I read an article on Deadspin.com today written by "Free Darko" and felt the need to retaliate.  Now, I don't normally attack other writers.  It's not an easy gig, and Lord knows I've posted my fair share of garbage.  However, this particular article made my Irish blood boil and, well, I can't keep quiet.

I suppose the point of the article is to examine how Garnett and Kobe came to be on Championship-caliber teams this season, and the different paths they've taken to get there.  Should've been a good read... man, was it terrible.

First, head on over to Deadspin and read the article:  A Tale Of Two Trades

OK... my first point of contention is that this article is obviously falling in line with the other "Boston Haters" out there.  Emboldened by the Patriots' loss, their venom increasing, it's suddenly become chic to bash Boston and all we stand for and hold dear.  His article should have started with his anti-Boston stance, instead of burying it in the middle, behind a veil of real analysis:

It doesn't help that I hate the city of Boston, the Irish, kelly-green, Tommy Heinsohn, and most every Celtic ever (no, Len Bias doesn't count as one). I wanted badly to feel that KG and crew were pimping this noble city, which would've given me no small amount of satisfaction. And yet here we are, nearing the halfway mark, and when I look at Garnett, I see a Celtic. He's embraced a lot of things that I--and plenty of others who once fed off of his energy--can't stand. Kevin Garnett may well get his title this season, but he'd be just as stoked about restoring the Celtics to glory. And that bums me out.

Here's what we learn from this paragraph.  Not only does he hate the city of Boston, he admittedly hates an entire race of people (could you imagine if he had written "I hate the city of Boston, African-Americans...")?  How can you write that and not back it up?  Why even include that?  What's the point of attacking Irish people?  Anyway, he hates the color green (immature) and every Celtic save for Len Bias.  OK, so we're throwing any and all objectivity out the window.  It happens. Then he attacks Garnett because he's embraced his new team and city.  So, he would be applauding Garnett if he was pouting on the bench, complaining that he wasn't still stuck in Minnesota, playing for a terrible team?  His arguments are childish and idiotic.  That Garnett, one of the only players who truly gets it, would be thrilled about playing for the most storied franchise in the league's history, and excited to bring back Celtic Pride, "bums him out".  Shut up!

I could ramble on for hours about that paragraph, but there's so much more garbage from this article to choose from.  Let's look at this paragraph:

The Celtics have diminished Garnett in my eyes. Not as a player, or a warrior, or anything real like that. I mean that when I watch him, there's no aura, none of that mystique that makes me want to howl at the moon. One time a few years back, I saw this Inside Stuff segment where KG took an at-risk youth on a London vacation for the hell of it.

So, the Celtics have diminished Garnett because he's not taking poor kids to London?  WHAT!?! 

He poorly attempts to explain what he means here:

Now, Garnett's just a fiery veteran on a very good team. I no longer feel like he's got the power to make the world end, or at least lives each second like the end is near. He's been normalized, and frankly, that's not the stuff myths are made of. He's gone from a regional god, the identity of a franchise whose very font seemed ripped from their star's consciousness, to a professional athlete capable of moving on.

So, it's terrible that one of the great talents of our generation, who was stuck on a team going nowhere, has sacrificed some personal accolades for the chance to win a ring?  Isn't that why they're all there in the first place?  Garnett is being attacked because he's embraced his new home and his new teammates?  So, what was Garnett supposed to do, pull an Alonzo Mourning in Toronto whine-fest to keep his legacy alive?

After those idiotic statements, he digs into the Kobe Bryant/Lakers situation.  He talks about the Gasol trade, Bynum's emergence and states, "they'll be must-see in a way the Celtics can only dream of."  Um, care to back that up with anything?  How is Kobe,  Bynum, Gasol and Lamar Odom more of a must-see team than Garnett, Pierce and Ray Allen?  How are they must-see in a way we can only dream of?  Because they're in LA and not in Boston?  Again, completely idiotic statement.

His closing paragraph:

If the Celtics and Lakers do somehow meet in the Finals, everyone will harp on history repeating itself. But they'll be missing the real story: That Garnett got there by giving up his revolutionary stripes, while Kobe got over being a "student of the game" and ended up joining the fun house. Two different paths to the top, and not the ones anyone would've predicted.

OK, first of all Garnett didn't give up any "revolutionary stripes" (whatever that even means).   Second of all, I'm pretty sure that every person in America predicted that KG would be traded from Minnesota to a contender.  I also don't find it too surprising that the Lakers traded for a veteran big man to keep Kobe happy.  In reading the article you'll notice a complete lack of any mention of the Kobe-Shaq feud, and how Kobe forced Shaq out of town.  If Garnett had been teamed up with the most dominating player in the league, do you think for a second he would have let his ego screw his chances of winning?  Never!  Garnett is, and always has been a completely unselfish player who will sacrifice for the good of the team.  Because he's doing that on a grander stage, on a larger scale, this Free Darko character feels the need to attack him.  I wonder if we'd be reading the same article had KG been traded to Phoenix or Chicago, instead of  Boston. 

I hate it when people let their hatred of Boston disable their ability to think clearly and write coherent, compelling articles.  This whole thing is just garbage, and frankly, I wish I'd never read it.