There have been a few occasions here at BostonSportZ where I've had to question (attack?) a fellow writer.  These attacks have always been warranted (and always pointed at someone who's getting paid a lot of money to write their garbage), and today's is no exception.  Without further ado, we're going to be giving the Fire Joe Morgan treatment to ESPN Page 2's Jemele Hill.  Enjoy.

Forgive me, citizens of Easily Entertained, Need-Flash-To-Appreciate Nation for this blasphemous proposal:

Let's root for another edition of Pistons versus Spurs in the NBA Finals!

(Trying to block out the sound of 260 million people collectively groaning.)

If your article begins with you acknowledging that what you're writing  is going to make the entire country "groan", then perhaps your idea is stupid... but I'll let you dig your own hole.

 ...if Stern could overcome his nausea at the thought of another clash of these underappreciated titans, even he would have to admit that Pistons-Spurs would be the best thing for the NBA.

If by "best thing for the NBA" you mean record-low television ratings for the second straight year, then yes, this would be for the best!  Let's just cancel the conference finals and let these two titans play.

Full disclosure: As a Detroiter, I would love to see the Pistons in the Finals for the sixth time in my lifetime. But this isn't about me.

Full disclosure: Jemele Hill is an idiot and this is completely about her and page views.   

This is about the league's credibility.

*Yawn* I smell a conspiracy theory... 

As an NBA fan, there is nothing more irritating than when the league's credibility is challenged by cockamamy conspiracy theories.

As a reader, there is nothing more irritating than when a writer intentionally writes something "controversial" to draw attention to themselves, and because their thesis is so flimsy their entire article is filled with poorly thought out arguments that are never supported nor backed up. 

The biggest NBA conspiracy theory going right now is that the league is trying to make a Boston-L.A. Finals happen, because it would mean insane television ratings

... not like those "Best for the NBA" Spurs-Pistons matchups that nobody watches. 

This has undoubtedly been the NBA's best season since MJ's heyday.

So let's ruin that momentum by forcing a finals matchup that nobody wants to see!!

If this were any other NBA season, the insinuation that the league was somehow working to orchestrate the return of the Lakers-Celtics rivalry would be considered a real reach -- but not when the Tim Donaghy betting scandal is still looming.

 Right, because nobody has ever suspected the NBA of shady dealings before...

Donaghy's lawyer, John Lauro, filed presentencing documents in federal court that supported what those conspiracy theorists have been screaming for years.

Which is... ???  Let's give Jemele a quick writing lesson... when you make an argument, you need to provide facts that support your argument.  Without those, you have no credibility and you're wasting everybody's time.

Couple that with what was reported about Jordan's extensive gambling and Charles Barkley's initially "overlooking" that he owed the Wynn casino $400K, and Donaghy's issues all of a sudden look like they're a part of a problematic NBA subculture.

Jodan's gambling has been common knowledge for about 20 years, and Barkley's gambling has been in the spotlight ever since he retired.  I just don't see how Barkely, a TV analyst, owing a casino  $400K has anything to do with the league pushing for a C's-Lakers finals matchup.  Unfortunately, Jemele didn't take the time to figure that out either.

Certainly, you can look at the Donaghy situation and think of Matt Walsh, another guy who seems difficult to trust.

What??!!??  What does Matt Walsh have to do with a Lakers-Celtics matchup?  What is going on here? 

If there are any controversial calls that favor Boston or Los Angeles, or if there are games in which either of those teams makes a ton of trips to the foul line, the CTs (conspiracy theorists) will ask: What would prevent the NBA from urging the officials to call games a certain way to ensure a Finals involving teams from two of the biggest media markets in the country?

And if Detroit and the Spurs make a lot of trips to the foul line (like, I don't know, Detroit's 32 attempts in Boston), is that just good officiating, or am I then allowed to write a pointless, "let's waste everybody's time" article outlining a pro-Pistons conspiracy theory with crazy, half-cocked ideas that are neither explain nor backup?

But if it's Pistons-Spurs, the NBA Finals will be conspiracy-free.

So, if the Celtics and/or Lakers make it to the Finals it's by the manipulative hand of David Stern... or Matt Walsh or Charles Barkley (still trying to grasp that argument).  But if it's the Pistons and Spurs, then we know the NBA is an upstanding league?  Does talent or team defense have any room in the outcome?  No?  Ok, just checking...

I anticipate the crybabies will complain that the Spurs and Pistons are boring to watch.

If you define "crybabies" as casual-to-less-than-hardcore NBA fan, then yes, they probably will say that... and they'd be right, because boredom is completely subjective. 

But most real basketball and sports fans won't think that way -- just those casual NBA viewers who want it both ways. You know, the ones who deride the NBA for promoting individuals, but whine when Kobe, LeBron or some other one-named superstar isn't in the Finals. The ones who claim they love underdogs, but won't give the Pistons or Spurs a chance.

We're going to ignore her attack on casual NBA fans to question that last statement.  Since when are either the Spurs or Pistons underdogs?  Aren't the Spurs the defending champions?  Haven't the Pistons made it to the Eastern Conference Finals 6 years in a row?  I'm not trying to argue storylines here, but the Celtics have 3 guys who are as well-known for their inability to win as they are for their talent.  Isn't that the underdog story?  3 good guys who joined forces to overcome their past failure?  Isn't that more of an underdog story than the Spurs repeating as National Champs?  Seriously, Jemele.... do you even think about your arguments before you make them?  Don't answer that...

If you're someone who grumbles that NBA players don't play defense, you should root for Pistons-Spurs (although Boston may play the best defense of the remaining playoff teams).

Always nice when a writer making an argument contradicts themselves within the same sentence.

If you complain you're sick of seeing NBA teams that don't play hard, root for Pistons-Spurs.

Yes, the same Pistons who are known by those die-hard NBA fans (the ones this article is geared towards)  to only play when their backs are against the wall.  If you enjoy watching teams lay down in every series Game 1 (or every time they're up a game), root for the Pistons!

If you love teams that win because of their commitment to team basketball, root for Pistons-Spurs. If you're sick of seeing basketball dominated by And-1 wannabes, root for Pistons-Spurs.

Do the Lakers and Celtics not play team basketball?  Do the Lakers or Celtics have a single player who is an "And-1 wannabe"?  Jemele, I plead you, back up your statements!!  Let us know why the Spurs and Pistons fit these descriptions, but the Celtics and Lakers don't.  I know I'm not nearly as knowledgeable as you because I don't cash a check from ESPN, so please enlighten me.  My ignorant brain can't handle the depth of your arguments.

These are two teams loaded with unselfishness -- and they feature players who are among the NBA's best citizens.

Hasn't the biggest knock on the Celtics this season been their unselfishness?  Who do we have on our team who isn't a great citizen?

When people call Tim Duncan milquetoast, it makes me want to break kneecaps. First, Duncan is a thoughtful quote -- as are most of the Spurs. Second, Duncan shouldn't be penalized because he'd rather frustrate his opponents with precise passing out of double-teams and unstoppable bank shots, rather than trying to make the Top 10 Plays on "SportsCenter."

You're a fan of Tim Duncan, as am I... see, we can agree on something!  Now, I don't mean to interrupt... but what does Duncan's "thoughtful quote" power have to do with Matt Walsh, Conspiracy Theories and the Spurs-Pistons being a better Finals Matchup than Celtics-Lakers?

If it's Pistons-Spurs, it's our core sports values at work.

Yes, flopping, complaining, whining, arguing, never admitting your mistakes, and only trying your hardest when you absolutely need to!  Lessons we should be teaching to all our nation's youth.

Besides, unlike the Lakers and Celtics, the Pistons and Spurs didn't get to the conference finals with the help of questionable blockbuster deals....

Took her long enough to bring this up.  Were I writing this nonsensical piece of garbage, this would have been argument number one, not Matt Walsh, Barkley's gambling debt and Duncan's post-game quotes.

The Lakers got Pau Gasol for 10 rubles and a John Tesh DVD.

While I think she may have gotten the exact details of that deal wrong, I completely agree.  That deal was suspect at best.  My take isn't so much an NBA-lead conspiracy, but a Big F-YOU to the Celtics from Chris Wallace.

And Kevin McHale forked Kevin Garnett over to the franchise he just so happened to win three NBA titles with.  Nothing suspicious about that, right?

Nothing too suspicious, no.  While I think Ainge and McHale's friendship helped get the deal done... it's not like we didn't send away some talent.  Al Jefferson, the main target for Minnesota, received 14 All-NBA Team votes this past season.  Plus he's only 23 years old, gave Minnesota a discount in exchange for a long-term contract and is the best low-post scorer since Kevin McHale.   Definitely a player you can build a championship around.

The Pistons and the Spurs built their teams the old-school way -- through coaching, drafting and crafty pickups.

OK, she has us with the coaching part.. but drafting?  Has there been another GM in the league able to get talen through the draft better than Ainge?  Two starters, Perkins and Rondo, plus two key bench players both found in round 2:  Powe and Davis.  Not to mention the quality draft picks (Jefferson, Gomes and Gerald Green) with the talent and potential to land us Garnett and Ray Allen (Deltonte West).    And Executive of the Year Ainge didn't pull off any crafty pickups?  Posey, House, PJ Brown, Sam Cassell?   The Spurs got lucky and had Tim Duncan fall into their lap after an odd injury plagued down year (don't need to remind C's fans about that one).  If you want to have a conspiracy theory, start there.

Pistons-Spurs -- that's what we all should be dying to see.

Um... why is that again?  Your arguments made no sense.  Is it because, if they don't the NBA if fixed?  Or is it because Tim Duncan is thoughtful?  Or because their teams weren't put together by trades that took place this season, but seasons before?  Or because you can't trust Matt Walsh?  Jemele, can you do mankind a favor and please re-write this article so it makes sense... or better yet, just stop.