Whether you're talking a squeaker over miserable teams like Washington or a convincing triumph against the Bostons of the world, players are routinely asked about the "quality" of each win. Was this a "good" or "bad" win?  Did it represent the Lakers at their best?  Their worst?  Their mediocre-est?  How would we grade the win on a scale of 1-10 (not a literal numerical figure, but in so many words)?  And if this happened to be a win worthy of a metaphoric "9" or higher, is it also the signal of a potential "formula" discovered or merely a positive blip in a seemingly gloomy 25-5 record? 

It's a line of questioning equally rooted in occasional merit and borderline lunacy, which made me wonder if this particular brand of scrutiny has been the norm for any Laker team considered a contender. 

Apparently, not so much.

"I don't recall every game being a 'how good we are' or 'how good we aren't,' " noted Derek Fisher when I asked whether Threepeat era wins were continually placed under the microscope. "The margin of victory and all these different stats of how we won."  Fish cited the 2000 version as an example.  That crew won the games they "were supposed to," racked a gaudy 67-15 record and everyone sort of left it at that. Of course, as Fish also mentioned, any squad with Shaquille O'Neal at the peak of his power-meets-agility craft has a storyline that writes itself. And in his own way, The Diesel still continues to create plot points, even when they don't emerge as organically. Said Kobe with a sly smile, "You know what it feels like right now? It feels like everyone is kind of searching for something to talk about. Because Shaq's not here. Me and Shaq smacking each other around, you can't talk about that too much. So I think people kind of search for things."

There's obviously some truth to Kobe's take, given our current 24/7 media age (an evolution I absolutely despise, but that's neither here nor there), with cable stations and Internet outlets competing for the same audience's attention. That requires a steady stream of "talking points," some more legit than others.  Throw in how "Lakers" and "drama" historically going hand in hand and where we're at feels inevitable. 

"More individuals have an ability to weigh in on their opinion of the Lakers, the Celtics or the NBA, whatever is going on," noted Fisher.  "People are going to choose different things to focus on, and so far, that's one of them."  But in Kobe's mind, the only folks scouring these details with a fine-toothed comb "are the analysts and the people who read it. They want to follow us and see how they're doing, what's going on. It makes for good barbershop talk."  Apparently, hair goes untrimmed at Staples, because according to Kobe, what it doesn't make for is good locker-room talk.  "We understand that [the season] is an evolution," reassured Bryant.  "No matter what they say now, if we win a championship, it's all good."

So here's my question. Is this content being driven by the media or the fans who want the media to dwell on it? It's honestly hard to tell at times. 

I'll be the first to admit, I've dissected efforts that could be generously described as "half-assed."  Anybody worth their observational salt couldn't have missed a period of stagnant ball movement, precision-based trap D disintegrating into "Gamble Fest 2008," Andrew Bynum's foul trouble, Lamar Odom's confounding passiveness, etc.  I talked about it, because not doing so is the equivalent of not doing my job. But at the same time, I've presented these issues within the context of "It's all potentially serious, but this is a very good team, there's puh-lenty of time to fix whatever and panic button pushing would be absurd."

On the flip side, my attempt at perspective maintenance has often prompted the blogosphere to accuse me of having my head in the sand.  Not "telling it like it is."  "Sugarcoating" the reality of a team that doesn't have what it takes to win a title. It's hardly a stretch to say the Lakers Blog readership is more willing than their humble hosts to pick apart and poo poo a victory by fewer than 20 points.  Yes, there are expectations - reasonable ones, I might add - among the faithful, and that hasn't been lost on the players. "I think a lot of people see us on the verge of greatness," said Fisher.  "And quite frankly, they want to see us do it. We want to as well."  But even
taking that into account, there's arguably zip to truly "complain" about with these Lakers, but you'd often never know it, between its coverage and fan feedback. 

Is the result of a media that typically focuses on the "immediate," as opposed to a more reasoned (if potentially more "dull") analysis of the bigger picture?  Are these reporters simply feeding a fan-created beast?  Can one even exist without the other?  You tell me, because the chicken and egg points often feel blurred.   

Check out the vids below to hear Kobe and Fish weigh in.

AK

Photo: Dancing with the Stars. Credit: Kelsey McNeal / ABC
Photo: Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal. Credit: Lucy Nicholson / Reuters