Paralysis by Analysis

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

As part of my “day job” as a high school English teacher, I help juniors prepare for the SAT. I warn them of the danger of “paralysis by analysis,” in which you spend too much time talking yourself into the idea that any of the proposed answers could be correct. You start off pretty sure the answer is A, but then as you re-read B, you think, “Well, that could be right.” Then upon reexamining answer C, that suddenly seems like an eminently reasonable possibility, and so on. You’re racked with indecision and can’t move on, as you continue to mull over the arguments you’ve invented.

On my drive downtown for our game against the Chicago Sky Wednesday evening, I felt really confident about our chances of a win. We were on a five-game winning streak; we had great players who seemed to be finally figuring out how to play together, and we would most likely be playing a shorthanded Chicago team, if Sylvia Fowles’ ankle was still troubling her. That all seemed to add up to a win for me. Then there was a lot of traffic on the 101 (no surprise there) and I started rethinking it. I had known all season we had great players, but that hadn’t guaranteed wins. A five-game winning streak is long, and maybe we would feel over-confident and fall back into bad habits. It wasn’t Fowles who had killed us the last time we played Chicago (and lost), it was Shyra Ely — and there was nothing wrong with her ankle. The game was on national television — that always seems to be bad for the Sparks. Then I went back to all the reasons we were definitely going to win, and then again how we would end up losing this one. By the time I got to Staples Center, I had convinced myself that we were absolutely going to win and that I needed to steel myself against what was almost certain to be a loss.

Fortunately, the game started at 7 instead of our regular 7:30 start time to accommodate the ESPN2 schedule, so I could finally just end the analysis and watch the game.

The first quarter started and the first play was fine — Sparks get possession from the jump ball; Tina Thompson finds Candace Parker down low and we score in the first couple of seconds of the game. Ely then scores back-to-back baskets. “Uh oh,” I thought. Then Lisa Leslie blocks two Chicago shot attempts. “OK,” I thought. But as the first quarter played out from there, there was definitely more “uh oh” than “OK.” With two minutes left in the quarter, the Sky had built up a nine-point lead. We got it down to seven by quarter’s end, but we had pretty much lost to the Sky in every statistical category in those 10 minutes. Even though I thought I had prepared myself for this, it really was not going down well.

Second quarter. Would it be a slumping quarter for the Sparks or was this where we were going to dig out of the first-quarter hole and make our move? It started well: with a Tina Thompson block on Mistie Bass, leading Parker and Noelle Quinn to make some baskets, cutting the Sky lead to two with about seven minutes left in the half. I thought it looked good. But that was as close as we would get that quarter. When the Sky had pushed their lead to 11, I thought it was all over. Then something came alive in Leslie, and in the last 1-1/2 minutes of the quarter, she blocked one shot and scored on three baskets to get Chicago’s lead down to just five at the half.

Now I spent halftime wondering which team was going to play in the third quarter. Back and forth I went in my head — we had a weak first half, so we should finish strong in the second. The third quarter was always a weak spot and Chicago would be able to exploit it to build on their lead. We had learned to fight back over the last several games, to push for a win, even though it seemed unlikely. Back and forth I went. And then the third quarter started.

It was a mess. In the first two minutes, the Sky succeeded in building their lead back up to nine. “Uh oh,” I thought. This was going to be another awful slow third quarter for the Sparks. And then things started going our way. Parker stepped to the line to shoot free throws. She made the first, but missed the second. Just as I was bemoaning another missed free throw, Leslie stepped in for the rebound and batted the ball high — it went to the top of the backboard and then fell into the basket. We got two points for that play, instead of just one if Parker had made the free throw. From that point on, it seemed like we couldn’t miss. Lisa had 10 points and five rebounds in the third quarter alone, shooting a clean four for four; Candace shot a perfect three of three, and Tina would have been two for two, if she hadn’t been fouled, but she made them pay with two made free throws. I was surprised to look at the scoreboard and see we had regained a two-point lead. If we kept up that intensity into the fourth, then I would need no more analysis — the answer would be clear.

We opened the fourth quarter with a nice run. Leslie picked up where she had left off, blocking Bass and scoring on the other end. We went on a 7-0 run to start and at the end of two minutes, we had expanded our lead to right on Quinn’s fourth consecutive basket. Chicago fought back, but we were at home, we were riding a five-game winning streak, we were the team everyone thought we would be in June. Chicago got as close as four points, but then we held them scoreless for 5 1/2 minutes in the quarter while Parker scored and scored and scored. We won by 12.

Six-game winning streak. But we play Phoenix on Thursday and they’re the No. 1 team in the West. But we have home court advantage. But they have beaten us twice. But they lost their last game. It is a long time until Thursday night — this could take awhile.

-- Kathy Goodman

Goodman is a co-owner of the Sparks