At the start of the playoffs, I felt like the Celtics were pretty substantial favorites to win it all. Right now? Not so much. It still seems like they'll beat Cleveland and I'd pick them to win against Detroit, but the Lakers are definitely looking like the superior team at this point. After all, one of Boston's advantages was supposed to be its much easier path through the playoffs. Instead, they can't win on the road even against markedly inferior teams.
« O'Reilly Remix | Main | Weekend Reading »
Revised Predictions
17 May 2008 10:25 am
Comments (30)
First, the Celtics will be lucky if they get past Cleveland, so I think Detroit will win the East, and then if fellow Colorado native, Chauncey Billups is healthy, I see Detroit beating LA. Sheed is always the X factor; but I don't see Gasol and Odom providing the consistent scoring needed in a 7 game series against Detroit
Noooooo!
Matt, I know you hate the Lakers, but why did you have to give them the kiss of death?
Please revise, retract - anything.
For the love of all that is decent and holy in this world, please pick someone else!
But seriously, what has happened to Ray Allen?
The Cavs may have played the worst first half in the playoffs so far last night (statistically, anyway) - it was very ugly - and the were winning.
I've been watching the Celtics all year, I'm a fan and I don't have them picked to win. They're just not as good as their record indicates (though it is true that during the season they played better against the strong Western teams than they did against mediocre Eastern teams).
After following the Celtics most of this year, I attribute their problems to 2 factors:
1) Doc Rivers. He's just terrible. When I was in Houston and one of their best teams was swept by Seattle (1996), I thought Rudy T. was as bad with X's and O's as any coach I'd ever seen. Seattle double teamed Hakeem with their power forward (most teams used a guard) and Rudy had no idea how to attack it. He left the power forward outside the 3 pt line, but since Robert Horry had moved to the small forward slot, that meant Hakeem had to thread a pass through the double team (and past Gary Payton) to Mark Bryant or Chucky Brown. Who then had no idea what to do with the ball 24 ft from the basket. Doc Rivers is much, much worse. In addition, he has no idea what to do with the rotation. Eddie House or Sam Cassell? Leon Powe, Glen Davis, or PJ Brown? Nobody knows except Doc, and there's no rhyme or reason to it. And the offense looks completely clueless on the road (after being great all year).
2) The offense is designed to play relaxed, make the extra pass, and take the open shot. Works great when there's not too much defense pressure, but in the playoffs (on the road), nobody has a defined role and everything tends to fall apart.
Of course, the road refs have been brutal (particularly in game 6 in Cleveland, but also 4 and 6 in Atlanta). When the number 1 seed is outshot 47-25 at the line by the 8 seed, something is up. That's pretty unusual in the NBA.
That said, to beat the Celtics, you have to win in Boston, and until somebody does it, they'll keep going. I, for one, look forward to seeing a team go 16-0 at home and 0-12 on the road in the playoffs. But let's not pretend it's all about psychology, ok?
It is with a heavy heart that I have come to realize that Doc Rivers has broken this team. In every Celtics loss, his substitutions have been a key if not the key. His most egregious sin is to leave Sam Cassell in the game long after he misses his first shot. Sam never hits again when he misses his first shot. That cost us a whole bunch of games against Atlanta and Cleveland in the playoffs. In fact, since Cassell came into the lineup at the end of the West Coast tour the Celtics have not been the same.
The reason Doc brings in Cassell is that he has no faith in Rajon Rondo, one of the two players who make the Celtics tick (the other being Kevin Garnett). In fact, Doc seems to go out of his way to humiliate Rondo, as he did last night when he left Eddie House in long after he stopped making a difference. It is a credit to Rondo that he keeps coming back and helping them win games. Not that his play is perfect, but he learns from his mistakes and he's the only point guard they have who can bring out the best in the big three.
Anyone watching last night's game would also notice that Doc kept Pierce out of the game way too long too, and refused to even play Leon Powe, who is now arguably their best big man. I was a big Doc Rivers fan all season, but things changed when he started using Cassell and the entire team chemistry went down the tubes. It's not the same team that devastated opponents in the regular season.
That said, Pierce has resorted to immature play many times, often giving the ball up when he tries to spin in traffic, or taking senseless threes. Ray Allen has been a shadow of himself. And the value of Kendrick Perkins seems to be set to null.
However, that's why they need a floor general, Rondo, who knows how to get the players the ball where they like it. He's not perfect, but he learns, even in mid-game. You have to leave him in to get the full benefit. Ray Allen's shot is dependable only when he gets the ball just as he arrives at the three point line, and when there's an opponent rushing towards him. That may be a limited repertoire, but it is possible to actually run plays to achieve that end.
This is a sad state of affairs, and they're going to have to win it despite Doc Rivers. I think they have an even chance of doing that against the Cavs and Pistons, but not against the Lakers.
Pistons are making stops. They are blocking shots, knocking the ball away, picking pockets, thwarting the other teams offensive dynamos. They got me kinda optimistic. The only way Cleveland or Boston beats them is if Rasheed starts getting into early foul trouble. Same goes for LA.
The last time I was this optimistic was 2004.
Don't be so quick to count out the Hornets or Spurs. I suppose I'd make the Lakers a slight favorite over either (especially with the Game 7 home-court advantage); but either match-up would be awfully close.
I'm a Piston fan, so take this with a grain of salt, but right now it's hard to see the Celtics doing better than Detroit against any of the three Western teams. (On the other hand, the Celtics did do very well on the road against the West before their transformation . . . .)
Query: Does anyone know why Game 7 of the Spurs/Hornets was scheduled for Monday instead of, say, today? The arena is not booked. Some TV schedule quirk?
Pistons are making stops. They are blocking shots, knocking the ball away, picking pockets, thwarting the other teams offensive dynamos. They got me kinda optimistic. The only way Cleveland or Boston beats them is if Rasheed starts getting into early foul trouble. Same goes for LA.
The last time I was this optimistic was 2004.
Emphasis through repetition.
One of the huge problems for the Celtics no one is talking about, except maybe as an subtle swipe at the officiating, is the fact that they don't get to the line. It's not surprising teams with guys like Joe Johnson and LeBron shoot way more free throws. Who exactly on the Celtics is going to draw fouls? Allen is a spot up shooter. Rondo is small enough that they can disrupt his infrequent drives without fouling him. Garnett relies exclusively on fade aways and spot up jump shots, rather than being a true post player. Pierce is the only guy on that team that could, and he is too old at this point to attack the hole over and over again throughout a game. Plus he has a terrible attitude and sulks for long stretches. Contrast that with the Cavs, who obviously have LeBron driving. But West has also been aggressive driving and drawing contact, Ilgauskas and Varajao both are more aggressive inside than Garnett. Even Wally tries to create his own shot once in a while.
After all, one of Boston's advantages was supposed to be its much easier path through the playoffs.
I remember listening to Barkley on ESPN radio back in March saying he liked the Celtics to go on to finish first in the conference, and that this would be a disadvantage because they'd have to face LeBron in the second round, and that they'd be better of finishing second. I think he's right. It's entirely possible -- I'd say likely at this point -- that Detroit has had the easier path thusfar.
The fact is the highly athletic Atlanta squad was a much better team (by season's end, at least) than their record indicated. Moreover, they matched up particularly well against the experienced but aging Celtic team. And in the second round Boston has had to face the league's best player -- a phenomenally gifted talent who presents serious matchup issues for any team in the league.
The Celtics will beat Cleveland tomorrow -- make no mistake. They're a significantly better and deeper team than Cleveland, as their respective victory margins indicate. I've thought for several months now that the Pistons represent the biggest hurdle between Boston and a seventeenth banner, and I stand by that. I was giving the Celtics about a 55% chance at beating Detroit. Now I put that at about 45%. Detroit has to be favored at this point over Boston, but I'd say they're only modest favorites. It's not like any team this post-season has exactly been rampaging on the road. Boston's doughnut hole in road wins just looks awfully bad against the "one" or "two" managed by LA or Detroit. But I'd rather peak in the conference or league finals than in the first or second round. And in facing the Pistons, it will be Boston who possesses the best player on the court.
If anything surprises me this year it's San Antonio. (and that series is far from over).
What I'm most interested in is, who does Stern want to win this game? Celts fans tend to assume that DS is all hype to return to the glory days of Celts/Lakers, but from a long-term POV King James is the future of the NBA brand, so...
The line right now is at BOS-8; if the league assigns good refs to the game, it may drop a bit and that'll be panic time for the Celts.
APS
I suppose I'd make the Lakers a slight favorite over either (especially with the Game 7 home-court advantage); but either match-up would be awfully close.
The Spurs no longer worry me. I'm not sure what the problem is--my suspicion is that the refs are now calling fouls on them--but their ability to close people out by defense and execution seems to be lacking. Instead, they seem to depend on excellent performances from Manu or Parker.
The Hornets, OTOH, scare the hell out of me. Somehow it never quite registered that Chris Paul is kind of thick and kind of strong. Chandler seems designed to frustrate Gasol. And West offsets Odom.
but from a long-term POV King James is the future of the NBA brand, so...
I seem to recall a lot of talk about the NBA being burned by too much focus on the stars, so my suspicion is that the NBA would prefer that the Celts win.
And the Celts will beat the Pistons. I have no idea what the Celts' problem is, but the Pistons are at least the headcases that the Celts are.
"but from a long-term POV King James is the future of the NBA brand, so..."
. . . so let's get him some teammates that would make the Cavs worth watching. It is entirely possible that LeBron could beat the Celtics tomorrow and (as last year) singlehandedly carry the Cavs over the Pistons. (Not likely, but possible.)
In which case the Cavs (unlike the Pistons or Celtics) would be swept in four by any of the three Western teams, in games that not much of anyone would enjoy watching. That can't be David Stern's design.
"but from a long-term POV King James is the future of the NBA brand, so..."
. . . so let's get him some teammates that would make the Cavs worth watching. It is entirely possible that LeBron could beat the Celtics tomorrow and (as last year) singlehandedly carry the Cavs over the Pistons. (Not likely, but possible.)
In which case the Cavs (unlike the Pistons or Celtics) would be swept in four by any of the three Western teams, in games that not much of anyone would enjoy watching. That can't be David Stern's design.
Matt Yglesias - No love for the Pistons AGAIN. I want an 'I was wrong about the Pistons' post examining the incredible career of Rasheed Wallace, the second-best PF of his generation (that includes KG and Dirk), when Detroit makes the finals.
Marty Lederman - You need to throw in a gratuitous 'I think Ray Allen and Justice Stevens share the same pair of ankles' remark so people know it's really you.
Here's my two questions:
1) Why does KG RARELY ever take a step towards the basket when he's in the paint? Make a move and go for the layup? Instead, he will take a step away and try for the fall-away.
2) Who thought up the HORRIBLE strategy of cutting towards the basket... then passing out towards the perimeter? You're like, 2 steps away from the basket. Why are you passing out to the perimeter?
I don't expect Cleveland to beat Boston in a game 7 at home.
A couple of weeks ago, I expected a Boston-Detroit ECF, and I gave Boston the edge, but Detroit a good chance. I would reverse that now. I don't think Boston can beat Detroit four straight times in Boston, and Boston hasn't shown much sign they could beat Detroit at the Palace. Of course, if the bad Pistons show up, anything can happen, but the bad Pistons seem to have stayed in Philadelphia, which is another reason I like the Pistons better now.
The Pistons are vulnerable to teams with overwhelming superstars, which at this point would be only NO, LA, and Cle. Against the Spurs or the Celtics they have a much better matchup, because those two teams are constructed in the same way: a bunch of star level players (yes, Duncan is a superstar, but he isn't in the dominating class of the above 3). They probably have the advantage over Boston because of their experience together, but neither team has a real clutch player who can take games over. SA has an edge because they have been together just as long as Detroit and their top 3 players are all slightly better than Detroit's.
Don't kid yourself in thinking if the Cavs pull out game 7 Detroit should be heavily favored. The Cavs creamed them last year and they should have won that game 6 2 years ago except for some fortuitous bounces at the end for Detroit on the offensive boards. They don't have an answer for James, Prince is completely outclassed. And you have to hate Sheed in a tight series, especially if he feels like they are going up against an inferior team (which all of Detroit has believed about the Cavs for years, despite the playoff results).
i'm largely not in the predictions business (although i noted on 3/6, in this very space, that i thought the acquisition of kurt thomas made me believe, for the first time all season, that the spurs would win again), but i do like historical parallels.
the reason, for instance, that i'm not sold on the lakers winning (and never have been) is this: coach jackson proved in the '90s that you could win with 3 superior talents and a bunch of role players.
for today's purposes, i'm happy to call kobe and michael a wash; certainly gasol is better than horace grant (although not better than rodman); but the question for me has been whether lamar odom is equal to or better than scottie pippen. i don't actually think he is, and so i've doubted that the lakers quite have enough in their tank to win it all.
the same question, by the way, arises with the celtics, although since it's not the same coach or the same system and the player types don't match up as well, i can't quite do the same comparison.
i've also questioned, on an historic basis, whether a team with a key midseason acquisition can meld the players sufficiently to win it all (the only example in recent years i can think of is rasheed to the pistons), so while i expect the lakers to be awesomely dangerous next year with gasol having all season on the squad, this year i'm less certain.
I can't stand them, and they have gotten older and slower, but until the Spurs are knocked out, they are still the favorite. They are the only team with real strengths at those 3 positions. I'm not saying the Hornets can't beat them (certainly have showed it), but they're tough. Pistons look good but have played 2 mediocre teams. We'll learn more when they get the Celtics or Cavs.
In Matt's early predictions, he didn't gave much thought to the Spurs, Cavs, and Pistons. Depending on what happens over the net few days, there could be some major surprises.
Totally unimpressed by the Celtics this postseason. At least they were blowing Atlanta out at home. Versus the Cavs, margin of victory has been 4, 16, and 7. The Cavs of all teams have outscored them this series(!) by 13 points. So far.
ugh, howard. Kobe is no MJ. Did you ever see Jordan go scoreless when his team needed him? Did he ever take games (or series) off like Kobe does. I'm not saying that Kobe is less talented than Jordan (although that may be true, and neither of them hold a candle to LeBron in pure physical dominance), but he does not have the drive that Jordan did. Not even remotely close.
That said, while Gasol is infinitely better than Grant on the offensive end, he doesn't run the floor, D up, or rebound anywhere near to Horace's level. And Odom is miles shy of Scottie Pippen in his prime. Plus, the role players on those Bulls teams were superior to what the Lakers have after their big 3. Remember, Pip should've been the MVP in 1994 and those Bulls would've been in the Finals but for some terrible ref-ing. Where do you think these Lakers would be w/out Kobe, about 40-42?
Crusty Dem, since we're basically agreeing that lakers '07-'08 aren't '90s bulls, i don't want to go into great detail here, i'll just make a few notes:
i am not, for example, saying that you have to think long and hard about whether kobe bryant is the greatest (or in my book, second greatest, since i'm a bill russell man all the way) player of all time. i am saying that he is a dominant force, the league's mvp, and for purposes of my comparison, i was prepared to call him a wash for jordan.
i liked horace grant, but given the choice, i'd rather have gasol than grant, but i won't fight hard about it: as i said, i certainly don't think that gasol is as great a player as dennis rodman, but i do think that he's good enough in this context.
and obviously, where we agree most strongly is that odom isn't pippen, and that's where i think the real shortfall will be.
Joejoejoe,
You are SO wrong about Rasheed. Most talented? Possibly. Best? Not even close. Rasheed actually looks worse if you look at his statistics through the years. 6.9rpg career average for a power forward, 15.6ppg? Sure he is a great defender (although rebounding is apart of defense that he clearly doesn't excel at), but he is not even close to the level of KG or Dirk in career production.
When was Rasheed ever a top-3 PF in the league? Malone, Garnett, J.O'Neal, Nowitzki, Webber, Brand, even Vin Baker have outshone him.
He's obviously an important piece of a championship contender, but he's never been a superstar.
and Duncan of course
KG isn't as efficient an offensive player (eFG% .499) as Rasheed (eFG% .510) and Dirk is only slightly better (eFG% .512). I think Rasheed is a much better defender than Dirk and on a good night the equal of KG on defense. Rasheed turns the ball over far less than KG, cancelling out KG's rebounding advantage.
The point of the NBA is to win and advance as far as possible and Rasheed Wallace has done that better than either KG or Dirk over the course of his career. Only Shaq and Tim Duncan have been bigger winners over the past decade than 'Sheed. I give Rasheed a lot of credit for that winning and don't believe it's an accident of chance.
howard, the Lakers don't have to better than the '96 Bulls, they just have to be better than the teams that are in the league this year.
And whoever thinks Rasheed Wallace is better than KG is smoking way stronger shit than 'Sheed himself.
You know who else has been a bigger winner than KG? Robert Horry. He must be better, too.
The Truth.
And motherfu**ing PJ Brown.
Comments closed May 31, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
i've been a celts fan for thirty years, and no one around these parts has listened to me all year long when i kept saying that no matter how much they improved themselves, they were not a championship cliber team. i expect to be proven right on that very shortly, if i haven't been already.
Posted by passing thru | May 17, 2008 10:51 AM