Today's High Five: U.S. Open and other endings

^
5. Martin Kaymer reminds me a lot of myself.

No, I'm not talking about his wire-to-wire victory in the U.S. Open, his incredible putting, his bunker play, his 310-yard drives, his good looks, his physique or his overflowing bank account.

I'm talking about his apparent disdain for using wedges around the greens. Like me (and many other high-handicappers), the man putts everything he possibly can.

On one hole, Kaymer could have tried a tricky chip from a tight lie over a bunker into a pin near the edge of the green. Instead, he actually putted backward through the fringe, leaving himself with a long par putt from off the green. He two-putted from there for a bogey, and seemed quite happy to get it.

With a huge lead over the field, he knew that the only way he could lose the tournament was by experiencing a few horrific holes. He knew that the best way to avoid that was to stick with the club he trusted most. I loved it because I do the exact same thing. (And not only when I am leading the U.S. Open.)

What I didn't love was Kaymer lapping the field. I dig fantastic finishes, and watching dramatic U.S. Open battles has become a Father's Day ritual. So Tiger being hurt, Phil stinking up Pinehurst, Rory failing to find any magic, Bubba missing the cut and everybody else being unwilling or unable to challenge Kaymer turned the tournament into the Who S. Open and ruined my Father's Day.

Ruined it, I say!

Actually, that's not close to being true. I had a lovely, relaxing day. Roberta, Simmie and I took a long walk and visited with some goats and a donkey at a nearby hobby farm. I saved nearly $40 on a $12 grocery store bill - I am not making this up! - and even received a $10 instant rebate for buying a $5 pie. That's right: They paid me 5 bucks for taking a key lime pie off their hands! Later, I thoroughly enjoyed the Copper River salmon I grilled on a cedar plank for dinner. (And pie for dessert!) Of course, I also took several moments to fondly recall my many happy times with my father, truly a great man.

Kaymer even saved an otherwise anticlimactic U.S. Open for me by putting from off the green - well off the green - on at least a dozen occasions.

The next time I'm playing with my buddies and they scoff at me for putting from 15 feet off the green, I'll just smile and say, "It worked for the Who S. Open champion!"

4. And speaking of anticlimactic, it sure would have been nice if the Heat had bothered showing up for the last three games of the NBA Finals.

You know what? Instead of totally ragging on the losing team, let's give a big thumbs-up to the winners.

The Spurs were the NBA's best all season and they underscored their dominance in the Finals. They are talented and savvy and well-coached and deeper than the Grand Canyon. They wore out LeBron & Co., outplayed them, outclassed them and outscored them by 20 points per game after the series was tied 1-1.

There was a lot of talk about players' legacies going into this series, specifically revolving around LeBron James and Tim Duncan.

Despite all the haters' blah-blah-blahing, LeBron's legacy is fine. He has won two titles, has carried two organizations to a total of five Finals appearances and already is one of the top 10 basketball players ever.

Duncan? You know, he's pretty good, too!

3. The U.S. Open and NBA Finals weren't the only things to end Sunday. I already miss Game of Thrones.

It might be time to put my HBO subscription on hiatus for a little while.

2. And while we're on the subject of endings, this weekend marked the end of my Little League umpiring season. 

Here in Charlotte, it is too hot and humid to make the kiddies play all summer, so they have spring and fall seasons.

I had a lot of fun in my first full season behind the plate and in the field. And hey, I only ejected one coach all year - and I let him hang around for at least three innings of whining longer than I should have.

My highlight: During a brief time-out while one of his teammates was tying a shoe, a 10-year-old catcher turned around and asked me: "Do you umpire MLB, too?"

I was so stunned, I didn't even have a clever retort. I probably even blushed. Umps don't get compliments very often, especially one quite like that!

1. The weekend's first ending, the L.A. Kings' clutch performance against the Rangers in the Stanley Cup Final, served as a happy reminder of something that happened to me 20 years earlier.

That memory actually started 21 years ago, when Wayne Gretzky and the Kings lost in the 1993 Final to the Canadiens. I was the lead hockey writer for AP back then, and my coverage earned the Will Grimsley Award for best body of work.

Flash forward to '94. This time, the Rangers were in the Final, and prevailed over the Canucks in a thrilling seven-game series to break their 54-year championship drought.

About two weeks after covering that series, Roberta and I were flown to a resort in southern California, where I received my '93 award at the Associated Press Sports Editors conference. Because I happened to be the first AP writer called to the podium, I had the stage to myself for about a minute while my peers applauded.

Twenty years later, I still consider that minute to be the pinnacle of my AP career ... and one of the great things to happen to me in what I acknowledge has been a very lucky life.
^

Finally time for the Finals!

^
The NHL is the most egalitarian league. If you make it to the playoffs, you have a chance. Not a chance only in a cliche kind of way - I mean, every team that makes the playoffs in every sport thinks it has a chance even though the opposite is true - but a legitimate shot at winning the Stanley Cup.

Look at what the L.A. Kings, who finished sixth in the Western Conference during the season, have done to reach the Stanley Cup Final. They fell behind the Sharks 3 games to none but stormed back to win the series, taking Games 5 and 7 on the road. They then met the Ducks, the No. 1 seed, and fell behind 3 games to 2 before winning the last two games. Then came the defending Cup champion Blackhawks. This time, the Kings got the 3-1 series lead and let Chicago back in it before rallying from a late Game 7 deficit to win in OT.

On L.A.'s winning goal, Al Martinez flipped a soft 50-foot shot from the point. The puck appeared to nick somebody's stick in the shot, changing directions slightly. Its trajectory continued upward until it hit the shoulder of Chicago defenseman Nick Leddy. That changed the direction of the puck yet again, and it fluttered past goalie Corey Crawford and into the net. Wow!

When was the last time an NBA team made it to the Finals on a basket that deflected off an opponent's shoulder?

Whereas David Tyree's catch in the 2008 Super Bowl is considered one of the most miraculous (and fortuitous) plays in sports history, goals like Martinez's happen ALL THE TIME in the NHL. Luck is a bigger factor in hockey than in any other sport, as the puck takes wild bounces constantly. Then there's the goaltender factor - a hot goalie can (and has) carried seemingly inferior teams to great heights. There is no real equivalent in other sports.

So with the Kings getting great goaltending from Jonathan Quick - a native of my hometown of Milford, Conn. - and getting even greater bounces at the most crucial moments, they were able to win three Game 7s, all on the road. Amazing.

By comparison, the Rangers had an easy road to the Final, although the Eastern Conference's No. 5 seed did have to overcome a 3-games-to-1 deficit to defeat the heavily favored Penguins in the second round.

So the Final, which starts Wednesday, will pit the clubs that had the league's 9th- and 12th-best records.

Is it a total cop-out to predict that the luckiest team will win?

Yes? Tough, because that's the best I can do!

+++

Meanwhile, it was far easier to predict what happened in the NBA, where the team with the best regular-season record (Spurs) will meet the two-time defending champs (Heat). What else is new?

I can't remember the last time the NBA produced a true surprise at this stage - and that's fine, too. We have the NHL for that. The NBA tends to reward teams for proven, sustained excellence.

I enjoy watching the Heat thanks to the amazing LeBron James. Plus, his second fiddle is Dwyane Wade, arguably the greatest basketball player in Marquette history.

Even with those stars, however, Heat games sometimes are boring because they can be slow-paced defensive battles. LeBron and Wade also tend to go 1-on-1 quite often, which leads to a lot of standing around by their teammates and a lot of 3-pointers jacked at the 24-second-clock buzzer.

The Spurs, on the other hand, are almost always a pleasure to watch. They share the ball beautifully and play sound fundamental basketball. They also are much taller than the Heat, helping to create even more of a contrast of styles.

The teams met in a memorable NBA Finals last year. The Spurs seemingly had the title won in Game 6 but a questionable coaching decision by the usually outstanding Gregg Popovich helped cost his team the game and, eventually the title. (Popovich inexplicably benched Tim Duncan down the stretch, leading to Chris Bosh grabbing key offensive rebounds, including one that set up Ray Allen's tying 3-pointer.)

Now Popovich and the Spurs get a chance at revenge ... and it says here that they'll get it.

The Spurs have homecourt advantage, which is always huge but is even bigger now that the league has returned to a 2-2-1-1-1 format for the Finals. The change (from 2-3-2) means the Spurs will be home not just for Game 7 if necessary but also for the always pivotal fifth game.

Beyond that, I just like the way the Spurs match up with the Heat. Popovich can go big and the Heat really can't answer that. Popovich can, however, match the Heat if both teams want to go small. Kawhi Leonard is an excellent defender who will make LeBron work for everything, and if Manu Ginobili's shot is on, he will cause big problems for the Heat.

And I just talked about two Spurs difference-makers without even mentioning future Hall of Famers Duncan and Tony Parker.

The Heat will need Bosh to justify his $100 million salary and also will need major contributions from several supporting players, most notably Allen, Mario Chalmers and a couple of bigs.

I'm saying Spurs in 6, and they won't even need a basket that deflects off of Udonis Haslem's earlobe to do it.
^

Game of Thrones: Greatness ... and dragons, too!

^
Just when you think you have it all figured out, along comes something new.

OK, now in its fourth season, Game of Thrones is hardly new. But it's new to my "Best of Nadel" list, and what else really matters in life?

The acting is brilliant, from leading actors such as Peter Dinklage (who won an Emmy as wise-cracking dwarf Tyrion), Lena Headey (Cersei) and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (Jaime Lannister) to supporting players Jack Gleeson (the recently departed King Joffrey), Maisie Williams (Arya Stark) and Sophie Turner (Sansa Stark), all the way down to the bit players.

The story-telling is wonderful, weaving in themes of angst and forbidden love and terror and longing and hubris and bile and guile. Oh, and damn cool dragons, too!

HBO, which had been flagging a little since The Wire went off the air, has struck gold with Game of Thrones, which has the network's highest ratings since The Sopranos.

My biggest beef is that friends who have read the books always want to tell me what's going to happen next. Hey! I don't want to know who is next to get beheaded, to be saved, to be damned. For me, a good TV show is like a good athletic event -- I hate it when I accidentally learn the final score of a game I've recorded. It's all about the drama!

I'm happy to put Game of Thrones on the pantheon of all-time great HBO dramas ...

1. The Wire. There are those who think this is the greatest series in television history, and it's hard to argue with that ... even if the fifth and final season can't quite keep up with the first four. I know I can't think of a show that has captured the hopelessness of inner-city life any better.

2. The Sopranos. The standard against which all cable TV series must be judged. It had a couple of mediocre seasons, and the final scene will be debated forever, but the series brought us Paulie Walnuts, gabagool, Artie Bucco, Father Phil, manacot, Pine Barrens, "Waddayagonnado?" and so many other memorable characters, phrases and scenes. "Iconic" is an overused word, but it fits here.

3. Game of Thrones. Fun, exciting and all of the stuff I said earlier. If it lasts long enough and doesn't have a bad season -- so far, so great -- it could ascend to No. 1.

4. Deadwood. Turns out, the Wild West was even more wild than we thought! Ian McShane's Al Swearengen truly is one of the great characters ever: vile, repugnant, unapologetic and maniacally vain. Lots of great supporting characters, too.

5. Six Feet Under. The show about a family of undertakers was always so much more about life than death. A tremendous ensemble of actors, including Michael C. Hall, Frances Conroy, Lauren Ambrose (my personal favorite as the eye-rolling, deep-sighing youngest Fisher, Claire) and Richard Jenkins, as well as "guest-regulars" Kathy Bates and James Cromwell.

Honorable Mention: Rome, Boardwalk Empire, Oz, In Treatment, True Blood (Season 1).

Top 5 HBO Comedies: Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Larry Sanders Show, Real Time with Bill Maher, Veep, Entourage.

Worst HBO Series Ever: John From Cincinnati. Yes, I actually watched the entire series, waiting for something to happen. The joke was on me ... nothing ever did. Thankfully, a second season never did, either.

There. I have said it, so it must be true!
^

On Donald Sterling, Jewish bigots, free speech, privacy and consequences

^
Not long after my Bar Mitzvah, I stayed at the home of an orthodox rabbi on a Friday night to see how ultra-religious Jews celebrated the Sabbath. I bunked in the same bedroom as the rabbi's son, who was about my age, and we talked for a little while to get to know each other. About a half-hour into the conversation, he was discussing the neighborhood his school was in ... and he used the n-word twice. I asked something like, "Did you have problems with them?" His response: "Nah, I just don't like (n-words)."

That pretty much ended our conversation. I wasn't confident enough in myself back then to admonish him on the spot or to tell his parents what he said, but I wasn't going to get swept up into this world. As the only Jewish kid in my grade school, I had heard plenty of taunts; as a guy who had befriended the few black kids in my neighborhood, I knew that racism existed and was ugly. I tried to go to sleep but tossed and turned until finally drifting off some time later.

The episode did affect my Jewishness. As a newly minted teenager, I already was questioning my faith (among other things). And now here came this son of a rabbi, and he was filled with hate. He didn't even have a reason for it. I remember thinking, "This is somebody who professes to be Jewish, somebody who claims to believe in a benevolent God?"

Which brings us to Donald Sterling. His real name is Donald Tokowitz. And, as we all know by now, he is a Racist with a capital R.

I'm always amazed when a person whose lineage traces back to a long-persecuted people can be so hateful and bigoted toward another long-persecuted people. You'd think Jews would have empathy for blacks and other racial, ethnic and religious minorities. When the Jewish person instead is filled with bile, it is, in my mind, a little tragedy. It certainly doesn't speak well for how God supposedly oversees us all.

I won't go into Sterling's transgressions because we've all heard them by now. His punishment? He eventually will be forced to sell the L.A. Clippers, reaping a mere $1 billion or so on his original $12 million investment.

See? Jews are good with money!

Some are trying to make this a free-speech issue. It isn't. Sterling is free to say whatever he wants. And the private organization to which he belongs -- the NBA Board of Governors -- is free to punish him. If you work for a private company and you are overhead saying the exact same things Sterling said, hopefully your company will ban you for life, too.

Because Sterling was recorded by an angry girlfriend, who might have goaded him into showing his hateful self, some are trying to make this a privacy issue. It isn't. Just because those comments came out in such circumstances, it doesn't mean Sterling's peers should have ignored them. He DID say them. He obviously believes every word he said. If you send what you think is a private email to a co-worker belittling your boss, your boss has every right to fire you. You will not be protected by any kind of right to privacy.

Were this a court of law, he couldn't be convicted. But it isn't a court of law. He doesn't have the protections of speech and privacy. He signed a league constitution binding him to rules of order and he violated those rules of order.

Some have equated this to hateful comments that black NBA players have made against gay people or putdowns of white players. In the future, will the NBA also ban players for life for insensitive or bigoted remarks? Well, no.

For one thing, players are protected by a union. The NBA couldn't even make stick a year-long suspension of Latrell Sprewell, who famously choked his coach in front of witnesses. A player might get a slap on the wrist for racist comments, but there is no way he will be banned for life.

But that's a double-standard, isn't it? Perhaps, but the two situations are far more dissimilar than they are similar. A player has little power. He doesn't hire and fire coaches, he doesn't decide if a department manager should be promoted or demoted, he doesn't establish a pay scale for secretaries and janitors. His bigotry is distasteful, but he doesn't have the power to use it for evil.

Long before this incident, Sterling left a trail of discrimination lawsuits, allegations of mistreatment and the like. His NBA peers have long wanted to rid themselves of him. This latest incident gives them an "in" to do it -- kind of like Al Capone finally getting nabbed for tax evasion.

Well, how about those who worry that this is a slippery slope? Will every owner who is caught on tape saying something disparaging that he thought was private be forced to sell a franchise he worked so hard to build?

Certainly, precedent now has been set. But let's not get overly dramatic here. Maybe people actually will start thinking before they talk. Now there's a crazy notion. We can't answer the broader question until we see how it plays out.

Finally, given Sterling's history, one person who comes out looking particularly bad is recently retired NBA commish David Stern. While his replacement, Adam Silver, has come out of this looking golden for the swift, strong stance he has taken, Stern has the smell of an enabler who turned a blind eye toward Sterling's longstanding racist acts.

Stern certainly wasn't afraid to ruffle feathers. He fined Mark Cuban so much and so often for ripping referees over the years that the Mavericks' owner might as well have set up direct deposit from his bank account to the NBA's coffers.

Here's hoping Stern wasn't giving Sterling a pass because they share the same religion.

Being Jewish never has been easy. Beyond the overt and covert bigotry that has persisted for thousands of years, entire nations and religions want nothing more than to eliminate all Jews from the face of the earth.

So it's especially sad and disheartening when Jews are guilty of narrow-mindedness, intolerance and hate.
^

Draft Day doesn't delight, but Old Man Softball does

^
I recently saw Draft Day, Kevin Costner's ode to The Most Overblown Event In Sports, implausible storylines, ESPN, unpassionate love and, of course, himself.

OK, that sounds like the movie was horrible, and it wasn't. It was easy enough to watch, it maybe offered a little insight into the NFL Draft for those who don't follow football and there was nothing offensive in it.

Roberta said it felt as if she were watching a made-for-HBO movie. That's a pretty apt description, but I'd rather watch any episode of Game of Thrones.

Let's just say it wasn't one of Costner's best.

Costner is the general manager of the Cleveland Browns and he is feeling pressure to produce a winner after some lackluster seasons. The owner (played by Frank Langella, by far the best performance of any actor in the film) mostly wants to make a splash in the draft by trading up for the No. 1 pick to select the hot QB, while Costner -- son of a legendary former Browns coach -- wants to create a legacy for himself. Denis Leary plays a coach at odds with the GM, but comes across mostly as Denis Leary playing himself.

I don't want to give too much away here in case you still want to see it, so I will send out a SPOILER ALERT warning right now ...

Costner's wheeling and dealing as GM is so unrealistic that it borders on the ridiculous.

Actually, let me amend that: The border was crossed into abject ridiculousness.

Costner trades away a boatload of high draft picks (including the Browns' 7th-overall selection) to Seattle for the No. 1 pick -- OK, that kind of thing has happened, albeit rarely. He then uses the pick to select not the QB but the guy he wanted to take at No. 7 anyway. Farfetched? You betcha. And it gets even sillier.

Costner then trades two second-round picks to acquire the No. 6 overall selection (even with the great QB prospect still on the board). As if that isn't a dopey enough plot twist, he trades that pick back to the Seattle GM who fleeced him in the first place. Not only does Costner get back all of the draft picks he gave away but he convinces the Seattle GM to give him a great punt returner, too.

What, he couldn't get Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman and Marshawn Lynch, too?

And then there's this: Jennifer Garner is the Browns' salary-cap expert. She also is Costner's love interest, although there couldn't have been less chemistry between the two.

The kiss they shared at the end of the movie? Put it this way: Mike and Carol Brady had more passionate smooches 30 years ago than the Costner-Garner kiss -- and Mike didn't even like girls!

On my 1-10 ratings scale, I give Draft Day 5 Bald Heads. Which is my way of saying, "Meh."

+++

Here's something that gets a far better rating: The Sons of Pitches are back, baby!

Yep, it's springtime in Charlotte, and that means it's time again for Old Man Softball.

I'm pleased to report that the Sons of Pitches are 3-0. Thanks to timely hitting and some clutch defense, we have won our three games by a total of five runs. Most importantly, none of us has had to be rushed to the Emergency Room.

We play the two other unbeaten teams over the next three weeks, so we'll see how good we really are.

As for yours truly ...

For the second time in three seasons, I'm my team's youngest player. That's right, The Kid. I need to cherish that "honor," because I'm miles from being the most talented player. Still, I did go 3-for-3 yesterday, with two solid singles to right-center and a fortuitous bloop (that looks like any other line drive in the box score). I'm batting .667 so far -- another thing I need to cherish while I can.

We have a great group of guys. We enjoy each other's company, we like to give each other crap and we even play some pretty good softball occasionally. Joining this league, and specifically playing for this team, is one of the most enjoyable things I've done since moving to N.C.
^

Mortal Lock for NCAA title: Either Kentucky or UConn!

^
Well, I've embarrassed myself enough trying to make tournament picks, so I'll just slink away from basketball prognosticating for now!

Still, I do love the NCAA tournament. I love it when everybody is wrong, even when one of those everybodies is me. It is the one sporting event that never, ever disappoints -- and this year's tourney has been one of the best ever.

Funny that Kentucky and UConn, two of the most successful, big-time, big-name programs of the post-Wooden Era, have become underdog darlings, no?

Obviously, I wish Marquette had been one of the two darlings remaining, but we Warrior Eagle fans got our surprise a few weeks ago when Buzz Williams took less money to take an inferior coaching job, at Virginia Tech. There's way more to this story than we've been told, because that kind of thing simply doesn't happen.

Buzz gave us five excellent seasons (and one not-so-excellent season) and was an improvement on his predecessor, Tom Crean. And now I'm hoping our new guy, ex-Dookie Steve Wojciechowski, is an improvement over Buzz.

Awww ... who am I kidding. I'm just hoping I don't have to spell Wojciechowski too often! Let's go with "Wojo" from now on, OK?

+++

Finally, appropos of nothing, I received a bit of an honor a few days ago when a highly respected Seeking Alpha writer named me one of the 25 best authors on the financial Web site.

I'm not gonna lie: It's always nice to have folks say nice things about you!
^

NCAA hoops pick: Don't do as I say, do as I dont!

^
I've been busy vacationing with my family in Vegas and Arizona. A lot more fun than blogging for free!

My NCAA bracket, like pretty much everybody else's, blew up a long time ago.

For the Final Four, I'm saying Florida handles UConn fairly easily while Wisconsin beats Kentucky in a close game featuring teams of contrasting styles. Then, Florida takes down Bucky Badger to win another title for Billy Donovan, the best coach (regardless of sport) that just about nobody talks about.

In other words, bet everything you have on UConn!
^

Here's a Shocker: 40-and-oh!

^
My NCAA tournament bracket is already garbage.

What? I can't possibly be the only one who had Mount St. Mary's going all the way!

Yeah, I know. With me, the hilarity never ends. So who really is going to win?

I'm going with the one team that just about nobody is picking, the one team that also happens to have not lost a single game this season.

Yep, Wichita State.

How 'Bout Some Love?

It's weird that a 34-0 team -- a team that has had only a few close calls all season long -- could be such an underdog. Most Vegas casinos have the Shockers' odds of winning it all at 12-1 or higher, behind No. 4 seeds Louisville and Michigan State.

All five of ESPN's main "experts" -- Dickie, Digger, Seth Greenberg and Jays Bilas and Williams -- picked Michigan State to win the title. And none of the five even has Wichita State reaching the Final Four. Wow.

Two Sports Illustrated basketball gurus (Seth Davis, Luke Winn) have the Shockers getting to the Final Four but neither they nor SI's other pundits (Brian Hamilton, Pete Thamel) have Wichita State winning the title.

The only two prognosticators I could find who agree with me that Wichita State will go on to be the first unbeaten champs since Bobby Knight's '76 Hoosiers are both from CBSSports.com: Gary Parrish and Wally Szczerbiak.

It reminds me of the lack of respect folks had for Larry Bird's 1979 Indiana State team. Of course, that team -- unlike this year's Wichita State squad -- didn't bring just about everybody back from a squad that went to the previous year's Final Four.

Gregg Marshall is still coaching the Shockers and will be the hottest name for every job opening this offseason. Fred VanVleet is still running the show, Cleanthony Early is still scoring from everywhere and Ron Baker and Tekele Cotton are still leading a deep, versatile supporting cast.

I mean, I know Wichita State is from the weak Missouri Valley Conference (as were Bird's Sycamores), but come on! Dismissing an unbeaten team is one thing. But dismissing one that has proven it knows how to win NCAA tournament games -- something few others in this field can claim -- seems outright dopey.

Shockers-Cardinals, Take 2

There is nothing easy about Wichita State's road to the Final Four. Just to make the Sweet 16, the Shockers will have to beat either Kentucky or Kansas State. Win that one and the next opponent figures to be Louisville, a favorite of many to repeat as champions.

Consider this, though: While Wichita State returns so many proven performers, Louisville no longer has three of its best players from last year's title run: Peyton Siva, Gorgui Dieng and Chane Behanen.

Wichita State led Louisville by 12 points with less than 14 minutes to play in last year's national semifinals before 'Ville rallied to win by 4. The Shockers were down 3 and had the ball with 6 seconds left when Luke Hancock tied up Baker for a controversial held-ball call. Louisville had the possession arrow and clinched the win on the free-throw line.

In other words, the teams were all but dead-even a year ago, when Louisville was better than it is today ... so it's not exactly far-fetched to give Wichita State a puncher's chance against the Cardinals this time.

After beating 'Ville, Wichita State will dispatch Duke for the Midwest Regional title and Final Four berth. Maybe then, at 38-0, the Shockers will be taken more seriously.

The Rest of the Final Four Field

Also making it to Dallas on the first weekend of April: Florida, Iowa State and Creighton.

Florida is the easy pick. The Gators are well-coached, supremely talented and playing well going into the tournament. Kansas certainly is talented enough to beat them in the South Regional final, but Florida is more likely to make the big play with the game on the line. Florida also is less likely to get upset in an earlier round.

Virginia is a No. 1 seed that won both the ACC regular-season and tournament titles, yet the Cavs are getting only a little more love than the Shockers are. I guess if it's not Duke or Carolina, it's not really a representative ACC team.

Practically everybody is saying Michigan State, not Virginia, will emerge from the top half of the East bracket ... which pretty much means I have to pick the Cavs to take down Sparty. In the regional final, though, I've got Fred Hoiberg's entertaining and talented Iowa State Cyclones beating Virginia.

Creighton has the best offensive player in the country, Doug McDermott, who can score from 30 feet, 3 feet and everywhere in between. He is surrounded by great shooters -- the Bluejays led the nation in 3-point percentage (.421) and also were No. 5 nationally in 2-point percentage and No. 16 in free-throw shooting. If the Bluejays enjoy a period of sustained excellence from behind the arc, they can beat anybody anywhere.

They will meet Wisconsin to get to the Elite Eight. The teams are similar but Creighton is better -- and has McDermott. In the regional final, Arizona would be an extremely difficult opponent, but I'm thinking that either Oklahoma State or San Diego State will keep the Wildcats from getting that far.

40-0? Why Not?

So that's two No. 3 seeds (Creighton and Iowa State) and two No. 1s (Florida and Wichita State) in the Final Four.

Florida is too good for Iowa State and Wichita State is too well-rounded for Creighton, which finally runs out of 3-point bullets.

And in the title game ...

Well, Wichita State has beaten everybody -- including 99.5% of the experts -- to get this far.

So why not beat Florida, too?

Forty-and-oh. It has a hell of a nice ring to it.
^

Coach Mike's favorite season (so far)

^

After taking a couple of weeks to let it all sink in, here is a look back at my first year as a head basketball coach. My season at The Scholars Academy in Charlotte was amazing -- one of those rare life experiences that actually exceeds expectations.

I don't know if folks remember any of the things I posted months ago, but it was a rocky start back in October. And that was before the girl who was supposed to be our best player decided on the eve of our first practice to participate in Mock Trial instead of basketball. My wife said after I read that email from the girl's mother, all the color drained from my face.

I knew I had taken a job at a charter school for gifted students, but did I really lose an All-Conference player to Mock Trial? "What have I gotten myself into?"

Our Fine Nine

That left us with 9 girls, including four 6th-graders and one 5th-grader, to play in our 7th/8th-grade league. Four of them had never played basketball at any level. Several were soccer players, not accustomed to using their hands in sports. Our center, Celeste, was shorter than the guards on several teams in our league. Our guards were smaller (often significantly so) than their counterparts.

That being said, the improvement from the first day of practice to the end of the season was absolutely mind-blowing. Our little 5th-grader, Ritika, a tennis-playing basketball neophyte, turned herself into a good outside shooter. She had just 10 points in the first 13 games but was our leading scorer the last three games. Schuyler, who had trouble hitting the backboard on layup attempts -- I am not kidding! -- became a valuable contributor who made two big free throws in one game. Olivia, a soccer-playing 6th-grader who hadn't played hoops in three years, developed a nice short-range jumper. Margaret, who came into the season with some guard skills, took her game up several notches. She hit the winning shot in the final seconds of our next-to-last regular-season game and followed that by scoring 14 points, our season high for any individual.

We had incredible captains, Maddie and Sienna, and they set the tone for a group that was willing to work. If I told the girls to run, they ran hard, and they did so without complaint (mostly). They loved competing against each other in practice. They willingly dove to the floor when the situation called for it. Charlotte, one of our "littles," fearlessly stole the basketball from girls twice her size -- plays that thrilled her teammates (and her coach). Hannah was willing to mix it up with anybody, and our opponents had the bruises to prove it. Celeste and Sienna never got tired, and that's saying something because we used our 1-2-1-1 press almost every minute of every game.

Kids at Scholars are motivated, well-parented -- and smart. They loved to correct my grammar, and Maddie once raised her hand at practice to say, "I have an anecdote I'd like to share." You know, the kind of thing all athletes say. They like each other and have a great collective sense of humor. Also, and this is big, these girls care. A lot.

"AGGRESSIVE!"

Despite our improvement and our team chemistry, the Eagles had severe limitations. We had trouble rebounding because of our size. Our players rarely looked up when they dribbled. We often panicked when pressured, leading to lots of bad passes. And to say we shot poorly would be doing a disservice to the word "poorly." Still, we were able to compete because we played good defense -- and because we scrapped and clawed and out-hustled every team we played. 

Once I saw the makeup of our team, I thought we could be more aggressive than our opponents and force the refs to make difficult decisions; as a guy who officiates this age group myself, I'll say most refs don't want to call everything so they let a lot go. I told the girls that I didn't care if half the team fouled out -- I wanted our opponents to know they were in for a battle. These girls are really tough and competitive, and they loved pressing full court. Coming out of huddles, we often would yell, "Aggressive!"

We played a double-round-robin schedule against the other seven teams in the league. A couple were superior and defeated us decisively. Another team was better and beat us twice, but the games were closer. We were more skilled -- and far more physical -- than three of the teams, and we won both games against each. The other team, St. Michael's, beat us in two nail-biters. 

So we went 6-8 during the regular season, and I felt pretty darn good about it considering I had once worried we might not win a game. More than that, the joy that the girls got out of playing together trumped where we finished in the league standings.

A Game To Remember

In the first round of the playoffs, we met St. Mike's again. Margaret, who by that time was sharing point guard duties with Maddie and otherwise playing the 2 or 3, was out of town with her family. So I had to use Sienna, our 4, at the point quite a bit. She did well and we battled hard, but we barely made any shots (even layups) and we trailed by 5 with less than three minutes to go. Those familiar with girls middle-school hoops know that is like being down 15! Plus, our aggressiveness finally caught up to us; the refs were calling everything, and four of our eight girls had four fouls apiece. (St. Mike's also had trouble, and one of their best players fouled out.)

It didn't look good for us, but our press kept forcing turnovers, and finally a couple of shots fell. Sienna hit a layup. Celeste made a free throw. Ritika swished a sweet 17-footer from the baseline to tie it with about a minute left. She then stole an inbound pass and hit a layup to put us ahead, and we held on to win by 2. 

Afterward, during our celebratory meeting, the girls gave me a bunch of carnations they had brought to the game. They denied it, but I'm pretty sure they thought we were going to lose and our season would be over!

Battling Right to the End

Two days later, we did fall in the semifinals to the eventual champion. St. Anne's was better than we were, and we were still without Margaret, but we cut a huge deficit to 7 in the third quarter. We made them sweat a little before they pulled away from us. 

When it was over, I got a little choked up as I told the girls (for the zillionth time) how proud I was of them. Hannah said: "I think Coach Mike needs a group hug!" It was a special moment, but the actual execution of the hug was so funny we all couldn't help but laugh.

I already had decided I was going to return to Scholars -- as long as Mock Trial would return to school hours (where it had been in previous years) instead of after school (where it was at conflict with basketball). After all the hard work we put in, I didn't want to lose half of next year's team! I was assured that the decision already had been made to move Mock Trial back into the school day. 

We had our team party two weeks after the season. (The gathering was at Charlotte's house, and she and her family did the amazing chalk mural that is displayed at the top of this post.) When I announced I was coming back, I got a loud ovation. Parents thanked me for everything I did, and the girls gave me a gift card to a sporting-goods store. I presented each of the returning players with a pair of "dribbling glasses" -- specially designed plastic frames that force players to look up when they dribble. 

Roberta, who wasn't able to make it to any games because of her work schedule, was at the party and said "there was a lot of love in that room." I have to admit it was nice to feel so appreciated.

More To Come!

Had I decided not to return, could I have gotten a better coaching job?

Well, I'm not sure how one should define "better." Could I be a high-school assistant coach or maybe a JV head coach? Could I go to a private middle school that pays good money and has top facilities? 

I don't know, and I won't know next season because I'm not looking. My players are awesome, the parents are wonderful and the administration is supportive. Though I'm an old man (OK, maybe only an old-ish man), I am a young coach, and Scholars is a great spot for me to keep growing.

Just as all of the girls became better players, I like to think I improved as the season progressed. Still, I can recount a couple of exact instances in which I was out-coached, and I hate that feeling! After every game, I wrote down things I could have done differently, and those hard-learned lessons will help me in 2014-15 and beyond.

Bottom line: I am psyched about next season. We're losing two valuable players in Maddie and Hannah, but we should be returning seven. That includes both of our All-Conference picks, Celeste and Sienna, and a good supporting cast that figures to get much better. Hopefully, the girls will "recruit" some classmates to try out for the team. (A couple of tall classmates would be nice!) It looks like I'm going to run a week-long basketball camp in June, and there might be opportunities to get more involved at the school down the line. It's all good!

So what started with me asking myself, "What have I gotten myself into? ended with me realizing that I got myself into something pretty special.

Before the season, the girls were assigned to state their goals in writing. In my welcome note to the team, I stated my goal, too:

I want this season to be such a great experience, both on and off the court, that each of us will look back months and years and decades from now and say, "I'll always remember the 2013-14 basketball season at Scholars Academy. It was one of the best times of my life."

Well, I can't speak for the girls, but I know that will be the case for Coach Mike.

^

Bald bits about Oscar flicks

^
My wife and I just got home after a great vacation that included a 5-day Caribbean cruise followed by 2 nights in Delray Beach, Fla. So relaxing, such great weather ... and so much food. I am NOT looking forward to stepping on the scale!

I am looking forward to Sunday night's Oscars. I'm sure that Ellen DeGeneres will do a great job hosting the telecast -- and that a deserving film will win Best Picture.

On the last night of our vacation, Robbie and I saw Philomena, so I've now seen all nine nominated films. I'll give my ranking in a minute, but first a few thoughts about others awards:

Best Actor: I loved Bruce Dern (Nebraska) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (12 Years a Slave), but Matthew McConaughey gave a performance of a lifetime in Dallas Buyers Club.

Best Actress: I did not see Blue Jasmine and that's too bad because just about every pundit out there says Cate Blanchett is a shoo-in. I saw the four films featuring the other nominees, and I'd rank Meryl Streep (August: Osage County) just ahead of Judi Dench (Philomena).

Best Supporting Actor: Four great candidates -- sorry, Jonah Hill, you'd be the one on Sesame Street's "one of these men just doesn't belong here" -- and my favorite performance was that of Barkhad Abdi (Captain Phillips) as the leader of the Somali pirates who kidnapped Tom Hanks' character. Incredible to think that he wasn't even an actor before shooting started on the film. Most critics think Jared Leto (Dallas Buyers Club) will win it, and it would be impossible to argue that choice.

Best Supporting Actress: Again, because I didn't see Blue Jasmine, I can't rate Sally Hawkins. I really liked the work of each of the other four. I laughed almost every time June Squibb (Nebraska) opened her mouth, but Lupita Nyong'o (12 Years a Slave) had the most meaty role of all the nominees and was absolutely fantastic.

Now, here is where I rank each of the nine Best Picture nominees ...

9. The Wolf of Wall Street. I liked several films that weren't nominated more than this overly long, over-the-top silliness. Lots of critics liked it, but I didn't think it was one of Martin Scorsese's best.

8. Gravity. I almost feel like apologizing for liking this movie so much less than most experts do. I mean, I didn't hate it, and Sandra Bullock was fine as usual, but I was not wowed by either the special effects or the story. If it were a college basketball team, I'd be taunting it with chants of "Over-rated! Over-rated!"

7. Her. Quirky and interesting, with Joaquin Phoenix deserving of the Comeback of the Year award, if there was one.

6. Philomena. A well-written, well-acted film about an important but rarely discussed topic. Kudos to Steve Coogan, who adapted the screenplay and starred alongside the excellent Judi Dench.

5. Captain Phillips. Just as I was surprised I liked Gravity less than I thought I would, I was surprised that I liked this film more than I thought I would. It was a completely believable, edge-of-the-seat flick with outstanding acting by the two leads.

4. Dallas Buyers Club. Here's where it starts to get especially difficult for me, which is how it should be in trying to separate the Final Four. This film was superbly acted and presented, and I've got nothing bad to say about it.

3. American Hustle. I smiled or laughed throughout the entire movie and I thought Christian Bale was wonderful in leading a talented ensemble cast. It was a little goofy at times, but I know that was intentional.

2. Nebraska. As I watched this quiet gem of a film unfold, all I kept thinking was, "This is my favorite movie this year." Bruce Dern was absolutely perfect in the lead role and June Squibb was a hoot as his wife. It was beautifully filmed in black and white, and the entire production was top-notch and moving. I know it has little chance to win because it was not a "big" enough flick, but I enjoyed it tremendously.

1. 12 Years a Slave. A powerful, important story that was exquisitely presented by director Steve McQueen. Often brutal and difficult to watch, it nonetheless was filled with astounding performances, especially by Chiwetel Ejiofor, Lupita Nyong'o and the boo-and-hiss-worthy Michael Fassbender. This is the kind of film academy voters often favor -- and for good reason.

+++

I'm just now realizing that while I posted the final results of my basketball season on Facebook, I didn't here for my loyal tens of readers.

My Scholars Academy Eagles lost our semifinal game to a bigger, more experienced, and ... well ... superior team but I so enjoyed my first season as a head coach. The girls worked incredibly hard and played with such passion, the parents were wonderful, the administration was supportive. It was just a great experience, even better than I hoped it would be.

I'll probably write more about it after our team party on Friday.
^