Book-browsing the other day, I came across the latest issue of Rolling Stone, their 40th Anniversary issue. Interesting in that it had 20 interviews with various VIPs and their recollections of 1967, The Summer Of Love.

Jimmy Carter, Patti Smith, George McGovern, Jane Fonda, Michael Moore, Paul McCartney...

... and not a single person of color.

Not a one.

Now, I know, it's Rolling Stone. Dedicated to keeping rock and roll alive, music that if you believe some is mostly white: The Beatles, Elvis, Buddy Holly, The Stones, Chicago, Led Zep, The Doors...you get the idea. Never mind the fact that R&R orgins are rooted in rhythm and blues, or the Chuck Berrys, Otis Reddings, Little Richards who helped shape the genre.

And I have no problem giving props where they are due - I have and play music from all of the above in my collection. But RS has always seemed to accept its roots with reluctance, preferring the "rock" in "rock and roll" - and that is not my reality.

Speaking of reality, quick: What were the two defining issues of 1967 - if not the decade? If you chose anything other than Civil Rights and Vietnam, kindly go back into hibernation.

And the faces of civil rights were...King, Ralph Abernathy, Stokley Carmichael, Huey Newton, Andy Young, Fannie Lou Hamer, and so on. (Notice a trend?) The most hated man in 1967 America?

Muhammad Ali, of course, refused induction ("I ain't got no quarrel with them Vietcong") and  unjustly stripped of his title that June at the peak of his serious, serious game. 

And Rolling Stone decided that out of 20 interviews they couldn't have ONE interview of an Ali, Andrew Young, Smokey Robinson or Carlos Santana? Was Bill Russell or Jim Brown busy? How about a close associate of the late, great, Ceasar Chavez? 

What, all of their phones were disconnected?

Rolling Stone blew it. By design. 

Then again, whitewashing history is so... 1967...

And that's why that issue stayed on the rack, unbought.

----------------

In other news, the Spurs Robert Horry was ready and willing to compare his Spurs to the great teams of the 1980's.

"We would beat them," he boasted.

"No disrespect to the guys back in the 80's and the 70's, but the guys now are so much better than those guys," Horry said. "I don't care what they say. If you look at old films, guys only went right. They turned and kept it in their right hand. Look at the things LeBron (James) can do, Tim (Duncan) can do, Tony (Parker) can do, Manu (Ginobili) can do. Little (Daniel) Gibson over there. There's no way you can compare those guys. We watched what they did and expanded on that."

OK Big Shot Bob, are you telling me that everyone in today's NBA can go left? Please! You've been in the league since Mikan, and the next time I see you post twice in a row will be the first. I'll be the first to say that this league has more athletes than ever. I'll also say that basketball skills are still in shorter supply league-wide than common sense in the Paris Hilton household.

While I'm on this subject, Tim Duncan would have to play center, assuming that we use the 06-07 Spurs in this comparison. Honestly, does anyone really believe that Fabrico "Little Fabio" Oberto would last against Robert Parish, Kareem, or Moses Malone? I'm disqualfiying him on his hair alone. Nah, Timmy D, you're going to have to man up and be what you are - a center.

Now onto the comparison:

1985 Lakers vs 07 Spurs:

Backcourt: Magic v. Tony Parker. Parker would probably draw Bryon Scott, I suspect Magic would guard the offensively challenged Bruce Bowen or the solid, but aged Michael Finley. Scott would not only slow down Parker somewhat, but unlike Eric Snow, Bryon had a deadeye out to three point range. And who guards Magic? Ginobili would get posted more than a Gabrille Union pin-up. Bowen couldn't stop LeBron from posting - do you think he'd do better with Magic? Edge: Lakers, but not a huge one.

Frontcourt: Big Game vs Big Shot. James Worthy , A.C. Green and Kurt Rambis vs Bruce Bowen, Horry, and Oberto. I suspect that Bowen would start by guarding Magic, hence Horry would get the PT on James. For stretches, Horry would hold his own - after all, Worthy is the forefather of Horry - a tall (Worthy goes 6-9 to Horry's 6-10), "long" explosive 3 on the wing.

Alas, Horry may have been "The New", it doesn't mean he's "The Improved". Worthy is far more offensive-minded and can score inside or out, depending on the situation. A young Horry would have made this a really interesting confrontation with his defense and length. But over 7 games, if the series goes that long, Horry gets ground down, forcing Bowen or Finley to deal with number 42. A.C. Green/Rambis and Elston/Oberto would be a standstill.

But the special matchup would be The Hair of Oberto vs The Jehri Curl of Green. A.C.'s grease would give him a small edge inside, where he'd be harder to grab, but it would be hell on his shooting touch.

Edge: Lakers, Worthy being the difference.

Center: Kareem vs Duncan/Oberto/Elston - Possibly the two most fundamentally sound big men to ever play square off. The Skyhook v. The Bank Shot. The Old Stone Face versus... The Younger Stone Face. Duncan would get the edge running the floor on the 40-year-old "Cap", but the skyhook is money - and I'm talking Euros (have you seen the dollar lately?). Kareem basically took most of the regular season off from rebounding, but stepped it up in the playoffs. Duncan's D would make life difficult for Jabbar, and Elston would #### to make life painful and slow The Old Man down. I suspect Horry would even take a turn here. But Duncan isn't used to guarding prolific post men. He usually left the dirty work of guarding Shaq to Robinson or Malik Rose until the 4th period. He won't have that luxury against this team.

Edge: Draw.

The Bench: Spurs bring the 6th man of the year in Ginobili. Brent Barry would drop in some threes. Horry would be the swing man playing the 3-4-5 slots. But the Lakers would bring Michael Cooper, the Bruce Bowen of the 80s (minus the cheap shots) to lock down Parker or G-Nose (more likely), and to match Barry or Bowen on 3's. Mychal Thompson and Kurt Rambis would provide more scoring than Elson or Oberto, and could guard Duncan credibly. Thompson and Kareem at the 4 and 5 have a clear edge on any Duncan combo that the Spurs could throw out.

Edge: Lakers, slight.

Overall, I actually like the 85 Lakers more, with a younger Kareem, but their bench wasn't quite as deep (Silk Wilkes was getting up there in age, as was Bob McAdoo), and no A.C. Green.

And I'd like the Spurs to take a couple of games on guts, Parker, and a big game from Manu supporting Duncan. But the Lakers' superior depth and running game and Magic would be too much over the course of seven games. The Spurs would have to slow the tempo, and the great secret of the Showtime Lakers was that they could play it either way, much to the chagrin of the Spurs.

The Verdict: Lakers in 6.

...and no one heard that sucker crash on Tony Parker's head, who could say it made a sound?

OK, Eva Longoria would.

(And that's the last time I'm bringing her fine behind  - or face - up in this conversation.)

The only drama left in this finals is whether LeBron finds his inner Kobe and goes 1 on 5 against the Spurs. The only way Cleveland can win even one game is if LBJ goes for at least 40. Forget this "Make your teammates better" ####.

Who is it easier to make better anyhow: Manu Ginobilli or Drew Gooden?

The Cavs scored 33 and 35 points in the first half of the first two games. I'm willing to bet a Happy Meal that the Browns - yes, the Browns with Brady Quinn - will score 30 points in a half this year.

The real remaining pressure is on David Stern. This has not been a good year for the comish, who could not have mishandled the New Ball Fiasco any worse than Phil Leotardo handled his meeting with Tony Soprano.

(And there is your obligatory Sopranos mention.)

Back to The David: The NBF was bad - the NBA playoffs were worse:

• First, a 67-win Dallas Mavs team folded like wet origami to the one team that matched up with them (and don't kid yourselves - the Spurs had few answers for Dallas - Coach Pop should do the class thing and send fruit baskets and mixtapes to Oakland in gratitude).
• Second, a Robert Horry cheapshot handed the Spurs the NBA crown, then David Stern's performance on live radio showed him to be arrogant and oblivious - at best  - to fan concerns. To top it off, he now alleges no owner wants to change the rule.(Show of hands, who REALLY believes that? Where is Mark Cuban when you need him?)
• Third, because of the above, we got a painfully boring Spurs-Jazz conference final.
• Fourth, the NBA Draft lotto totally bombed, as the three worst teams in the league were locked out of the three top picks. With the two best college players in long time going to the Pacific Northwest, the Eastern Conference pretty much ensured themselves a few more years of June beatdowns.
• Fifth - For the fourth time this decade, the Finals isn't an anti-climax - it is freakin' irrelevant. 2001-03, the Lakers and Spurs dispatched the Nets and Sixers, surprising absolutely no one. At least the Sixers had AI's Game 1 to hang their hats on. 2004 featured a Pistons upset, but not a watchable series, and the following year was even more boring. Now in '07, the common perception is that NBA champ was decided in the conference semifinals. And they are right.

Let's face it, the NBA Finals isn't the Super Bowl. As Tim Keown points out, it isn't even the BCS Championship game, and you know you're in trouble when the BCS gives the world a better product.

What are you to do Mr. Stern?

For starters, here are a few ideas:

• Re-weigh the lottery so that the worst team has at least a 40% chance instead of 25%. Make sure that the worst team can finish no worst than 3rd in the lottery. If a Portland gets lucky - fine. But we shouldn't have THREE Portland's getting over on the system.
• Forget this re-seeding the playoffs that always comes up, that just kills the whole concept of having a conference. I'd go one further:

Move San Antonio to the Eastern Conference. Or Dallas perhaps? Swap the Bucks and Hornets for good measure. Look, if the Baltimore Colts could spend 20 years in the NFL Western Division, and the Atlanta Falcons could spend 30 years in the NFC West, why not put a Texas team back in the Eastern Conference? Think the Rockets or Mavs wouldn't be a huge threat in the East?

• Mr. Stern, the next time you hear someone call you the "Greatest Comissioner In Sports", RUN LIKE HELL. Far away. I can make a case that you've read too many of your press clippings, because...
• ...it's about the game sir. Once you get past the bling, the slick marketing, it always comes back to the game. You waited too long to get rid of all of the excessive physicality. Too many 86-77 games killed your committed fan base. But the game is cleaner now. Now widen the court and lengthen it. Go from 94x50 to 100x55. Half-court sets in the NBA remind me of pickup games at the Y, when we play 5 on 5 half court. Crowded.
• Take some of those games back from ABC. Last year, some of the best and/or most exciting basketball (Cavs-Wizards and Suns-Clips come to mind) was never watched because it was on cable. And it was on LATE. Same with these Finals. You don't need a MJ or Bird to sell the Finals. But you do need to sell the league. And you can't do it all on cable. What's next - Pay Per View?
• When you do get some of those games on free TV, give them to Fox or NBC if ABC won't promote them properly. And when you do, make sure you get Kenny Smith, Sir Charles and Ernie Johnson to provide analysis. They are the most fun since Cosell and Meredith had their A-game. They are an asset to the league.
• Get rid of the best of 7 first rounds. Go back to best of 5, and end the silly layoffs. You're doing it for ratings, and the ratings suck anyway because the games have no interest. And it would be nice to see the season end before the fourth of July. Besides, a shorter season means more time to rest for the players. That means they'll be healthier for the following season.

Time to do the counter-inutitive. Like, right now.

Good luck Mr. Stern. Try to stay awake.

People, I am trying. Really trying hard.

But I’m sorry, the Cleveland Cavailers will not win this series. Cleveland taking this series to six games will be an upset. LeBron stands a better chance of eloping with Eva Longoria. Paris Hilton has a better shot starring in "Penitentiary 3". 

Yes, I said this even before that hideous Game 1 performance “won” by the Spurs 89-71.

There is this part of my brain that wants to make it so. And almost every time I went with that atrophied slice of my head, I lost. Badly.

I could give you a deep analysis, such as that famed stat geek John Hollinger, but I have a peeve about belaboring the obvious. Sometimes, Occam’s (Ultra Close) Razor is better than any stat. For those of you that missed “Contact”, Occam’s Razor goes like this:

When in doubt, pick the better team.

Fact: Cleveland isn’t that good, and the NBA Finals never cut severely flawed teams a break. 

Fact: The best team almost always wins. You’d have to go back to 1975 when the Warriors led by Rick Barry swept the heavily favored Washington Bullets with Wes Unseld and Elvin Hayes. And I can make a case that the Warriors were seriously underrated (their roster included Keith (Jamal) Wilkes, Phil Smith, All-Defensive center Clifford Ray (think Ben Wallace with better hair) and Gus Williams), not to mention a weird format that year with a 1-1-1-1 format instead of 2-2-1-1-1 working against the Bullets.

What about 2004 you say? Lakers-Pistons? The Lakers may have had more pure talent, but Karl Malone was hurt, and the atmosphere with Shaq and Kobe had reached toxic levels. And the Pistons proved to be a far better team than we knew. Throw an asterisk on that baby.

Every other time, the clearly superior team won, and usually easily.

Fact: In the history of the NBA Finals, the seven game playoff series goes to the better team - barring major injury or internal strife. Every damn time. 

You can claim all you want that LeBron James makes his teammates better than Kobe as the misguided Mark Kriegal did. The truth is, the biggest difference between the two is that LBJ and his teammates play in the pathetic Eastern Conference. Yeah, LeBron loves his teammates. As any single person past 25 will tell you, love ain’t enough. In the Western Conference, the Cavs win 45 games - maybe.

Yes, Cleveland plays solid defense. Teams that can’t score had better. If Charlie Rosen even deigns to read this, he’ll hate this, but it has to be said: Some teams try to outscore their opponents to offset any defensive shortcomings, and some teams grind it out because they can’t score. Guess which box the Cavs go in?

The Onion probably came closer than anyone else to judging the level of the Spurs comp. Let’s see:

Eric Snow – Can’t score 20 in an empty gym. He’s a nice defender – he’d better be. He can’t shoot.

Larry Hughes – A creative scorer when healthy. Note, I didn’t say a good shooter. A scorer. Note, I said “when healthy”. He isn’t.

Damon Hughes – Looks better in a suit (assuming you are watching him with a welder’s mask on) than in an NBA uniform. Lord love him for cashing in on that one big season with Shaq.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas - The slowest big man to make an All-Star team since George Mikan. Nice shot, but did I mention that he is slow?

Drew Gooden – He’s big. He scores a bit. Sort of like a poor man’s Carlos Boozer. Ouch.

Daniel Gibson – I forgive the fact that he went to Texas, since he’s a Houston kid. Then again, he went to Jones High School  – I went to Yates. What a loser. Oh yeah, he’s got a streaky shot, and since Game 6, the bar has been raised. To about 6 inches. And he’s still small enough to walk under it without ducking.

Andy Varejao – He’s taken the flop to new heights – or is that depths? Nice energy guy. Translation: Annoying enough to be effective for short periods. Limited enough that he’s one of your seven best players, you aren’t winning many titles.

By the way, is it just me, or does Mike Brown looks a LOT like “Smart Brother” from the movie "Undercover Brother"? Or is he Al Roker’s taller, younger twin?

The Spurs are boring - and look even more unwatchable against a team like the Cavs. They whine far too much. They got a big assist from Golden State (being the worst possible matchup for Dallas), and from David Stu Jackson-Stern in the Phoenix series to get to the finals.

They also have Tim Duncan, one of the best 15 centers ever (he’s a power forward in name only), and please don’t waste my time telling me different). They have Tony Parker torching whomever the Cavs put in front of him. Parker has Eva Longoria. Spurs bring Manu “The Nose that Roared”, and Michael Finley.

 Better team? The Spurs.

Hotter team? The Spurs – who finished the regular season 37-7. Both of the Cavs wins came before that run. This series goes five games. My only consolation is David Stern squirming over the lowest TV ratings since the Magic Era began.

I guess I better keep trying...