Jackson wants to share some deep thoughts with everyone

I remain confused, so you know I was talking to Phil Jackson.

The Lakers lost, and at Jackson’s post-game news conference he said, “I’m disappointed that we didn’t compete tonight and give ourselves a chance.”

Shocked that we would agree, I’m sure he could hear the excitement in my voice.

I told him that’s been a recurring criticism of his players during the playoffs, and did he now buy such criticism?

Then I add, “That’s a pretty good question,” which drew a loud laugh, something not heard very often at a Phil Jackson news conference.

My mistake. He didn’t swear this time, but it seemed to set him off, Jackson saying, “I’ll explain it to you in deep terms.”

Now as a rule he probably believes he talks over everyone’s heads, in part because he likes to sit on a chair that makes him taller than everyone else, but now he was going to talk in deep terms.

The officiating was inconsistent, he said, using the same deep terms that most high school coaches might use in blaming the officials for their team’s defeat by 19 points.

When I interrupted to make sure I understood his deep explanation, he said, “Just be quiet while you’re standing there. You asked me a question, and I’ll give you the answer.

“So as the momentum changes in a ball game like that and the refereeing then becomes where you’re always on your heels, guys are in foul trouble, then you are not the aggressor anymore,” he said, and that’s word for word. “Then you’re the guy that’s defensively playing the game. And that’s what I don’t like.”

It was getting deep in here, all right, but I just wanted to know, “Are you saying it’s the referees and not your team’s inability to compete all the time?”

“No, I don’t think I said that,” he said, and no way was I going to ask him to repeat himself word for word.

“I think you’re trying to put words in my mouth,” Jackson said, “and I’m not going to let you do that.”

Well, I said, “You’re a big guy. You can speak your own words.”

Often I get permission from players and coaches “to write what you like.” It was nice for a change to give the coach permission to say what he wanted.

Jackson’s reply: “I did. You’re just trying to convert them into your words. So leave them be my words, all right?”

He asked the other reporters in the room if they were going to allow me to ask another question, before continuing his onslaught against the officials. So I remain confused -- did the Lakers lose because they didn’t compete, as he suggested earlier, or because of the referees?

NOW FORTUNATELY I had stopped by Coors Field to start the day knowing the Dodgers would play hard from start to finish.

One by one, though, each of the Dodgers approached to say the same thing, Casey Blake the last to join the doubting chorus: “The only reason you’re here is because the Lakers are playing tonight.”

Now why would anyone want to watch the Lakers play after already winning a game in Denver, Jackson’s message to the team in the previous series, “we came here to win one.”

The Lakers had their win, regaining home-court advantage, so knowing the way these guys have played, what were the chances they would show up?

Just for kicks, though, I thought I’d put a little heat on Jackson before the game -- not realizing I’d be doing the same after the game -- in the hopes he might not let the Lakers roll over as they did in Houston.

“Joe Torre is going to be here tonight,” I said. “Will you try to impress him?”

The Dodgers have four more wins than any other team in baseball right now, so I thought mentioning Torre’s name might get Jackson’s competitive juices flowing.

But instead, Jackson said, “Only you. That’s the only person I try to impress, and Jeanie.”

Jeanie was mentioned only as an afterthought because he probably remembered he was going home after the game, but as I told Jackson, “Look how far we’ve come together.”

As you know, it takes a lot to impress me, which is why I’ve expected so much of the Lakers during the playoffs.

They are the best team in the West, and by a large margin, and while everyone is talking about Pau Gasol and Kobe Bryant being tired, if they had finished off their opponents in short order, it wouldn’t be a problem.

Now I know none of this probably matters in the big picture, because the Lakers have home-court advantage and the Nuggets aren’t good enough to win another game in Staples, but why prolong a series that is already over?

Denver got nothing from Carmelo Anthony, yet another opportunity for the Lakers to rip the heart out of the Nuggets, but they refuse to act like champions.

“You hope your players are motivated,” Jackson said before the game, and when I reminded him that speech didn’t fly in Houston, he agreed, “It didn’t work in Houston.”

Too bad the Dodgers couldn’t loan Larry Bowa to the Lakers for a few days.

WORD IS Drug Man has returned to L.A., as everyone knows, someone on the run such as Manny Ramirez having to move from safe house to safe house to remain in hiding.

ESPN BROADCASTER Mark Jackson called the Nuggets’ Chris Andersen, “a wonderful example.”

If you’re going to pattern yourself after someone who was suspended by the NBA for two years for drugs, he’s your guy, all right. Maybe it’s just me, but I would think “a wonderful example” is someone who never tried the stuff.

JUST A final thought in the highly unlikely possibility the Nuggets go on to eliminate the Lakers: Jackson, the master of managing great players and poised to pass Red Auerbach, losing that opportunity because of The Birdman.

--

t.j.simers@latimes.com