Part I
Question: “What is more important,
basketball or life?”
Answer: “Basketball is life.”
Sometimes this answer makes a lot of
sense. But even if it's an exaggeration, it's a great sport, and a
young one, where innovation still occurs regularly. And also, as a
young sport, some of us can remember the old days pretty well, well
enough to compare. I even remember when it was mostly white guys,
that's how old I am. I remember the elation of the Texas Western
triumph, speaking of race.
Basketball talk can include lots of
things, one of which would be the greatest innovator of all time. It
could be Hank Luisetti and the jump shot, or Dr. J and the dunk, or
as I have argued, Steph Curry for breaking the equivalent of the four
minute mile and proving that one could rely on the three-pointer and
also for developing the high-off-the-backboard layup over a giant
defender.
Another discussion would be the
greatest team of all time: this
year's Warriors vs. the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls, for instance, vs.
Showtime Lakers, vs. 1968 76ers, or even one of the Celtics teams.
Yet
another discussion would be the top five one could put together: I
have historically chosen Wilt at center, Oscar and West at guards,
Bird at forward, and Jordan at small forward (changing his position.)
I'm moving away from this five gradually, slanted toward the past as
it is.
And
yet another is the best backcourt of all time, from West and Goodrich
up to Steph and Klay.
But
with this too long lead in, the most recent discussion has been, what
city has produced the best five of all time? Bruce
Jenkins, our excellent and sometimes quite enjoyably discursive SF
Chronicle sportswriter who is fond of casting the wide eye, last
Saturday submitted his all-time list of Oakland basketball greats.
He
puts Russell at center, Paul Silas at power
forward, and three guards: Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, and
Damian Lillard. His reserves are Joe Ellis, Isaiah Rider,
Brian Shaw, Nate Williams, Antonio Davis, Leon Powe and Cliff
Robinson. This is a hell of a team, a hell of a team. Russell a
candidate for best center of all time, two of the guards Hall of
Fame, and if Lillard continues, he'll be the third.
So I challenged our basketball
discussion group to erect the Philly all-time great team, although we
were conscious of a certain unfairness of comparison, Philly being so
much larger.
Correspondent
Bob Liss observed: “The
Oakland team has zero offensive firepower up front. But that is a
very interesting team anyway. They can certainly get rebounds.
Maybe they can make room for Vada Pinson or Bob Beamon.”
The definitive Philly list came from
Bob Levin, which I then sent on to Jenkins in this email:
“Your column today mentioned your
all-Oakland team, which is near and dear to my heart and many of my
friends' as well, since many of us have lived here for many years.
“But, it happens that some of us come from Philadelphia. So, here is our all-Philadelphia team as postulated by Bob Levin :
'My All-Philadelphia team would run Wilt, Rasheed Wallace, Kobe, Guy Rodgers, and Earl. My bench would be Gola, Arizin, Wali, Chink Scott, Walt Hazzard, Kyle Lowry or Fred Carter.
“But, it happens that some of us come from Philadelphia. So, here is our all-Philadelphia team as postulated by Bob Levin :
'My All-Philadelphia team would run Wilt, Rasheed Wallace, Kobe, Guy Rodgers, and Earl. My bench would be Gola, Arizin, Wali, Chink Scott, Walt Hazzard, Kyle Lowry or Fred Carter.
If you want to reduce it to one area,
West Philly, you have Wilt, Earl, Wali, Walt, Chink, Jellybean Joe,
Wayne Hightower, Jim Washington and then a choice of Malik Rose,
Lewis Lloyd, Doug Overton, and Hal Lear.
If you want to reduce it to one high
school (Overbrook) you have Wilt, Wayne, Wali, Walt, those last four
guys above, and Mike Gale.'
Much as I love and respect Oakland, I
think Philly (OK, much bigger place) takes the honors. In fact,
Overbrook might take honors. Although I have to admit, Oakland's
guards are terrific - love Gary, Jason, and now Damian.”
Then Bruce J. responded:
“Budd: Great stuff. Love the
all-Philly team. I'd take Oakland because of Russell. I'd take any
city if he was on it. But thanks so much for writing -- Bruce J.”
Part II
Basketball
aside, this made me think about our affiliations. Why do we root for
our hometown teams? That's an old question. There is Jerry
Seinfeld's observation, which could have been about the Oakland A's,
about the peripatetic nature of the staffing of sports teams. What
are we cheering for, asked Jerry, when these guys have been ripped
off from here and from there and the teams change all the time? Are
we cheering for the uniforms? Are we cheering for a laundry?
Well,
when I grew up in Philadelphia – granted teams were much more
stable, and there was even the territorial draft – the Eagles,
Phillies, A's, and Warriors were all part of who we were. If it had
been the Middle East, they would have accused us of tribalism.
Leaving Philadelphia for college at Harvard, I found it difficult,
indeed impossible to root for Harvard teams. Who were these guys,
anyway? I didn't know them personally – at high school I rooted
for my friends, and played some myself. Who was I going to root for
at Harvard, those preppies, New Englanders, Ohioans? What was the
point of that? That changed when I roomed with the basketball team
and played JV myself, but otherwise, I rooted for Philly.
Cambridge
itself was difficult to absorb. I liked the roast beef sandwiches at
Elsies – hey, the chief sandwich maker, Smitty, was from
Philadelphia! – but a sub shop instead of a hoagie shop, and
putting all that pickle relish on a non-Amoroso bun? Narraganset
beer - “Have a 'Ganset!” – or Carling's Black Label? Give me a
break. Let alone rooting for the hated Celtics against the Warriors,
or the Red Sox against the A's. To me, it was identity.
I
thought about it. Not rationally, I just investigated my own
feelings. I thought, I'm loyal to Philadelphia; my parents were from
there and never left, and I was from there. I'm loyal to the United
States. But Boston? Come on, I'm still going to root for Penn. In
fact, I couldn't lay down roots there in Boston, hard as I tried,
although others could, especially in med school.
So
here I am in the East Bay for more than 40 years. I went to grad
school at Cal, so I can feel some loyalty there. I have rooted hard
for the transplanted Warriors (former season ticket holder) and A's
(former season ticket holder), and the Giants (current season ticket
holder), and the Niners and Raiders, and I'm here long enough, and I
worked in Oakland long enough, to take pride in Oakland, especially
now in Lillard for some reason I can't put my finger on. And for
Marshawn Lynch. And Jason Kidd. I think I'm double-rooted.
They
are all symbols, clearly. We care for them, and they “give back to
the community.” We yell and scream at the games and talk about
them all the time, and they give speeches about the fan's deserving
their victories. It's not frivolous. It's commercial, true, but
then so is everything now – our descendants will look back on this
commercialism the same way we look back at Roman customs, and marvel
at the triumph of capitalism. But you can make money and still care.
I'm a doctor, so I know.
I
still think of sports as a search for artistic triumph. Honing of
skills over a long period of time, intrinsic ability, working
together toward a common goal, production of beauty – “beautiful
play” is not just a casual term, it's the essence of sport. But
there is also identity. And that's why it's important to stick to
the rules, not to be dirty, not to cheat, not to cut corners.
Because what we are doing is succeeding together in the eyes of God –
non-denominational, open to atheists, and benign rather than awful –
but something beyond just us.
Is
art compatible with competition, or with identity? Sure it is!
That's why sports are so great – it's not simple, it's everything
combined. Let's not forget that Greek plays, one of the crowning
successes of mankind in art, were produced in competitions. I don't
know for sure that there were neighbors and friends rooting for
Sophocles and Aeschylus, but I bet there were. And around the year
400 BC, and 350 BC, I bet there were arguments about the best of all
time. And arguments about how could you compare the Olympics to the
theater.
Somehow
I think I could have fitted in there. Better than in Boston, where
they had the hated Celtics.
Budd
Shenkin
No comments:
Post a Comment