As I sit at home more often than not, I am usually consumed by sports. As my recent blogs have stated (vividly), though, there's nothing going on right now that would qualify as exciting. So, I decided, for the month of July (but starting today), to run a My List special. Every list in this marathon will be devoted to choosing the best players in the history of each qualified NBA franchise.
This is not a new concept for me; I tried a similar concept in a group for this site, but I abandoned it because, well, having only one active member doesn't a group make. And when I tried to bring it to the main blog pages, I was met with questions like "I'm confused. Is it just the best players, or is it single-season teams?". Let me use this space to explain what this concept is:
I have taken 29 of the NBA teams (except Charlotte, who was too new to be ranked), and chosen the best players from each position. That means that players who were never teammates would be, hypothetically, through this.
I have chosen the teams according to what a potential starting lineup would be. That could (and probably will) mean that certain greats on one team are backups, and weaker players on others starters.
Achievements with the team are paramount, obviously, but in cases where the talent pool is weak, and a player with a good career made a cameo on the team, they are included.
I then ranked the teams 1-29 according to how strong (I felt) their lineup was. So, it's not ranked based on titles.
Now then, we begin the countdown with my #1 ranked team, the Los Angeles Lakers. Here is the lineup:
Starters:
PG: Magic Johnson: If I recently ranked him as the best NBA player ever (certainly open to debate, but still), he has to start here. To run a Cliff's Notes version of his career, he led the Lakers to five NBA titles and nine appearences in the Finals, won three regular season and Finals MVPs, was the all-time assists leader at the time of his first retirement, and helped reignite the NBA in the 1980s. This was the easiest position to pick here.
SG: Kobe Bryant: And now, for the hardest position to rank a starter. Both Bryant and the Logo, Jerry West, would have been great picks. In the end, Kobe wins narrowly (though I have a hunch he would allow West to start if problems arose). The reigning MVP has won multiple socring titles, helped the Lakers reach five NBA Finals, and has won three of them (we won't go into how or why, but he has three rings).
C: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Kareem was already on his way to a HOF career when he was acquired by the Lakers in a blockbuster trade in 1975. He added three regular season MVPs to the three he won in Milwaukee (for a record six overall), and helped L.A. to five titles during his 15 years there. He also set the all-time scoring mark as a Laker in 1984. He now currently works for the Lakers as a special assistant.
SF: Elgin Baylor: Baylor's biggest black mark as a player (let's not discuss his tenure with the Clippers) was that he never won an NBA title, but Baylor was a legendary player who was among the first to take it airborne. He won ROY with the Minneapolis Lakers in 1959 and took the upstarts to the Finals that year. He went on to be named first team All-NBA ten times and be an 11-time All-Star. He also set an NBA Finals record (still stands) with 61 points against Boston in game 5 of the 1962 Finals. He helped Minneapolis/L.A. to eight NBA Finals overall.
PF: Wilt Chamberlain: Before you say "He's not a PF!"; there were so many great C's and fewer great PF, that I've included the C's at the PF position. Anyhow, Chamberlain wasn;t the magnificent scoring machine of his prime, but the Lakers didn't need him to be. Chamberlain showed how far he came in 1971-72, when he led the league in rebound and FG% and helped the team win 33 straight games en route to a then-record 69 victories. Overall, he led L.A. to four Finals (winning the 1972 Finals MVP).
Reserves:
PG: Gail Goodrich: Goodrich was the key scorer for the Lakers of the early 1970s, and actually helped his team land Magic when he signed with the New Orleans Jazz in 1976 (the Jazz gave up the pick that L.A. would later use on Earvin). But Goodrich was a solid player in his era. After being a bit player for the Lakers from 1965-68 and then emerging in Phoenix, Goodrich returned to L.A. in 1970, and in the Lakers' brilliant 1972 season, he led the team in PPG (25.9). He went on to average over 20 PPG in four straight seasons.
SG: Jerry West: I kinda alluded to this earlier, but West wasn't called Mr. Clutch for nothing. West personified grace and fire on the court, and was consistently brilliant for the Lakers in the 60s and early 70s. West won the first ever Finals MVP in 1969, and in doing so, is the only player from the losing team to win the award. He also won the scoring title in 1970 (the first year it was awarded on PPG average and not total points). He averaged at least 20 PPG in every season after his rookie year, and led the Lakers to nine NBA Finals and the elusive brass ring in 1972.
C: George Mikan: People today tend to forget Mikan, but in his era, he was the player of the NBA. His star was so big, Madison Square Garden famously put up "Geo Mikan vs Knicks" before one game there. Mikan was the Bill Russell of his day; he won an NBL title with the Chicago Gears, then after joining the Lakers, led them to an NBL title, and after they moved to the BAA/NBA, they won five titles in six years. Mikan won three scoring titles, and was the first player for whom the rules were changed to counter him (they widened the foul lane). That personifies dominance.
SF: James Worthy: Worthy was the spark plug for the Showtime Lakers of the 1980s. His swoops to the rack fired up the Forum crowds and his team, and Worthy always saved his very best for when it mattered the most; the playoffs. Drafted #1 overall in 1982, fresh off an NCAA crown, Worthy missed all of the 1983 playoffs with an injury. The next year, he bursted on the scene, and his zentih occured in 1988, when he won Finals MVP (he also got his only career triple-double in game 7 of that series, with 36 points, 16 rebounds and 10 assists). For his career, he averaged 17.6 PPG and 5.1 RPG.
PF: Shaquille O'Neal: For all he has done recently to look foolish, O'Neal did have a great run with Kobe and the Lakers early in this decade. After coming from Orlando as a free agent in 1996, Shaq won his first (and only) league MVP in 2000 after Phil Jackson took over. Shaq also won the scoring title that year (going with one won in Orlando). Shaq was the unstoppable force (unless he took free throws) of those Lakers as they won three straight titles from 2000-02.
Coaches:
Head Coach: Pat Riley: Riles may have sullied his rep a bit in Miami, but as the coach of the Showtime Lakers, Riley was dominant. He won no fewer than 54 games in every full season with the team, won four titles and made eight Finals during his run. He also won COY in his final season there in 1989-90.
Assistants: John Kundla, Phil Jackson: Jackson is pretty obvious; three titles with the Lakers, five Finals berths, and nine overall titles. But Kundla was a great coach with Minneapolis, winning five titles in six years. He also is in the HOF (though it took him nearly 40 years after retiring in 1959 to get there).
Honorable Mentions:
PG Slater Martin: He did win five titles with the Minneapolis team, but wasn't a key figure despite his HOF selection.
PF Vern Mikkelsen: Another HOFer, and a true PF, but which of the C's can you leave out here?
any Lakers from the 1990s except Shaq and Kobe: They didn't win consistently enough to get here.
There are the Lakers. Tomorrow, I'll unveil their archrivals, the Celtics.
After taking the weekend off from blogging to finish up some other tasks, I couldn't resist returning to comment about the end of the NBA Finals. What was promised to be the renewal of a classic rivalry instead became a one-sided affair as Boston wrapped up the title in six with a resounding 131-92 win. First off, 131 points!?! The Lakers' defense never really showed up, and tonight, they just looked like they didn't care. Then again, one could say many of the Lakers never showed up in this series, as Boston thoroughly dominated here. Kudos to Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Finals MVP Paul Pierce for getting the elusive brass ring.
But getting back to the Lakers, it is truly amazing how opinion can change in the blink of an eye. A little more than a week ago, many people (including myself) said the Lakers would win the championship. Now, many of those same people are angry and demanding stuff be done (including the outrageous 'proposal' that would send Tim Duncan to L.A.! Please!). There are many reasons people use to explain the loss. Here are my reasons:
1. Kobe wasn't an MVP because of great Celtics' D: Kobe was (in my opinion) never defended better than he was in this series. Aside from game 3 (36 points) he never broke out. They didn't allow him to set up in his usual spots, and he looked completely out of sync. This, however, should end the "Jordan" comparisions for awhile. Kobe's good, but he's no MJ.
2. No inside toughness: I have said in many comments that Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol "play softer than pillow feathers". So I won't bore you with that again. Gasol, however, isn't and probably never will be counted on for the tough points. He really isn't a center, and if Andrew Bynum returns healthy and continues his prior solid play, Gasol should be O.K. Odom really looked bad in this series, as he never could sustain stretches of good play. I do think he could be in line to be moved if the Lakers want to make a big trade.
3. Where's some bench help?: The Celtic bench thoroughly outplayed the Lakers' bench. James Posey was solid throughout, P.J. Brown made big contributions without the stats to show for it, Leon Powe had that huge game 2, and Eddie House and Sam Cassell had their moments. Meanwhile, aside from a big game from Sasha Vujacic in game 3, the Lakers got little from their assumed better reserves. Vujacic was out of control for most of the rest of the series, Jordan Farmar was here and there, Ronny Turiaf was barely used, and Luke Walton... well, forget I mentioned him. By game 5, Phil Jackson was using Chris Mihm (I didn't even realize he was still a Laker!) for a stretch. There was no consistency, which leads to...
4. There was Zen, but no master: Phil was not at the top of his game against Finals neophyte Doc Rivers, who I'll give credit to; he was prepared and took advantage of every Laker weakness. Phil never got a set rotation going (why else would Mihm be in the game?) and probably was hoping for that Bobby Hansen moment to appear. It didn't, and it's appropriate that it occured on the court with Red Auerbach's name on it. I guess Phil isn't quite #1 on the greatest coaches of all time list, huh?
5. Where was Robin, Batman?: Was there a consistent #2 scorer for the Lakers? I think not! We've already mentioned Gasol and Odom, and Vladimir Radmanovic seemed to get more fouls than points, and Derek Fisher was a non-factor at both ends.
6. No defense, no rings: The biggest culprit was that L.A. treated defense like it was optional. Take game 6; nobody in the current NBA should EVER give up 131 points in any game (unless your in Denver), let alone a Finals game. The 39 point loss was the most embarassing one ever in a closeout game (and only three points off of worst Finals loss ever, eclipsed by Chicago's 96-54 laugher against Utah in 1998). Allen also tied a Finals record (held by Kenny Smith and Scottie Pippen) with 7 threes in this game. In short, defense like that makes you a loser.
So, after all of that, what do the Lakers need to rebound next year? A healthy Bynum would be a good start, but only a start. I say add some front line toughness (and not the Ron Artest kind) by putting Odom on the trading block. They need to acquire some decent, consistent bench help, and maybe Phil should take a cue from Doc Rivers and hire a defensive specialty coach to teach these guys the way to play D. All told, there need be only a few changes in L.A., not drastic measures. As for Boston, they earned that trophy, and hopefully this team (like the Spurs and, to a lesser extent, the Pistons) are the example of how to build a championship team in the NBA.
Tonight was a weird night for me. I had to attend my aunt's graduation ceremony, then the fam and I had to go to dinner at Friday's. While I'm eating, the Lakers/Celtics game begins, and I struggle to watch from afar. Also struggling, out of the corner of my eye, were the Celts, who trailed by 21 after one period. I told my grandmother (who celebrated her 70th birthday today) that "L.A. was opening a can of whup### on the Celtics (her pick to win the series)".
After stuffing my face, I return home, and low and behold, the Celtics start to come back. I watch the rest of the third quarter, and they cut the Laker lead to 2. I thought "This isn't good for the Lakers!". It proved not to be, as Boston won the game 97-91 to take a commanding 3-1 series lead. After such an impressive victory, the inevitable question is "Did Boston win it, or did L.A. lose it?". Let's examine that.
The Celtics really won this game. L.A. shot over 50% in the 1st half (don't have the exact figure) but ended up shooting just under 42% for the game. They scored a grand total of 33 points (15 in the 3rd and 18 in the 4th) the entire second half; they scored 35 in THE FIRST QUARTER! Kobe Bryanty didn't play like the MVP with a pitiful 6-19 'performance' for the game, and the bench did nothing, as Sasha Vujacic shot 1-9 and had only 3 points, and the bench as a whole had just 15 points. Many signs to point to for 'choke'.
On the other hand, the Lakers built an 18 point halftime lead (after leading by as many as 24) without Kobe hitting a FG, and with Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol finally making an impact. The Lakers scored 58 1st half points, and as late as the middle of the 3rd, led by 20. I give the Celtics tons of credit for not quitting; it would have been easy to say "Forget tonight, let's focus on game 5". Instead, they fought hard, and their bench was solid, led by James Posey (18 points) and Eddie House (11). The Big 3 made shots when they had to, and unlike game 3, Doc Rivers adjusted and put shooters on the floor, and voila, they won. They also made Odom and Gasol revert to form in the second half, continuing to exploit what has become an obvious Laker weakness; no tough interior D (where have you gone, Andrew Bynum?).
So, was it a choke or a comeback? I'll say it's both; to have a great comeback, the other team must accomodate you. The Celtics deserve all the credit in the world; they won, and now stand just one win away from their 17th NBA title. But the Lakers also deserve blame for Kobe not showing up (he really has no-showed in all three Laker losses) and for the rest of the team being softer than pillow feathers. I now regret my pick of Lakers in 6 because I just didn't realize how soft physically and mentally these guys are. And now you expect them to beat Boston three straight (twice at the new Garden)? Hell no, that's not happening! So, Celtic fans, I'm sorry. And, even though it might not be Sunday, I'll say it now; congratulations on another NBA title! And may the Laker trade rumors begin in earnest after this series!
Game 3 of the NBA Finals has come and gone. Now it's time, once again, for my post-game analysis. I really like doing these blogs where I take a peek into my thoughts about the game. So, without further ado, here are my completely random thoughts, followed by my analysis:
1st Quarter:
12:00- I sincerely hope ABC quickly cancels both of their new game shows; Wipeout and that Japanese show. They already are blitzing both, and they both look bad! Enough, already!
10:18- The Lakers got the first FTs of the game. That should quiet Phil Jackson for awhile.
9:45- (Lamar) Odom looks passive again. Bad sign.
9:29: (Mark) Jackson just said the Laker fans wouldn't catch (Paul) Pierce as he fell into the crowd. Duh!?!
7:51- Just got a pen that writes. At long last!
7:41- Phil certainly won't be complaining about the foul calls tonight. Ah, nothing better than home cooking!
commercial break- There's that damn Wipeout (it's so bad, I'm not italicizing it) again! I hate Wipeout, and I won't watch!
5:16- Every time a call goes against L.A., the fans treat it as a crime. Calm down, already!
4:59- Thank goodness the referees want to have the spotlight shine brightly on them; I guess if you're the home team, you're made (not that that's bad; I picked L.A. to win, so go ahead, refs!).
3:07- Kobe's very aggressive. A great sign.
2:45- (Rajon) Rondo's aggressive, too. Probably not a good sign.
commercial break- Please no Wipeout or Japanese commercials! (shows Japanese commercial) Dammit!!!
1:40- How can Celtics compete when (Kevin) Garnett and Pierce are really stinking right now?
:24- How much you willing to bet that (Leon) Powe doens't have nearly the same impact as game 2?
End of 1st- Are they trying to promote more ABC shows (with a 20/20 score)?
2nd Quarter:
11:37- Odom simply (fill in expletive). Period.
11:23- It's "Sudden Sam" (Cassell). Look out below!
10:21- How many times is (Mike) Breen going to say "Great defense by (insert Laker name)."? We know that already, Mike!
8:50- Fight! Fight! Dammit, no fight! Where's McHale and Rambis when you need them?
8:26- Why is (Luke) Walton even thinking about shooting?
7:11- Then again, why is Garnett shooting so many jumpers?
5:13- Garnett + Shooting tons of jumpers = You will lose!
3:54- The Lakers and Celtics have switched roles from game 2.
3:25- Thank goodness this game will quash those calls for the refs' heads after a game. Where's Donaghy?
1:49- (Sasha) Vujacic is hot! Great for the Lakers' bench.
:54- Can Garnett play any worse?
End of 2nd- 43-37 Lakers. Good.. for Celtics fans.
3rd Quarter:
11:16- Rondo's hurt. Who would have thought earlier in the playoffs that this would be a bad thing?
8:54- Any wonder why Pierce is the Celtics' offensive X-factor? Since he stinks, the Celtics have struggled.
8:21- (Ray) Allen looks really good.
7:54- Do Odom and (Pau) Gasol have a pulse?
7:29- Who is the FT coach for these teams? Ben Wallace?
6:51- Do Garnett and Pierce have a pulse?
4:58- Maybe Garnett does. If he keeps going down low.
commercial break- Oh no! More (expletive) game show commercials! Forget later; cancel them now!
2:14- Odom's looking slightly warm.
Last commercial break before end of 3rd- Another Wipeout commercial! Fudge! And why is (Jeff) Van Gundy talking about Alyssa Milano?
End of 3rd- Celtics lead 62-60. This should be a great finish!
4th Quarter:
11:21- Allen's really got game! (yes, a cheap joke, but I like it)
9:25- Odom ####s, period.
9:11- Kobe's going to take over eventually.
8:56- Pierce ####s, too. It's a ####off!
commercial break- More Wipeout! Dammit, stop the bull####, already!
7:59- Who cares how much you pay for your haircut, Van Gundy!
7:15- Will Garnett please stop the jumpers and go to the basket.
6:21- Rondo shouldn't be in the game right now. Kobe has no respect for his shot, and they need shooters.
4:25- There are so many candidates for goat of the game for Boston; Garnett, Pierce, Rondo, (Doc) RIvers. I'll say "all of the above".
3:37- Book it; the Lakers will win this one. I don't like how Rivers is playing these last few minutes.
3:22- Speaking of which, can someone explain why Rivers is shying away from a hot Allen for an ice-cold Pierce?
2:00- O.K. Kobe. Finish this one off!
1:43- Good thing Vujacic stepped up for the lackluster Odom and Gasol.
1:33- I guess Doc wanted to lose tonight.
:38- That (Celtic) possession proved it.
End of 4th- And now it's official; Lakers win 87-81.
What can we take away from this game? Aside from the seemingly endless Wipeout and Japanese commercials, that Kobe (aside from some trouble at the line) had easily his best game of the series (36 points) and that his team was more aggressive and got more FTs (a sure point of contention for the road teams so far in this round, but I'm not a referee, and the Lakers were due). Vujacic gave the team life, as well, scoring 20 points.
Meanwhile, many of the Celtics came up small. Garnett and Pierce were the biggest culprits, as Garnett looked soft and frankly stupid, repeatedly shooting (and usually missing) jumpers, and Pierce looked awful all night. I don't want to hear about "maybe his knee swelled up"; he just didn't show up. The Lakers were also decent on the boards (only outrebounded by one, a huge key) and held the Celtics, a team that struggles to score easy baskets, to 34% shooting. Those factors won the game for L.A.
Now, what about game 4? Expect the Celtics to demand KG show more muscle down low and try to eschew those jumpers, and they need Pierce to show up. Also, Doc needs to have the light bulb go on when he knows he has a hot hand. But I think Gasol will show up Thursday, and now the Lakers have confidence. That should translate to a game 4 win and a tied series. Lakers by 6.
I often find it amazing hwo opinions can change on the drop of a hat. How, in a matter of days, someone's treasure turns into trash. It's not uncommon in sports; Mike Bibby remarked earlier in the playoffs that Boston's fans were, in essence, bandwagon jumpers. But tonight, after the Lakers lost 108-102 to trail the NBA Finals 2-0, the negative blogs that have appeared on this site, blaming everything from the referees to Kobe having a terrible support cast, amaze me. Isn't this the same team that everyone outside Boston said would win this series in a walk? Why the sudden change of heart?
Observing most of this game (I came in late in the first with the score knotted at 19), I can give some credence to the referee problem. When you're outshot at the line by a 3-1 margin, that's hard to overcome. And yes, your supporting players had problems. But until the fourth, everybody on the team had problems. Kobe was shooting at his game 1 clip (until a late hot streak). Odom spent much of the game in foul trouble (and he hasn't been a factor when he's been on the court). But Gasol (aside from not being a physical presence at times) had 17 points and 10 rebounds. Here are some reasons the Lakers lost tonight:
They dug too deep a defecit to overcome: The comeback was impressive, but logic dictates that you must spend so much energy to come back, you have nothing left for the finish. Although I will give you if the decision to go for three (down by 4) was curious.
Leon Powe going Kevin McHale on them: Like McHale in his prime, Powe couldn't be stopped underneath. He scored 21 points (after coming in averaging 4 per game) in only 15 minutes! When Powe, and not Garnett or Allen, is the Celtics' second leading scorer for the night, you're going to lose.
No defense, no rings: The Lakers actually shot respectable tonight (49%), but Boston shot 53%. The Celtics are not a high scoring team to begin with, and allowing them to shoot that percentage is begging for disaster.
Luke Walton is playing!: O.K., maybe I'm being too harsh on Luke; his benchmates weren't much better except for Jordan Farmar, who shot better than Derek Fisher and matched him in points in 12 fewer minutes. Why did Fisher get 30 minutes when he was struggling?
Overall, it was a bad night for L.A. Now they head home down 2-0, and the last time that occured (1989 against Detroit), they were swept. Even more disheartening for Laker fans, the Celtics have held a 2-0 lead on the Lakers three times (1959, 1963, 1965), and the series were won in four, six and five games, respectively. So, is L.A. done? Though I will never say never (and the finish tonight could be a morale booster), the Lakers need to do a better job crashing the boards, and need some life from their bench. Also, Kobe needs more consistency, and Odom needs to show up back home. Otherwise, Red Auerbach will toast title #17 with a heavenly victory cigar!
After witnessing a very solid first game of the NBA Finals, I decided to do a blog similar to what I did after game 3 of the Eastern Finals; I put some thoughts down on paper during the game, and now I'll share some of them with you and also analyze the game. Here goes:
Pre-Game Show: Magic Johnson said the Lakers will win tonight. What a surpise! I wonder how (Larry) Bird is picking?
National Anthem: Could James Taylor please speak up! Could he sing the anthem at a lower possible pitch? I can't hear him!
1st Quarter
10:57: Rondo may have missed that jumper, but he must keep shooting to keep L.A. honest.
9:14: (Lamar) Odom hit a jumper. He needs to play well.
7:52: (Mike) Breen said it's loud in Boston. Duh!?!
7:09: (Kevin) Garnett is very aggressive early. I like it! He needs to continue this play.
6:14: Kobe (Bryant) is not into this game right now. Maybe he's having SA flashbacks.
3:56: That was a backcourt violation? I know they (the referees) made a bad call, but why is Pau (Gasol) making that pass?
2:02: Sasha (Vujacic) just made a jumper. You can't say he lacks confidence.
1:02: Posey has two fouls like that? Oh, never mind, he's not that important!
2nd Quarter
10:09: (Sam) Cassell has started very hot. If he keeps it up, look out!
9:09: I guess Odom will continue to struggle.
8:46: Kobe's just returned to the game. Hopefully he can get going.
8:00: Where was this Cassell earlier in the playoffs?
7:25: Garnett's still aggressive. I still like it.
5:30: A lot of players have two fouls. What is this, the 1950s?
5:20: They're selling jerseys worn in this game. Wait until they're finsihed, O.K!
5:14: (Paul) Pierce has 3 fouls. Holy BLEEP!
4:17: Who would have thought the Lakers would be ahead with Kobe playing like you-know-what?
2:48: They just showed Magic and Kareem. Easily the most popular people for Celtic fans to see (lol).
1:36: Kobe's doing a good job not forcing shots and setting up Gasol.
:58: What happened to Garnett?
End of half: Good sign for Lakers to be up 51-46.
Halftime: Is anybody else tired of these damn promos for ABC's game shows? I know I am! And did it look creepy to see Magic and Bird in game jerseys doing those split-screen commercials?
3rd Quarter
12:00: The Celtics need to rediscover Garnett.
11:15: Pierce just hit a three and got the foul. Wait, wasn't that the same play he got called for an offensive foul on in game 6 in Detroit? What was different today, refs?
10:45: Pierce is hot to start the third!
9:03: Garnett's getting going, too.
7:13: Kobe looks like he's getting warm.
6:49: Pierce is really hurt. Oh BLEEP if you love the Celtics!
6:19: Now (Kendrick) Perkins is hurt. Is it 1987 for Boston again?
5:04: Pierce is back. Summon Bird and Willis Reed, someone!
4:59: Thank goodness (Jeff) Van Gundy is here to tell us Phil Jackson calls great timeouts!
1:54: Garnett's cooling off.
1:00: Back-to-back three's for Pierce. Summon Bird, again!
End of 3rd: This should be a helluva finish!
4th Quarter
10:51: The Celtics are more aggressive towards loose balls.
10:07: Cassell's last shot looked like vintage 'Sudden Sam'; bad-looking and missed.
8:52: The Lakers are very sloppy right now.
8:09: Kobe's on the bench? Is Phil crazy? Does he think he still has Bobby Hansen?
6:48: The reserves are making up some ground. Maybe he wasn't crazy.
5:44: Kobe needs to take over now.
4:15: Garnett's ice cold. He needs to go into the post.
3:43: Forget Garnett! The enitre Lakers team is ice-cold!
2:27: Kobe, are you going to take over?
1:32: What a slam by Garnett!
1:12: I guess Kobe doesn't want to take over.
:16: Decided not to foul, Lakers? You must want to lose.
End of game: I guess you did; Celtics win 98-88.
So, how did Boston win? They made Kobe work for his points. Bryant was only 9-26 from the field, as Pierce and James Posey played him very well. His 24 points were about as quiet a 24 as you can get. Pierce also inspired his team with his return from a knee injury to score 15 3rd quarter points (22 for the game), and I liked how Garnett was aggressive early and was good late. Cassell also gave them good minutes, as did P.J. Brown, while L.A. got virtually nothing aside from a couple shots from Vujacic. And I must ask; why is Luke Walotn still playing? Just a thought.
What do the Lakers need to do to recover in game 2? They need a more efficient game from Kobe, and they need to shoot better as a team. They also need to contain Garnett and Pierce and get some production from the bench. Hopefully, that will happen, and they can steal the game. Until then, may the next time they do a Magic/Bird commercial, do it with suits on!
I know I said a few days ago that I wouldn't succumb to the seemingly endless Lakers vs Celtics previews that would spring up. I guess I just couldn't resist! So, I decided to jump in on the fun and give my preview of the most anticipated Finals matchups in years; the renewal of the NBA's greatest rivalry, Lakers and Celtics. I'll give my positional breakdown, then give a prediction.
Point Guard: I love this matchup; something old (Derek Fisher) & something new (Jordan Farmar) vs something borrowed (Sam Cassell) and something blue (Rajon Rondo). Or is it green? After dealing with Tony Parker in the conference finals, Fisher will need to be on his guard with Rondo and his penetration. Expect Doc RIvers to go with whoever is hot as Rondo's backup, as Eddie House could return to the rotation after he was benched because he couldn't handle the Pistons' pressure D. Advantage: Even
Shooting Guard: Before I begin, I'll give Ray Allen credit for finishing solidly against Detroit, and that, in good matchups, he can thrive. Just not against Kobe Bryant. You know Kobe remembers 2004, and with his first post-Shaq title on the horizon, he'll play possessed. Good luck defending, Paul Pierce! Advantage: Lakers in a runaway
Small Forward: Likewise, Pierce has a huge advantage on Vladimir Radmanovic, who isn't a good defender (to say the least) and who is way too streaky to be relied on. Pierce has huge advantages over Vlad and Luke Walton, so expect Kobe to get the defensive work. Advantage: Celtics
Power Forward: Welcome, Kevin Garnett, to your first NBA Finals! How will Garnett match up with Pau Gasol (since the L.A. Times said Lamar Odom would guard Kendrick Perkins)? A leopard never changes its spots, so expect Garnett to work his game on Gasol, which could be a good thing for Gasol if he avoids foul trouble. Gasol will likely work on Perkins, which means both centers must avoid fouls to keep their team from being at a major disadvantage. Advantage: A razor thin edge to the Celtics
Center: Odom was a dud against the Spurs for most of the series, but now he gets Perkins to work on. The Celtic front line is much quicker than the Spurs' front line, though, so Odom must get his jumper working early and have the C's respect his shot before he slashes to the rack. Perkins needs only to be steady (he doesn't need to have a game 5 like performance, but he does need to assert himself on the boards) and the Celtics will live with that. Advantage: Lakers
Benches: The Laker bench was solid against the Spurs. Expect Sasha Vujacic (there, I finally spelled it!) to keep shooting, and I think Trevor Ariza could be a factor on defense if they employ him; he can't be much worse than Walton, can he? The Celtics will counter with James Posey (their defensive stopper and good 3-point shooter) and P.J. Brown (ditto except for threes), but they need some contributions from either Cassell or House to give them some balance. Advantage: Lakers
Coaching: Let's see: Phil Jackson, 11 Finals appearences, 9 titles as a coach, 2 as a player, one of the greatest (if not the best) coaches ever. Doc Rivers: first appearence in Finals as player or coach, no titles, road teams' coattails to Finals. Eh, Advantage: Lakers by a lot
Prediction: The Celtics had a much tougher road to the Finals than the Lakers; the C's have played just one game under the max to get here. They do have home court, though, but both teams will have been rested. I give game 1 to the Lakers, and as far as the series goes, I predict the Lakers win the title in six games. Yes, you heard it; for only the second time ever, an opposing team will celebrate a title victory in Boston. And who gets Finals MVP? Luke Walton! Just kidding! Kobe wins MVP if the Lakers win the title.
I've spent the last few days staying out of the fray of the inevitable Lakers/Celtics NBA Finals matchup. Maybe because I knew many people would have an opinion of this series, be it good or bad. Or because I felt that doing a preview would be tough not because I couldn't do it, but rather that everyone would do it. So, instead of another boring preview, I decided that I would instead revel in the past. To that end, I am going to look back on the 10 previous Finals matchups these two great teams have had. After that, I'll rank the matchups. For the record, I'm not including 1959 because that series ended in a sweep, and those series stink! Let's instead begin with...
1961-62: The Celtics were in the midst of their remarkable run of eight straight titles. Having won three straight at this point, the C's steamrolled to a then-league record 60-20 record. Bill Russell won his second straight MVP (and third for career). The Lakers, in their second year in L.A., won their first division title since 1954 with a 54-26 record, despite Elgin Baylor missing 32 games with injuries. Jerry West and Baylor were among the league leaders in scoring.
The Celtics beat the Warriors in a seven game series (the season where WIlt averaged more than 50 PPG!) with a dramatic Sam Jones jumper with two seconds to go in game 7. The Lakers beat the Pistons in six, and the Finals matchup was a struggle. Each team alternated wins going into game seven. With only a few seconds left, Laker G Frank Selvy had a chance to win the title at the Garden, but his shot rimmed out, and the Celts won in OT 110-107.
1962-63: One year later, little had changed. Boston still dominated the league, going 58-22 and winning the East by 10 games. Russell became the first player to win three straight regular season MVPs. This also marked Bob Cousy's final season and John Havlicek's first (basketball's answer to Mantle and DiMaggio). The Lakers finished 53-27 and won the West by 5 games, as Baylor finished second to Wilt in scoring with a 34.0 PPG.
Both teams faced challenges in their respective division finals; the Celts went seven with the Cincinnati Royals, and the Lakers went seven with the St. Louis Hawks. But both survived to have a Finals rematch. Although most of the games were close (only one was decided by more than 7 points), the C's took a 3-1 lead and won it in six games.
1964-65: After a year's break, the rivalry resumed. Boston set a new league record with a 62-18 record, finishing 14 games ahead of the Royals for first in the East as Russell won his fifth (and final) regular season MVP. He also led the league in rebounds for the last time (24.1 RPG). The Lakers went 49-31 to win the West by four games. West (31.0 PPG) and Baylor (27.1 PPG) were in the top five in scoring.
While the Lakers had a much easier time in the Western Division finals (beating Baltimore 4-2), the Celtics went seven with the Philadelphia 76ers, who had acquired Wilt Chamberlain during the All-Star break. The seventh game was legendary; the Sixers had a chance to win after Russell turned the ball over under the Sixer basket, but John Havlicek stole the inbounding pass (Havlicek stole the ball!!!) to preserve victory. The finals were anticlimatic; with Baylor out the entire series with injury, the Celtics won 4-1.
1965-66: The Celtics' run of nine straight division titles ended during this season; the Sixers beat out the C's by one game to win the division (the Sixers were 55-25, the Celts 54-26) which took away home court and made the Celtics play an opneing round series. So what; Boston beat Cincinnati 3-2, then beat the Sixers 4-1 to advance to their ninth straight Final. The Lakers went 45-35 to win the West by 7 games, as West was second in scoring (31.3 per) and fourth in assists (6.1 per) . They beat the Hawks in seven to advance to the Finals.
L.A. managed to take the opener in Boston in OT. That's when Red Auerbach (who had announced his coaching retirement) named Bill Russell his successor, making Russell the first black coach of the modern era. That inspired the C's to three straight wins and an eventual seven game series win. The win was the Celtics' eighth straight title and ninth in ten years.
1967-68: The Celtics were showing their age a little during the 1968 season. Having lost their title the year before, the Celts finished eight games behind the new champion Sixers with a 54-28 record. Still, they showed there was still something in the tank, as they beat Detroit 4-2 in the division semifinals, then came back from 3-1 down to beat Philly 4-3 and return to the finals. The Lakers finished second to the Hawks in the West with a 52-30 record, as Baylor had one of his last great years (second in scoring with a 26.0 average), beat the Bulls 4-1, then beat the Warriors in a 4-0 sweep to reach the Finals.
The Finals flipped back and forth, with each team alternating wins until the Celts took games 5 & 6 and won the title. The series was noteworthy because Russell played himself a total of 292 minutes in the six game series (a record for a six game Finals series).
1968-69: Many pundits assumed the Lakers were a sure bet to win the title in 1969. They added Wilt Chamberlain in a trade with Philadelphia, and with the dominant trio of him, West and Baylor, the Lakers won 55 games and the Western Division title. Chamberlain led the league in rebounds (21.1 per) and the Lakers beat the Warriors 4-2 and the Hawks 4-1 to advance to the Finals. The Celtics struggled to a 48-34 record, the worst of the Russell era, but managed to beat the Sixers 4-1 in the semis, then beat the Knicks 4-2 to make one more Finals run.
The Lakers took the first two at home by a total of eight points, before the Celtics lashed back with two home wins (one on a dramatic jump shot by Sam Jones, in his last Finals). The teams exchanged home wins to set up game 7, and before the game, the Celts found out that the Lakers, through owner Jack Kent Cooke, had set up dozens of balloons and a marching band to celebrate an apparent Lakers win. That inspired the Cetlics, as they took a big lead early, then through a lucky Don Nelson jumper, beat the Lakers 108-106 to claim their 11th title in 13 years. Despite this, Jerry West won the first Finals MVP (and remains the only losing player to win the award). Three months later, Russell retired, taking the dynasty with him.
1983-84: After a 15 year hiatus, the Celtics and Lakers renewed their hostilities in 1984. The Celtics, after a disappointing 1983 season, replaced Bill Fitch with K.C. Jones and added Dennis Johnson in a trade with Phoenix. With the more relaxed atmosphere, the Celtics went 62-20 and secured the NBA's best record. In the newly expanded playoff format, they beat the Bullets 3-1, survived a grueling seven game series with the Knicks, and beat Milwaukee 4-1 to make the Finals. Larry Bird won his first regular season MVP. The Lakers went 54-28 for the West's best record, swept the Kings 3-0, romped past Dallas 4-1, and beat pesky Phoenix 4-2 to secure the dream finals.
L.A. won the first game 115-109, and they seemed poised to win game 2 until Gerald Henderson stole a pass from James Worthy and scored a tying layup. The Celts won in OT 124-121. The Lakers rolled to an easy 137-104 win in game 3, as Magic Johnson set a Finals record with 21 assists, and Bird angirly said "We played like a bunch of sissies". The Celtics then rebounded with a physical 129-125 OT win, highlighted by Kevin McHale's clothesline of Kurt Rambis and Bird's verbal jousting with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Game 5 was played in sweltering heat (the courtside temp was 97 degrees), but Bird didn't mind; he scored 34 points as Boston won 121-103. The Lakers won game 6, only to see Cedric Maxwell have his last great game as a Celtic with 24 points, eight rebounds and eight assists as the Celtics won 111-102 and beat the Lakers for the eighth straight time in the Finals. Bird was Finals MVP.
1984-85: The Lakers entered the 1985 season determined to avenge their 1984 Finals faliure. They surged to a 62-20 record, second only to the Celtics, whipped Phoenix 3-0 in the first round, and eliminated Portland and Denver 4-1 each to return to the Finals. The Celtics went 63-19 for the league's best record, with Bird winning his second straight MVP, but faced trouble in the playoffs, beating Cleveland 3-1 in a series where the Cavs matched their total point ouput, eliminated Detroit 4-1, and beat the Sixers 4-1 in the last matchup of the heated foes in the 80s.
Even with that, the Celtics smoked the Lakers in game one 148-114 in the Memorial Day Massacre, as Kareem looked old and the Lakers looked nervous. Both dispelled those notions in game 2, as Kareem scored 30 points and added 17 rebounds in a 109-102 win. After a 136-111 Laker rout in game 3, the Celtics stole game 4 as Dennis Johnson hit a buzzer-beating shot to securd the win. The Lakers won game 5, but as they returned to Boston for game 6, they knew no team had won a title against the Celtics at the Garden. So what?; the Lakers cruised to a 111-100 win and ended their jinx against the C's. Kareem won Finals MVP, and Magic Johnson removed the ghosts of his struggles of 1984.
1986-87: The last matchup (prior to this one, of course) was the series that would determine who would be remembered as the better team of the 1980s, sorta like the third Ali-Frazier fight. The Lakers went 65-17 for the league's best record, as Magic won his first regular season MVP by finishing 10th in scoring (a career-high 23.9 per) and leading the league in assists (12.2 per). The Lakers went 11-1 in the Western Conference playoffs, beating Denver (3-0), Golden State (4-1) and Seattle (4-0) to advance. The Celtics looked old and worn out, but still won 59 games, beating Chicago 3-0 for the second year in a row, then survived seven game series with the Bucks and Pistons (including Bird's legendary stolen inbound pass of Isiah Thomas') to reach their fourth straight Final.
The Lakers rolled to two wins at the Forum, then lost game 3 at Boston. Game 4 was the best of the series. Bird drilled a three late to give the Celtics a two point lead, then Kareem hits and missed a FT, then the C's knock the ball oput of bounds, leading to Magic's famous 'junior skyhook' that proves to be the game winner. After a game 5 loss, the Lakers wrap up the title with a 106-93 win at the Forum. Magic wins his third Finals MVP.
So, after that, here's how these Finals ranked (from 1-10):
1. 1984-85: Can't beat history, can you?
2. 1983-84: So dramatic, and a seven game series usually is very good.
3. 1968-69: I bet you Cooke never counted his chickens like that again, did he?!?
4. 1986-87: The 80s were great, weren't they?
5. 1965-66: History made on the court, and off it, too.
6. 1961-62: Does Frank Selvy still have nightmares about that shot?
7. 1967-68: Talk about running you top guys into the ground; Havlicek played only one fewer minute than Russell! They both averaged over 48 minutes a game!!!!
8. 1962-63: Because it went six games.
9. 1964-65: Because it went five games.
10. 1958-59: Because it was a sweep. None of these series mattered that much!
What do you think was the best Lakers/Celtics matchups? I just want Lakers and Celtics fans to be civil here (lol)! And Fox, this is under NBA, so don't banish me, please (I hope they have a sense of humor. Gulp!).
There is definately one celebration for me today, and if the Lakers can take care of business today, there could be two things to celebrate. As those of you who commented on my post-game Lakers/Spurs blog know, this is my birthday (I'm 24). So, before I begin my preview of tonight's game, I decided to see what sports events happened today (this is a one-time only thing for me, so whoever does those "This week in sports" blogs is safe):
On this day in:
1911: The first Indy 500 is held.
1922: Baseball is ruled a sport (not business) and isn't included in antitrust legislation.
1980: Larry Bird is named ROY in the NBA.
1984: The Red Sox retire Ted Williams' number.
1995: Indiana and Orlando play a memorable Game 4 of the Eastern Conference Finals. The lead changes hands four times late until Rik Smits hits the game winner at the buzzer for a 94-93 victory.
1997: John Stockton sinks a buzzer-beating 3 to send the Utah Jazz to their first NBA Finals as they beat Houston 103-100 in game 6 of the Western Conference Finals.
2004: Kevin Garnett wins his final playoff game as a Timberwolf when Minnesota beats the Lakers 98-96 in game 5 of the Western Finals.
And who could forget:
1993: Jose Canseco takes the mound for a relief pitcher appearence during a Rangers/Red Sox game. He pitches the 8th, gives up 3 runs and 2 hits, plus 3 walks. The Rangers lose 15-1, and to add injury to insult, he injures his arm and misses the rest of the season.
Ah, the memories.
Now then, let's look at the Lakers/Spurs matchup. Can the Spurs avoid elimination? Or can Kobe move one step closer to a career-defining ring? Here are my keys for each team:
Spurs keys:
1. Be the Man-u, Ginobili!: If the Spurs want to play again at home this year, Ginobili must come up big. It's great when Brent Barry has a huge game, but Manu inspires his team when he goes off. Plus, it takes pressure off of Duncan and Parker to carry the load.
2. Take the open shots: It sounds childishly simple, but the Spurs have passed on a lot of open looks (I commented Tuesday that Robert Horry had become "I Don't Want The Shot Bob!"). If you're open (Timmy), take the shot. You have nothing to lose, so don't worry if you miss.
3. Don't let Kobe beat you: Again, fairly obvious, but you know Kobe will come for the throat tonight. He's so close to the Finals, he can taste it! Make players like Odom and Fisher, plus Vlad Rad and Sasha V, shoot to win.
Lakers keys:
1. Forget about the finish to game 4: Yeah, the NBA admitted they made the wrong non-call at the end of game 4, but I'm talking about the stuff before that; the Barry three, the Parker goaltend-that-shouldn't-have-been, and two bad shots by Kobe. Throw that out, and come out swinging tonight!
2. Lamar Odom, please hit a shot or more!: Kobe is the undenyable top player here, but Odom is the X-factor; when he's playing well, they're virtually unbeatable. He didn't have his A-game on display in SA, but maybe the home crowd gets him going.
3. A steady diet of Kobe, please!: In the end, this game is where superstars leave their mark on the game. Kobe not only has a berth in the Finals on the line, he has his enitre legacy at stake as well. That's all I need to know to say Kobe will go off tonight and try to send the Spurs home as ex-champs!
So, who wins? The Spurs have to be demoralized that they got ripped off at home by incompetent referees, and they will bring fire tonight. I just don't see that as being enough to stop the Lakers now. The Lakers advance to the Finals with a seven point win.
Tonight's game may go down as one that could end the Spurs' dynistic run, albeit in controversial form. The champs fought valiantly, but the Lakers won the game 93-91 and can now wrap up their first conference title (and make their astounding 29th trip to the NBA Finals) at home on Thursday (my birthday; cheap plug, I know). The Lakers nearly blew a seven point lead by allowing Brent Barry to hit a three, and Tony Paker getting a goaltend, while Kobe Bryant threw up bad shots on successive possessions. However, let's get to the end-of-game controversy.
I'll ask the universal question; was Barry fouled at the end? I like the analysis of ESPN's Tim Legler, who said if Barry had kept moving, he would have gotten the call. Essentially, if Barry had pulled a Billups, or something closer to Spurs fans, a Ginobili (we'll get to him in a moment), he would have gotten FTs and likely won the game for the champs. If you ask me about the play, yes, Derek Fisher fell on him, but Barry intended for contact to occur (not a bad idea), and the refs didn't give him the contact. So, I say the call wasn't incorrect.
And for all you Spurs fans who will undoubtedly say something on every post-game blog like "That was an obvious foul, you no good Laker lover!!", or "We told you Joe Crawford has a bias against us!" (btw, wasn't Crawford refereeing a game against the Spurs a method I gave for the road team to win back in my "Does anybody want to win a road game? Solutions to fix the problem!" blog?), the Spurs had a substantial advantage at the foul line, so don't give me that. Look at the real reason your team lost; Manu stunk, and stunk big time!
The Spurs have proven they are only as good as Manu's play; he played terrific in game 3 with 30 points, only to revert to games 1-2 form with only 2 FGs. Granted, Barry was huge off the bench with 23 points, but there is a tangible difference between Manu going off and Barry going off; when Manu goes off, the Spurs' energy level rises, and it inspires the team to do well. When Barry goes off, only he gets pumped up by it. The team's inability to shoot straight (they played like the Celtics did last night, missing often from the field but getting a lot of FTs) cost them tonight.
So, after all of that has been said, are the Spurs done in this series? I've learned not to count them out until it's over (although I picked L.A. to win in six before this series began). 3-1 down is a hard mountain to climb, but the Spurs are the champs until that title is taken from them. So I'll hold final judgement until after game 5. But if L.A. wins, they'll have a tremendous advantage in the Finals since Boston and Detroit will have hurt each other in a brutal series.
Final thoughts:
Sasha V (I can't spell his name) needs to know when to not shoot. he could have been the goat of the game if they had lost.
Wasn't it nice to hear just straight commentary most of the night? You don't hear Doug Collins imitate Al Pacino, do you, Jeff?
Kobe didn't close late with those two bad shots at the end. Bet ya he comes out with a vengence in game 5.
I though Robert Horry was "Big Shot Bob". Now he "I Don't Want The Shot Bob"!
There were a lot of no-calls for both teams. And complaints by the players and the fans were rampant. I thought the fans would riot "Frankenstein"-style after the game!
We've now had about two days to wonder about tonight's game 2 between the Spurs and Lakers. So, what are the keys to winning for each side? I'll say that this game is critical for both teams, but more so the Lakers. Not to sound like many commentators/columnists, but the Spurs can probably shrug off another loss; they fell behind 0-2 to New Orleans and won the series, so they could do it again. But here are each team's keys to winning:
Spurs keys:
1. Maintain the tempo from game one: If they keep the game half-court and methodical, they shouldn't be concerned.
2. Manu, please maintain control!: Ginobili was a major factor in why the Spurs lost game 1; he was reckless and probably forced too many shots to get out of a slump (think AI). If he can show some control, there won't be as many turnovers as game 1.
3. Encore, Tim Duncan!: Duncan was great in game one... until late, when he stopped attacking the basket and passed on open shots. Duncan must maintain his early game preformance for 48 minutes; that's bound to draw fouls on Gasol and Odom, and keep the tempo in their favor.
Lakers keys:
1. 48 minutes, Kobe: Did you listen to Craig Sager's interview with Kobe after the game? He said that Phil Jackson said he was running the Bermuda Triangle early in the game! It's nice that the MVP wasn't forcing on Tuesday, but he needs to give a full effort all game, especially now that he has a target on his back for his comments after leaving the court.
2. More balanced scoring: It's amazing that the Lakers won when they got little outside of Kobe, Pau Gasol and Sasha V (don't ask me how to spell it!). Derek Fisher needs to know when to shoot, and Lamar Odom needs to step up tonight for a Laker win.
3. Keep up the bench production: The Laker bench was good in game 1; Sasha provided offensive help and played great D on Ginobili, and Ronny Turiaf was solid off the boards and on defense (except at times on Duncan). If they get similar production, they'll win.
So, who wins the game? The Spurs will have had a night to rest (in their hotels), and that will help immensely. But I don't see Kobe having an off half again tonight. He'll be more consistent, and the Lakers know that they can't afford to give the champs confidence as they go back home. I'll say the Lakers win tonight (forget about a score; that's too much!).
After a debate more passionate than I've seen in quite some time, the Spurs and Lakers played two games last night. The first 2 1/2 quarters belonged to the champs, who eventually took a 65-45 lead. The last quarter and a half belonged to league MVP Kobe Bryant, who showed that the Lakers have the one critical element the Hornets lacked; an elite closer.
Kobe's performance was Jordan-esque, as in the Jordan of 1991. Like Mike did during that playoff run, Kobe held back on shooting early (3 attempts in the first half) and distributed the ball. In the second, when his team needed it the most, he took over, and Bruce Bowen (or anyone, for that matter) who guarded him had no chance to stop him. Despite getting off games by Lamar Odom (8 points) and Derek Fisher (who couldn't hit the broad side of a barn yesterday), Kobe and Pau Gasol gave them the scoring necessary to win. Even more iimportantly, they proved they could win a Spurs-type game.
If you're the Spurs, you're probably thinking these things:
1. We lost a 20-point lead yesterday, but...
2. We established our tempo, and Manu Ginobili was terrible, and we were tired, so it's not completely bad.
The Spurs looked every bit jet lagged after a blistering start, and Ginobili looked the worse for ware; he was out of control (in a bad way), shooting 3-10 from the field, including missing a potential three to take the lead late. If anybody's game is predicated on energy, Ginobili's is, and he had none of it. The Lakers did an outstanding job of limiting Ginobili and Tony Parker's drives to the paint (just 10 points in the paint between them) and their defense late in the game was impressive. But the Spurs have to be encouraged by the fact they did everything they wanted to do last night. Now all they have to do is maintain that for the entire game.
The Spurs of last night reminded me, though, of the mid-to-late 90s Knicks; they can go through long dry spells during a game, and they hit that wall late, when the fresher Lakers made every key play down the stretch. Now, they face a big game 2, and though I said recently the Lakers would win the first two, if the Spurs play the same way tomorrow that they did yesterday, and Ginobili resembles the player he can be, they could easily steal this game. Tim Duncan was a beast (30 points and I think 18 boards), and if I'm Phil Jackson, I wouldn't keep putting Ronny Turiaf on him; that's akin to guarding a in-his-prime Shaq with Tom Tolbert! Nonetheless, tomorrow's game should be fun to watch.
Before I begin today, let me address last night. I said in my blog that the Spurs' run at their second straight title would end last night. And, of course, that didn't happen. I was ready to use today's post to write an apology letter (and that would have been the enitre post). After sleeping on it, however, I came to the conclusion that the thought of it would be boring and longwinded. But most of all, it would have been bitter, and I don't want to sound bitter (cynical, yes; bitter, no). So, I'll keep it brief; Sorry, Spurs fans. You obviously showed the championship mettle that the Hornets lacked, and congrats on the victory.
Now then, let's use this post more wisely; to preview the Spurs' matchup with the Lakers, a matchup many people (including Jalen Rose, Jay Mariotti, Skip Bayless, etc.) wanted to see. As I said yesterday, the Lakers probably prefer this matchup not for any mismatches they could exploit, but to affirm thier ascent by beating the best the NBA has to offer. Let's look at it position-by-position and give an early prediction (take it for what it's worth; a stick of gum):
Point Guard: Tony Parker vs Derek Fisher appears, on paper, to be a mismatch, but to use an oft-heard comment, Fisher has the championship savvy (he has as many rings as Parker does) and is still a good defender. If he can just keep Parker in check and hit a few threes, the Lakers will live with that.
Shooting Guard: How can you choose against the MVP of the league? No offense to Manu Ginobili, but Kobe always wins in a comparison. Expect Bruce Bowen to defend (and try to roughhouse), but Kobe will get his points.
Small Forward: Ginobili will instead guard Vlad Radmanovic (who cares about spelling?), who is too streaky for my tastes. Radmanovic and Luke Walton (who didn't do much against Utah) will do for "Sir Flops-a-Lot" what Ginobili does on Kobe; they'll let Kobe defend Manu, and guard Bowen instead. Good idea.
Power Forward: Let's assume that Tim Duncan is the center here (he is listed as one, after all). So,the matchup here is Fabricio Oberto and Kurt Thomas against Lamar Odom and Ronny Turiaf. Oberto showed his usefulness by facilitating scores through his passes, and Thomas was a offensive rebounding beast in limited minutes last night. But if Odom plays like he did against the Jazz, and slashes to the rack on these slower defenders, he could be the biggest factor in this series.
Center: The head-to-head matchup everyone is curious about is Duncan versus Pau Gasol. The last time these two met in the postseason (2004 1st round), Duncan dominated, and the Spurs swept. That won't happen here (the sweep, mind you), but Gasol didn't have to defend premier post players in the prior two rounds (Marcus Camby and Memhet Okur don't qualify), and that could be a problem for the Lakers. Expect the Spurs to use Duncan like last night and have him attack the D early and often to slow the tempo in their favor and open up the perimeter game (the Spurs shot only 37% from two last night, but were 42% from three).
Coaches: Unlike the Eastern coaches matchup, few coaching duels today are better than Gregg Popovich and Phil Jackson. These are the gold standard for coaches, with 13 titles and 14 Finals berths, among other accolades, in their careers. In four head-to-head matchups, Jackson has a 3-1 series edge and a 14-7 overall playoff record against Popovich, but he had Shaq for all four series. How he fares with Gasol will be key (here's where Andrew Bynum's injury really hurts). Whoever establishes his tempo will win this series.
Prediction: Game one is critical for both teams; the Spurs have been here before (now I sound like Mariotti), whereas most of the core Lakers haven't (Kobe excluded, of course). I'll say the Lakers win game one, and in fact, the home team will win the first four games. The Lakers then win game 5 at home, and in a mild surprise, The Lakers end the series in SA in six. The Spurs' run will end at home, to the delight of David Stern and the NBA executives who can't wait for their demise (so, that means the Spurs will win if my luck continues).
At the beginning of every NBA season, you hear commentators say "This team needs home court advantage to win in the playoffs. That refrain is heard all through the season. And usually, those guys are right. However, what's going on in round 2 of the playoffs makes me wonder if homecourt is the only way teams can win in this round.
Including last night's games, the home team is an incredible 19-1 in round 2. Only the Pistons in game 4 of their series with Orlando, and the final score was 90-89! The Celtics, the team with the best regular season record, are winless in five road playoff games (by the way, the last team to make the Finals without a road victory in the playoffs was the 1963 Lakers, and they only played one playoff series to get there). How has homecourt suddenly become unstoppable?
With that in mind, here are some possible solutions to allow the road team a chance to win at least once in the games coming up:
Have Robert Horry hipcheck someone (Chris Paul) into the boards, forcing a benched David West and Tyson Chandler to get off the bench, leading to their one-game suspension for game 7 in New Orleans: Hey, it worked against Phoenix, didn't it?
Have Joe Crawford re####ame with Tim Duncan, then allow them to really fight: Crawford would give the stoic Duncan a war, but the smart money is on Duncan.
Have DeDoNothing Stevenson badmouth one of the road teams' best players and call them overrated before the game: It made LeBron want to knock out the Wizards, and I found a way to keep my nickname in the news.
Warn the Hornets, Lakers and Celtics the 'consequences' of another Spurs-Pistons Finals matchup: That thought, in Stern's mind, is scarier than the 'Saw' series! He'll threaten the Lakers with a Kobe trade if they fail to make it!
Tell the remaining teams if they fail to win on the road, some of the players will be traded to the Knicks!: A fate worse than death, perhaps? They'll play their butts off to win then!
Have Tony Romo sing for the home team before their game: They'll be so frazzled, they won't be able to concentrate and stop the opponent!
Take the home team to watch 'Speed Racer' before the game: See above.
If they fail to win, the road team's players must watch all of Shaq's movies... without a break!: See the Knicks above.
Yeah, this may be sarcastic, but what's preventing these teams from winning A ROAD GAME? I'm not saying that every win should be on the road, but a figure closer to round 1's figure (7 of 10 wins by the home team) would do. What makes these games so hard to watch is that, for the most part, they are blowouts, and blowouts don't interest the casual fans and make diehards fall asleep, too.
So, what's your take? Does this homecourt dominance take away from the excitement of the playoffs? And what would you suggest to fix it? Let me know! Until then, may everyone run should Romo sing in front of a theater showing 'Speed Racer'!
To be fair, I haven't been watching the NBA playoffs as closely as in years past. Maybe because I've had many different things to do during this time, or because the playoffs have been low on drama (sorry, TNT), with many games being noncompetitive and with almost no road teams winning recently. So, I decided to try and conjure up a new list. But what would I talk about?
The inspiration hit me when Mike D'Antoni bolted for the Knicks and Rick Carlisle was hired by Dallas. The list today counts down the best single-season turnarounds in NBA history under a new head coach. The criteria: the coach of the team must have been in his first full season with the team (so if he was an interim the prior year, I'm going with his first full year). So Doc Rivers' turnaround this year doesn't count, because this is his fourth year there.
Without further ado, here's the list:
10. Detroit Pistons 2001-02 (prior year's coach and record: George Irvine, 32-50; next season's coach and record: Rick Carlisle, 50-32): The Pistons weren't seen as a legit contender at this time. The first year after the sign-and-trade of Grant Hill wasn't pretty, even though Ben Wallace had proven to be a nice addition as part of the deal. The 2001 Pistons were a one man gang for scoring, as Jerry Stackhouse set club records for points in a season (2380) and in a game (57), but they still lost 50.
That's when team president Joe Dumars decided a change in attitude was needed, and replaced George Irvine as coach with Rick Carlisle, the ex-Pacers assistant who was a key coach on the 2000 finalist. The Pistons shifted to a tough nosed team that always went to work and hustled for their wins. Despite making only one significant move (acquiring Cliff Robinson from Phoenix), the move paid off. Stackhouse became less of a ballhog, and the team won 50 games and their first division title since 1990. They beat Toronto for their first playoff series win since 1991 before losing to Boston 4-1 in round 2. Two seasons later, after adding Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince, they would win their 3rd NBA title.
9. Portland Trail Blazers 1989-90 (Mike Schuler & Rick Adelman, 39-43; Adleman 59-23): The Blazers' 1989 season was one of their worst in their recent (for that era) history. Coming off a superb 53-29 season in 1988, they failed to break .500 in 1989, replaced former coach of the year Mike Schuler with Rick Adelman, and were swept by the Lakers in round 1 of the playoffs. Changes were needed.
The team made a critical offseason move, trading oft-injured Sam Bowie to New Jersey for Buck Williams, adding soild rebounding, toughness, and (most of all) healthy legs! Adelman installed what would become his trademark; a free-wheeling attack that allowed guards Clyde Drexler and Terry Porter (among others) to launch a ton of threes. Behind that assault, the Blazers improved by 20 games and second to the Lakers in the Pacific Division.
In the playoffs, they beat Dallas 3-0 (the Mavs' last playoff berth until 2001), beat the Spurs 4-3 in a thrilling seven game series, then beat the Suns 4-2 in the conference finals to advance to their first NBA Finals since 1977. Though they lost to the Pistons 4-1, the Blazers had established themselves as a legit contender in the early 90s, and Adelman had established himself as a front line coach.
8. Portland Trail Blazers, 1976-77 (Lenny Wilkens, 37-45; Jack Ramsay, 49-33): Speaking of the Blazers, this is the aforementioned 1977 finalists. What makes this amazing is that Portland had not even had a winning season prior to that year! The Blazers decided to make changes after falling short the prior two years. Lenny Wilkens was out as coach, and former Braves coach Jack Ramsay was in. The team decided to build around oft-injured star Bill Walton, bringing in former ABA players Maurice Lucas and Dave Twardzik. Lucas was the enforcer Walton needed to succeed (and is the reason his son is named Luke), and the team won 49 games to finish second to the Lakers in the Pacific.
The playoffs became Walton's showcase: the Blazers beat Chicago 2-1 in the first round, beat Denver 4-2 in round 2, then rolled past the Lakers 4-0 to reach the Finals. No one expected them to mount a serious challenge to the Dr. J-led 76ers, and after losing twice in Philly, it looked grim. Portland stormed back, hwoever, winning two at home by 22 and 32 points,
