THE BLURST OF TIMES

FINALS OVERVIEW

OK, OK, let's not overreact here. Yes, the Lakers got stomped as bad as any good team has ever been stomped in a deciding game in NBA history, they were soft, got physically overpowered, were terrible defensively and couldn't find a way to reliably attack the Celtics' defensive scheme. In short, they got wrecked.

But let's not overreact. Basketball's a game of matchups, and some matchups are really unfavorable to you and make you look a lot worse than you are. Going back to my favorite example of this, do you really think Golden State last year was better than Dallas? Sure, head to head, but what if they both played a round robin tournament against every other playoff team? The Mavs would have crushed the Warriors.

Look at Boston this year against Atlanta, who took the Celtics to 7 games. Do you think Atlanta is better than the Lakers? No, they just matched up better. Do you think the Spurs this year, whom the Lakers beat somewhat easily, were substantially worse than the Celtics? I don't. Hell, I think that would have been a great NBA Finals, and I'm not sure who I think would win. Tim Duncan ain't Pau Gasol, y'know?

And the people dogging the Lakers for "not wanting it" enough, give me a break. Yes, Gasol and Odom and others played real soft, but I think physical toughness often gets mistaken by fans as mental toughness. The Lakers are almost entirely a finesse team--Gasol, Odom, Vujacic, Farmar, Radmanovic, Walton, even Kobe. Kobe's tough as nails mentally, but he's mostly a finesse player--if he takes 25 shots, at least 15 of them are going to be jumpers. He's not Dwyane Wade, he's not going to go to the basket time and time again.

So you have a mostly finesse team playing against the most physical team in the league, a team with a really good defensive center (Perkins), an all-time physical/aggressive/tough guy at PF (Garnett), a big and strong SF (Pierce), and a super athlete at PG (Rondo). Heck, these guys even rubbed off on Ray Allen, who played tough and physical defense the whole way through. I don't think they "wanted it more" than LA (with the possible exception of the 2nd half of game 6, when the Lakers looked pretty defeated), I think they're just a lot physically stronger and tougher than LA, and to regular fans, that superior toughness looks an awful lot like superior effort. I think even Gasol played as hard as he could, he just doesn't deal well with really physical defense. Obviously that's an issue going forward, but I don't think it speaks to the degree to which "he wanted it".

KOBE

So does this answer once and for all whether Kobe is as good as MJ? No, that was done over the course of Kobe's career, which left absolutely no one arguing that position. Maybe Kobe's wife. Yes, Kobe completely sucked in the series, but again, don't overreact here. He just got done torching Bruce Bowen and a fantastic Spurs defense, I don't think he forgot how to ball in the one week between series. And I don't think he stopped sufficiently "wanting it".

Allen and especially Pierce played great individual defense on him, but they also had a lot of help from Perkins & KG when Kobe tried to penetrate. I think during Game 4, when they really started to collapse on him whenever he drove, he decided he needed to score on jumpshots and pass on penetration, which was probably the right thing to do. You can't score inside when you have Pierce on your left, KG on your right, and Perkins hovering right behind them for the help shotblock. The problem with passing off penetration was twofold:

(a) The Lakers' shooters (Fisher, Vujacic, Radmanovic, Farmar) were largely cold and surprisingly hesitant to put shots up--how many times did Radmanovic & Fisher pump fake/pass up an open shot? And how many bricks did Vujacic toss up? Your job as a Laker shooter is to make the other team pay for devoting so much of its defensive attention to Kobe, Gasol and Odom, and they did it well all year--but not in this series.

(b) The Celtics really are a phenomenal defensive team. The Laker shooters had a bad series, but that was partially due to how unbelievably fast Boston rotated out to shooters once Kobe or Gasol passed back out. A Vujacic or Radmanovic would appear to be wide open (as they usually are on a team with 3 dangerous offensive weapons), but then someone like Posey or Pierce or Rondo would materialize out of nowhere and force a contested shot--or no shot at all. Boston's great defense starts up front with Perkins and KG, but their perimeter defenders had a fantastic series as well.

BOSTON

I'm glad to see Paul Pierce get the recognition he deserves, he's always been a great player and he's always played his ass off even in bad situations. He was brilliant in the series. I'm also happy for Garnett, the guy in the league who most deserves to win a championship. He wasn't dominant offensively, but it was his versatile and imposing defense that really made their "take Kobe away from the basket" scheme work.

After a somewhat quiet series, Rondo really showed what he can do in that game 6, which he finished with 21-7-8 with 6 friggin' steals. He was all over the court on both ends, disrupting the Lakers' offense, breaking down the Lakers' defense with his penetration (and forcing them to play honest by making a few jumpers), and even killing the Lakers on the boards with his unbelievable athleticism and excellent hands. He's a keeper, man, he's going to be a really good player in this league.

Boston's shooters were excellent, constantly killing the Laker defenders for doubling Garnett in the post. Ray Allen was ridiculous--he shot 22-42 from three, and played really solid defense on Kobe. James Posey furthered his reputation as a Lakers killer, shooting 12-24 from 3, playing his usual tough defense and also hurting LA on the glass.

So why were there so many open threes for these guys when they were shooting the ball so well? Do you think Phil Jackson and the rest of the Lakers don't realize Ray Allen can shoot the ball a little? Of course not--it's that LA struggled so much with Garnett around the rim and Pierce going to the basket--and keeping Boston off the offensive glass--that their perimeter defenders had to start sagging down to help out. Maybe you'll get killed with the three (they did), but taking your chances with that is better than the certainly of being killed with layups, dunks and 5-foot runners.

The problem is that the Lakers just aren't a very good defensive team, so (a) perimeter defenders couldn't rotate out to open shooters fast enough, unlike Boston who did pretty much the same thing (giving help inside), and (b) even with the help by the perimeter defenders, Boston was still able to score inside quite a bit and get a bunch of offensive rebounds. I don't think there's anything Phil Jackson could have done about that, you scheme in a way that's supposed to help Gasol and Odom inside--but it's still not enough; AND you give up a ton of threes by red-hot shooters in the process. Sometimes you just gotta say there's no way any coaching maneuver could have changed that outcome. And in the NBA, I'd say that's the case about 97% of the time.

LOOKING AHEAD

OK, so where do we go from here? I think Boston's going to remain a monster for the next couple of years at least. Yes, they're an older team, but did anyone on that floor look it? Fuck, even PJ goddamned Brown was super energetic out there. That doesn't mean they're unbeatable, it just depends on the matchup. They struggled against Atlanta, and they got pushed by Detroit with their most important player dinged up (and a rookie who may or may not explode in the next year or two). I'd definitely make Boston the Eastern Conference favorite for 08-09, but I'd have the Pistons lurking somewhat close behind. (BTW, I predict no moves in the offseason and Rasheed still on the team, but I won't be shocked if I'm wrong).

As for the Lakers, well, you can probably guess what I'm going to say...and you're right: Andrew motherfucking Bynum. I think Bynum would have changed this series a lot, especially with regard to the Laker defense. I'm not saying LA would have necessarily won with Bynum, just that the series would have looked a lot different. As I said above, they had to have their perimeter defenders sagging down to help out Gasol and Odom, but I don't think they would have needed to do that with Bynum, who was becoming a serious defensive force when he got injured. LA still probably wouldn't have shut Boston down, but I think it would have allowed them to play a more straight-up defense--even a more aggressive defense, since you can live with funneling penetrators into Bynum; doing the same with Gasol just means an easy layup.

Same goes for rebounding. LA had to keep defenders hovering around the basket to keep Boston from getting a million offensive boards--which they did anyway. With Bynum out there, I think that becomes a non-issue. LA wouldn't have dominated the glass, but they could have played it more straightforward (with perimeter defenders sticking tight to their men), and that's a big difference.

I also like what Bynum will do for Gasol and Odom. Both players were physically overmatched by their Celtic counterparts, and both players played intimidated. I swear, I don't think Gasol had 5 post plays where he took the ball hard to the basket, he almost exclusively relied on that fading-away mini-hook that he makes about 12% of the time. Same with Odom, he just didn't have anything against the bigger, more athletic Garnett, which is what I expected/feared. But what happens when that defender is Paul Pierce of James Posey? All of a sudden it's Odom who has the physical advantage. The point is, it won't matter as much that Gasol and Odom are finesse players if they get to play against mostly smaller defenders.

So I said all along that I could live with a loss in the Finals because of the prospect of adding Bynum to this group next year, and I was sorta right. The loss was still extremely painful, but I am super optimistic about the next 5 years with this franchise. I don't think they'd be a slam dunk over New Orleans or Boston or Detroit in the playoffs, but I do think they'll win in the high 60s in the regular season (assuming--please god--no significant injuries) and I definitely would make them the championship favorite at this point.

What a difference a year makes. Then, as now, the offseason was all about Andrew Bynum and what he'd bring to the table the following fall--but the stakes are just a little different these days. When a year ago it was about needing Bynum to break out in order to become a solid playoff team and save the rapidly-disintegrating Kobe Bryant era in LA, now it's about that incremental improvement necessary to be an NBA champion.

I think most of the Lakers are what they are, they're never going to be any different. Gasol and Odom are going to continue to be soft ('soft-ish' in Lamar's case) finesse players, they're not going to suddenly start "wanting it more" and turn into KG-like beasts. And Kobe is going to continue to be a jumpshooter, Radmanovic & Walton are going to continue to be godawful defenders, etc. But adding Bynum, that's the great leap forward this team needs. Maybe Farmar, Vujacic and Ariza can improve, they're all young and promising players, but I feel like the answers to this team's biggest question marks--rebounding and interior defense--lie with the big fella.

It was a hell of a season, you really can't ask for much more than this as a sport's fan. Between Bynum's explosive development, the additions of Gasol and Ariza, the emergence of Farmar and Vujacic, it feels like almost everything went right all at once ("almost" = Bynum's injury). Kudos to Mitch Kupchak for not panicking in the face of criticism and staying the course, the man became Midas overnight.

So farewell to another NBA season. The playoffs may have been disappointing, especially the Finals, a crappy ending to a spectacular regular season, but I'm still pretty excited about where we are heading into 08-09, with Boston, Detroit and LA as the league elites, New Orleans right there on their heels, San Antonio, Phoenix and Dallas struggling to hold on, and Portland due to arrive next year--and another couple of what appear to be no bullshit superstars about to join the league in Derrick Rose and Michael Beasley. The Finals may have sucked, but the on-court future for the league is still as bright as it's ever been.

GAME ONE

Fuck.

The Lakers had a golden opportunity to take game one on the road and steal homecourt advantage--a few timely shots at the end when both teams were ice cold might have done it--but I'm still pretty concerned at what happened last night.

I know, I know, the Lakers had that opportunity to win even with Kobe having a godawful shooting night, but then Garnett, too, missed a bunch of shots he usually makes, so I'm not sure what to make of the "what if the superstar didn't suck balls?" analysis.

What I find worrisome are a few trends that, if they continue, will probably mean the Lakers' demise:

1. Paul Pierce. Yikes. The Lakers handled him pretty well in the first half, but only by double teaming him relentlessly. When they tried to go with one defender on him--even when it was Kobe--Pierce went off. He's a dangerous player, man, he can put the ball in the hole in a bunch of different ways. The Lakers have two hopes here, one is that if they go back to the double, the rest of the Celtics don't/can't make them pay for it; the second is that Pierce was red friggin' hot in that 3rd quarter, hopefully he'll come back down to earth a little Sunday--but even if he does, I'm still pretty concerned about him.

1a. Trevor Ariza. 0 minutes, despite the fact that he's far and away the best defensive matchup on Pierce, who was kicking the crap out of LA. Damn. Guess it's time to write him off for the series.

2. Pau Gasol. He can't have games where he scores 15 on just 11 shots, he has to be way more aggressive out there. If you're going to get your ass handed to you on the boards (more on that later), and you're going to play so-so defense, then you need to put up some goddamn points. I swear to god, I need to watch some Memphis game film because I can't fathom how he scored 20 a game without being set up for a million layups and dunks like he usually is with the Lakers. His post game has been nonexistent through the entire playoffs. When you're the #2 guy on a championship caliber team, you have to be prepared to be the go-to guy on those occasions where the #1 guy is stinking up the joint. See Pierce, Paul.

3. Rebounding. I was really worried about this going in, and all my worst fears have been confirmed. Even with Kendrick Perkins playing only 23 minutes and grabbing only 4 boards, the Celtics outrebounded the Lakers 46-33. Eek. PJ goddamn Brown had 6 in 21 minutes; Garnett was Garnett; Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo combined for 13. Meanwhile Gasol and Odom combined for 14, that's just not going to do it. It became such a big problem that Phil Jackson went to the little-used Gasol/Turiaf combo at the big spots (one bright spot in the game was that Turiaf played pretty well).

I think the Lakers were OK on the defensive glass, they gave up some key offensive rebounds, but they didn't just get hammered there--the problem was more on the other end. It's one thing not to get many offensive rebounds, it's another to not even be able to contend for them. I swear it seemed like literally every trip down in the 2nd half was a one-and-done. Boston's a really good rebounding team, the Lakers (sans Andrew Bynum) just aren't, this will continue to be a trouble spot for them.

4. Rajon Rondo. I said yesterday that if he plays well, the Lakers are in big trouble. Well, he played a pretty nice game, 14 pts, 5 boards, 7 assists, 2 turnovers. The Lakers have enough problems guarding the Big 3, they don't need this little gnat making it even harder. Hopefully we'll see the "Pistons series Rondo" Sunday and/or when the series goes to LA.

So those are the big 4 problem areas as I see them. I didn't mind the shots Kobe took (after the 1st quarter, anyway), those were largely makeable for him and he had a bunch of rim-outs. I'd like to see him go to the basket more when his shot isn't falling, but I'm not worried about him going forward.

I liked what Fisher & Vujacic gave them, they have to continue to be aggressive. Radmanovic played great, except he picked up a foul for every 3 minutes he was in the game--as predicted when I heard they were putting him on Pierce. I wonder if Phil will flop Kobe & Radmanovic, give Vladdy a break by putting him on Allen instead. If he's going to remain on Pierce, he needs help on literally every possession, which of course opens things up for KG, Allen & Rondo. It's all part of the chess match.

So where am I after game one? I guess I'm pretty worried, to be honest--the Celtics are as good defensively as San Antonio, and they have the firepower to avoid those long droughts San Antonio had in every Lakers win. But Vegas--astonishingly, IMO--still has LA as a very slight favorite, so maybe things aren't all that bad after all. I think I might put a bet down on Boston. Even if the Lakers win game two, I don't think they can take three straight in LA. That moves the series back to Boston, so the Lakers in that scenario would have to take two road games. Obviously it's in the realm of possibility, they damn near took the game last night, but I think I'd make Boston the slight favorite given the one game advantage and homecourt.

THIS IS IT

Lakers-Celtics, here again after all these years. I feel like pulling out a skinny tie and watching super realistic family sitcoms like Growing Pains, specifically the episode where Mike turns down a coke orgy with two hot chicks because he's not that kind of boy.

These teams last met in the NBA Finals in 1987, a year when the stock market tanked and there was trouble in the middle east--but far more innocently than now. At least global warming hadn't been invented yet, and pollutants were belched into the atmosphere with cheerful impunity. It was an age of maturation and upheaval, and Hollywood responded with edgy, challenging fare like "Secret Of My Success", which proved once and for all what we suspected all along: a 22-year-old with no business experience is more than capable of running a giant multinational corporation, as long as he's pure of heart.

Oh, and on other major event took place in 1987: the birth of one Andrew Bynum in Plainsboro, New Jersey. No one would have suspected then that this little baby--or anyone in Plainsboro, New Jersey, really--would one day grow up to be important, but this little ball of freaky genetics turned out to be The Man Who Saved The Laker Franchise. It was his play in the early going of this season that turned the franchise around, that made them a legitimate championship contender, that pacified a Kobe who was on the verge of blowing up the organization. With his injury he's become the forgotten man, but not around these parts. Thank you, 1987, for your many wondrous gifts.

So on to...

THE FINALS

I said 3 months ago the Lakers wouldn't win the championship, and yet I've predicted they'd win each individual series--and I'm not changing it up now. I'm unhappy about not having home court, but I still think the Lakers' superior athleticism and depth pulls them through in the end. I wouldn't bet my life savings on it or anything, but I do think the Lakers are the very slightly better team.

THE MATCHUPS

The Big Fellas

Phil Jackson says LA is going to start out with Pau Gasol on Kevin Garnett and Lamar Odom on Kendrick Perkins, I don't know if that's going to work. I can see what he's thinking, Gasol's size might give Garnett problems on the inside and force him to be a jumpshooter (and he's often more than happy to be taken away from the basket, one of his few flaws). Gasol is truly a terrible team defender, but he's not half-bad staying on his man one-on-one...but that's in the post, where his man usually operates. I don't think Gasol can stay with Garnett when he gets the ball at the high post and then takes it to the basket--in fact, I think that's a great way to get Gasol into foul trouble, which would be disastrous for the Lakers (more on that later).

So I suspect the Lakers will end up with Odom on Garnett, and I'm plenty comfortable with that. Odom struggles against the big bruising PFs sometimes, but not so much with the quicker finesse guys. I think Odom will take away what Garnett wants to do (jumpers and drives to the bucket), and force him to do what he doesn't want to do (post up and bang around inside). But that doesn't mean KG can't do it; I think the level of success he achieves here will be key in determining the winner of the series.

I like the matchups on the other end (Perkins defending Gasol, KG defending Odom), but I don't love them. I think Garnett can take Odom out of his game, I expect Odom to struggle a little on offense in this series--but I think Gasol can hurt Perkins. Perkins is definitely a really good defender, bordering on great (his performance on Gasol might determine that question for me), but I don't think he can deal with Gasol's length, quickness and skill level. Perkins was great against the big men of Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit, but none of them have a Pau Gasol. I don't think it's a slam dunk that Gasol will score a lot on Perkins, but I think he will. In any event, it's another of those key matchups that'll determine the winner--if the Lakers don't get a lot from Gasol, I don't think they can win.

The Little Fellas

Let's start with the PGs, Fisher/Farmar vs. Rajon Rondo. I like Rondo a lot, I think he has a ton of potential and will ultimately be a great PG in this league--but he's not there yet. He took a huge step backwards in the Pistons series, playing way too tentatively, passing up shots, and letting the Pistons play off him and use 5 defenders on the other 4 Celtics. If that happens again, I feel really good about the Lakers chances. But I'm sure Doc Rivers and his staff have been all over Rondo the last week, and that he'll come out in game one and try to make himself a factor.

But it's not all just about trying, you have to make the plays before the defense begins to respect you. The Lakers will play him like they did Tony Parker, sagging way off and daring him to take the jumper. If he makes a few of them, I'll start to worry. If he misses, I'll start to smile. If he can't make the Lakers play him honest, I think they can do a solid job on the Big 3 and Perkins.

So that leaves Kobe & Radmanovic/Walton/Ariza against Allen & Pierce (with some help from James Posey). I know Pierce had a really nice defensive series against the Pistons, but this is Kobe Bryant--it's different. If he ends up on Kobe, I don't think we'll be hearing every 10 minutes about his "underrated defense" like we did in the previous series, you know what I mean?

But the Celtics usually put Ray Allen on Kobe--the result won't be any different. You can't stop Kobe with one man (look what he did to Bruce friggin' Bowen) you have to defend him with your entire team, which makes opportunities available to Kobe's teammates. So even if Perkins can handle Gasol and KG can handle Odom, that's not the end of it. Kobe is playing some of the best basketball of his career right now, his shot is on, he's not forcing bad shots and tough passes, he's just been on fire. Boston is a great defensive team, but so was San Antonio and they couldn't slow him down either. I fully expect Kobe to dominate the series offensively.

So what about Pierce and Allen? I have to admit, I'm a little nervous about these two. For one thing, Kobe can only take one of 'em. LA is reportedly going to start out with Kobe on Ray Allen, with Radmanovic on Pierce, but I don't think that will last. Pierce is the better offensive player, and Kobe has a habit of laying off his man to freelance and try to create turnovers. That's fine if you're guarding Ronnie Brewer, but not if it's Ray Allen. Allen stunk so unbelievably bad in the early going of the Pistons series, but he really bounced back in those last couple games.

Radmanovic is a lot like Gasol--he's a terrible, terrible team defender, but he's decent at sticking with his man and forcing tough shots. I much prefer Paul Pierce as a shooter than as a post player, and I'm sure that's Phil Jackson's thinking on starting the bigger Radmanovic on him. But Pierce can do a lot of things, he can shoot, he can post, and he can drive, and that's an almost impossible cover for Vladdy. I predict Phil will have to switch Kobe on to Pierce after the first game or two--if I'm wrong and Radmanovic does an adequate job on Pierce, I think Boston's in big trouble.

The Lakers have a wild card on the bench in Trevor Ariza, the athletic defensive ace who is finally playing again after losing four months to injury, but who the hell knows if he's ready to play crunch time minutes in the NBA Finals. It sure would help if he could get out there and handle Pierce/Allen for 10-15-20 minutes, but I think that's asking a lot of a guy who hasn't gone past 6 (garbage time) minutes in the handful of games he's played in since his return. So I guess I think one of Pierce/Allen is going to hurt the Lakers consistently, whichever one Kobe isn't on.

As for the rest of the bench, I think the Lakers have a huge advantage. Boston's guys--James Posey, Eddie House, Leon Powe, Glenn Davis--are underrated, especially Posey who I expect to be a big factor in this series and who could play crunch time minutes defensively against Kobe. I also feel like Posey has never missed an open three against the Lakers in his NBA career--and if there's one thing the Lakers consistently lapse on defensively, it's giving up open threes.

But the Lakers bench has been a huge strength all year, and they were instrumental in taking down San Antonio. I love the idea of playing Sasha Vujacic on Ray Allen down the stretch in that 3-guard lineup Phil likes to go with in the 4th quarter. In addition to being one of the true money shooters in the league, Sasha has also made a quantum leap in his defense and has now made himself a real pest on that end. I don't want him checking Dwyane Wade on the perimeter or anything, but he's excellent at sticking tight on shooters. He'll be huge in this series.

I also like Jordan Farmar here, I think he can come in and shut down Rondo while also pushing him on the offensive end. Farmar struggled against Utah, but his confidence came raging back against San Antonio. Farmar isn't great against bigger, tougher PGs like Deron Williams, but he thrives on both ends against the quick little guys like Tony Parker and Rondo.

I do think Boston's big men--Powe, Davis--might be able to do some damage when Walton and Turiaf are out there, but I don't expect Luke & Ronny to get a ton of PT. Walton will play about 15 minutes per, Turiaf will play only as needed to spell Gasol.

Which leads me to another key to this series: Gasol staying out of foul trouble. If he's on Garnett, I think that could spell trouble and might force Phil to switch Gasol onto Perkins, who has a pretty rudimentary offensive game. I'm not saying Gasol will completely shut him down, especially if Perkins plays like he did in that one Pistons game--but I don't think he'll get Gasol in foul trouble, and that's the key to Lakers offensive success. On the contary, I think it might be Perkins who struggles to stay on the floor while trying to handle Gasol. Powe and Davis are good, solid players, but they're both a huge decline defensively from Perkins, I think Gasol would light up either of them like a christmas tree.

So I guess that's about it. The keys as I see them are:

1. Can KG score in the post?
2. Can Gasol stay out of foul trouble? Can Perkins?
3. Can Rondo force the Lakers to respect him as an offensive threat?
4. Can Radmanovic/Walton handle Pierce? If not, can LA put Kobe on him and still defend Allen?
5. Can Pierce/Allen at least keep Kobe from really going off?
6. If the Celtics help out Pierce/Allen on Kobe, can the other Lakers make them pay?
7. What will Lamar Odom do in this series on both ends of the floor?

Sorry about the verbosity, but my brain is bursting with thoughts about this series. Lakers-Celtics, the dream matchup (c'mon, even if you hate one or both, you have to admit it's pretty cool).

This series is so bright, I gotta wear shades...