Pot Odds

I’m going to wait until after tomorrow’s game against the Pistons to weigh in fully on Marbury, as I haven’t actually seen him play yet (the Pacers/Celtics game was out of market for me, sadly).  Until then, I have a few quick points for y’all about why this move makes sense for the Celtics and how it trumps any moral debate about Marbury’s past or abundant character flaws.

The bottom line about Stephon Marbury is this: he needs the Celtics far more than the Celtics need him.  Without Marbury, the Celtics are contenders for the best record in the East and possibly an NBA title; with him they may be over the top (hopefully we’ll find out sometime over the next 20+ games).  With the Celtics, Marbury has an opportunity to play for an NBA title and to prove to the rest of the world that he isn’t the clubhouse cancer that he’s appeared to be throughout much of his career.  If this stint with the Celtics doesn’t work out, Marbury will likely be out of the league forever.  If the allure of a championship and a shot at redemption (and another fat contract) isn’t enough to motivate Marbury, I can confidently say that there is nothing out there that will. 

The other important aspect of this move to pick up Marbury is the outstanding risk: reward ratio that comes with the move.  The Celtics are paying a guy whose career averages put him with the NBA’s all-time elite players a little over a million dollars for the rest of the season.  Nobody can deny Marbury’s talent and his potential to contribute to the Celtics in a variety of ways, and for the price they’re getting the Celtics would have been foolish not to sign the troubled point guard for their looming playoff run. 

Signing Marbury at this point is like limping a small suited ace or some suited connectors into a gigantic pot in a game of Texas Hold ‘em.  It’s only slightly risky (you could lose to a stronger hand or miss your draw), but you’ve also got a good chance of making the absolute best possible hand and winning the whole thing.  Maybe the hand (or in this case Marbury) is a bit outside the normal, conservative range of playable cards, but for the price and because of the possibility of a very high reward, Danny Ainge and the Celtics can make the play safely.  And because it was so cheap to get into the hand, Ainge can always fold (or cut Marbury) if there’s an ugly flop or turn that spells disaster for his chances in the tournament (in this case the NBA playoffs). 

And what if Ainge hits his draw?  Then the Celtics could have the inside track on a repeat championship because of this kind of calculated gamble.  While it could still be considered a long shot that Marbury will accept a diminished role, play within the system, not cause problems in the locker room and defend with purpose for the first time in his career, there’s still a chance that all this might happen.  And if Marbury does bring his best game to the table then the reward is more than high enough to offset the risks involved.

Early indications are that this move could work well.  Despite not having been on a basketball court in months, Marbury was efficient and effective in his Celtics’ debut, scoring 8 points on 4-6 shooting in only 13 minutes.  That’s actually very impressive considering he’d had only an hour or so of practice with the team before suiting up and playing in an NBA regular season game for the first time since January 11 of 2008.  This game was probably played on adrenaline, and I’m expecting some sort of regression over the next week or so before Steph really gets his legs back.  Though I wasn’t able to see the entire game, the consensus is that Marbury fit in well and made contributions during a few crucial stretches of the game.  With some more practice and time with his new teammates, I am feeling surprisingly optimistic that this could be the start of a beautiful relationship with Stephon Marbury. 

Counting Chickens

I'll wait to weigh in on Marbury until he actually signs on the dotted line, which should give me enough time to come up with some thorough analysis of the move.  Until then, you'll have to live off a little Mikki Moore analysis and some plugging of a few other sites out there that have some good analysis of Rajon Rondo's recent hot streak. 

 I feel I should also clarify that my last post wasn't putting down Rondo or trying to undercut the sheer awesomeness of his game, my intention was to simply ask the basketball watching public "what'd you expect?"  Looking back, perhaps that wasn't articulated well enough.  Rondo is amazing and vital to the Celtics' success, my perspective was that his torturing of Steve Nash was unsurprising because I've seen him play at such a high level for more than a season, though it is sometimes hard to tell because of the presence of his three All-Star teammates.  But I digress, now on to a quick quip about Mikki Moore.

First, I assume that most of you will need to know who exactly this Moore fellow is and why he matters at all to the Celtics' hope of repeating as NBA champions this year.  The short answer is that he's a wiry seven-footer who can hopefully provide a bit of floor spacing (with a serviable mid-range jumper) and the length the Celtics' second unit has been sorely lacking all season.  Yes, his averages of three points and three rebounds a game are unimpressive, and yes, he was playing for the NBA's worst team, the Sacramento Kings, but I swear to you that he has value and could potentially be a solid contributor for the Celtics down the stretch.  

Two years ago, Mikki Moore lead the NBA in field goal percentage as a member of the New jersey Nets.  As a compliment to New Jersey's core of Jason Kidd, Vince Carter and Richard Jefferson, Moore shot nearly 61% from the floor and averaged a career high 9.8 points per game.  Moore was able to hit open shots and make opposing defenses pay for focusing too much on his All-Star teammates, working as a small yet vital part of their system as a team.  Moore played his part very well that year, doing all of the little things you love to see out of your role players and helping New Jersey to reach the playoffs that year.

In the playoffs that year, Moore increased his scoring and rebounding averages by two points each while still shooting an impressive 56% from the floor in twelve games.  Though they lost to the Cleveland Cavaliers in the second round (the Cavs went on to win the East and get spanked by the Spurs in the Finals), Moore had finished by far his best season as a complimentary piece to a core of veteran players.  

Catch my drift yet?  In case you're really slow I'll go ahead and say it: Moore had his best season as a role player on the floor with All-Star teammates, which would be the situation he's about to enter in Boston.  I think that Mikki Moore could actually fit in quite well with the Celtics and really help them in their push to get back to the NBA Finals.  He's long enough to guard centers and quick enough on his feet to rotate within the Celtics' defense.  he plays with passion and intensity and doesn't have an aversion to doing the little things that don't necessarily show up on stat sheets.  Add to that his offensive ability to hit open shots when he gets them and help his teammates, and you can start to see why this acquisition could prove to be very significant for the Boston Celtics.  

Though I wonder about Moore's rebounding, toughness and slight frame (he's listed at 7' 225 lbs, but I doubt he even weighs that much), I feel as though he'll fit in well with Leon Powe and Big Baby Davis and can compliment them nicely in the front-court.  It's true that I would have preferred Joe Smith to be our pick up rather than Mikki Moore, but there was no guarantee that Smith would be available in time.  So it goes.  

If you haven't already, hit up this lengthy but insightful piece on Rajon Rondo.  It's a topic I touched on a while ago about Rondo's development and his jump shot.  I came to the same conclusion that they did, which is that Rondo just has to be himself and keep playing his game, rather than working to become a mid-range shooter.  I don't think it would be bad if his jumper were more reliable, but it's my opinion that Rondo has to do what he does now in order for the Celtics to be successful, and forcing change would be bad.  I ended up concluding that improved free-throw shooting would ultimately be much more important for Rondo than a mid-range game, as he's most dangerous when attacking the basket and being a better free-throw shooter would make him all the more dangerous.  

Stand Fast

I've been trying for a while now to really dissect yesterday's Suns/Celtics clash and find the most remarkable aspect of the game, but my effort has thus far been in vain.  It's not that without KG and Amare this game lacked intensity or entertainment value (on the contrary, in fact), just nothing that happened was remarkable or enlightening about the Celtics.  They won without Garnett, which we already knew they could do (now 13-2 without the Big Ticket).  Ray Allen hit shots and played an efficient game just as he's done all year.  Paul Pierce was all too familiar, heating up at the right times, exploiting mismatches and getting to his spots (frequently the free-throw line), making scoring look easy, defending and rebounding, turning the ball over five times, all while providing the usual heart and leadership that defines him as a player.  Kendrick Perkins made sour faces at referees after committing obvious fouls (shocking, I know).  

But what about Rajon Rondo?

You mean the career high 32 points on a scalding 13-18 shooting, ten assists, six rebounds and three steals on his 23rd birthday?  That was definitely nice, but what'd you expect from him against the matador defense of the Phoenix Suns?  Rondo gets to the cup against some of the league's tightest defenses defenses and best perimeter defenders (ask Chris Paul, Tony Parker or any of the Lakers that played last June), so forgive me if I'm not shocked that he embarrassed Steve Nash on his way to a career night against a terrible defensive team. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled that Rajon Rondo played so well, and I think that this game is a huge confidence builder for him and his teammates, but this kind of play from Rondo isn't new to me.  Rondo's development is a favorite topic of mine (read more here and here), and I've always maintained that he is capable of great things.  I mean, he was the catalyst on a championship team that played perhaps the fiercest defense that the NBA has ever seen, and he maintains a delicate balance between his three All-Star teammates while running one of the NBA's best offenses that often requires him to sacrifice his own numbers for the benefit of the team.  He can flat out play, and we all (at least I) already knew that.  

Going into the game against Phoenix, the point guard match-up between Rondo and Nash jumped out at me as the most favorable for the Celtics (though the other backcourt pairing of Allen against Captain Barbosa was a close second).  God bless his Canadian heart, but Steve Nash is a defensive liability for Phoenix* (I'd say at this point in his career, but he's always been one), and he had zero chance of containing Rondo on Sunday afternoon.  And sure enough, Rondo dominated the Suns, getting anywhere he wanted and any shot he wanted against defenders that more often resembled cardboard cutouts than actual live bodies.  The word layup drill comes to mind, but it doesn't fully illustrate the lack of resistance Rondo encountered on his way to the rim time and again on Sunday.  

*As a quick aside about Steve Nash and defense, I'm just wondering if anyone else noticed that Paul Pierce started heating up as soon as the Suns started switching the pick & roll to contain Rondo, leaving Nash on Pierce in an isolation?  Not that many defenders in the NBA can handle Paul Pierce, but still, as soon as Nash was on Pierce he started making shots that were rimming out in the first half.

Aside from the abhorrent defense played against him, Rondo benefited greatly from the increased game tempo and the void left by KG in the offense.  In my last post, I called for the other Celtics to step up and each do a little bit to fill KG's shoes, and on Sunday, Rondo proved that he has big feet, so to speak.  For the season, Rondo is averaging nine field-goal attempts per game (and converting at a rate of 51%) and just over three foul shots per game (converting only 63% of those).  On Sunday, he took 18 shots (of which he made 13, including a three-pointer) and got to the line nine times (only hitting five), while still having time to feed his teammates for ten assists.  With more space to spread his wings and against a defense that would be indifferent were they not so physically overmatched, a performance along the lines of this one seems to me to be more par for the course than an enlightening foreshadowing of this young player's career to come.

Perhaps the only exciting thing to see was Rondo's marksmanship with his jumper, which has always been the one hole in his game.  Yesterday, he hit several mid-range jumpers to punish Phoenix for playing off of him, and a three-pointer that was actually pretty contested by Phoenix standards.  These jumpers, however, came only after Rondo was well into an offensive rhythm established by a multitude of uncontested drives to the hoop.  For that reason, I'm going to try and not get too carried away about those makes, instead filing them appropriately under "heat-check" (see also LBJ v. Bucks) for now.  When any player is feeling it like that, shots just seem to fall.  What I will hope for is that this game gives Rondo and his teammates a confidence boost, and that it drives him to work even harder than he has been on developing a solid jump-shot (Rondo has been steadily improving that aspect of his game throughout his short career).  

The chorus of the media says "Rondo has arrived" after this game; I say, "he's already been here for a year plus."  It's not that I'm unimpressed with the way he played, in fact, I'm elated that a young guy like him relishes the challenge of rising to the occasion to get a win for his injury depleted team.  I feel as though he's been capable of such greatness for a while, and its eventual manifestation against a clearly inferior opponent shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.  To Rondo, I say keep fighting the good fight, and even if you don't ever score 30 again, I'll still appreciate you for what you do on the court for the Boston Celtics.  Doc Rivers said a while ago that Rondo was the most irreplaceable Celtic, and I'm tempted to agree (if only because we're thinner than Kate Moss at the point right now).  But while it's great to see a big game out of Rondo and another win without Garnett, I still maintain that I expect nothing less from the defending champs, especially against a team that they can clearly beat.

In other news, Andy Roddick deserves a pat on the back for withdrawing from the Dubai tennis tournament in protest over their treatment of an Israeli tennis player and using his celebrity status to send a meaningful message to the world.  It's not often that sports and politics or the historical narrative intersect at significant points, so it's always nice to see somebody capitalize on the opportunity to make a statement, even at the risk of losing sponsorships, prizes and the like.  So what if you can't beat Federer or Nadal, this is a much better way to go out, and it will hopefully be remembered for years to come.  Hats off to you, my friend.

Better Days

I just checked and it turns out that I'm contractually obligated as a journalist to spend at least 500 words writing an "oh shit" column about Kevin Garnett's right knee and the Celtics' ugly (and I do mean ugly) loss to the Jazz last night in Utah.  My heart was in my throat last night and my mind was racing after Garnett came up lame in the second quarter and struggled to put any weight on his right knee, however after some sleep, hookah, beer and an afternoon sitting in the sun I'm not feeling nearly so heartbroken today as I did last night.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not sunny on the injury, but I'm not exactly going to declare the Celtics' season over because of it.

In case any of you didn't know, KG has flown back to Boston for an MRI, and at this point it seems as though the Celtics are wisely erring on the side of caution with their superstar forward.  Boston will miss him during the remaining games of the road trip, but this option is better than letting a warrior like Garnett (who'd play on a bleeding stump of his leg if you let him) tough it out and risk making a minor injury worse.  This injury seems somewhat similar to Garnett's abdominal strain from last year, with one significant wrinkle that could cause problems down the road for the Celtics (more on that a bit later).

First of all, the Celtics have shown that they can win without Garnett in the lineup.  They proved this last year around this time, and I expect them to be able to do so again this year.  In fact, losing Garnett for a week or two could end up being beneficial for the Celtics in the long run.  Without the Big Ticket in the lineup, both Glen Davis and leon Powe are going to get more touches and more minutes in the rotation, providing the team an opportunity to get more out of two role players who will need to play big in the playoffs.  Giving Davis and Powe more time with the starters now is just a warm up for May and (hopefully) June.  This is an opportunity for both players to grow and develop, hopefully they can take advantage of it.

The important thing to remember is that no one player has to shoulder the load that KG normally carries, and that even without their emotional leader the Celtics have a good core of veteran players that have proven to be tough enough to carry a team by themselves.  If Kendrick Perkins can step up a bit with the other front court reserves, the Celtics should still be able to win games, even against some of the Association's tougher defenses.  The early prognosis is that Garnett may be ready to play against the Pacers at home once the road trip is over, so with a little bit of luck the Celtics should be back to business as usual in a week.

But let's not count our chickens before they hatch, people.  When Garnett missed time last year, the Celtics were way ahead in the standings and had a very small chance of losing the best record in the league and home court advantage throughout the playoffs (which, as it turns out, was HUGE with a capital HUGE).  That was then, this is now.  Today, the Celtics trail the Lakers for the best overall record and aren't even first in the East (the Cavs are two one-thousandths of a point ahead of Boston right now), trailing Cleveland by a small margin.  The Celtics were having their fair share of issues just keeping pace with the NBA's best before Garnett's injury, and now they have to make up ground without their best player (definitely a different discussion for a different time, but I stand by this).  

The implications of this race for the best record both in the Conference and in the NBA are twofold.  First, having home court advantage is a big boost, especially for an emotional team that relies heavily on falling jump shots to get wins (I'm no stat geek, but I believe that a home crowd can focus players and help make shots fall).  Cleveland took the Celtics to the last possession of the seventh game last year, and given their off-season improvements, the Celtics will need every edge they can get against LeBron James and the Cavaliers.  Although the Celtics were able to win road games in Detroit and Los Angeles last year on their championship run (including the huge comeback against LA in game 4 of the Finals), having game sevens in Boston will be vital for the Celtics' success this year in the playoffs.

Secondly, and most importantly, having the best record matters because favorable playoff match-ups on the road to the NBA FInals.  If the Celtics can't pass Cleveland for the best record in the East, then Boston is looking at #3 Orlando in the second round of the playoffs, while Cleveland would get the winner of the Hawks/Heat series.  Although I firmly believe that Dwight Howard is extremely overrated and that the Celtics can beat Orlando in a seven game series, they aren't a team that I want to play in the second round.  With Turkoglu, Rashard Lewis and now Rafer Alston on the perimeter, the Magic are a dangerous team that's as talented as any in the NBA.  Not having to play them while simultaneously forcing Cleveland to take them on would be huge for Boston's hopes of repeating as champions.  

In other news, Joe Smith wants to play for the Celtics, which would be just what the doctor ordered for the Celtics' bench, the Blazers failed to make a move for Gerald Wallace (which has me so steamed that I may start a Blazers blog too just to write 3,000 words about why the Blazers should have pulled the trigger), Tyson Chandler is a Hornet again, and Amar'e Stoudemire's eyes are falling out.  Also, Ray Utech is unreliable and despite his firm assertion to the contrary, should always choose will-call for his Blazer tickets from now on.  The last two thirds of that Blazers/Grizzlies game was awesome, though.

Put the Pieces Back Together

The NBA's trade deadline is only a few days away, and as a result of our crappy economy, many NBA owners are running around like chickens with their heads cut off to cut costs both immediately and down the road.  Today has already seen one such move, with the Hornets sending Tyson Chandler to the Thunder for expiring big man contracts that happen to be named Chris Wilcox and Joe Smith.  Many of you are probably scratching your heads right now wondering what exactly this means (along with who the hell these players are), but fear not, that's why I'm here.

This move means that New Orleans is throwing in the towel, closing up shop and kissing any and all of their title hopes goodbye for this year.  Chandler was the Hornets' only 7-footer as well as their best rebounder and interior defender.  He was also one of Chris Paul's favorite targets for jaw-dropping alley-oops, and is currently only 26 years old, meaning that he is in his peak years currently (NBA players usually peak between ages 25-30, give or take a little bit).  Chandler was a force in the paint on defense, and despite his struggles with injury this year is still too valuable (in my humble opinion) to be dumped for two solid contributors at mid season.  This move is a straight salary dump, and now the Hornets will have to try and make do with new players who are unfamiliar with their system (always be ready for a pass from Chris Paul!) and without the necessary size and interior toughness to seriously compete in the Western Conference.  Because Chandler has three years left on his deal at approximately $11 million per, he (along with the title hopes for New Orleans) are now gone.  So it goes.

What does this have to do with the Celtics?  A deal like this shows that this year's market for NBA players is a buyer's market, meaning that teams trading away important pieces are likely to get little in return.  This is wonderful for the Celtics, who not only need to make an addition to keep pace with Cleveland and LA, but have bupkis to offer in return.  Earlier today, the Celtics sent Sam "the Crystal Skull" Cassell to Sacramento for the right to swap second round draft picks in 2015, clearing a little bit of salary for us while also opening up a roster spot on the defending champions' bench.  With a spot now open, the Celtics could add a piece through free agency (I can still hope for PJ Brown, right?), drawing on a talent pool that is likely to increase in the coming day when some veteran players are likely to get bought out of their remaining contracts by their cellar-dwelling teams (this is how Sam came to the Celtics last year).

While waiting around for a good piece to get bought out is not a bad strategy (adding a piece like Jerry Stackhouse or *gulp* Stephon Marbury wouldn't hurt), I feel that given the current economy and market for NBA talent that the Celtics could be slightly more proactive in their search for the missing piece that can help them repeat as champions this year.  And since New Orleans has now waved the white flag of "salary dump" high so that everyone can see it, I have a business proposition for the Hornets...

Trade James Posey back to the Celtics for either Brian Scalabrine and Tony Allen or for Scal, JR Giddens and Patrick O'Bryant.  Both of these trades work in ESPN's NBA trade machine and could be mutually beneficial for both sides.  For New Orleans, they'd be shedding $24 million dollars over the next four years in the form of James Posey's contract while taking on a few modest salaries that are off the books after next season.  The Celtics could also offer a pick or some kind of monetary compensation to entice the Hornets a bit more, too.  Additionally, New Orleans would be getting at least something back in return in the form of Scal and whomever else is included in the deal.  If New Orleans takes Giddens and O'Bryant, then they're getting two dirt cheap fliers on some young and undeveloped talent, as well as Scal's presence in the locker room and his intangible contributions on the court.  

The appeal for Boston is obvious.  As a team contending for a title with a nucleus of aging superstars, it is in the Celtics' best interest to win right now, regardless of the economic climate of the league and the nation.  It's not like the Celtics are losing or will lose money in the city of Boston if they field a competitive squad with realistic title hopes.  In a city of sports nuts who have been conditioned to pay out the ass for the Red Sox and Patriots, the financial reserves will always be there for the Celtics, so adding some salary shouldn't be a problem for Danny Ainge.  Doing this deal moves pieces that didn't exactly fit in the first place and gives the Celtics exactly what they've been missing this year: James Posey.  

I may be beating a dead horse here, but it remains true: the Celtics need hep this year if they want to have a shot at repeating as NBA champions in June.  Posey was vital to Boston's success last year as a versatile swing man who could defend the other team's best player, rebound and stretch the floor with his outside shooting.  Additionally, he was a great chemistry guy who helped keep the Celtics together in the locker room and on the court, always leading by example with his hustle and effort.  He was a huge factor in the Celtics' title run last year, and he's been sorely missed ever since he signed with New Orleans in the off-season.  Doing this deal would put the universe back in order and would (albeit in a rather convoluted way) atone for Boston's choice of saving $6 million over strengthening the team for years to come.  

I've since reviewed every game of the Finals from last year as well as the seventh game of the Conference semi-finals against Cleveland (thanks to my collector's edition DVD set), and I can say with confidence that Boston wouldn't have won without James Posey.  He shut down Kobe Bryant and LeBron James as well as anyone has ever done, hit big shots, created possessions for the Celtics with his defense and rebounding and gave Boston much more versatility with their personnel and consistency with the second unit.  Despite similar records at the All-Star break (41-9 with Posey, 44-11 without), this team doesn't just need somebody like James Posey, they need the real deal.  

He already knows the system, and we already know that he fits in well with the players on the roster.  We also know that the Celtics desperately need help (why else would Stephon Marbury's name keep popping up?) despite their NBA best record.  Adding Posey to a Celtics team that has seen improvements form its role players thus far would put Boston over the top for a title this year.  Despite losing their best role player, the Celtics have kept pace with the NBA's best teams, all of which improved over the off-season.  Add Posey back into the mix and the Celtics jump way ahead, with more solid defense and better production off the bench, which has been the Celtics' biggest Achilles heel this year.  The stars seem to be aligned for a coup like this, now if you'll excuse me I'm going to make an animal sacrifice to the NBA gods to try and push this deal through.

Fade-Off

For many years during the dark ages of Rick Pitino, basketball was almost dead to my father.  As my passion for the game and the Boston Celtics was budding (at a fairly unusual time, when you consider how dysfunctional and bad the Celtics were when I was growing up), we had many discussions about professional basketball in general, most of which ended with me standing up for the value of today's NBA and my father claiming that the current incarnation was almost unwatchable and had no real appeal to him.  Pointing to the dilution of the talent pool between too many teams, the seemingly never ending regular season, and the prevalence of me-first players that seemed only to want to show off their own skills for fans who would ooh-and-ahh at their crossover, I could hardly blame him for being turned off from the game.  He made good points, but I never conceded, firmly believing that a good brand of basketball still did exist and that if he were exposed to it it could rekindle at least an appreciation if not a love for the game.

He reluctantly showed a flash of interest in 2004 when the Pistons upended the Lakers in the Finals (there's nothing like watching Kobe, Shaq and the Lakers get served to ignite some passion within a Bostonian), and that interest grew somewhat the next year during a hard-fought Finals that went down to the wire between two legitimate teams, the San Antonio Spurs and the Detroit Pistons.  Though the games were brutal and ugly, I can distinctly remember my Dad in awe of Tim Duncan's sheer willpower, Manu Ginoblili's unbelievable ability to get to the rim, and the way both teams played together rather than just standing around and waiting for the superstars to make plays.  But even so, he was still unimpressed by the state of the game, and while he was aware and possibly excited by the basketball he saw, the NBA was still a hard sell for him.

And then, on March 14th of 2007, it happened.  Phoenix played Dallas and made a huge fourth quarter rally, winning 129-127 in double overtime in what was recognized as an instant classic at the time.  Jason Terry and Steve Nash both made ri-damn-diculous three-pointers to continue the game (Terry hit his three with Steve Nash's hand about half an inch from his face), and Nash in particular showed his whole arsenal, finishing with 32/16/8.  Amare had 41/10, Dirk poured in 30/16, and Jason Terry finished with 27 in a game that was hotly contested from start to finish.  Beyond the fact that this game was a high-scoring barn burner of a game, both teams (emphasis on teams) played with a brand of intensity and passion that even as a young NBA fan I could tell had been missing for quite some time.   Dad could tell, too.

Sure enough, the next day, he called me and we both ranted and raved, recounting the heroics on both sides for the better part of an afternoon (afternoon for me, evening for him, I was here in Portland and he was home in Boston).  He conveyed to me the same sentiment that I just conveyed to all of you: this game was vintage NBA, with scoring, defense, and two teams that wanted to beat the pants off a familiar opponent far more than they wanted to make Sports Center.  His passion for basketball was revived, and I could tell through the phone that he was genuinely excited and was left wanting more after that incredible game.  Sure enough, he paid attention whenever Phoenix and Dallas were playing from then on, and I feel like that one game showed him the possibilities of today's NBA and revived his interest in the game of basketball.

So other than the involvement of the Dallas Mavericks, you're probably asking (who is this talentless hack?) what did that long tangent have to do with last night's 99-92 Celtics win in Dallas?  Fear not, baby birds, Daddy's gonna feed you.  I watched the game last night with some friends at home, none of whom are hardcore NBA junkies like myself (though they all have at least an appreciation for the game).  By the end of the game, everybody was hooting, hollering and letting out a chorus of "oohs-and-ahhs" as the Celtics made their comeback behind 18 fourth quarter points from Paul Pierce.  The quality of the game and the level of competition inspired a group of (forgive me, guys) non-fans to get into a regular season game.  

Everybody, including myself, was in awe of the shot making by Dirk Nowitzki, who reached all the way back to 2006 for a dominant 37 point performance, and Paul Pierce, who seemed determine to not only win the game, but to one up Dirk for the most-ridiculous-fade-away award as he summarily abused Devean George and Jason Kidd down the stretch.  Pierce carried the team after both Kevin Garnett and Doc Rivers lost their heads (don't even get me started on them...), providing the kind of leadership, grit and competitive fire that we've grown accustomed to seeing from The Truth.  Most importantly, the Celtics kept pace with the Lakers for the best record in the NBA, and are headed into the All-Star break on a positive note.

But more than the ridiculous shots or the boneheadedness of KG and Doc, I was amazed at the reaction of the friends around me who were watching the game.  I've always believed that a good enough game can turn even the most indifferent observer into a rabid sports fan, if only for a fleeting moment or two.  Whether they knew the names of the players or not was irrelevant, the game turned everyone in the room into an NBA fan, and had everybody on the edge of their seats and hanging on every dribble, fake and shot taken down the stretch.  It wasn't as pretty as the instant classic from March of 2007 between Phoenix and Dallas, but last night's game provoked the same kind of reaction and was an impressive contest on both sides in its own special way.

I Digress...

No Celtics related musings today, just the thought that they need to take care of their business against a wounded Hornets squad tonight.  Rajon Rondo should feast on Antonio Daniels, and the Celtics should have an easy time controlling the paint against the likes of Sean Marks.  Also, tonight's contest should be a nice change of pace for he Celtics, who will actually be facing a team with more bench issues than they have (woo hoo!).  I mean seriously, we beat the pants off them earlier this year when they had Chris Paul, this one should be an easy win (unless the Celtics uncharacteristically overlook their wounded opponent and fall into a trap game).

So instead of talking Celtics with all of you out there (I assume that's no more than Mom, Tyler and Asian Dave), I thought I'd take this time to tell y'all that I am going to see the Blazers (my other home team and mistress) play against Kevin Durant and the artists formerly known as the Sonics (instead of changing their name to some fruity symbol, these guys adopted the fruity name of "Thunder" and changed into some nice computer blue uniforms to really drive the point home).  I am sure that at least two of you laughed at this without needing an explanation, but for those of you going "huh?," that was actually a two tiered Prince joke, so allow me to take a bow...  Thank you.  

Where was I?  Oh right, live NBA action tonight, get psyched!  Although the Thunder are one of the Association's worst squads, I'm actually really excited to go watch the game in Portland's lovely Rose Garden tonight.  First of all, live NBA is always astonishing and entertaining because it really lets you see the combination of size, grace and speed that most NBA players have.  Yes, you can appreciate the athleticism of KG, LaMarcus Aldridge or Amare Stoudemire on TV, but there's just something different about watching the game live that adds a whole new dimension of understanding and appreciation of the physical gifts of an elite NBA player.

Secondly, tonight's game will be my first opportunity to watch a pair of young stars in Kevin Durant and Greg Oden and evaluate them without the intermediary of television (again, there's just something different about seeing it live).  I'm excited to see Durant in person, because he's not only super talented and possibly going to be one of the greatest players of this era, but because I hardly ever get to see him play (neither the Thunder nor the Sonics were/are regular staples on ESPN and TNT).  Comparisons to Alex English and Ice Gervin are already happening with Durant, so I feel obligated to bear witness and see for myself.

I'm also excited to see Greg Oden play in person, and not because he's super tall and I want to see in person just how tall he actually is (already had the opportunity to do that when we saw him in the club for his 21st birthday.  And yes, he is really, really, really, really tall).  I'm more interested in observing Oden as he moves around the court and how he plays within the flow of the game.  Though he's steadily improved in most areas of his game this year, there are still times where Greg can be a bit disruptive to his team's rhythm on offense.  Because he doesn't have any reliable scoring moves in the low post and because his handle and footwork are still progressing, Greg has to do a lot of hard work to get a look at the basket which has thrown off his team's timing in the past.  Add to that the fact that he is turnover prone, and you can see how his presence, gigantic and intimidating as it is, can be occasionally more detrimental than helpful to his team.

So what do I expect from Greg?  Post moves like Duncan or McHale, passing like C-Webb, and defense like Bill Russell?  Not yet.  I realize that Greg is a first year player and that he's experiencing the inevitable growing pains that come from having to adjust your game to the NBA level.  Everyone goes through these, and big men doubly so.  Heck, look at Kevin Durant's first year.  He was chucking up so many bad shots even Allen Iverson blushed, but now he's efficient and could be an All-Star player as early as next season.  So while I don't expect Greg to be the best center in the game or to even validate his selection over Durant in the 2007 NBA Draft, I want to see some signs of improvement in his game, perhaps just a flash or two of brilliance that shows some of the hard work he's put in this year.  After seeing somebody play live, you can definitely get a feel for where they're headed and what they can do that's unlike anything you can experience through watching the game on TV.

Oh yeah, the third reason I'm excited to see this game is that the Thunder play at a fast pace and have been known to be negligent on defense, so the Blazers should have no problem filling it up tonight.  It will also be interesting to see if Portland can get out in transition a bit more (something I've been dying to see from them) and get some easy baskets to establish a rhythm.  I get that the Blazers like to play a controlled tempo game and grind it out with defense, ball movement and good shot selection, but they should run more, plain and simple.  they don't have to be the Knicks or Philly or Golden State, but the Blazers need to get easy baskets in transition.  They should model themselves after a good team like the Spurs, Celtics, Hornets or Cavs, all of whom play a controlled tempo style and rely on defense to grind out wins, but run when they can in order to get easy baskets.  Turning good defense into easy offense is a huge part of what makes all of these teams so good, and it's what has won the Spurs so many championships in the last decade (not solely, obviously, but definitely to a much higher degree than people realize).

Not only is it a winning style to push the ball in certain spots, but the Blazers have ideal personnel to become one of these teams.  They have a play-making point guard who is creative and brilliant with the ball on offense (Sergio Rodriguez), guys who can spot up for three-pointers in transition and stretch an already off balance defense (Rudy Fernandez, Steve Blake and Martell Webster when healthy), a slasher who can score with either hand at the rim (Brandon Roy) and a pair of long, athletic, explosive forwards with great hands in dire need of more easy basket opportunities (Aldridge and Travis Outlaw).  Combine their personnel who seem tailor made for transition offense (seriously, LaMarcus Aldridge was made to run the break) with their defensive tenacity and ability to rebound the hell out of the ball with just two guys, and there will be ample opportunities for the Blazers to get easy scores off of their defense in the future.  I suppose I can dream about it all I want, but tonight I may just get the chance to see if it could ever be a reality.  I may be coming back with some analysis/reaction after the game depending on my state of mind, but it will likely come tomorrow at some point. 

Monday Moaning

Memo to the rest of the NBA: when the game is winding down and that guy who wears number 8 for the Spurs, I think his name is Roger Mason, has the ball, you may want to put a hand in his face.  Otherwise, he may do something like this.  Or maybe something along the lines of this, or this.  You've been warned.  Also, we'll be putting new cover sheets on out TPS reports from now on.  

Um, yeah.............

Did ya get that memo, Celtics?

I guess not.  First off, that was a great shot, and every time I watch San Antonio this year, all I can think about is how good Roger Mason would look in Celtic green.  He stretches the defense, can handle the ball, is efficient on the floor, understands his role and clearly, he can hit big shots.  And while it may not look as flashy as some shots you'll see in the NBA, pulling up for a jumper off the dribble after navigating your way around a screen and between two defenders is incredibly difficult to do, so kudos to Mason for coming through again and giving the Spurs a big road win.

But that shot didn't win the game for the Spurs, nor did the Celtics lose the game because their defense was not tight enough (the play was covered reasonably well and the other Celtics had to stay home on their men, seeing as the Spurs are one of the best passing teams in the league).  I'm not of the opinion that any one possession lost the game, although Ray Allen's cosmic brain fart on the ensuing inbounds play is making me challenge that statement even as I write it.  That was an awful exchange, to be sure, and the clear path foul, free-throws, possession and more free-throws that resulted from Allen's epic fail did solidify a seven point swing towards the Spurs in just under two seconds.  But even so, the Celtics could have easily won that game.

So what went wrong?  Aside from not playing defense in the first half and failing miserably to exploit some of the mismatches that the Celtics had (Matt Bonner guarding KG?!?  Really?), I can't help but feel like the game was lost at the start of the fourth quarter, when the Celtics bench was on the floor.  With a second unit of Leon Powe, Glen Davis, Eddie House, Tony Allen and Paul Pierce on the floor, all of Boston's momentum that was accrued in a stellar third quarter that saw Boston outscore San Antonio 24-14 evaporated into thin air.

After working so hard to regain the lead after three quarters, the Celtics reserves struggled to find offense and keep the Spurs from scoring on defense, surrendering a 76-74 lead and falling into a five point hole.  The bench play was so bad that Doc Rivers was compelled to go back to his starters early in the quarter just to stop the bleeding.  Not that the first unit looked excessively tired at the end of the game, but the fact that the bench players can't be trusted to do their fair share is Troubling (notice the capital "T").  

Although the Celtics' bench isn't short on hustle, effort or enthusiasm, they've struggled all year long to create offense and match up with some of the better second units in the NBA (think Portland and the Lakers).  Eddie House is instant offense, sure, but he's really the only one who needs to be paid attention to, and he suffers for it much of the time.  Yesterday's Spurs game was a great example, during which Eddie only attempted two shots (never mind that he made both)!!!!!!!!  For a guy whose sole purpose on the team is to shoot and score, this is baffling, like worse than trying to figure out the plot of Eye of the Tiger.  Why did this happen?

House was never open because San Antonio simply didn't have to worry about anyone else on the floor from the Celtics' second unit beating them.  Sure, Paul Pierce was out there too, but he was swarmed and pestered by defenders as well (even so he did actually keep the game relatively close).  With Tony Allen, Big Baby and Leon Powe on the floor, there simply aren't enough offensive threats to make a halfway decent NBA defense sweat over the Boston Celtics.  

All three of those guys (TA, Baby and Powe) are energy/hustle players, meaning they generally impact the game on offense by hitting the offensive glass, setting screens, getting easy baskets in transition and occasionally scoring as a fourth or fifth option for the team.  Plays don't get run for them, and they don't threaten a defense outside of the ways I just outlined.  None of these guys are shooters or scorers, none of them can really handle the ball very well, nor are they great play-makers, so while they aren't liabilities on offense per se, they are by no means hard to defend or game-plan against.  

Don't get me wrong, each one of these guys, and effort/hustle role players in general, are vital cogs in any elite basketball team, and without them the stars couldn't shine as brightly as they do.  Often times these players are making the biggest sacrifices for the betterment of their team with the smallest reward, and it does seem somewhat wrong to be overly critical of the guys who don't get the same opportunity and have to make the most of what they have, but the simple truth is that there's only space for one or maybe two of these guys in a successful rotation.  Having too many limited offensive threats can and will make your offense stagnate and fall apart like so many celebrity marriages.  Just as the stars need the role players to do the little things, the role players can only flourish when there are stars around to attract attention and make the game easier for them (think Anderson Varejao).

Right now, the Celtics are suffering because of this.  Last year, with James Posey in the mix along with House and usually Ray Allen or Paul Pierce, the Celtics' second unit was much more threatening.  Not only did Posey bring defensive intensity and versatility to the Celtics, but his ability to hit outside shots stabilized the Celtics' second unit and forced defenses to stretch out and open up lanes for the other players on the court.  With three scorers out there, it becomes harder to camp out in the paint and box out the likes of Davis and Powe or keep track of them on dribble penetration, which was possible because of the optimal floor spacing provided by Posey.  This year, with three guys who can't shoot out there, everything has become that much harder and more taxing for the Celtics, who have been showing signs of fatigue this year much more so than last year (that 2-7 slide in December just happened to coincide with a lot of games in a short amount of time taking place on both coasts).  If I were a robot with silly clamps for hands, I'd be flailing my arms around and screaming "Danger, Will Robinson!!!  Danger!"

What are the Celtics to do?  Let me first say that the Celtics wouldn't be in this pickle had Antonio McDyess read that letter I wrote him earlier this season, but we can't change the past so I won't go there (but I bet you wish you'd listened, don't you think so?  How's life on the crappy Pistons treating you, Tony?).  The Celtics either need a point guard to take the load off of Eddie House and create for others on the second unit (the more Wild Turkey I drink, the more I like the idea of Stephon Marbury, I'm just sayin'), or find a long big man to help defend the lanky dudes like Pau Gasol and occasionally hit a big shot every now and then (please, PJ, come back!  I beg you!).  The tricky part for Boston is their lack of trade chips either in the form of young talent or expiring contracts, which limits the team's options to free agency pick ups.  The bad news, is that there isn't really anyone out there that is terribly enticing as of yet.  A move is needed, but unfortunately, I have no idea what the move is.  All I know is that if the Celtics keep losing close, winnable games, their future will be as bleak as the job market is.  Yikes.

Sunday Session: First Half Analysis

Heading into the half of today's contest between the San Antonio Spurs and the Boston Celtics, it's been a mixed bag thus far.  On the one hand, Boston's activity on the offensive glass has been phenomenal, and their energy has offset some bad shooting and even more physical defense from San Antonio.  Boston is shooting over 50% from the field, but very little has come easy for them and it doesn't seem to me like they're getting the best looks possible out of their possessions.  

For instance, Matt Bonner spent most of the first half guarding Kevin Garnett, which is a glaringly obvious mismatch that, in my humble opinion, the Celtics should have tried to exploit every time down the floor.  With a huge height, quickness and vertical leap advantage over the New Hampshire native (he has 16 points on 7-10 shooting, by the way), I'd like to see Garnett take Bonner in the post and get some more high percentage shots and be a bit more aggressive on offense.  As it is, Garnett has shot mostly long jumpers (albeit wide open) and has only made 3 of 7 shots for a pedestrian 7 points.  Hopefully Doc Rivers will make an adjustment and maybe get Garnett the ball in a better position to either score in close or make a play for someone else.

The biggest problem, however, hasn't been the Celtics offense, but their defensive schemes against the Spurs.  Going into the half, San Antonio has 60 points on 58% shooting overall and 45% from behind the three-point line.  Numbers like these are quite uncharacteristic for the Celtics' defense, and it seems to me that the Spurs have found (and knocked down) so many open shots because the Celtics' have been a step slow on all of their defensive rotations.  The Celtics have been aggressively trapping on defense a lot, especially against Tony Parker, who's been somewhat limited in the first two quarters of play.  

Normally, trapping is a fine strategy as long as your defense can rotate in time to pick up the open man and close out on the perimeter shooters.  Today, however, the Celtics have been committing far too much attention to Tony Parker and haven't been able to rotate in time.  Against the Spurs, who have only won four championships in nine years by collapsing defenses and kicking the ball out to the perimeter for wide open shots, slow rotation on defense is a recipe for disaster.  Don't get me wrong, I understand the need to double Parker and keep him out of the paint, but the Celtics took it a little too far and have gotten burned for doing so.  

Going into half number two, I'd like to see at least some defensive intensity and better effort to stopping the ball in transition, as well as some better quality touches for Garnett and Paul Pierce to help fire up the Celtics' offense.  Hopefully, if the defense can tighten up, the Celtics may be able to get out in transition themselves and score a few easy baskets.  Boston's done a decent job of taking care of the ball, hopefully that can continue in the second half.  And please, for the love of God, keep finding Ray Allen!

Knee-Jerk

I'll probably feel differently about this game tomorrow, but as it stands I can't help but feel like the Celtics got hosed just a little bit tonight against the Lakers.  I'm probably just frustrated about the way the Celtics played the game (terribly), but seriously, I have no idea how or why Kevin Garnett fouls out down the stretch in a game that was that physical.  Oh yeah, and the "foul" was an obvious flop by Derek Fisher (or was it just "selling the call?") and Gasol practically hacked bone to get the ball loose in the first place, but you know, no big deal.

This is what I don't get about the NBA: the game is physical and whistles are getting swallowed left and right because the players are playing the game.  And then, out of nowhere, Garnett gets called for a touch foul when he's fighting for a loose ball in a tight game?  It puzzles me, truly.  Incidental contact had been ignored for the entire game, Garnett played within that standard, and yet even after getting fouled to create the loose ball, he's called for his sixth foul in competition for the loose ball just because Fisher acts like he's been mugged and spills all over the ground (conversely, Lamar Odom had five fouls for most of the fourth quarter and got away with far more than KG did).  The vacillation of the refs tonight was just flat out mind boggling.

All I want is some freaking consistency from the officials.  Oh sure, it's hard to make judgements so quickly and observe and judge such a fluid game and all, but pretty please, just suck slightly less at your job once in a while.  I know that the Super Bowl just happened and you NBA referees are all antsy-in-your-pantsy to one-up the NFL Zebras, but that's no excuse to ruin a perfectly good game between two very equal opponents.

Whatever, to be honest, the Celtics didn't deserve that game anyhow.  They were careless with the ball on offense (16 turnovers) and essentially gift wrapped the Lakers twenty-freaking-four points as a result.  And even though the Lakers threw up enough bricks from the free-throw line to build house (17-29!!!!!!!!!!!), the Celtics still couldn't get it done without Garnett down the stretch.  As soon as he was gone from the game, the Celtics lost all of their spacing, ball movement and much of their defensive tenacity.  Had KG been available for overtime, I feel strongly that the game would have had a different result.  But KG wasn't in there, and the Celtics played poorly throughout, so give the Lakers some credit for playing a good game (I just threw up in my mouth a little bit, ugh).

This loss is especially disappointing because it wasted some great efforts and it felt like the Celtics missed a lot of open shots that could have just as easily gone in as rimmed out.  In particular, Leon Powe and Eddie House came up huge for Boston and made the most of their floor time (I was actually wondering why we didn't see more of those two down the stretch), combining for 26 points on 11-17 shooting and 11 rebounds to boot.  Their energy was key for the Celtics, and both made big buckets when their number was called (House went 4-5 from downtown).  

Paul Pierce deserves a great deal of credit for his defense on Kobe, forcing Mamba into many a contested jumpshot in crunch time, often working one-on-one. Unfortunately, Pierce also deserves his fair share of the blame for the loss, as he missed several late free-throws that would have given the Celtics a late lead and would have put more pressure on the Lakers.  He also went 5-13 from the floor and turned the ball over five times.  Sad trombone...

The implications of this game?  LA is very deep and appear to still be sore from their humiliating exit from last year's Finals.  They're much worse without Bynum controlling the middle of the floor, but unfortunately, the Celtics still seem behind without James Posey and PJ Brown.  The Celtics need help, desperately.  I'd like to see them add another long body to come off the bench and make life harder for the likes of Pau Gasol, who had a field day against the much shorter Glen Davis tonight, as well as somebody to handle the ball for the second unit and let Eddie House roam free on offense.  I hate to say Stephon Marbury at this point, but there isn't a lot of promising talent out there at this point.  Signing Marbury to a small contract and keeping him on a short leash would be a low risk option that given Marbury's talent could be very rewarding for the Celtics.  I feel dirty just writing that, but Boston needs to get better if they want a shot at defending their title against the Lakers in June.

Injury Implications

Sorry for my extended absence over the weekend, but I had to go make some money to pay the bills (believe it or not sharing your infinite basketball wisdom with the masses isn't quite as lucrative as you might think).  Fortunately, the Celtics kept right on rolling through the weekend after yet another convincing victory over Detroit (the Iverson for Billups swap is quickly gaining ground on Jason Varitek and Derek Lowe for Heathcliff Slocumb as one of the worst trades of all time) and wins against Minnesota on Sunday and Philadelphia last night.  

Boston's' winning streak is now at 12 (in case any of you were counting), though it will be put to the test against the Lakers this Thursday in Boston.  While the circumstances for this Thursday's contest against LA are quite similar to the two teams last meeting on Christmas (nationally televised, Celtics riding double digit win streak, another brutal road trip looming), this match-up will have a dramatically different feel because of the personnel involved.  

Kevin Garnett has sat out the last two Celtic games with the flu, and while it isn't a certainty that he'll play on Thursday, I imagine he'll do whatever he can to be back in the line-up against the Lakers.  Even if KG suits up, I'm not sure how effective he'll be with the flu affecting his energy and intensity on the court (though it apparently wasn't a problem for Ray Allen last night, who is suffering through the same sickness).  Garnett is key for the Celtics, who need his length, quickness and physicality to match up with Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom.  If KG isn't there or isn't able to contain those guys, the Celtics defense will have to double team, leaving them constantly out of position and susceptible to ball movement and dribble penetration.  On the other side of the ball, Garnett is a tough cover for the Lakers, who can't match his length and quickness with just one defender, forcing them to commit more focus on KG and leave the other Celtics free to operate in single coverage.

The Lakers, on the other hand, have much bigger injury issues (literally and figuratively) after Andrew Bynum tore his MCL on Saturday against Memphis.  The initial prognosis was 8-12 weeks of missed action for Bynum, which should keep him out for the remainder of the regular season and possibly into the playoffs (12 weeks would be almost through the Lakers first round playoff series at the end of April).  Additionally, 8-12 weeks is an exceedingly optimistic time frame for such a big player to be able to recover fully from such a serious injury, not to mention the amount of time it will take Bynum to work himself back into playing shape.  And when you consider his injury last year and the way his return kept getting delayed, I seriously doubt that we'll be seeing Andrew Bynum again this year. 

This loss is unfortunate and must be very disheartening for Bynum and the Lakers, and not just because Kobe was the one who hit Bynum's knee after apparently trying to sell a call on a drive to the hoop and flopping on the ground.  No, this injury is unfortunate because Bynum was playing his best basketball of the season (much like last year when he hurt his other knee) was finally on the floor to provide the length, defense and toughness that LA was so sorely lacking in last year's Finals against Boston.  Although Bynum's injury is beneficial to the Celtics as well as every other team in the West, even somebody as morally corrupt and twisted as myself wouldn't wish this on anyone (except maybe A-Rod, a Manning or possibly Kobe).  

Though the task was daunting, I was actually interested to see how the Celtics would try and react to this incarnation of the Lakers, who not only had enough offensive weapons in their arsenal to blow the doors off just about anyone, but could lock you down on defense as well with Bynum patrolling the paint.  After watching the game on Christmas and seeing some of the other signs throughout the year that exposed Boston as behind where they were last year and showed the Lakers as noticeably better, I wasn't sure that the Celtics could handle LA in a seven game series.  But now that the Lakers are essentially back to the rotation (although they have a healthy Trevor Ariza for now) that went belly up last June against the defense of the Celtics, I'm back to only being scared shitless of LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers, who are now 23-0 at home this year (yikes!).

To make matters worse, there isn't another Pau Gasol out there for Mitch Kupchack to hijack this year, so the Lakers will have to make do with what they have (not that this will be a problem for them).  Although the Lakers still have plenty of depth on their roster, they are starting to look a little bit thin up front, especially without Ronny Turiaf to bring energy and size off the bench.  For most of the year, LA was playing either Gasol or Bynum at all times to give them a constant post presence with both units, however without Bynum some minutes will have to go to the likes of Chris Mihm or DJ Mbenga, who have played 75 minutes combined this year and have contributed only 27 points (all of them scored by Mihm).  And when you consider the PTSD flashbacks Mihm must have every time he has to play against the Celtics, the outlook for LA is especially grim.  

But hey, if you look on the bright side for LA, they should be well acclimated to playing without Bynum already and now there are just that many more shots for Kobe to take.  And Kobe does seem to want to atone for his unfortunate part in Bynum's injury, judging by his 61-point outburst against the Knicks (and Mike D'Antoni's New York Knicks aren't just anyone, you know...).  Mamba seems determined to carry the Lakers during this difficult period with his scoring or go out shooting.  As a matter of fact, this is just what the Lakers needed: for Kobe to go back into the mode where he shoots 30+ times per game and carry the totality of the load himself.  It's not like his sacrifice and focus on playing team basketball was what enabled the Lakers to become such a deadly team in the first place, right?  

I mean, so what if there's no shot-blocking, intimidation, rebounding or interior toughness on the Lakers anymore?  It's not like that was what was missing during the Finals last year.  As somebody who owns the Collector's Edition DVD set, I can honestly say that the Lakers didn't suffer from Bynum's absence (trying to keep typing with a straight face).  I hope that everyone in LA recorded the Christmas game on TiVo, because I imagine that's the last time you'll se the Lakers physically dominate the Celtics this year (sad trombone).  

Next time: Jameer Nelson's shoulder!