It's really too bad that ABC has the whole NBA Finals and we won't be able to get any of TNT's wildly superior broadcasting teams. My pick is Lakers in 6 and thought I'm not happy about my choices I'll root for LA.
« Gates Goes Nuclear on the Air Force | Main | All About the Panties »
Finals Thread
05 Jun 2008 07:59 pm
Comments (72)
Kobe is the best player, Phil Jackson is the best coach, and the Lakers are the younger team. Look for Saša Vujačić to become a household name. Lakers in 5.
Where is the love? Giants over the Pats? Yankees over the Sox? and now LA over the Celts? Was living in Cambridge for four years really so terrible???
Thank goodness you're a great writer and thinker. Your sports taste, however, is in your mouth. [with all due respect and honor]
Boston wins 4-3
Better defense, home court advantage, and mostly the Lakers can't matchup with Pierce or KG.
Lakers will be proven to be too young, too soft, and play too little defense to beat a Celtic team that is focused, and will want it more.
Finals MVP is Paul Pierce
I hate tnt for having exclusive on conference finals because in l.a. without cable you didn't see the games... It sucks for us without cable...
yeah, i said Lakers in 6
"Its like sex with Kobe Bryant -- you can kick and scream all you want, but its going to happen."
-Family Guy
Even worse is that every game starts at 9pm. Great way to build the next generation of fans (East Coast anyways)!
Breen, Jackson and Van Gundy are calling the game and you're complaining? JVG is the best there is.
True dat on Van Gundy. Him and Jackson are the best duo hands down. If they're doing the Finals, it's for the best.
It's really too bad that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence can release a report on how Bush and Cheney misled America re the Iraq threat in 2002 --contrary to available intelligence -- and ABC NEws decides to not even mention it to people who watch their broadcast.
You can see why. In my opinion, the only people lying more to Americans in 2002 than George Bush and Dick Cheney were the whores at ABC News.
If the world was a just place, Kobe would still be serving his jail sentence. How soon we forget!
I hate the Celtics but I'm all in for them.
Hubie Brown, Doug Collins, and Marv Albert are the best in the business. Too bad we'll get Mark Jackson repeating cliches that don't apply. Van Gundy is funny and speaks his mind. Matthew is right about TNT's relative expertise.
Too bad Chick Hearn and Johnny Most are no longer around to make guest spots.
The Lakers seem to be clearly the better team. Even though they're behind by 2 at this point.
Agree with a few above. The team of Van Gundy, Jackson, AND Breen are by far the best. Probably in all of sports. However, TNT obviously has the best in-studio team. Oh, and the Lakers win this in 4. And yes, I realize the Celtics are winning right now. L.A. is so deep,so deep, they'll put Boston's proverbial butt to sleep.
Like the TNT crew for half-time post-game analysis, like the ABC crew for play-by-play.
This is a good game so far. If the Laker's take it tonight, LA in five. If the lose tonight, LA in six.
James Taylor? Really? James Taylor? The NBA/ABC really doesn't know how to market their product.
James Taylor? Really? James Taylor? The NBA/ABC really doesn't know how to market their product.
Hoppen?,
Yeah, but you know David Stern
is always trying to be more vanilla to appeal to all the white folk. Although JT might be too vanilla for even uptight rich people. Wait, no, he's perfect.
TICKET!!!!11
I haven't been a fan of pro basketball since Jordan stopped winning championships, but was developing some interest with the wide-open styles of Dallas or Phoenix.
However, I've been watching tonight because nothing else is on.
Man, both of these teams suck. Is this really the championship round?
Did I say 4 games? Oh, I meant 6 games. My bad.
Suck on that, LA!
Celtics: Rebounds. Defense. Big shots. The Truth. Better bench.
Lakers: Brick after brick after brick. Gasol posterized. Bryant forgettable. Shit from the bench.
Boston takes out LA in Game 1 of the NBA Finals at the Garden. There is a certain kind of poetry in those words.
Taking into account that they last met in 1987, I can barely believe that I can type that first sentence.
My C's finish off OJ and the...sorry, Kobe and the Lakers in 7. 3 more wins and all is right with the basketball universe.
Dear God, I hate the Lakers. No, it's not rational. Luckily, it's just sports.
Why people are ignoring the Celtics enormous edge in interior D and rebounding boggles the mind.
Jackson, I think it were, said that--if ye can believe it--Kobe is the equal er MJ. Now Mark jackson were an OK point guard, super slow, with and ugly shot and uglyer trademarked celebration--and yet stillhe got the job done better than a lot. But he's moving into Ann Coulter territory here: saying something outrageous to garner attention and boost his career. Not to mention, there were times where I swear it were Randy Jackson, not Mark Jackson announce the game.
Look at Kobe's game tonight and tell me if MJ would ever stoop to equal such in a finals. How many bad shots did that bastard throw up? How many times were he shut down by Paul Pierce?
I know you Kobe-lickers out there are going get yer huffy up over this, but I'd advise ye not to strain yer milk. I don't give a shit about yer man crushes. Hero worship is fer teenage girls.
No Spurs--don't care.
Yes, there are some of us out there.
Inside the NBA is sorely missed even though JVG is off the wall. If the Big Mouse were smart, they'd subcontract with TNT for the half-time and post-game. And the Celts in 5 if they go to LA 2-0.
Funny thing is, I've mellowed somewhat on Kobe over the years, but the Lakers are still the Chelsea of the league, and Pierce and KG need rings on their fucking fingers.
mark jackson was more than an OK point guard. he was an excellent point guard for many years with Indiana, and he's one of the all-time assist leaders, a testament to his longevity if nothing else.
(perhaps a testament to changes in official scoring, but hey...)
Did I say 4 games? Oh, I meant 6 games. My bad.
Can you believe that stat about Bill Russell?
30 pts - 40 rebs in a game!!
Boston in 5?! You do realize ita split 3-2-3. Oh, and Brewmn, you're a fucking idiot. You don't even like basketball if you stopped watching when Jordan retired.
It's kind of crap making a prediction after the series started, but....
Celts in.......7.
The NBA is approximately 10x better than it was 10 years ago. The end of Jordan's run in Chicago was a low point for depth of talent. It is off the charts right now. Mainly due to the influx of great foreign players
Not to mention LeBron, Chris Paul, and Dwight Howard.
It's a good time to watch the NBA. Though those fines for flopping can't come soon enough. And they need to clear out some of the deadwood in the reffing corps. But otherwise...
Mark Jackson were not an "excellent" point guard. Excellent means better than very good. On a scale er 1 to 10 an excellent would be 9 or 10. Name me 100 point guards er the Mark jackson era and tell me he's one er the top 10. He might be one er the second ten, which would be good to very good, so maybe me "ok" were a bit parsimonious.
But anyway, it's neither here nor their. Jest idle chit chat. I'm just killin time till the hoors arrive.
Despite getting dominated in every way imaginable inside, the Lakers were still right there until about five minutes left. Then, for no reason at all, they abandoned their offensive rotation, started jacking up 20 footers, and stood around and hoped Kobe would pull one out of his hat.
This was the worst possible scenario for the Lakers: The 3Cs all got theirs, Kobe shot poorly, the bench was ineffective, and they got pushed around all over the court — and it was still a two possession game until the last three minutes. We'll see what sort of adjustments they make, but right now, I don't see any reason why the Lakers can't steal one in Boston.
I'll just second the appreciation for Van Gundy, Jackson, and Breen as in-game broadcasters. Marv Albert and Doug Collins are perfectly serviceable, but I've tuned in games I didn't care about just to hear the ABC team do their thing. They're smart, on top of the action, and tell me things I didn't already know. I feel like most color analysts tell me stuff everybody knows, or crap that's just plainly not true.
Hubie Brown--just as an aside to whomever it was that mentioned him--has completely degenerated. He used to be okay, but he's awful now.
I'm not a big fan of Breen who steps out of his play-by-play role too often. He should leave the commentary to Van Gundy and Jackson, who almost always have it covered well.
I really like the Celtics. They're acting and playing like a team right now. They've strengthened through adversity and I don't see the Lakers beating them. Unless Pierce reaggravates his injury, they will win.
Had to miss most of the game, unfortunately, so I don't feel qualified to comment, but I wanted to kick this out there for discussion:
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-32-284/Coaxing-Kobe-Bryant-into-Hero-Mode.html
Can you believe that stat about Bill Russell? 30 pts - 40 rebs in a game!!
The league has definitely gotten better over the years.
Least we won't have to see any more freaking on-the-game promos for that Kyra lady. Jeez. If it gets any worse, the government may have to regulate TV advertising the way it regulates toxic chemicals. If an ad threatens to cause mass brain damage in the population, it needs to be controlled. Nobody allowed on the court who's not in the game.
ol one eye,
whats with the way you're typing? is it like a pirate voice or something? wtf are you talking about?
and yes, mark jackson had a 5 or 6 year run where he was EASILY one of the top ten point guards in the league. no doubt.
I'm very interested in this series and would love to watch the games. However, from their scheduling the NBA has made clear that they don't really care in the tiniest bit whether I, or anyone else on the East coast, tunes in. I'm certainly not staying up until 1AM to watch the NBA finals, and it's utterly pointless to watch any of a game if you can't stick around until the end.
The Celtics are a unique team. I always expect tight playoff games to go to the team with a scorer who can get tough baskets in the last few minutes - the team that plays composed and efficient when the game's tight. But down the stretch the Celtics looked like a CYO team with at least three kids who were short a few Ritalin tabs.
They still won - and I was never all that worried - because they were just stifling on defense. The best possession came near the end, Pierce on Kobe, when Kobe threw four or five fakes at him, trying to get him up in the air. No dice - Pierce was right up on his chest, hands up, not biting - and Kobe threw up a lousy shot that clanged off the rim. Celtics rebound, more time off the clock. Maybe it wasn't such a good idea for Kobe to be playing one-on-one with Pierce in the offseason.
Unless Phil and the Lake show figure out some way to shake the Celtics late-game D they can't win this series.
NBA All-Time Leaders in Assists
1 John Stockton 15,806
2 Mark Jackson 10,334
3 Magic Johnson 10,141
Anyone still want to say that Jackson wasn't a great point guard?
Lakers in 4. Wait. What?
For all the Lakers slurping that went on in the media, a few basic facts were ignored.
1. The Celts are the better defensive team, and it's really not that close.
2. The only guy on the Lakers who can come close to guarding Pierce is Kobe, while Boston has 4 guys (including Tony Allen) to harass Bryant.
3. The Lakers have no one who can come close to guarding KG.
The Lakers could still win, but the hype for LA coming into this series is just another example of how the NBA is the ultimate front-runner's sports league. Kobe being as good as Jordan? Because he's finally made it to one Finals on his own? Please.
Mike
Anyone still want to say that Jackson wasn't a great point guard?
That's an interesting question. I hated Jackson as a player (and I hate him as an analyst), but his stats (inc. PER, which I like in other situations) indicate that he was better than average a lot of years. He was slow, he held the ball too long, and his preference for showy passes resulted in turnovers. He appears to have been better than I remember.
But "great"? No. Of the 16 players listed (throwing out those I know nothing about), I'd take him before Bogues, and that's it. Clicking around and checking the other listed players' PERs, his appears to be the lowest save Bogues, and he's one of the few that never breaks 20. And that list doesn't include players like KJ.
The Lakers could still win,
My sense is that the consensus was the Lakers in six. That's still on the table. The Lakers played very poorly, and I don't think that was entirely a function of the Celts' defense.
I was only able to watch the second half, and have a couple of disjointed thoughts ....
What on earth happened to Sam Cassell? It used to be he was notable for being the man who most closely resembled a catfish, but now he is trying to resurrect memories of Antoine Walker by leading the league in shots per minute while having the lowest fg% in the league. Watching him is like watching Nick Van Exel back in the day - I would always pray he made his first two or three shots because then he was good for ten or fifteen ridiculous shots later in the game.
When you are being unfavorably compared to Van Exel, it is probably time to hang them up.
Rebounding is going to be the key statistic in this series. The Lakers were shocking in the WCF by dominating the Spurs on the offensive glass, particularly in the decisive game four. If the Lakers win, I think they have to have the softest frontline of any championship team, and yet they dominated the Spurs on the offensive glass for several games.
I used to hate Phil Jackson doing the post-game conferences, when he was all trying Jedi mind tricks on the officials, and taking potshots at the opposing fans. The last couple of years, this has completely changed, and he is one of the most enjoyable post-game interviews. I wonder what caused that transformation.
Garnett was huge down the stretch, but all of his key plays were on hustling, instinctive plays. I am thinking of the putback slam, the save from halfcourt (they never showed a replay, but I would have sworn he was at least a couple of feet into the backcourt. Not that they have an actual line there anymore since we have to have the trophy logo on display at all times, never mind if it affects the officials ability to call the game correctly....), and the offensive rebound off of the missed free throw. But on all of his jump shots, he was off badly down the stretch. But he was assertive. His performance down the stretches of games and as the series gets longer will be fascinating to watch. It could go either way. And it could be dispositive.
MBunge,
Those are all pretty valid points, but we are kind of forgetting something here. It took Boston 20 games to beat Atlanta, Cleveland, and Detroit. It took L.A. 14 games to beat Denver, Utah, and San Antonio. I know the NBA is all about matchups, but could you imagine Kobe and Co. losing 3 GAMES IN ATLANTA?! No. The Lakers are clearly the better team coming into this series. Not saying Boston can't win, but I don't think there is much evidence to suggest they will. LA will probably sweep them at home.
KG's nimble prevention of that backcourt violation was legit. Saw it on replay multiple times here in the Boston media market. He took off from the right side of the "line" (that trophy is atrocious), hooked the ball backwards to Pierce, then landed in the backcourt. Great play, and par for the course for the kind of hustle that he, Posey, Brown, and other guys brought to the club this year.
But KG needs to take it the rim more often, especially against these Lakers. He can get very hot on those jumpers from around the top of the key, but sometimes when he ices up out there it seems like he keeps shooting in order to prove it to himself that he's okay, when really he should be taking it to Gasol. He can outfly Pau by a foot or so——his head was right at rim level on a few of those dunks and on the failed alley-oop attempt——so I really want to see him very active around the rim throughout the series. The Lakers front line looks hesitant and soft compared to KG, Perkins, Brown, and Powe.
"You don't even like basketball if you stopped watching when Jordan retired."
Yeah, that Houston-New York final was like watching greased lighning in sneakers.
"The end of Jordan's run in Chicago was a low point for depth of talent."
Any of those six Bulls champions would have beat any winner since in five games. Six tops.
Folks always overreact to the first game, but some of the things I've been saying going in were borne out: the Lakers simply can't match up physically with the Celtics on the front-court; the Celtics D is *much* better than the Lakers D; Pierce dominated the Lakers on that matchup; and the rebounding wasn't even close.
However, in spurts, the greater athleticism of the Lakers and better offense asserted themselves. The second quarter was pretty ugly for the Celtics. If they can spread the floor well enough to mitigate the Celtics dominance of the interior, they'll be much better off.
It's a fairly tight matchup. If either Pierce or Perkins are really hurt, the Celtics are in big trouble, but if they are OK, I think they look like the favorite because of homecourt advantage and how much more physical they are.
The next game is a huge game for the Lakers.
Brewmn,
You've just proved how little you know. The Houston-New York series took place in one of Jordan's baseball years. That was his first retirement. You do know that he came back and they won three more, right? Or did you pay such little attention to the NBA that you weren't even aware that he came back? So the very fact that you think that series sucked shows that the DEPTH OF TALENT in the league was much lower then. But actually, either one of those two Houston teams would have had a legit shot at beating the Bulls. Its actually a shame that they weren't able to play each other. Do you remember how good Hakeem was?
In regards to your second comment...uh, wrong. You seem to suffer from a bit of nostalgia. You're trying to tell me that none of those three Lakers teams with Shaq and Kobe would have been able to compete with the Bulls team that beat an old Utah team in 6 games? You are clueless.
Basically, Brewmn, the point is that you don't seem like a fan of basketball. You sound like a fan of Jordan. Well, welcome to the club. But just because you don't know anything about basketball, don't act like the Celtics and Lakes suck this year. You just sound stupid.
"KG ain't got nothing on Bill Cartwright, and Pau Gasol couldn't hold Luc Longley's jock!!"
Bulge,
Yes, it IS all about match-ups. And the Celtics have now defeated the Lakers, both before and after the much-heralded arrival of the Spaniard, in all three of their meetings this season because they do indeed match up very well with the Lakers. The Celtics play much better D, they're tougher head-to-head on the boards, and the Lakers have a serious problem defending KG and/or Pierce.
The Hawks, by comparison, gave the Celtics problems because they were incredibly athletic and they had a couple of guys playing out of their minds in Atlanta (Smith, Johnson). The Hawks also blocked a ton of shots, whereas Gasol seems to be the only shotblocker on the Lakers, and his blocks seem to be the mild from-behind variety rather than the intimidating "get that shit out" type that Josh Smith unleashed upon the Celtics with admirable fury. The Celtics have very little to fear down low against L.A., and nobody's really contesting outside shots either. If the C's had simply shot better in the second half it would've been a spanking instead of merely a convincing win.
The Cavs played comparably good defense, especially on the front line, and they had a superstar player who was harder for the C's to defend than Kobe is. (LeBron is big, strong, and takes it to the hole, whereas Kobe, against the C's, seems to be hesitant to drive and, last night at least, was well defended by Pierce, Allen, and others.) The Pistons weren't much of a match, in the end, and Ray Allen finally got hot.
The Lakers looked like the better team coming into the Finals because they'd had an easier time in the three previous series and didn't need as many games to get through. But that doesn't mean they suddenly matched up better against the Celtics, or that the Celtics struggles with the uber-athletic Hawks or strong-D Cavs would reappear against the Lakers.
And the Celtics probably would've cruised through the West in the playoffs too, if that were their conference. I believe they were 5-2 this season against Phoenix, Utah, S.A., and Denver. Utah might've presented the most problems out of any them.
People seem to assume that the Celtics had the best record in the league because they were playing in the weak Eastern conference. But they killed the West, too.
"The Lakers looked like the better team coming into the Finals because they'd had an easier time in the three previous series and didn't need as many games to get through. But that doesn't mean they suddenly matched up better against the Celtics, or that the Celtics struggles with the uber-athletic Hawks or strong-D Cavs would reappear against the Lakers."
Yeah, I pretty much agree with everything in this statement. But really, people are talking about Game 2 being key to the Lakers having a chance, but I think the Celtics are the team that have to win game 2 to have a chance at winning the series. If LA is able to win game 2, the point about matchups becomes a bit closer to moot. Does anyone really expect LA not to win at least 2 of 3 in LA? I fully expect them to sweep the Celts in LA. Have the Lakers even lost a game at home yet?
I don't think the Celtics had the best record simply because they played in the East. They were the best regular season team. They just haven't seemed like themselves for much of the playoffs, or at least the first two series.
Either way, I really want to see a long, competitive finals...
"I know the NBA is all about matchups, but could you imagine Kobe and Co. losing 3 GAMES IN ATLANTA?!"
Does anyone even watch these games? The Celts played poorly in Atlanta against a long, athletic team that was playing really, really well. If the Hawks had played that well during the regular season they would have been at least .500.
The Celts also completely dominated the Hawks in Boston, so it's not like the series was that close even though it went to 7 games.
The Lakers got to Finals beating a Denver team that doesn't play a lick of defense, a Utah team that was great at home but just as bad on the road (indicating some real weaknesses) and an old, beat-up Spurs.
The Lakers can certainly play better than they did in game 1 and win the series, but the Celts can also play better then they did in game 1 and they've already got a game in the bag.
Mike
MBunge,
Yes, that's why I acknowledged that the league is all about matchups. I'm simply saying there was no debate heading into this series as to who has played better in these playoffs. The Atlanta series was close. Letting it go to seven games meant that they were one KG stomach flu away from being out in the first round. I just don't think anybody should be surprised that the Lakers were favored by most to win the series. They've simply played better, and are much deeper, although I will concede that the matchup appears to be favorable for Boston.
Yarrrr, where else but on the intrathingy could ye find people willin to argue fer the greatness er the puddin-filled, short-limbed Mark Jackson. Let me put it this way: at best, he were a "nice" addition. He were smart enough to overcome his shortcomings to some degree, which is a noble affirmation. But he couldn't keep a toddler in front er him, nor could he penetrate himself: he were a virtual eunic in them regards. Plus, if me memory serves me rightly, he were an aesthetic nightmare, with a hideous push shot and a shimmy that he performed after proud moments that causes the canadian nation to ban his games fer fear er the damage the sight er which would do to their young.
About the current series: those who aver that the Lakers can't guard pierce and garnett are correct. But Garnett needs to take this opportunity to decend his right testicle, which he been hidin up there all these years, as if fer a special occasion. Which this is.
IF YER READING THIS YOUNG KEVIN, LET ER GO! BECOME A FULL MAN AND VENTURE INTO THE LANE. THAT BE WHERE YER LEGACY LAY. EITHER YE'LL BE REMEMBERED AS ONE NUT SEVEN FOOT JUMP SHOOTER, OR YE'LL USE THE GIFTS THE GODS GRANTED YE IN THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY WERE INTENDED. THE MOMENT IS HERE, KEVIN. USE THE FORCE KEVIN! USE THE FORCE!
There. Ol One Eye's done all he can do. It's in the hands er Garnett and the mother sea now.
They've simply played better, and are much deeper...
How are the Lakers deeper!? I keep hearing this, but I see no evidence of it. Let's see how the benches fared last night:
BOS: 16 points, 12 RB, 3 asts, 3 steals, 1 blocks
L.A.: 15 points, 7 RB, 2 assists, 0 steals, 0 blocks
I'd say Boston's bench looked pretty deep. More boards, bigger D. Do the C's need to have a Walton in order to be known for their bench?
do you seriously use a pirate voice every time you comment on blogs? that is bizarre.
Tinisoli,
C'mon, I think we can come up with a bit bigger sample size than the one you provided. I by "we," I was kind of hoping that you would do it, because the research sounds like a lot of work. Thanks!
Montefiore is a beauitful name. Means mountain er flowers. It suggests to me that ye were born in a villa somewhere overlooking the Adriatic, one er the top three medium-sized bodies er water on this here planet. I wish me heritage were as such.
However, I were born to a spanish hoor in Honduras and sold at 4 to a turtlin drunk I called only Mr. Sir till the day I slit his throat and stole his skiff nine years later. And it's been an uphill battle from there.
So pardon me "bizarre" locution, Mr. Monrefiore, and I'll pardon ye yer bizzare love er the never more than moderately likable Mark Jackson.
"But just because you don't know anything about basketball, don't act like the Celtics and Lakes suck this year."
Seriously, where would you place them in the historical pantheon? These teams look like they would be blown out by even the likes of the Rik Smits-era Pacers.
The Lakers or Celtics would get blown out by the Rik Smits-era Pacers? How would those Pacers match up with either one of these teams. Well, if you believe that, we might not be able to talk about basketball at all. You are basing this off watching one game because it was the only thing on. And you haven't actively paid attention since the Jordan era Bulls. Gotcha...
Ray Allen, Kobe-stopper!
When I become dictator of the world, on MSBTV I will have Gus Johnson switched in for Breen to do play-by-play with JVG and Jackson as color, and then bring Kenny, Ernie and Charles over for the studio show. I may also sub in Marv for GuJo every so often, just to give Gus a break. Maybe Marv will do the third quarter a la baseball on the radio. Also, I would probably have Mutombo and Arenas do color for some games in crappy series in the first round, just as an experiment.
It's 2-3-2? (I spent too long watching the Stanley Cup.) Oh, well: Celts in 6.
The Lakers can't beat the Celtics in 6 because they'd have to do it in the first game back in Boston, which they just won't do.
If the Lakers don't win it in five, which they could, then either the Celtics win it in six, or it goes seven and the Celtics have to be favored in the last game.
Note to Lakers: You can't win a seven-game series with jump shots. You might win one or two that way, but you won't take four. You have to get to the rack, get high percentages shots, get to the foul line.
The Celtics series with Cleveland was great preparation for the Lakers because the Cavs had LeBron and a bunch of stiffs, and the Lakers have Kobe and...well, OK, Fisher and Odom can play, but jeez, Big Z impressed me more than Gasol.
Comments closed June 19, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Matt, TNT has a much better team. By the way you are my kind of blogger. I like the variety of your subject matter. It jut sucks you guys do not discuss African Affairs. Maybe you guys could give me the plateau to blog on this.
Lakers in 6, Kobe Final MVP.
Posted by lamine | June 5, 2008 8:07 PM