. Lebron James 3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 4. Magic Johnson 5. Larry Bird 6. Bill Russell 7. Kobe Bryant 8. Tim Duncan 9. Wilt Chamberlain 10. Hakeem Olajuwon. That’s not my top 10 list, but it’s a pretty standard list, if you ask me. A lot of lists look pretty similar. But then you have guys that say things like, “If you don’t have Kobe in your top 3, you don’t know anything about basketball!” Really? I don’t know anything about basketball if I put Kobe a few places lower on a top 10 list? I don’t know anything about basketball? Not a single thing about it? 

That’s so stupid. The way I look at a top 10 greatest players list is that they’re pretty close. They’re all amazing players, nearly all just as good, so if I put someone at 8 and another person at 2, that’s not a huge gap for me. It’s not worth getting so riled up. 

Here’s another thing that happens: people will cite the opinions of NBA greats as being of more value than a non-NBA player’s opinions. It makes intuitive sense. NBA players, especially great ones, know the game better, they’re playing against top competition, so their opinions matter more. And certainly the opinions of NBA legends are incredibly valuable, insightful, and interesting, but their status as a great player doesn’t automatically make their view “correct.” Because, if you listen to enough NBA legends talk about the game, you’ll find they disagree with each other quite a lot. An NBA writer may put Hakeem at #11 while Kevin Durant puts Hakeem at #4, so you’d think that the NBA writer is just wrong because he’s just a writer, but another NBA great may also put Hakeem at #11, so now what?

It’s just all opinions, man. I love hearing other people’s NBA opinions even if they differ drastically from mine. It tells me a bit about them, how they see the game, what they value. It’s fun. We can go back and forth a bit, but in the end it’s just opinions.

Here’s an opinion of mine: I think there is a highlight bias in the collective NBA mind. Highlights are cool. They look sick. They’re exciting. But they don’t necessarily align entirely with a person’s ability to play basketball. There’s some correlation, of course; if a player has a lot of really great highlights, it’s likely that they are a pretty good player. But it’s not entirely related. Highlights, by definition, exclude lowlights. If you watch highlights of a player, it’s not gonna show them missing shots, turning over the ball, or making costly errors on defense. Sometimes people with great highlights make a lot of mistakes. 

I know people don’t base their entire opinion’s on a player’s caliber based on his highlights, but the exciting plays stick in a person’s mind more easily. 

So it’s my opinion that the highlight bias favors exciting perimeter players over less exciting “bigs.”

Here’s a sub-point to that broader point: it’s not just highlights, but people have a tendency to value “skill” over “ability.” This concept is exemplified perfectly by James Harden’s quote, “I wish I could be 7-feet, run and just dunk. That takes no skill at all.” This is a bit of trash talk about Giannis Antetokounmpo when the pair were MVP rivals. Now I could respond and say that Giannis does have a lot of skill, which is what I believe. But I’d rather take the quote at face value. Yes! If you could just dunk all the time, you would do it! Any player would do that! The dunk is the most efficient shot in the game! It’s like 99% accurate, if you can dunk, you should dunk!

This is what always annoyed me when talking about Shaquille O’Neal. People would say, “He’s just big and all he does is dunk.” I would disagree with that, but even if it was true… SO WHAT? He was the best player at the time. If you want to say that you don’t like his playstyle, that’s fine, but when we’re talking about the best player, the style shouldn’t really factor in. It’s just about who’s best. 

Like what was Shaq supposed to do? Was he supposed to say, “Hey guys, I know I’m bigger and stronger than anyone in the game, and I can dunk all the time,  but some people might not appreciate that, so I’m gonna take some wild fadeaways and cool step back threes just for fun.” When you’re on offense, you try to score, you don’t get any extra points for scoring in a more “skilled” manner. This also came up with field goal percentage. Shaq led the league in field goal percentage several times while also being near the top in scoring. That’s a good quality, in my opinion, but some would try to deflect the point by saying, “Well, it’s only cause he shoots so close to the basket.” So? He’s able to get close to the basket more effectively than anyone. When you shoot the ball, you want it to go in. 

The debate that generates the most emotion is who’s better between Lebron James and Michael Jordan. Personally I think there are a lot of players that could be considered the GOAT, but most people pick one of these two. People are so passionate about this one. It’s funny to me because I think most people who pick Lebron would put MJ at #2, and most people who pick MJ would put Lebron at #2. It’s just one number off, but it’s so desperately  important for people.

Sometimes I see people say things like “MJ never won without Pippen,” as part of their argument that Kobe or Lebron or whoever else was better than MJ. It’s fine to think those guys are better than MJ, but this point always seems so silly to me. What was Jordan supposed to do, exactly? Was he supposed to say: “Hey, I just won three championships in a row with my teammate Scottie Pippen. He’s a great player and I’m the best. I retired, came back, and we won two more championships. But you know what? In the future there will be a similar player to me that is part of an amazing duo [Shaq and Kobe], but he’ll separate from his amazing teammate and then win two championships without him, proving that he can win without Shaq. Because I know this, somehow, I need to prove that I can win without my teammate, so I’m going to force management to trade Pippen away for a young Tracy McGrady so I can prove that I can win a championship without Pippen.”? 

Ridiculous.

Just one more thing: we talk about underrated players and overrated players. And I used to think of a player like Moses Malone as a really underrated player because the typical 5 best centers are talked about way more often and he’s not mentioned much but he was one of the best players and all that. But then I look at rankings, and I rank him around the same as most lists. Usually he’s #6 or #7 on all-time centers lists and in the 17-22 range on all-time players lists, which is where I’d rank him. So I don’t really think he’s underrated, just not talked about much.

And that’s that. My actual NBA opinions can get very wild, and it’s fun!

Celebrities are Stupid and Pointless [except the one that I like (Brie Larson, please go out with me)]

So recently an event called the Met Gala happened. Well, not recently, but it was recent when I started writing this. Then I took a long break and moved to another continent. They call it the Met Gala, but I don’t think I ever see, you know, Tom Seaver there. Or Darryl Strawberry. Definitely not Mike Piazza. I don’t know how it can be the Met Gala without those guys, but I digress. 

The Met Gala is a special event where celebrities come together and wear the stupidest things that humanity could possibly imagine. And they all get together and talk about how amazing they all are for being celebrities and attending this celebrity event for celebrities. And the rest of us are meant to watch admiringly from behind an invisible [though incredibly strict] societal barrier between us and them. Because they are our superiors. And we must honor them.

In reality, though, they’re all just out-of-touch, phony people who are completely full of themselves. Phoniness, out-of-touchness, and full-of-onselfness are bad qualities, no matter who has those qualities, and celebrities have them in abundance.  Except Brie Larson. She’s cool. I can just tell, somehow. She’s chill, she’s pretty, and if she ever felt inclined to go out with me, I think that would be a pretty cool thing. Maybe we could even go to the next Met Gala together.

But hey, it’s possible that I’m being a bit too harsh on the celebrities. They can’t all be all that bad all the time. I’m sure some celebrities (like Brie Larson, for example) are very nice people. If you saw them, you’d say “Hello there,” and they’d say “Nice weather we’re having!” or something along those lines. That’s pretty nice. Some are nice, fine, but many have those aforementioned bad qualities. Qualities that you wouldn’t like in a “regular” person, whatever that means.

And it seems like celebrities are just getting worse and worse, doesn’t it? In the 20th century, there was at least a general  sense of merit. Babe Ruth was so famous because he was good at hitting home runs. Marlon Brando was good at acting. Michael Jackson was good at making music, and so on. We still have some of those. People are still good at hitting home runs and acting and making music. But we also have celebrities who don’t seem to do anything, as far as I can tell. Social media influencers and socialites and whatever other terms they use. Famous for being famous. And, admittedly, we did have that before with people like Zsa Zsa Gabor. She was kinda famous for being famous, but the level of fame and the commonality of the “famous for being famous” phenomenon is so much greater in the 21st century. 5 of the top 20 most followed people on Instagram are famous for being famous [by my understanding of the phrase (and in my personal opinion)].

Not only all of that, but they’re also consuming us off the proverbial cliff. Celebrities are unsustainable, that’s what I mean. Their countless vacations with private jets, their giant mansions, huge swimming pools, car collections, almost everything they do is just horrible for the environment. They’re just so bad. I mean, if you were an interplanetary consultant, and you came to Earth to analyze its climate problems, you’d quickly say, “First off, you gotta get rid of these fossil fuel companies and their lobbyists, they’re just the worst.” Then the second thing you’d say is, “Man, these celebrities are really fucking it all up. Definitely get rid of those people. Not Brie Larson, though, her smile alone could light up a city.”

Okay, so I’ve been pretty critical of the celebrities so far. Let me advocate on their behalf for a quick second. I don’t think celebrities should be gawked at or harassed or stalked or anything like that. If a celebrity wants to enjoy a cappuccino at an outdoor cafe, they should be able to do so in peace. If you’re walking by, you shouldn’t stare at them or bother them. Unless the person walking by is me and the person enjoying the cappuccino is Brie Larson. In that case, I will walk up to her and chat her up. That wouldn’t even be bothering her, it would just be a great moment for us.

People shouldn’t take photos or videos of celebrities when they’re out and about. And those photos get on the covers of Star and People and Us magazines, and that’s supposed to be important somehow. If you’re a paparazzi photographer, you should go home and rethink your life, but you probably won’t.

Don’t mistreat them, that’s the basic point.

So celebrities are bad, and they should be criticized for their harmful behavior and mistakes [Brie Larson never makes any] but we shouldn’t be horrible to them for idiotic reasons. We shouldn’t stalk them. We shouldn’t obsess over them. We shouldn’t concern ourselves over their dating lives [well, in Brie Larson’s case, I think we can all agree that she should date me.]

Nothing that I’ve said is particularly groundbreaking or profound or insightful. In fact, I think most people would agree that we shouldn’t care too much about celebrities. I’ve never heard anyone say, “You know what would be good for me personally and for society as a whole? It’d be good to become really obsessed with celebrities. That should be the main focal point of life. Let’s do that.” There doesn’t exist a single person who believes that celebrity obsession and celebrity worship should dominate our lives. Yet, celebrity obsession abounds…

Our obsession with celebrities’ dating/personal lives is particularly pointless. Hot/successful/famous/ talented people will date and have sex with other hot/successful/famous/talented people. Why is this treated as crazy gossip? It’s so unbearably obvious. Oh, the sexy actor is dating the sexy actress? I’m so shocked! The dating lives of celebrities should be of no interest to anyone else, except me and Brie Larson. That’s different. I actually have strong feelings for her cause I basically know her, and we would definitely have a special connection, okay? Brie and I get each other.

Society’s celebrity obsession [that I’m not a part of] creates a horrible series of events. As our society becomes more obsessed with celebrities, the result is that more and more people feel a stronger and stronger desire to become celebrities. Celebrity wannabes resort to more and more stupid/pointless methods of becoming celebrities. So celebrities, as a whole, become even more stupid and pointless than they already were. Wanting to be a singer or an actor is okay. Those are fine, creative pursuits, but the desire to just be a celebrity is a waste.

With the proliferation of social media, celebrities are more inclined to share their support for various socio-political causes and their opinions on various current issues. That’s not entirely new, but it’s more common now than ever. Before, you had to play a big concert just to say, “Hey, maybe the U.S. shouldn’t kill innocent people in Iraq,” but now celebrities  can just whip out a cell phone, type 140 characters, and broadcast their opinions to millions of people. Why do they do this? There are multiple reasons. There’s some pressure to do so. A lot of people, for some reason, feel that their favorite celebrities are obligated to voice their opinion on modern issues and conflicts. Some celebrities recognize that it’s good for their personal brand to be seen as a socially conscious person. So even though they don’t know much about any issue, they’ll take an easy stance to support black people or gay people or the environment or something like that. And some celebrities do educate themselves and do feel compelled to lend their support to a certain cause. Often there’s a combination of reasons.

But for the most part, why would we give a single shit? Some of these issues are very important, so why would we look to an actor’s opinion to help formulate our own opinion? Unless that actor is Brie Larson; she so eloquently sheds light on social issues. It’s so beautiful. But maybe we’re not basing our opinions on what celebrities say, maybe we just want them to express good views on current events. Why? I mean, sure, it’s great when actors are good people. I want actors to be good people. I want my mailman and bartender to be good people, but I don’t expect them to give me their beliefs on the Russia-Ukraine war. They might even have shitty opinions on it; it wouldn’t change the actual ensuing events of the war. 

Alas, the reality of fame, though. As much as I don’t like it, people pay attention to celebrities’ opinions. Taylor Swift tells people to register to vote, and the vote.org sees a big upsurge in voter registration. So maybe they should use their fame to promote good causes? And if I become a famous but elusive writer, will I feel the moral obligation to give my opinions on wars [they’re bad]? Is it true that celebrities are obligated to use their platform and influence to raise awareness and support change on important issues, despite how stupid that arrangement is? I think the question of whether famous people should speak out on issues is a question for undergraduate philosophy students to discuss in their ethics class. That question is not the point of this post. 

The point of this post is to encourage non-celebrities [like myself] to stop caring about celebrities because it’s stupid and pointless. Stop caring about celebrities’ personal lives, their homes, the clothes they wear, the restaurants they frequent, the people they date, and so on. I’m not saying you can’t enjoy their art. That part is great, enjoy as much art as possible. Just stop concerning yourselves with celebrities as people. From this day forward, I will stop caring about celebrities. There’s one exception, though, which is Brie Larson, because I love her.

One more thing: the whole pointless game of celebrity obsession is given away by the fact that celebrities are often mistaken for other celebrities. A person sees a celebrity, recognizes that the person is famous, but doesn’t really know who it is, but they’re excited to see and talk to them, so they guess the celebrity’s name, and they guess wrong. A person sees a person and thinks, “hey that’s an actor! That’s Elijah Wood, isn’t it? I’m gonna say ‘hi’ to him and tell him I loved the Lord of the Rings.” Then Daniel Radcliffe replies politely, says thank you, and maybe even poses for a picture with the other person. This happens with a lot of actors and actresses. If you can’t really recognize them, then you’re probably not a huge fan of their work, and if you’re not a huge fan of their work, then why is it exciting to meet them?