Alright let’s roll up the sleeves on this sports op-ed thing. Woke up this morning buzzing after that crazy Lakers-Celtics finish last night. Figured I’d try my hand at writing about it like the pros. Followed some so-called “expert” advice online. Yeah, right.
Step 1 They Said: “Pick a Hot Take”
Went straight for the LeBron debate. Too old? Still the best? Scribbled down “LeBron is WASHED” at the top. Felt aggressive. Typed a whole angry paragraph about missed free throws. Read it back. Sounded like a mad teenager ranting on Twitter. Deleted the whole thing. This “hot take” nonsense felt forced. Started thinking maybe it shouldn’t be about forcing anger, but about something I genuinely saw that others missed.
Step 2 They Said: “Do Your Research”
Oh boy. Dove into stats. Points in the paint. Turnovers after timeouts. Fourth quarter shooting percentages last 5 games. My eyeballs glazed over. Got distracted looking up jersey numbers. Found a nugget though – that kid Austin Reaves took 8 more shots than AD in the 4th. Weird. That felt like something actual. Research isn’t just digging up random stats, it’s finding the one thing that makes you go “huh?”
Step 3 They Said: “Structure Your Argument”
Tried it textbook style: Intro, Points 1-3, Conclusion. Yawn. Felt like writing a school essay. Drafted:
- Point 1: Lakers bench scoring sucks
- Point 2: LeBron tries too hard
- Point 3: Coach’s rotations are bad
So boring. Fell asleep reading it myself. Scrapped it. Realized it needs to flow like talking to a buddy at the bar after the game, not like reading a manual.
Step 4 They Said: “Be Opinionated and Provocative”
Went back to my Reaves nugget. Wrote “The Lakers Don’t Deserve Anthony Davis.” Now that felt spicy. Argued Darvin Ham trusts Reaves more in crunch time than AD. Used the shot stats. Pointed out that crucial possession where they ran the play for Reaves rolling to the basket, not AD posting up. Didn’t scream “hot take,” screamed “look at this weird thing happening!” Big difference.
Step 5 They Said: “Polish and Share”
Read it out loud. Cut out three sentences that sounded like a professor wrote them. Found myself wanting to explain every little stat. Chopped those bits. Kept the story: Ham trusts Reaves more than AD late, here’s proof, what does that mean for the Lakers? Hit publish on my crappy little blog. No big website, just me shouting into the void. Surprisingly, it felt… right? Like I actually had a point instead of just noise.
Final truth? Those “5 Simple Steps” articles sound easy. Actually doing it involved deleting more words than I kept, arguing with myself, and realizing my best point came from being confused by a stat, not being artificially angry. The polished “pro” op-ed wasn’t built in steps, it was dug out of the messy first draft rubble.
