Back to the Future

Just prior to the 2003-04 season, Pat Riley announced he would step down as Miami Heat Head Coach and focus solely on reconstructing the team as President. He said he would give duties of walking the sidelines to a young protege. Less than five years later, Riles recycled that script, with the exception that Pat Riley would announce his decision while the first-round playoffs were still undergo.

I am elated that Pat Riley will no longer coach this team. As President and Head Coach, Riley has done too much damage to this team. They went from champs to barely making the playoffs to zero. This past off-season, I only think Riles should have traded Antoine Walker. In fact, I wouldn't have minded him getting rid of Gary Payton, Jason Kapono, James Posey, and the rest of the players that left Miami. The problem was that he surrounded Dwyane Wade and Shaquille O'Neal with a bunch of bad players. There's an old saying that goes "What makes you a leader is who you surround yourself with." Pat Riley surrounded himself with players who were not interested in winning, and they sunk to the bottom of the League.

I must admit, I was somewhat surprised when Pat Riley had the courage to concede that he hasn't done the best he could have as coach. Riley cited a promise he had made to himself that if he could not coach to the fullest of his potential, he would know it was time to shut it down. Yesterday, he knew it was time. We all knew it was time.

Nonetheless, I would have been more satisfied if Pat Riley went to live on an island for the rest of his life and not partake in the Miami Heat again. Since his decision to draft Dwyane Wade in 2003, it has been hard to argue that Pat Riley has made the right decision in recruiting young players. While he has made significant, and sometimes beneficial, changes to the roster, the vast majority of those players do not spend a substantial amount of time on South Beach. Moreover, Pat Riley has been infamous for not going very deep in his bench.

If history repeats itself, Miami will make a shrewd choice in the Draft, pick up a few pieces to become a resurgent team before adding a perennial All-Star to take them to the Promised Land. And no, somewhere in the middle of that Riles won't announce his decision to return to the sidelines. Pat Riley said that he is officially retired from coaching with the NBA, as he was recently elected to the Basketball Hall of Fame. For now, I'll take his word for it.

I like the decision to choose Erik Spoelstra as the assistant coach. He has had a lot of experience, especially with Wade, the team's centerpiece. However, there is a more important underlining in this. Spoelstra brings youthful vigor and a fresh approach to this team. With a core nucleus of Wade, Shawn Marion, and a high first-round pick, possibly Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley, Spoelstra can work with a more youthful squad.

If Spoelstra is a coach who will bring change to this team, willing to inject a hunger and desire into this team, as well as discipline this team, they could go far. However, Pat Riley still sits atop the Miami Heat Organization. If the Heat continue to move in the direction they are going, they are looking for a very energetic and youthful group of players. Riley has had a long-held priority of veterans over inexperienced newbies. By giving one of two jobs to Erik Spoelstra, who will be the youngest coach next season, Riley may have finally gotten over his obsession. What he does in the next few months will determine where this team is headed.

Judgment Day for Phoenix

If you want to see how much the Phoenix Suns want to win in the playoffs, tune in to ESPN tonight at 10:30 ET. The Suns find themselves in an 0-2 hole, having wasted double-digit leads in both games played in the Lone Star State. There have been whispers of a firing of Mike D'Antoni if the Suns do not emerge victorious in this series.

Most people would say that Gregg Popovich is out-coaching D'Antoni. It is certainly very plausible he could find himself on the outside looking in in a few weeks. One of the reasons the Suns are in this 0-2 hole is because Mike D'Antoni is very timid to go to his bench. He will go seven, maybe eight men deep. D.J. Strawberry, despite his lack of experience, is one of the best perimeter defenders Phoenix has. He could provide to be very useful guarding Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.

However, it's not just D'Antoni's reluctance to play D.J. Strawberry that is leading to more points in the paint for San Antonio. One of the things I find troubling is why, when Shaq and Amare were out of the game in the second overtime of Game 1, Brian Skinner wasn't in the game instead of Boris Diaw. Brian Skinner is far better in terms of defense than Boris Diaw is. In crunch time, it is better to go with your defense. What was the result of Game 1? Manu Ginobili made a simple fake on Steve Nash and drove to the rim for an uncontested layup.

The Suns' problem is not with their offense. They may have hit a cold spot in Game 2, but I doubt that will carry on into Game 3. The problem is their defense. I know Steve Nash is not the most athletic of players, and may not be the best match-up for someone like Tony Parker. However, what Steve Nash can do is not let Parker get into the lane so easily. By putting forth a little effort, Nash can make Parker earn more of his points.

On offense, I would look for Leandro Barbosa to keep the Spurs' guards honest of defense, and thus wearing them down on offense. I would expect to see a lot of screens, a lot of movement in the Phoenix offense to wear down the Spurs.

Remember, the Suns have had double-digit leads in both games in San Antonio. They just need to hold on to that lead. How do you do that? By playing defense. The NBA is a game of runs, and you should expect a team like San Antonio to make runs of their own. However, the difference between a run that is countered with another run of their own and a run that changes the game goes right to the heart of the character of a player. If a team truly wants to win, the players will play defense. And it comes down to their best players to set an example for the rest of the team.

Amare Stoudemire and Shaquille O'Neal are going to have to stay out of foul trouble and provide defense against Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker when they are going to the basket. The Suns are going to have to look very sharp on both ends of the court if they want to not only get a win, but also convince their fans that they have a shot to win this series.

Last night, NBA fans saw Toronto, Washington, and Houston all counter with a win of their own after losing the first two. All three teams showed resilience and a will to win, especially the Wizards, without Agent Zero. The Phoenix Suns should play like a bat out of hell tonight. We'll see how it goes.

How the Suns Can Prevail

Okay, so the San Antonio Spurs did win Game 1 of, arguably, the most intriguing first-round playoff match-up in the 2008 NBA playoffs. Game 1 was filled with suspense and action, as this game went into double-overtime before the sixth man of the year, Manu Ginobili, was able to get to the rim with ease in the final seconds. Although history tells us the team that wins Game 1 usually prevails in the end, the Phoenix Suns still have a shot to win this.

First of all, the three-pointer by Tim Duncan was pure luck. That is out of his range. He never shoots threes, partly because that's not his game. I guarantee you give him that same shot 10 times, he'd miss it nine. Nonetheless, I'm not saying the Suns lost this game because the Basketball gods didn't want them too. There were numerous miscalculations that teams simply cannot afford going up against the defending champions of the NBA. And after days of dissecting and analyzing this game, there are a few things that stick out to me.

Phoenix had a 16-point lead in the second quarter and blew it. They even had leads in the fourth quarter and both overtimes, but could not extend their lead. Why? Because the Suns did not feed the ball to Shaq. Now, I know that if you give it to him down low, they can just hack-a-Shaq. However, I noticed several instances in which Phoenix could have capitalized off of missed opportunities. Take, for example, the play which made Amare Stoudemire sit out the rest of the game. He got the ball about 15 feet out with a wide open shot. Disregarding that he had a perfectly good jump-shot to take, he drove to the rim, tried to shoot over Fabricio Oberto and got called for an offensive foul. Why not lob it up to Shaquille O'Neal, who had nobody guarding him at the time? When you give Shaq alley-oops, they can't foul him as effectively.

In fact, wasn't that part of the reason the Suns traded for The Big Aristotle? To give Phoenix an option down low in the playoffs? The only basket Shaq had in the double-overtime segment was when Shaq ran a pick-and-roll with Steve Nash, Nash missed a contested shot, Shaq was right under the basket to slam it back home? If you look at that play, you will see no one guarding Shaquille O'Neal.

Now, Shaq had some errors of his own. It is obvious that "the floppers prevailed this time" as O'Neal put it; and it is very difficult for the Big Fella to work when the referees will believe the floppers. However, several times Shaq got called for a foul on the defensive end, whether it was him trying to take a charge or contesting a shot. Shaq is 7'1". He's got to contest shots. He has one of the best blockers in the game in Amare Stoudemire right next to him. He does a fairly good job of avoiding contact when he goes up for blocks. Shaq should consider learning something from the player he touts as the "best big man" in the League.

Perhaps the most pressing need for the Phoenix Suns is their perimeter defense. This was most evident in crunch time. Manu Ginobili blew right past his defender and went in for an uncontested layup. Now, one can argue that Stoudemire and O'Neal were not on the court. That is a fair assessment. However, some of the onus has to go on on the perimeter defenders. It was a cake-walk for Ginobili. It shouldn't be that hard for a professional basketball player to stand in front of their man and contest a shot.

The Phoenix Suns need to address these concerns. As I said, the most important is defense. If a player truly wants to win, he or she will buckle down and play defense. It's that simple. And it comes down to your best players playing defense. Steve Nash may not be the best well-equipped player to play defense, but if he does put forth some for effort, they can start winning some games. If not, the Suns are in for an early exit.

'Bitter' Fight

Senator Barack Obama's remarks in San Francisco that blue-collar workers were "bitter" and "cling to guns and religion" has erupted into a quite-fitting bitter fight between him and Senator Hillary Clinton that some are saying could cost the Democrats the election in November.

Ironically, Senator Clinton has said that Senator Obama's remarks could cost the Democratic Party the election, suggesting that his comments were "elitist" and "out of touch" and could alienate voters in states such as Pennsylvania, which holds its primary April 22.

I know some people have been offended by Obama's comments and I respect their opinions. However, I do not have a problem with what he said. In fact, I would agree with everything he said. There are numerous one-issue voters who vote on issues such as gun rights, abortion, gay marriage, et cetera. One may argue that some people buy guns because it is their tradition; or that people pray to a Higher Being because it strengthens their spirit. Look at what the man said. He said people vote on issues such as guns and religion.

On campaign stops, Senator Obama has told supporters that he tells people what they need to hear, not just what they want to hear. Obama's statement about the anger of blue-collar workers was a perfect example of that. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton's assertion that Obama is "out of touch" is contradictory. The Clintons have made over $100 million since leaving the White House. For a good portion of her life, Senator Clinton hasn't lived in the real world, she's lived in a bubble. To be called on elitist by a multi-millionaire doesn't resonate with me very much.

Obama, on the other hand, is in touch. His father left him when he was two, his mother died at a very early age due to cancer, and his maternal grandparents had to take an active role in raising him. Barack Obama was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

When Hillary Clinton was talking about learning how to shoot a gun at an early age, then one day shooting a duck, I thought "What the heck is she thinking about?" Senator Clinton's support for gun control has been well-documented. In 1992, she supported a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons. In fact, she has been given an "F" from the National Rifle Association on her stance on gun rights. She knows better than that.

Will this hurt him in Pennsylvania, a state in which there were talks of an Obama upset? Of course. I'm a realist when it comes to that. However, the reason why it will hurt him in Pennsylvania is not because of what he said, it is the spin on the political machine. Within reason, I can't see much of a window for Sen. Clinton to win her the nomination. Therefore, she has to paint Obama as the unelectable, out of touch elitist to grab votes.

The Senators will meet for a debate in Pennsylvania this Wednesday on ABC. The "bitter" comments will certainly be prime focus on the debate, and may play a key role in who undecided voters will vote for come April 22. Stay tuned.

Who Can End the Iraq War?

To the roughly 80% of Americans who think this country is going in the wrong direction, a Democratic candidate is the only answer. Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama promise to get troops out of Iraq. John McBush, forget about it. He said it's alright for troops to stay in Iraq for one hundred years (and yes, he did say that). The George Bush abhorrence is in its seventh year. And we keep on drowning further towards the bottom of the ocean.

Despite the fall of Saddam Hussein and instating a "democracy" in Iraq, they are no closer to developing a full-functioning democracy capable of providing its own security than it was five years ago. The United States of America is no safer than it was five years ago. General David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker affirm that Iraq is in a fragile state and genocide could occur (it isn't going on now?) if the U.S. leaves.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has said that the next President will have the face the actuality that the U.S. must withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. Powell, however, added that, "None of them are going to have the flexibility of just saying we’re out of here, turn off the switch, turn off the lights, we’re leaving. They will have a situation before them."

Yesterday, Clinton asserted that she is the only candidate who can end the War in Iraq. She said that Obama only says he'll end the War, and continued to pound McBush on his "100-year" remark.

I have a problem with Hillary. For her to say that Obama only says he is going to end the War carries no weight. She voted to authorize the War in Iraq while Obama went on record saying this War was a bad idea. Like helping get NAFTA approved, Clinton faces trouble with voters who believe that leadership is about action, not what a candidate says now about his or her state of mind.

It's not as if Obama simply says he is going to withdraw troops without regard to anything that happens on the ground. He has a stable, concrete plan. Obama will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats, and will carry out al Qaeda attempts to build a base in Iraq. The U.S. has gotten rid of Iraq's ruthless dictator. Now it's time for the Iraqis to take responsibility. The best way to ensure that happens is to say that we are leaving. The United Nations will play a central role in developing a new convention to seek a new accord to Iraq's governance and Constitution.

Obama has also said that we will launch a diplomatic effort in Iraq to focus on securing Iraq's borders, keep neighboring countries such as Syria and Iran from meddling inside Iraq, support reconciliation among sectarian groups, and provide financial support to Iraq's reconstruction.

Of course, this is easier said than done. And things could change Obama's plan. However, I do not understand why Hillary Clinton should be trusted more to get out of Iraq than Barack Obama. Iraq has problems of their own and I am not an isolationist, but we simply have to take care of our home-front now. The economy is sluggish, the dollar is flat-lining, thousands have lost their homes, and citizens are forced in a tight financial corner. We can't afford to waste billions upon billions of dollars in Iraq.