Psychoanalytic Musings with Dr. b. Lee

On Confidence and the Cool; Pierce vs. Pacquiao

On Saturday night two victors walked off the stage and into their respective locker rooms. One with a scowl and the other with a smile. Performers have different ways of "getting up" for competition. They also have different dispositions during competition. Some people are all business; "doing their job" without even noticing the crowd and letting the ball, their fists, or their all-around play do the talking. Others use the crowd as a sort of weapon, wielding it against their opponent, while verbal jabs are hurled at opponents on and off the field of play.

Why is that athletes behave in either fashion? Some maintain a more reserved appearance while others visibly react to everything and seemingly need to add something extra to the game, whether it is in the form of talking trash or general theatrics. And is one approach better than the other? Is one more detrimental to the health of an individual competition or to the game at large? And is one approach more beneficial than the other, or in other words, is one approach "more fun"?

Prior to taking the ring in last Saturday's fight against Ricky Hatton, the cameras closed in on Manny Pacquio before he made his entrance. Typically a fighter will have a stern look of determination on their face prior to a bout, feeling the need to stay focused. However, when we see Pacquiao, he is grinning from ear to ear. It's as if he were about to take part in a parade rather than a boxing match. He was perfectly calm, serene even, yet ready, and apparently, absolutely confident.

Basketball players also seem to oscillate between these two extremes. Sometimes during the pre-game shoot around you see players stone-faced, getting mentally prepared for the game. Other times you can see players clowning around as if it were just another shoot around before practice, perhaps trying to work out the butterflies. But, rarely will you see the kind of "just happy to be here" look that we witnessed on the face on Pacquiao prior to the fight.

Normally, an argument would be, "Well, Sport A does not require the same kind of intensity and mental strength as a basketball game." But, in this case we're talking about boxing. If any sport required intensity, mental strength, and execution, boxing would most likely be at the extreme. However, Pacquiao seemed to rise above this. During the Pacquiao vs. Hatton 24/7 series, the majority of the barbs were slung from the Hatton camp. However, Pacquiao's side remained calm and relatively silent in the face of this assault. What is more, is that this onslaught did not seem to fire up Manny at all. There was no "bulletin board" material for Pacquiao, perhaps because he didn't want it. But probably because he didn't need it.

Maybe Pacquiao is just a transcendent figure, so wrapped up in his faith and his preparation that the outside world and his opponent do not even seem to exist prior to fight night. He doesn't need fodder or any extra motivation. He just needs to get himself ready.

Does such a figure exist in basketball? Or is basketball simply a different animal. Trash seems to be a part of basketball. You always need to get an edge on an opponent, one way or another, and mind games are a part of that. But, I do not think this plays as big of a role as some would like to believe. More often than not, the trash, or the histrionics appear to be more aimed at drawing positive attention to the actor, rather than negative attention to the actor's opponent. This hearkens back to a previous piece on the dispositions and tendencies of Kobe and TO.

Recall game 6 of the Bulls-Celtics series; Pierce starts to get warm in the 4th quarter; hitting back-to-back shots and putting the Celts up by 8 with under 4 minutes to go. As soon as he hits the latter of these shots, he turns to the Bulls bench and barks at them. Now, what competitive advantage is gained by such a tactic? Clearly not much, considering the fact that Chicago ended up winning the game. And more globally, how did this improve the game at all? Did it add more excitement to the game, or more "fun"?
Or was there a negative effect? Did Pierce lose concentration? By focusing on the yapdogs on Chicago's bench, did Pierce take his mind off the game, in turn helping Chicago recover and force the game into overtime? Of course, there is no way of knowing this, but it is difficult to see any benefit in jawing with people who are not even in the game to begin with. Sometimes of course a player needs fuel to get going. Someone from the crowd says something, maybe someone on the other team says something, and like a switch, the player starts performing. But again, this would also seem to argue against this whole concept of talking trash, for the opponent was aided by such a tactic.

Instead, maybe if Pierce kept his focus on the court, against his actual opponents, then maybe he bottles that fire, plays defense a little harder, and the Celts finish the series in 6, as opposed to 7 games. Or maybe, Pierce requires this release, either for his own personal need for attention, or perhaps because without this release he ends up committing a hard foul.

Or, perhaps basketball simply attracts this disposition; ostentatious athletes with a knack for theatrics in addition to making big shots. Basketball today is simply an outgrowth of its players, rather than an independent framework within which the players are forced to work. Talking trash isn't necessarily a part of the game (although Larry Bird and Michael Jordan were doing it in the 80's), but it has become one due to the nature of the games' actors. But this theory would seem too cookie-cutter, and would not take into account silent assassins such as the JZA.

Considering the history of boxing, the history of the pomp and circumstance, and the seeming necessity for boxers, their trainers, and promoters to talk and talk all the way up to fight night, Manny Pacquiao is surely an aberration. But, this cannot be considered a bad thing. If trash talk and promotions were all that mattered, then why would the fight even take place? People do not pay $50 to hear Don King speak, they do so to watch the fight.

The point is that in order to enjoy an event, trash talk and/or grandiose displays of selfishness are not necessary to the overall enjoyment level of the game. Sure, if Josh Smith threw down that between the legs dunk against the Heat, it would have been cool. Maybe the Heat even would have stepped up and not been so awful in game 7. There is no way of knowing. But one thing is for sure, no matter how much you talk, or dance, or scowl, it all comes down to execution, and execution stands on it's own. I'd rather watch Pacquiao smile his way in and out of the ring any day of the week, rather than watch a loser dance and jaw his way into the loss column.