Why is it...

...that when Kobe comes through in the clutch for his team, like he did last night against Denver, it doesn't seem to be as exciting to people as when LeBron comes through in the clutch for Cleveland?

I don't really know.

Maybe it's because LeBron supposedly has a better public persona? Because he's newer to the league? Because he's younger? Because he's already "surpassed Kobe as a player," according to former Lakers' player/coach/manager Jerry West?

I don't really know.

Even to Kobe's fellow Lakers, it doesn't seem to be that exciting. As teammate Lamar Odom remarked after last night's game, "Kobe does that time and time and time and time and time again for game winners." He then added, "It is routine--for him."

Maybe that's it. It's routine, for Kobe. For LeBron... not so much.

Sure, we all remember when LeBron manhandled--and I mean, manhandled--the Pistons two seasons ago by scoring 25 straight points for the Cavaliers in order to defeat Detroit in Game 5 of that Eastern Conference Finals.

And some of us remember when LeBron led his team, who was down by 17 points going into the fourth quarter, to a win over the Toronto Raptors in January 2008 by scoring 24 points in the final quarter... all by himself.

Sure, he's had memorable moments where he's stepped up to help his team in the clutch.

But for Kobe, it seems like it's just normal. When the Lakers were down by two points last night, with 1:09 left in the game, Kobe drained a 3-pointer over J.R. Smith to put his team up 96-95. The Lakers, with the help of some more clutch free throws by Mr. Bryant, kept the lead for the rest of the game.

And it just seemed typical.

When LeBron drained the game-winning, buzzer-beating 3-pointer for the Cavaliers two nights ago in Game 2, it was immediately hailed as one of the greatest shots, if not the greatest shot, in NBA playoff history. And as soon as LeBron hit that shot, there were Facebook and Twitter updates galore by people (including myself) expressing their admiration for LeBron.

Now, I'm not gonna lie, it was a spectacular shot. But if Kobe had drained that same shot, the reaction would not have been the same.

I guess why people go crazy over LeBron is because he's newer. A fresher face for the league. Plus, no player in recent history was hyped up as much as LeBron was before he entered the league... and we all love to see people live up to the hype. And LeBron definitely lived up to the hype.

But LeBron hasn't been doing it for as long as Kobe has been, and we still haven't gotten as used to LeBron coming through in the clutch as we have to Kobe doing the same. As a result, whenever LeBron does what he does, we just naturally get more excited about it.

Oh well. I just hope the excitement doesn't wear off anytime soon.

Praise God!

It's the weekend! More specifically, it's Memorial Day weekend. So I don't have class until Tuesday. I also don't have any more doctor's appointments, as my doctor told me yesterday that my eye is completely healed and my vision is perfect again. God is great, and greatly to be praised! (Thus, the title of this post.)

So what am I doing for the weekend? Nothing exciting, really. I'll probably just stay at school and chill out, relax, etc. Boring, I know. But after the last two weeks, I can use the rest.

Speaking of rest, I think those Cavaliers got a little too much of it. Having that long break after the conference semifinals definitely didn't seem to bode well for King James and his royal court Wednesday night in Game 1 of the conference finals. They started out strong against the Magic, building a 15-point lead by halftime. But they just couldn't hold on.

The Magic, however, after going for 6 games and 7 games in the first round and the conference semifinals, respectively, looked much more efficient down the stretch, made obvious by their 107-106 win. Even with LeBron's 49/8/6 performance, the Cavaliers just couldn't get it done.

Hopefully they'll get it done tonight.

No disrespect to the Magic, but I, along with approximately 99.76% of NBA-watching people, would love to see a Kobe vs. LeBron matchup in the Finals. That would just be too beautiful. I think...

But this Kobe vs. Melo matchup looks like it might be better than any potential faceoff between the Black Mamba and the King. During the regular season, both Kobe and LeBron averaged only 19.5 points per game when facing one another. In the first 2 games of these Western Conference Finals, Kobe's averaging 36 points per game, while Melo's averaging 36.5. A little better than that 19.5 average between Kobe and LeBron...

Actually, don't mind that last paragraph. After doing some calculations, I found that, during the Lakers-Nuggets regular season matchups, Kobe averaged 31 points per game, while Melo averaged a pitiful 14.5 points per game. So I guess that proves that the playoffs bring out the best in everybody.

If that's the case then, I really want to see the Lakers play the Cavaliers in the Finals, even more so than I did before. Kobe and LeBron bringing the best out of each other? And we already know that both of these guys love to put on a show for the crowd. Man... that would be a series for the ages.

Stay tuned... hopefully the #24 vs. #23 matchup... I mean, the Lakers vs. Cavaliers matchup, will be coming soon to a TV near you.

1,000 Twitter followers!

That's right... I just passed the 1,000-follower mark on Twitter! There are at least 1,000 people that care about everything that I'm doing with my life!

Am I friends with all of these people? No.

Have I even met all of these people? No.

Is that weird to me? Well...

Okay, so here's the story. I heard about this site called MyTweetFollowers.com, that allegedly would help me get new Twitter followers. And, for a VIP price ($4/day for 5 days, or $3/day for 10 days), I could get at least 200 new Twitter followers every day.

So, I decided to try this thing out. I put up $30, and waited to see the followers roll in. For the first couple of hours, it was pretty slow. Then, the followers started rolling in. This was Saturday night, about 5 days ago.

Now, it's Thursday night/very early Friday morning, and I've already passed the 1,000-follower mark. As a matter of fact, at the time that I'm writing this, I have 1,182 followers.

On a side note, however... remember how I said earlier that I wasn't friends with all of my followers? Well, apparently, Twitter refers to the people that I follow as my "friends." Really. It says it right there in the link: http://twitter.com/friends. But how exactly do you define what a friend is? The common conception of friendship is that... well, never mind. That's a deeper, more philosophical matter for another time.

When looking at my Twitter homepage now, the majority of the updates that I get are of people that I didn't even know existed until they started following me on Twitter. But, for some odd reason, I still find their daily updates interesting.

Maybe I'm just too nosy.

One thing I have found, though, is that a lot of the updates I've seen have helped me in my everyday life. For example, one friend of mine said to me (sorry... "@me") earlier in one of her updates, "Make it a great day!!" It might not look like much, but to me, it meant a lot. I usually tell people to "have" a great day, but "making" it a great day is completely different. It shows me that I'm in control of my own happiness on a daily basis.

Little things like that make me enjoy having all of my newfound friends on Twitter. Because it enhances my own life. Sure, some people might think it's too impersonal. But I guess I'm just one of those people that likes to converse with people. All people. Just because I've never met them in person, why shouldn't I feel comfortable knowing a little bit about them, as well as giving them a little bit of insight into my own life?

I'm not giving them all the details of my life story, and it's not like I'm giving them my home address and telling them when I'm leaving the house unattended. I'm just updating them on some things I do that anybody would do (e.g. going to the mall, watching the basketball game, studying for an exam), and adding a little bit of my own flair to it. And if a bunch of people are interested, or are at least pretending to be interested in that, then that's fine with me.

Yeah. Definitely worth the $30.

Guess how I started off my summer?

With one of these.

Yep. A corneal abrasion. And the story about how I got it is even funnier.

When I was unpacking my stuff in my summer dorm, I pulled out my alarm clock. As I was unwrapping the cord, the end of the cord bounced up and... well, you know the metal prongs that you stick into an outlet? One of them hit me straight in my left eye.

That's the story. And no, I didn't copy that from fmylife.com.

Additionally, I've missed my first two days of summer classes now, and I'm on my way to the hospital after I post this so the doctors can figure out the best way to fix my eye. Do I have the best luck or what?

I'll post more to my blog later after I can actually see clearly what it is that I'm typing.

Can anyone stop LeBron James?

So I'm watching the Cavaliers play the Hawks in Game 3 of the Eastern Conference Semifinals, and the Cavs are up by 1 (47-46) at halftime.

Good game, right? Yeah... only because the rest of the Cavaliers, not named LeBron James, aren't playing as well as they should be. That's really the only reason this game is still close. At the half, LeBron has 22 points, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists--already on pace for a triple-double. The rest of the team: 25 points, 13 rebounds, and 3 assists.

Some more numbers... LeBron's shooting 75% from the field, and 60% from 3-point range. The rest of the team: 39% from the field, and 0% (0 for 7) from 3-point range. And with all the work that LeBron is doing, he doesn't have a single turnover yet. (The rest of the team only has 5, but still.)

This post isn't supposed to offer any critical analysis of the game, but it's just amazing to watch one player make his team so much better. He definitely looks like the MVP that the league said he was this season.

And no, I didn't forget that I was a Lakers fan. Yes, I love Kobe, but still... the guys around Kobe (Gasol, Bynum, Fisher, Odom) are actually really good on their own. The guys around LeBron (Ilgauskas, Varejao, Williams, West)... well, they're good, but let's be honest. They wouldn't be anything without LeBron.

As great as LeBron is, though, I'm scared. The guy's only 24 years old. If he's this ridiculously good already... the next few seasons are gonna be very, very exciting to watch.

If you're a Cavaliers fan, that is.

Twitter: 18 days later...

"For the last couple of months, I've been bashing Twitter and saying why it was absolutely ridiculous and pointless. And then I actually went to the Twitter website. Obviously, that visit to their homepage changed my perspective on Twitter, so much so that I am the proud owner of a Twitter myself."

-- Me; April 21, 2009

When I wrote that, I had been using Twitter for three days, and I thought that it was the best thing since sliced bread. But that was still during the honeymoon period.

Now, I've had it for two and a half weeks, and in that time, I've really started to get a feel for the complete Twitter experience. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

The thing that I love about Twitter is the ability to stay connected with everyone, and to stay updated on what everybody's up to. I've even gotten a few of my friends hooked on Twitter; they weren't crazy about it at first, but now they're just as hooked as I am. As I've spent more time on Twitter, however, I've found that I now, unfortunately, have an addiction to Tweeting.

Yep. My name is David Hudson, and I'm a Twitterholic.

Over the last couple of weeks, I've Tweeted about everything from waiting forever at the DMV, to having a great brunch at IHOP, and to being appalled and disgusted at sportscaster Craig Sager's wardrobe choice. (Really, any guy that would wear a jacket like this should disgust anybody with any good fashion taste whatsoever. I respect him for not being afraid to oppose society's standards of fashion, but still. That's just not necessary. Neither is this.)

I've also Tweeted sometimes, not even because of a change in what I was doing, but simply because I felt the urge to Tweet. As a result, I would Tweet about trivial things... such as my strong disdain for Craig Sager's apparel.

But wait... is this what Twitter was created for? I highly doubt it. Twitter asks its users one simple question: "What are you doing?" The purpose of the site would then seem to be to keep people updated on what others are doing. In fact, the site itself explains Twitter's origins:

"Where did the idea for Twitter come from? Jack Dorsey had grown interested in the simple idea of what his friends were doing. Specifically, Jack wondered if there might be an opportunity to build something compelling around this status concept."

Did Dorsey then expect Twitter to become what it has today? A web of not only status updates, but people's thoughts and opinions on things such as sportscaster's wardrobes? He probably didn't. But that doesn't necessarily make Twitter bad.

Except for one thing. People don't often change what they're doing every second of the day, but people do have thoughts and opinions all day long. For example, a person who goes to work from 9 to 5 will most likely stay in the workplace for that whole time (except for maybe a lunch break). While this person is in the workplace, however, the thoughts that will go through his/her brain are innumerable. Therefore, the updates that this person could post to Twitter are also innumerable, as Tweets are no longer just status updates, but random thoughts, opinions, feelings, etc., that one may have.

Because of the innumerable amount of Tweets that one could post, one might feel the need to Tweet, and Tweet, and Tweet, to the point where Tweeting becomes a status itself. (The other day, I saw someone Tweet that they were "planning their next Twitter update." Ugh.)

Twitter might as well take a page out of Facebook's book (sorry for the redundancy). Instead of asking "What are you doing?", Facebook asks its users, "What's on your mind?" And that's basically the same question that Twitter users are answering, whether or not the question is worded the same way. Twitter should probably go ahead and fix that question.

Nevertheless, people (myself included) often like to feel important. We like to feel that other people care about what we're doing, what we're thinking, and what we're feeling. And Twitter shows that other people actually do care... but not that much. They don't need to know everything that we're thinking about.

For example, one of the people I decided to follow on Twitter was Ludacris, mainly because I'm a huge fan of his music, and I love the lyrical style he employs in his raps. In a recent span of 24 hours, however, he Tweeted 31 times. Is that really necessary?

No. No matter how famous you are, you're not that important. At least not to me.

So, people, just chill out with the Tweets. Keep some of your thoughts to yourself. They might be funny, humorous, deeply philosophical... whatever. But when you're filling up my entire Twitter homepage because you just can't stop Tweeting, that's not a good look. Just keep it simple and let me know what you're doing. That is why everybody signed up for this thing, right?

P.S. Seriously, though... somebody needs to get Craig Sager a gift certificate to either Men's Wearhouse or LensCrafters, so he can buy either a nice, fashionable, classy suit, or at least some glasses to help him see how awful and atrocious his current wardrobe really is. That mess is ridiculous.

Is this the season?

Last night, I was watching Game 7 of the Bulls/Celtics series (which the Celtics won... ugh...), and I saw something in the Bulls that reminded me of my Lakers:

A lack of a consistent killer instinct.

Back in the days when Kobe and Shaq played beautifully together, the Lakers would pull together to do whatever it took to finish off an opponent (e.g. Game 7 vs. the Blazers in the 2000 Western Conference Finals). We knew we needed to win, and we wouldn't stop until we did exactly that... win.

That was then, this is now.

Over the last few seasons, the Lakers have continued to be a very talented team, but we've just been missing that extra... that extra "umph." I realized that when we lost to the Suns back in the first round of the 2006 playoffs. And my realization was later emphasized last season with our Game 6 loss to the Celtics in the Finals.

So how do we overcome this? (Note: when I say "we," I mean the Lakers. Just to clarify.) To be honest, I have no idea. As good, and as skilled, and as talented as Kobe is... and as clutch as he can be, I still don't see that consistent killer instinct, night in and night out, like I saw in the past with MJ, the "Bad Boys" of Detroit, or even now with LeBron for that matter.

Okay, so I just attributed a quality to King James that Kobe doesn't have. Sorry. But if anyone remembers the Cavaliers' Game 5 win over the Pistons two years ago, you understand where I'm coming from.

Let me clarify something else right quick, though. I started out discussing the Lakers' lack of killer instinct, and then I ended up talking about Kobe's lack of killer instinct. Why? Because a team gets its strength from the head. For example, if the coach doesn't know what they're doing, then, no matter how much talent the team has, they won't know what they're doing either.

I know, I know. Kobe isn't the coach. But he's assumed a clear leadership role on the team, and, as a result, the team looks to him for direction. Therefore, to put it plainly, if he doesn't go hard, then the team won't go hard.

But anyway, I don't expect the Lakers to make this killer instinct clear every single night. The fact of the matter is, we're still one of the best teams, if not the best team, in the NBA. Some nights, we just won't have to go as hard as other nights.

However, in those big games where we need to go hard... well, we need to go hard. Talent doesn't win games on its own. Bummer.

So will this be the season that the championship returns to Los Angeles? It depends. If we want the championship badly enough, we'll get it. But that's all it depends on.

Do we have the ability to win it? Yes.

Do we want to win it? I would think so.

Do we want to win it more than the Cavaliers, the Celtics, or any other team still in the playoffs? That's the question... and I really don't know.

Is this the season that we actually will win it? We'll see.

Hmm... is technology really a good thing?

So I have a final exam tomorrow afternoon, along with a 5-page paper that's also due tomorrow.

But about 3 hours ago, I found myself updating both my Facebook and both Twitter. Which leads me to ask the question:

Is technology really a good thing?

Of course it is. I seriously just need to learn how to focus on my work.

The question I asked, however, is the same question that many other people ask all the time, as a lot of the technological advances over the past few years seem to become distractions, getting in the way of other work that needs to be done. With MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., there are numerous alternatives to doing work.

But why does it seem that people are more distracted with modern technology than they were in the past? The most likely reason is the interactivity that makes this new technology popular. All of the aforementioned web sites are examples of what has been termed "Web 2.0," described by Tim O'Reilly, founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, as transforming the Internet into "a more mature, distinctive medium characterized by user participation, openness, and network effects" (Web 2.0: Principles and Best Practices, O'Reilly Radar).

"User participation"... that means users have to participate, right? And the more that users participate, the more popular the technology becomes. And the more popular the technology becomes, the more that users participate. It's a never-ending cycle that will continue to both attract and distract more and more people.

So how do we get past the "distraction" of this new technology? It's not easy, that's for sure.

But let's think about something: when televisions became popular in American society during the 50's and 60's, people saw TV as very distracting, as it "invaded" their households at a ridiculously fast pace, providing news and entertainment throughout the day.

Did this mean that TV was bad, though? Of course not. Think about this: when you wake up in the morning and want to know what you should wear, you don't have to step outside. Instead, you can just turn on your TV, flip to The Weather Channel, and get an update on the current temperature, along with information about the weather for the entire week. (You can even watch shows about crazy storms and hurricanes and such, but that's not as crucial.)

The point I'm trying to make is that, although new technology might be seen as a distraction, it helps make life more convenient and efficient in the long run. And it helps make it more fun, too. (My new iPod Touch is a great example of this... especially the fun part.)

Okay. I'm done writing. Let me go start my paper. I just need to update my Facebook and my Twitter first to let everyone know that I'm finally writing it.