So Much for Lakers in 5

I should have posted a thread on this earlier, but: NBA Finals, woo! I think last night's game was an example of what a fallacy it is to think that only the fourth quarter matters (or whatever) in the NBA. Given the way LA outplayed Boston near the end, they clearly would have won the game if not for the fact that the Celtics managed to build up this huge lead earlier.

At any rate, I fully expect the Lakers to come on strong when the series shifts back to California. LA has, I think, a somewhat better team but Boston has home court advantage so I think we should continue to expect a very competitive series.

Comments

Given the way LA outplayed Boston near the end, they clearly would have won the game if not for the fact that the Celtics managed to build up this huge lead earlier.

This is nuts. LA came back when Boston stopped playing defense and started looking for highlight plays instead of running their offense.

Posted by Tyrone Slothrop | June 9, 2008 5:36 PM

Its a tribute to the shining lights in the MSM that the Lakers were universally regarded as the better team going into the finals. Which team had the best record in the league? Which team had absolutely no trouble with the Western Conference teams to the tune of a 25-5 record? Which team plays better defense, rebounds better and is tougher? Which team is 4-0 against the other so far this year?

It isn't LA baby.

Posted by rochrist | June 9, 2008 5:38 PM

Enjoy your WWE style entertainment. If you wonder why some of us prefer college hoops, just reflect back on how obviously that game was fixed. Only a guy who thought Bush was right about the Iraq invasion could ignore this fix, or the miami-dallas final, etc.

I'll be watching the Euro soccer cup, thanks. Soccer refs would get killed if they tried to throw a game like that.

Posted by Anon | June 9, 2008 5:38 PM

Tyrone,
Not really sure how that's nuts. The Lakers clearly outplayed the Celtics in the 4th Quarter, regardless of the reasons. It doesn't matter if its because LA was playing better, or Boston was playing worse.

Count me in with the people surprised at how the first two games have gone. But this clearly isn't the same Boston team that played in the first two rounds.

Anon, you're quite wrong if you think that college officiating is better than NBA officiating. Also, I can see why the NBA might fix games to get teams into the finals, but I don't think they really care one way or another who wins this series. And if you were just looking to prolong the series, you probably wouldn't start fixing games until game 4 or so. So, your post was fucking dumb.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 5:46 PM

Rocrhist,
The Lakers were favored with good reason. They CLEARLY looked like the better team over the past month of the playoffs. The Boston team has also played about six more games. This certainly wasn't the MSM building any team up. They had massiver hard-on for the Celtics all year. Have you already forgotten?

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 5:48 PM

Sorry, they might start fixing games as early as game 3. Forget about Wade about in game 3 a few years ago. That was the worst officiating in recent memory.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 5:50 PM

as soon as LA figures out how to defend the lane, they'll be the better team.

(when coach jackson won with jordan-pippen-grant and jordan-pippen-rodman, grant and especially rodman were ready to do the work on interior defense, and of course were backstopped by some plenty-of-fouls-to-give centers with some smarts; perhaps bynum will be all of that next year and augment gasol and odom perfectly - i'm expecting that he will at least approximate that - but this year, it's a problem.)

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 5:51 PM

In some cases, the fourth quarter matters less than any other quarter. Hence the expression "garbage time."

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | June 9, 2008 5:51 PM

Yeah, I thought the Lakers would do much better, too. I can't remember if said five or six, but, in either case, I didn't see the Celts winning the first two games.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 9, 2008 5:53 PM

The officiating has ruined the NBA playoffs. It does look like a repeat of 2006.

Posted by blah | June 9, 2008 5:55 PM

you fix the games to make sure the clearly inferior team wins and extends the series.

I've been called a DFH like atrios, for noticing that Bush had no clothes on the Iraq war.

Now you are calling me a DFH for noticing that the Lakers were on the wrong end of one of the couple of worse FT disparities in NBA finals history, where a scrub got more FT attempts than the the entire other team including the league MVP and aknowledged best offensive player in the league.

its the exact same dynamic as 2002, elite media calling people who notice the obvious crazy conspiracy theorists. luckily the only cost is a sport I like.

yes, college officiating is not as biased. Not too many college officials are 70- years old like Dick Bavetta

Posted by Anon | June 9, 2008 5:57 PM

Didn't see Game 2 - went to see USA-Argentina at Giants Stadium instead - but I still adhere to the old maxim that it's not a series til someone wins on the road (or Game 7). I picked Boston, but don't see this series as a foregone conclusion by any means.

Posted by Al | June 9, 2008 5:58 PM

Kobe Bryant is a punk. It really must suck to be a Lakers fan and have to depend on such a rat bastard.

Posted by MoeLarryAndJesus | June 9, 2008 6:02 PM

Not really sure how that's nuts. The Lakers clearly outplayed the Celtics in the 4th Quarter, regardless of the reasons. It doesn't matter if its because LA was playing better, or Boston was playing worse.

It was both. The point is that the last minutes of a game like that have no evidentiary value, since the Celtics started mailing it in from around the eight minute mark.

Gasol is obviously LA's second best player, but he and the rest of the Laker front line have been doing nothing impressive at the defensive end. The Lakers came back by going with a perimeter lineup, and hitting 6 or 7 three pointers down the stretch. Will they adjust their rotation in LA?

Ever since the middle of the Detroit series, when Ray Allen rediscovered his game, the Celtics have gone back to being the very potent offensive team they were for most of the season.

Posted by Dan Kervick | June 9, 2008 6:03 PM

thebulge, i'm always fascinated by people who insist the league is "fixed." why do you bother watching?

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 6:04 PM

Boston is a much better team. They just need the right motivation and focus. I think LA will win Game 3, but Boston will take Game 4 and win the series in 5 or 6.

Posted by Mike | June 9, 2008 6:06 PM

Anon,
I didn't call you any names. I just don't think that game 2 was 'fixed.' Horribly officiated, of course, but not fixed. Also, I never commented that college officials are more or less biased, just worse. Much worse. Did you see some of games that college officials blew this year? They blew three 3 UCLA games in a two week span. They called a blocking foul 45 feet away from the basket in that 'Nova-Georgetown game WITH LESS THAN A SECOND LEFT. College officiating sucks. NBA officiating also sucks, but to a lesser degree. The mistakes are really amplified in the playoffs though.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:06 PM

I'm a big Celtics fan, and I have to say the officiating in that game was miserable - about the worst I've seen. That said, I very much doubt it made a difference to the outcome.

Other impressions, having watched most of the Celtics' run through the Eastern Conference playoffs: the Lakers' intererior defense doesn't even come up to the level of soft. On so many drives I kept expecting weakside help to arrive or the defender to recover. Never happened. The Lakers are much better offensive team than Cleveland or Detroit, but boy are they a lousy defensive team over the past two games.

Wow. Luke Walton really can't guard anybody.

One thing that could definitely change things up would be if going back home allows the Lakers' bench to play at least minimally credible ball, and causes trouble for the Cs' reserves. The bench play (and Phil's odd rotations) have really given Kobe and co. a big hole to climb out of.

Posted by TedL | June 9, 2008 6:10 PM

Leon Powe - 15 minutes of action; 3 more free throws than the entire Lakers team. 12 more free throws than Odom and Gasol combined. But there's nothing unusual about that. It's not like Odom or Gasol every play around the basket.

I can't decide which official(s) are worse, the ones who called that game, or the dude who sent Pablo Mastroeni off in the friendly vs. Argentina last night.

Posted by Seitz | June 9, 2008 6:10 PM

dan kervick, thanks for noticing the key basketball point: ray allen shoots like ray allen, the celts have enough offense to win this thing (and particularly plenty of balance on offense).

he doesn't, they don't.

now, i agree that the celts did start looking for highlight plays in the 4th quarter, but still, it's telling that when the lakers mounted their comeback, ray wasn't doing anything on offense....

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 6:11 PM

Howard,
I wasn't complaining that they were fixed. I was simply pointing out that it wouldn't make sense for the NBA to fix game 2 for Boston. I don't think the NBA fixes series. I was simply saying that IF the NBA wanted to fix series, we need to think a little bit harder as to how they would do it. You're preaching to the choir here. I was defending the league.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:11 PM

sorry, thebulge, i read you too quickly and misunderstood. thanks for clarifying.

seitz, did you watch the game last night? powe got all those free throws because he was constantly in the lane, in good position, with the ball and people were hitting him.

gasol and odom, not so much.

sometimes there's a major discrepancy of foul shots because the refs were lousy, and sometimes it's because one team is in the lane all game and the other isn't....

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 6:16 PM

I don't plan on watching any more games, the finals sucked me in, and I saw a clearly fixed game. College ball just has some bad calls that go either way. the reffing is not one-sided, just bad.

College ball doesn't respond to having a ref fix games to clear up a gambling debt by allowing the refs to gamble more. And by ignoring the crooked ref when he says that several other refs are fixing games.

whatever, enjoy your "Undertaker" style entertainment, I'd just like to see an honest pro hoops league, because the players are so much better than the college athletes.

Posted by Anon | June 9, 2008 6:17 PM

I agreed with Matt in expecting the Lakers to be the better team, but it is clearly not the case. Granted this could be purely a home-court phenomenon. But the Celtics holding serve in Boston ratchets up the pressure on LA in Game 3 to near-Game 7 (generically speaking) levels. Thsi will fuel the atmosphere and crowd but I think it ultimately blunts the home-court advantage, as the Lakers have all the pressure on them. On the other hand, that could (and should) just be a motivator.

Posted by Mike | June 9, 2008 6:17 PM

Just wondering: Are the reasons that lead you to believe that the Lakers are a better team the same reasons that led you to pick them to win in five games?

Posted by Trieu | June 9, 2008 6:17 PM

They blew three 3 UCLA games in a two week span.

Actually, no, they didn't. Unless you think only calls made in the final ten seconds of a game are important. By all means, let's forget Lawrence Hill's blatant charge (not called) that gave Stanford the lead at the end of that game to begin with. And let's ignore the fact that the refs got the call on the Ryan Andersen play at the end of the Berkeley game 100% right. As for the over the basket play, there's precedent for counting that shot (see Oregon beating UCLA about 25 years ago). And against A&M, if it's a foul on Darren Collison when he gets body slammed by Donald Sloan, then it's not a foul at the end of the game when Sloan gets hit.

Again, those games were only "fixed" for UCLA if you, ya know, ignore the ENTIRE first 39:55 of the game. Nice try, though.

Posted by Seitz | June 9, 2008 6:21 PM

Although I'm surprised that the Celtics won the first two games, I don't think we can necessarily assume they are the better team yet. Would anyone be shocked if the Lakers went home and won all three games? I wouldn't. I think the Celtics will win it in 7. Lakers take 2 of 3 at home, but won't be able to win a game 7 at the garden.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:21 PM

If the Lakers go to that 4th-quarter lineup, moving Radman to the 4 and basically subbing Vujacic for Odom, they may not get a rebound the entire game. It would open things up on the offensive end - Radman out at the 3-point line means his man can't get back to the basket to defend when Kobe drives - but KG, Perkins, Powe, PJ Brown would pound the post and glass against Gasol when the C's have the ball.

If the Lakers have success getting somebody to the basket, whether its Kobe getting around the double-teams or somebody cutting, then they'll either get buckets or get fouled in the act of shooting. For all the talk of "fixes", the Lakers were only called for 7 more fouls than the Celtics last night (28 to 21). But the Celtics were fouled near the hoop in the act of shooting, while the Lakers were fouled on the perimeter where their offense was stuck the whole game thanks to the Celtics defense.

Posted by SMK | June 9, 2008 6:21 PM

I didn't think the officiating was that bad. The Lakers just fouled a ton in the first half. Sometimes one team really does foul more than the other!

Also: Why would the league be in the tank for the Celtics? LA is a much bigger market...and half the team is white, too.

Posted by Mr. Noah | June 9, 2008 6:21 PM

smk, thank you for making another essential point about the reffing last night.

as for your basketball analysis, i think you've summed it up the lakers problem very well; of course coach jackson knows this as well as we all do, and i suspect he'll think of something.

and given that coach jackson is a student of coach holzman, my guess is that the "something" he'll think of will have to do with better defending....

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 6:26 PM

Easy there, Seitz. While you are clearing a big UCLA fan, I said NOTHING about those games being fixed. Did you even read my post? I simply said that the Refs blew the game. I suppose I was probably exaggerating about 3 games in a 2 week span. A couple things though...

1. You can't be serious about the A&M game.
2. I don't give a shit about precedent. Either its the right call or not.
3. I don't recall all of the A&M game, so you could have a valid point.
4. I realize I just contradicted myself.
5. I love you.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:27 PM

While I don't like referencing Bill Simmons, I made sure to read him this morning for his take on the game. Even he said that there was no defending the officiating last night. And Bill Simmons is about the worst Boston has to offer

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:31 PM

5. I love you.

Well, I love me too. At least that's one thing we have in common. :)

Posted by Seitz | June 9, 2008 6:33 PM

Clearing=Clearly

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:34 PM

Do you whiners care to cite any specific calls that went against the Lakers that you think were truly questionable, or did you just look at the FT disparity after the game or hear Phil Jackson's wah-wah session and think, "Gee, I was always taught that each team should get just as many trips to the line as the other team, so obviously something is wrong here! Get me David Stern on the line!" By the way, some of the worst calls in the game went against the Celtics, and Kenny Mauer hates Doc Rivers and often goes out of his way to fuck the Celtics hard, real hard. If you want the Lakers to get to the line more, tell those fucking pussies to be aggressive and stop launching bricks from outside 15 feet. They're pathetic.

Leon "The Scrub" Powe got to the line b/c, unlike Pau and Odom and Kobe, he actually went hard to the basket and did so without hoping ahead of time that he'd get to the line. (And if you'd watched Powe throughout the season, you'd have noticed that he has a knack for drawing fouls on both ends of the floor—as demonstrated within moments of his entering the game, drawing a charge.) If you don't play good defense and you're flat-footed when someone comes hard to the hoop, odds are good that you're going to put them on the line rather than strip or swat the ball. The Lakers are playing terrible defense. The Powe coast-to-coast dunk exemplified how soft and timid this Lakers team is on defense. Step up and take the charge or at least hack the guy hard enough to send him to the line and/or send a message that your team isn't a collection of Euro-pussies.

Kobe threw a stupid, pointless elbow into Ray Allen's ribs, barreled through a pick trying to chase Allen, and also drew a technical for whining about a non-call on the offensive end. He's a whiny little bitch who takes it out on the refs and on his teammates when he's losing or not getting to the line as often as his coddling coach has assured him he should be.

By the way, here's last night's comparison of the Celtics scrub-filled bench versus the "deep" Lakers bench:

L.A. 23 PTS, 4 RBS, 5 TO, 0 FTA
BOS 35 PTS, 8 RBS, 0 TO, 15 FTA

Again, the Celtics' bench smoked the Lakers'.

They're deeper, better, and they want it more.

Posted by tinisoli | June 9, 2008 6:38 PM

TheBulge just said that Simmons was the worst Boston has to offer, but he could be wrong. Tinisoli sounds like a Celtics' ball boy.

Posted by Debbie | June 9, 2008 6:42 PM

TheBulge just said that Simmons was the worst Boston has to offer, but he could be wrong. Tinisoli sounds like a Celtics' ball boy.

Posted by Debbie | June 9, 2008 6:42 PM

Tinisoli,
I would say most people on this thread aren't Lakers or Celtics fans. They're just basketball fans. I'm not really rooting for either team, but there is no debating that the officiating was bad last night. And the Celtics seemed to get more questionable calls.

Posted by TheBulge | June 9, 2008 6:45 PM

And what, Matt, no comment on what was obviously the fakest injury in Finals history? I was watching with a Boston fan (and a Pistons fan) at the time, and called it right there that Pierce would make a "dramatic" return. Seriously, as if anyone has injured a knee so badly that they couldn't put weight on the OTHER knee. Paul Pierce is clearly ready for Euro 2008.

Posted by Seitz | June 9, 2008 6:48 PM

The Lakers are a soft, soft team, and I can't remember the last time a team that soft won the championship.

Posted by Freddie | June 9, 2008 7:00 PM

Simmons lives in Los Angeles and is practically a fifth column. Dude has season tickets to the Clippers.

As for the Lakers issues, it is not the refs. That game was not well-officiated, but it was pretty evenly officiated. The Lakers got ALL the calls in the 4th quarter, including a bunch of bogus non-calls like the one where Odom took out PJ Brown on the baseline, and of course the ridiculous 5 steps VladRad took on that layup.

Fact is, the Lakers got BLOWN OUT not because of the refs but because the Lakers are S-O-F-T!!!

Everyone knew this!

They are what we thought they were!

And idiot pundits decided that the Celtics were defined by a couple games against an underrated (and typically underperforming) Atlanta team, as opposed to their 66 win season, crushing of the West all season long, and defining 7th game wins against Atlanta (blow out) and LeBron (only second to Kobe as League's beset player).

Which means all the pundits were just bandwagoning. They weren't actually analyzing anything.

And any analysis of the matchups showed the C's D having a chance to stop the Lakers O because the C's D is great, and the C's offense having significant mismatches with KG and Pierce every time down the floor.

Plus nobody can guard Rondo. Kid can't shoot, still nobody can guard him.

Plus home court advantage.

But instead of thinking, they let the Kobe/Laker hype get to them.

The Celtics have been the best team ALL YEAR.

Act like ya know!

Posted by Barackalounger | June 9, 2008 7:02 PM

Actually, Debbie, I must confess: I'm Eddie House's son, I'm seven years old, and I am indeed a Celtics ball boy.

Posted by tinisoli | June 9, 2008 7:04 PM

All these Celtic fans remind me of the freepers after the 2000 stolen election. They don't want to see the obvious fix because it benefits their team. Fact, Lakers had equal shots in the paint as Celtics (assuming all Celtic foul shots were awarded off of drives to the basket). Lakers were equally as aggressive, but rewarded less shots because of fixed officiating. go enjoy your WWE crown Celtic fan. Pau. 11 shots in the paint, one foul awarded, how does that work?

How can anybody have any confidence in a ref team after one ref plead to fixing games and a guy who is reffing that game 2 (Mauer) was convicted of tax fraud?

And Bush V. Gore was fairly decided by a team of competent lawyers too.

go live in your dreamworld freepi.

Posted by Anon | June 9, 2008 7:24 PM

Guys-- for the LA Lakers to complain about unfair officiating is like Kim Jong Il complaining about unfair election. The series against the Jazz was the most biased officiating I've ever seen. The Lakers have no right to complain about bad officiating.

Posted by Freddie | June 9, 2008 7:30 PM

Consistently worst officiating ever.

Anon: Boston fans are obnoxious no matter where they are, here or in Boston. But unlike New York fans, they don't realize it. The only reason I give a shit who wins this series.

"Plus nobody can guard Rondo. Kid can't shoot, still nobody can guard him."

Oh my god. Not only are you all homers, you're all idiot homers.

Posted by JD | June 9, 2008 7:31 PM

Basketball? Is that the game where the tall people bounce the round, hollow ball and you only need to watch the last quarter?

Posted by anon | June 9, 2008 7:40 PM

Freddie, I have no confidence in any of the officiating. the entire Celtics Lakers scenario is far too cute for a league that has not been aboveboard on its officiating. I want an honest league that does not employ convicted criminals as referees.

Posted by Anon | June 9, 2008 7:44 PM

Shots In Paint - Foul Shots

Lakers:

First quarter: 11-0
Second quarter 10-1
Third quarter: 7-2
Fourth quarter: 7-6

Boston:

First quarter: 3-5
Second quarter: 5-14
Third quarter: 6-6
Fourth quarter: 5-12

The stat doesn't include field goal attempts in the paint that turned into two fts due to a foul called, but it is still fairly remarkable considering the claim by some that the lakers were not aggressive taking it to the rim.

Between the phantom calls on Kobe that rendered him useless in the first half or the fact that Powe had more fts in 14 minutes than the entire laker team had in 240 minutes, there is no denying what went down last night. Boston benefited from the way the refs called it and it is very likely the series will take a 180 degree shift in LA.

Lakers sweep the set in Staples and take it in 6.

Oh, and to the Kobe haters, I pity you. Anyone that denies themselves the pleasure of watching that man play basketball is a fool.

Posted by arshi | June 9, 2008 7:46 PM

...the Lakers were equally as aggressive...

Wow, Kobe's whineyness and sulking apparently is contagious. It certainly sucks when one's own team doesn't get to the FT line. Believe me, it's happened to the Celtics plenty of times this season, including in the playoffs (most egregiously against Atlanta IIRC). LA runs too many "get Kobe the ball" ISO plays, and this naturally hurts their ability to get to the line (just look at a couple of their playoff games against San Antonio). When you play good defense (LA mostly doesn't) you end up with transition plays, and this translates into an overall high energy style of play where you move the ball well and attack the hoop. And that in turn gets you lots of free throws.

...LA has, I think, a somewhat better team but...

Matt: I thought you were part of the reality-based community. On what do you base this absurd observation? Their season series? (Celtics 2-0, now 4-0) Their regular season records? Their regular season point differentials? The respective strength of their defenses? Boston has a stronger front court, a distinct advantage at point guard, a much better defense, comparable coaching (remember, it's a coaching staff, not just a matchup of head coaches, and when you include defensive whiz Tom T. Boston is LA's equal), and a more varied offense. Shut down Kobe and the Lakers fold. There's nobody you can say that about with Boston. Oh, and Boston's bench is much better and deeper. By my count there are ten players who are a threat to score in high double figures.

Boston has already gotten by its biggest hurdle to a seventeenth banner, Detroit, and San Antonio -- a team that matches up better against Boston -- is no more. LA hasn't scared me in the least all season. They still don't. This one's over, folks.

One last note: last night was the worst possible outcome for Los Angeles: not only did they fall behind by a critical two-zip margin, but they just managed to put a scare into Boston. The Celtics will not be cocky or complacent in LA. Thanks, Phil! (-:

Posted by Jasper | June 9, 2008 7:49 PM

Guys-- for the LA Lakers to complain about unfair officiating is like Kim Jong Il complaining about unfair election.

Classic.

Posted by Jasper | June 9, 2008 8:00 PM

arshi, your stats don't match the espn stats for the in-the-paint: in comparison, you overstate the lakers attempts and understate the celts.

but shots in the paint isn't the only point here: the celts were playing in the lane - look at those assists that rondo and pierce had by penetrating and dishing - and the lakers weren't. look at the overall shot distribution chart and that leaps off the screen....

Posted by howard | June 9, 2008 8:17 PM

This is what happens when Kobe gets caught up in his little personal battle with Ray Allen. Kobe gets torched on a three by Ray, then responds by trying to get over physical and getting two quick fouls.

The first was straight legit, so was the third when Kobe bowled over Pierce.

The second was weak sauce IMO but it was still a "rule book" foul as Kobe elbowed Ray in the chest. You get called for that foul when you do it repeatedly, and the refs finally call one of them. This is what happens when Kobe plays Ray - Ray is in Kobe's head and gets him out of his game. Gets Kobe thinking, I'm gonna embarrass Ray Allen, and not, we're gonna win this game.

So the Celtics have been playing Kobe very, very well. And if the Lakers keep acting coy and pretending that it's not happening, ain't no chance they are gonna make the adjustments they need and start playing better.

The Celtics defense is one of the All-Time Great Defenses. Top 10, if not Top 5.

The Lakers better start playing like they understand that - playing tougher and smarter - otherwise they are gonna be quickly embarrassed.

Posted by The Foulness | June 9, 2008 8:31 PM

The foul calls ALL went the Celtics way in the first half, no doubt. It was so bad I laughed at one call late in the half. But the second half had some brutal make-up calls and non-calls going the other way. Paul Pierce got mugged once late (when Fisher saved the ball at the sideline), the over-the-back non-call on Odom was ridiculous. He looked like he was sacking a quarterback on a blitz. And there were plenty of other ridiculous calls.

Overall, the balance was in favor of the Celtics, but it wasn't as bad as most are saying. And, really, tough shit. That's what happens when you're at home in the NBA. If the Lakers wanted the calls in Game 2, they should've won 67 games and finished ahead of the Celtics. I'm sure they'll get plenty of calls tomorrow night.

Besides, the Lakers weren't getting calls because they can't play defense and the Celtics can. The Celtics were almost always in front of their man or on his shoulder, while the Lakers were constantly reaching in or trying to block from behind. It's not so much that the Celtics were more aggressive on offense (although I think that's somewhat true) as that they are just a better defensive team. The Lakers were pretty bad.

Any team that allows Leon Powe to drive 60 feet for an uncontested dunk deserves anything that comes to them, as far as I'm concerned.

I thought the Celtics were better than people were giving them credit for, but the difference in the teams in Games 1-2 has been a little more stark than I thought. The Lakers just have no idea what to do with Paul Pierce, besides complain about his injury/return thing. And they really are soft, soft, soft. They aren't winning the physical matchup anywhere. I keep expecting to see the Lakers hand over lunch money.

Posted by Brian | June 9, 2008 8:33 PM

Gasol: soft Euro
Odom: headcase
Radmonovic: very tall #2
Kobe: great player but never a Finals MVP

The Celtics know the Lakers are soft down low so they keep giving the ball to Perkins/Powe. The only thing worse than the Lakers' D is KG's paint phobia.

Posted by overrated all around | June 9, 2008 8:37 PM

The combination of a somewhat passive team relying too much on jumpers in a loud building on the road usually leads to the away team not getting to the line a lot. Now, if Kobe doesn't get the star treatment at home, I'll be shocked - but all of the Lakers need to attack the basket if they want to reverse the foul trends all the way. Either way, LA fans should be able admit that the Celts played more aggressively for 3.5 quarters last night and it's not that shocking they got the calls. That's how the league works, for better or worse. I think Kobe got hosed on some ticky tack fouls, but that happens. His teammates didn't pick up the slack.

I've watched just about every Celtics game this season and the pattern has been consistent: when Ray Allen hits his shots, Rondo plays smart, and the team plays focused defense, they are very hard to beat at home. Thusfar, I haven't liked the way the Lakers have deployed Kobe on defense. I know they want to save his energy for offense, but they should use him to try and take either Pierce or Allen out of the game, to the extent that's possible. If you can reduce the three-headed monster to two, Boston's offense becomes a lot less fearsome.

Still, the formula for the Lakers is pretty simple: their bigs must play better in all respects. On defense, they have to clog the middle and rebound. On offense, they need to cut to the basket and use their skill advantage to get easy shots when the Celtics help on rotations. They are getting pushed around inside and they are rotating and helping much, much slower and less effectively than Cleveland or Detroit did in Boston's previous series'. The other thing that would reap big dividends would be if the Lakers' bigs could hit some jumpers. The Celts got killed by Big Z and McDyess - two guys who can nail 18-footers - in the last two match-ups. I don't know if that is part of Gasol's arsenal, but Odom should certainly be able to pick and pop. With Garnett, the Celtics D can clog the middle against Kobe and slow down Gasol and Odom in the post at the same time because these two activities take place in the same place: in the paint. If Gasol or Odom step out and start hitting 15 to 20-footers, the Celts won't have any easy answers. The question is whether the LA big men can do it.

Posted by owenz | June 9, 2008 8:39 PM

JD,
Rondo had 16 assists last night. If Fisher continues to guard him that well, it won't be necessary to be a homer to recognize how over-matched he is. And Garnett hasn't even had a good game yet. The Lakers don't play defense. They do, however, whine a lot. Best of luck with that. Run and gun only gets you so far.

Posted by jeer9 | June 9, 2008 8:48 PM

I love all the people who've turned to statistical analysis to justify their complaints about the officiating. The fact is that NBA refs suck. They're unbelievably inconsistent and are just guessing half the time, but while the Celts got some calls in the first half, the Lakers got the traditional make-up calls in the second. LA just wasn't aggressive enough to really exploit that bias.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | June 9, 2008 9:01 PM

1. Nothing compares to the non-call on the 4-step layup by Radmanovich late in the 4th.

2. I'm still trying to figure out what the national media was thinking. I'm convinced Detroit would have been 2-0 if they had beaten the Celtics.

3. Soft Euro jumpshooters do not go to the line much. One way to avoid fouls is to back away when Powe drives end to end.

Posted by maddarter | June 9, 2008 9:46 PM

Anon -- Why the hell would the NBA fix a game in the finals so that the less celebrated team would race to a 24 point lead late in the game against nonexistent defense, prompting a sizeable chunk of viewers to change the channel?

Or are you arguing that the game was fixed because of the way the Celtics stopped playing midway through the fourth quarter (highlighted by the failed alley oops, the behind the backs, and James Posey laughing during a timeout when the Lakers began their run.

Oh I know, its the free throw disparity. This has been discussed ad nauseum. Maybe if the Lakers tried attacking the basket, they'd get to the line.

Posted by Joel | June 9, 2008 10:29 PM

For what its worth, I didn't see too many Lakers fans crying foul when Brent Barry got bowled over by Derek Fisher. Certainly not when Vladimir Radmanovic approached a breakaway dunk like a high jumper (five steps and a kip!

Posted by Joel | June 9, 2008 10:33 PM

The thing to look for in game three is a ridiculous game-long series of make-up calls for the Lakers a la game 5(?) of the sacramento series a few years ago. I wonder if there is some way to bet on fouls in vegas?

Posted by cw | June 9, 2008 10:38 PM

So I'm to understand that the Lakers would have won had they not been outplayed for 75% of the game? Truly fascinating.

Posted by Angry Sam | June 9, 2008 10:39 PM

I forgot, the 46-13 free throw advantage in game 2. You know, against the Jazz. Guess who was on the positive side of that one?

Posted by Joel | June 9, 2008 10:39 PM

For the record: with 5:56 left in the 4th Quarter, the Lakers had committed 23 fouls, the Celtics 21. Check your DVR.

Beyond the softness of the Laker bigs on defense, the real problem is that Kobe Bryant has shot 41% with 7 total rebounds (and mediocre defense) in two games. To put Kobe's suckitude in perspective, Odom and Gasol are both shooting over 50% and averaging at least 7 rpg for the series.

In other words, if Kobe didn't suck so hard so far, the Lakers probably would have won a game.

But at least he's a nice guy who you can root for, right? Errr, right??

Posted by owenz | June 9, 2008 10:41 PM

Oh, and to the Kobe haters, I pity you. Anyone that denies themselves the pleasure of watching that man play basketball is a fool.

Arshi, I've gotta say, I've enjoyed the hell out of watching him against the Celtics this year. But then, I'm a Celtics fan...

It's been strange, because I see the highlight reels of Kobe torching other teams and I wonder why he can't do much against the Cs. I have to think that Ray Allen, for some reason, is in his head. That, and maybe he made a mistake playing one-on-one with Pierce in the offseason.

Hopefully, it continues. Personally, I'm loving the new Paul Pierce. After watching him take so many out-of-control drives in years past, seeing his in-control game this year is a delight. He's all growed up.

Posted by TedL | June 9, 2008 10:51 PM

...(assuming all Celtic foul shots were awarded off of drives to the basket)...

Gee, Einstein, do you think that maybe there are circumstances when a team gets to shoot foul shoots even though someone hasn't driven to the basket?

How about when the opponent is in the penalty?

How about when someone takes a shot from outside the paint? Do you think maybe players get to shot free throws when they are fouled outside the paint while shooting?

Technical fouls? Ever heard of those.

Posted by tinisoli | June 9, 2008 11:07 PM

"In other words, if Kobe didn't suck so hard so far, the Lakers probably would have won a game.

But at least he's a nice guy who you can root for, right? Errr, right??"

He and A-Rod should hang.

Posted by Angry Sam | June 10, 2008 12:18 AM

howard, u were right. i got those stats off the internet. shouldve known better. checked em for myself, and the correct stat for shots "at the basket" (within 5 feet) per quarter is

Lakers: 6, 8, 3, 5
Boston: 3, 5, 4, 5

boston played great O and capitalized on passive laker defense, but there is no plausible explanation for leon powe shootin 13 fts in 15 mins and the laker team shootin 10 fts in 240 mins that doesn't include the lakers getting completely shafted.

TedL, I think Boston's D has a lot to do with it. They seem to be in his head. He knows the entire defense is focused on him but he hasn't really figured out how to attack it yet, like all the angles are shut off and he just can't locate where the D is vulnerable (if it is at all)...he Lakers need to let the offense create shots for Kobe rather than have Kobe creating shots for the offense.
and i'm really enjoying KG's game now that he's surrounded by talent. He doesn't have to carry the offense and his defense has been out of this world because of it.

It should be a fun series the rest of the way =)

Posted by arshi | June 10, 2008 12:20 AM

howard, u were right. i got those stats off the internet. shouldve known better. checked em for myself, and the correct stat for shots "at the basket" (within 5 feet) per quarter is

Lakers: 6, 8, 3, 5
Boston: 3, 5, 4, 5

boston played great O and capitalized on passive laker defense, but there is no plausible explanation for leon powe shootin 13 fts in 15 mins and the laker team shootin 10 fts in 240 mins that doesn't include the lakers getting completely shafted.

TedL, I think Boston's D has a lot to do with it. They seem to be in his head. He knows the entire defense is focused on him but he hasn't really figured out how to attack it yet, like all the angles are shut off and he just can't locate where the D is vulnerable (if it is at all)...he Lakers need to let the offense create shots for Kobe rather than have Kobe creating shots for the offense.
and i'm really enjoying KG's game now that he's surrounded by talent. He doesn't have to carry the offense and his defense has been out of this world because of it.

It should be a fun series the rest of the way =)

Posted by arshi | June 10, 2008 12:26 AM

How can you say there is no plausible explanation for Leon Powe shooting more free throws than the entire Laker team?!?!!?

Dude had more layups and dunks than the Lakers too!

Dude was taking it to the rack!

He had more toughness in his little finger than the entire Laker team!

Dude dribbled 60 feet down court and dunked it WITH NO ONE TRYING TO STOP HIM!

How, you ask?

Because Powe came to play, and the Lakers didn't.

All you bandwagoners making excuses for your heroes are fucking pathetic.

The Lakers lost because the Celtics outclassed, outhustled and outplayed them in two straight games.

Give us a break with the victim shit. Makes you sound like Hillary Clinton.

And no, that's not a compliment. It means SORE LOSERS!!!!!

Posted by The Feeliness | June 10, 2008 2:17 AM

In this whole ref talk, there is one stat that is telling.

The Lakers committed 28 personal fouls, the Celtics committed 21.

This is NOT a big discrepancy.

And good evidence that the reason for the free throw discrepancy was because the Lakers are SOFT and DO NOT GO TO THE BASKET. The Celtics were in the lane all night. Plus, the Celtics play good D and don't foul shooters. The Lakers don't.

It's ain't the refs. It's the softness of the Lakers' underbelly.

Posted by Barney Franklin | June 10, 2008 2:35 AM

No matter who wins, I'll still always call Kobe Bryant, "Rapey." It's just how things are.

Posted by Jamey | June 10, 2008 8:14 AM

Now you are calling me a DFH for noticing that the Lakers were on the wrong end of one of the couple of worse FT disparities in NBA finals history, where a scrub got more FT attempts than the the entire other team including the league MVP and aknowledged best offensive player in the league.

It might be instructive to know that Leon Powe is 4th in the entire league in drawing fouls per minute played.

Oh, and Gasol has redefined the term 'soft'. Powe's length of the court slam was just sad.

Posted by rochrist | June 10, 2008 12:30 PM

Now you are calling me a DFH for noticing that the Lakers were on the wrong end of one of the couple of worse FT disparities in NBA finals history, where a scrub got more FT attempts than the the entire other team including the league MVP and aknowledged best offensive player in the league.

It might be instructive to know that Leon Powe is 4th in the entire league in drawing fouls per minute played.

Oh, and Gasol has redefined the term 'soft'. Powe's length of the court slam was just sad.

Posted by rochrist | June 10, 2008 12:32 PM

it helps to actually watch the game:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IUtf6-avo2c

fixed game, period.

Posted by Anon | June 10, 2008 12:50 PM

I expected the Lakers to win, and to do so by about the margin their bench outscored the Celtics bench. So much for my expertise.

I thought it was interesting that two of ESPN's yappers, the only two to pick the Celtics, Legler and Walton, both said prior to the series that the Celtics would physically overpower the Lakers. I wonder what the rebound totals were at the eight minute mark of the fourth quarter in Game 2. Walton was particularly dismissive of the notion that the Lakers bench was superior to that of the Celtics. Legler made the interesting point that a team that has some maulers, like Cleveland, actually matches up better with the Celtics in some respects, so one shouldn't take too much away from the Celtics needing seven games to beat the Cavaliers.

I'll be extremely surprised if the Lakers don't win tonight, but don't think they will sweep at home, so I'd be surprised at this point if the Celtics don't prevail. Not that I know anything, of course.

Posted by Will Allen | June 10, 2008 1:33 PM

"it helps to actually watch the game:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IUtf6-avo2c

fixed game, period."

Well, I'm very glad that you cleared that one up King Solomon. Only people who think the game was fixed watched the game. And what a brilliant way to make sure no one notices, get a Celtic bench player to have the game of his life. You got to hand it to David Stern though, to give up all of those millions in TV rating-related revenue by fixing a Game 2, thereby increasing the likelihood that the game won't go 7.

But did the league also somehow conspire to drug the Lakers to turn them into a bunch of timid, brick-laying jump-shooters? And does playing defense in the NBA Finals cause cancer and only Zen Master Jackson knew it? And if so, why did he wait until the 4th quarter to tell the Celtics?

Posted by Raindog | June 10, 2008 1:38 PM

The only way the game was fixed was if the Lakers decided to play soft and throw the game.

The ref talk is just a distraction from how pathetic the Lakers have played.

Toughen up Lakers (and Lakers fans!) and folks might start taking you seriously again.

The more you cry foul, the more pathetic you sound.

Cry baby talk is not gonna work.

Posted by The Fix is In | June 10, 2008 1:59 PM

How are the Lakers supposed to play good defense when the refs aren't letting them? Meanwhile, Boston is allowed to rake with impunity. The whole thing is fishy to me. The league knows that if the Celtics don't win it this year, it only gets harder for them next. Meanwhile, the Lakers will be better next year. In order to best stoke the rivalry, the Celtics must win it this time.

Posted by Bum | June 10, 2008 2:36 PM

While at 0-2, I would no longer bet the Lakers at even money, I continue to think they've got an excellent shot to win the series.

-----

Why is PJ having Kobe guard Ray-Ray?

I was sure that he'd hide Bryant on Rondo, to allow him to disrupt, and preventing him from having to chase Allen around screens. I don't get that one at all.

-----

And of course, the first two games have been with the Celtics graded on a curve.

The entirety of game 2 was officiated in an unbalanced fashion. In game 1, it started at the end of the third quarter after Paul Pierce made his return and nailed a three pointer. The crowd went wild. During the next play, the Lakers executed a screen and roll to perfection with Gasol ending up rolling with the ball to the hoop, Garnett massively bodying him on the shot, and no call. That was the moment when the refs made clear that they were going to call the Boston games to the whim of the crowd.

In conspiracy terms, I'd guess Stern has a bias towards wanting to minimize as much as possible having a semi-rapist as the face of his association.

Posted by Petey | June 10, 2008 2:53 PM

I'd also like to point out that the Lakers actually took 10 more shots from within 5 feet of the basket than the Celtics. Check the stats. So the myth that the Celtics were more aggressive on offense and that's why they got the calls is just that, a myth.

Posted by bum | June 10, 2008 3:13 PM

Many of those Lakers "10 more shots" were from hooks and turnarounds. Numbers are informative, but you need to actually watch the game to get an idea of how it was played.

Anyone who watched the game recognized quickly that the Lakers weren't penetrating effectively (and really, that means Bryant, as he's the only penetrator on the roster).

Posted by Joel | June 10, 2008 4:09 PM

Remember a few years ago MLB umpires tried some sort of misguided labor stoppage, it backfired and the vast majority got fired. Then the officiating drastically improved. They stopped calling the outside, but consistently outside pitch a strike. And Tom Glavine had to change his pitching strategy.

I think something similar has got to happen in the NBA. Ever since the early 90's, the officiating had gone from bad to worse. Sunday night was an abomination. Even the obvious make-up calls in the second half; what good is a make-up call when every starter is already in foul trouble and the team is down by 20? They need to just fire these old guys and get some new blood in there. The older guys are just bitter and they wear their biases on their sleeve. Crawford (both of them), Delaney, Javie, and especially Bavetta; just get rid of them, get rid of them all.

Posted by bum | June 10, 2008 7:24 PM