The Ominous Return of the Mamba

And I don't mean ominous for the Celtics, either. You can't get on the internet or turn on the TV today without tripping over a story about how Kobe Bryant almost burned a hole through the parquet floor last night and almost singlehandedly carried the Lakers to victory, but almost completely lost in the adulation for what was truly an impressive virtuoso performance was any analysis of how poorly the Lakers defended during that stretch of play. Kobe Bryant scored 19 straight points for the Lakers on 7-9 shooting, but a 1 point game turned into a double digit deficit for Los Angeles in the process, and nobody seems interested in discussing why. Were the Celtics just executing great offense and weathering the storm by getting lots of buckets, or was it something else?

I say that it is both. The Celtics showed great mental toughness and refused to wilt in the face of Kobe's greatness or overreact to his hot streak by leaving other Lakers open, but I also noticed something about this stretch that influenced the course of the game on both ends for the Lakers. During the 3rd quarter as Kobe hit ridiculous fall-away after ridiculous fall-away, I saw everyone else on the Lakers standing around and watching flat footed. LA would get the ball over half court, give it to Kobe (if he didn't have it already) and then go stand around far away from him and wait for the "Black Mamba" to strike. The fact that Kobe proceeded to stick just about everything he threw up there makes the point that this kind of offense is much easier to defend against totally moot, but the fact that this attitude permeated the Lakers' "defense" is worth discussing at length.

Basketball is a game of rhythm, and the players on the floor can lose their way quickly if they aren't involved in the flow of the game. When Kobe decided to take over the game offensively, he may have very well doomed his team to failure by removing all of them from the action and essentially releasing them from ownership of what was going on out there. If Kobe is going to do it all anyhow, why bother staying involved when I could passively watch the show from the best seat in the house? Despite the incredible production of Kobe for this stretch of the game, the Lakers' offense was incredibly stagnant and they let that infect their defensive game too. It's hard to stay focused on moving, rotating and running when half the time you're standing there and watching a teammate freelance for 20 seconds at a time.

Am I too harsh? Maybe. Am I simply a hater who is looking for any excuse to deride Kobe? Probably, but I still feel like my point here is valid. It's one thing to score 23 points in a row for your team by working within the flow of the offense and relying on your teammates to help you get open looks, but it is a completely different animal to pound the air out of the ball, take one screen from a teammate and launch an off-balance 20-footer with a hand in your face. Is it ridiculously impressive that Kobe scored so many points while averaging a 9.8 on the degree-of-difficulty scale? Absolutely, but the whole time it was happening I was saying to the Fox "it's ok, this is what we want. It's fool's gold, they won't win like this." And it's true, those shots are fool's gold. The Celtics gave Kobe those shots two years ago and won the title because of it, they're doing the same thing this year and Kobe is obliging them. This time around he's made more shots and his teammates have gotten better, but as long as the Celtics can get Kobe to take these shots, I like their chances to win the title this year.

Contrasting Kobe's all out barrage of shots, the Celtics once again played a balanced game and came away with a win, thanks to inspired play from Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Rajon Rondo, Tony Allen, Nate Robinson and Rasheed Wallace. Everyone chipped in on both ends and played a role in the Celtics' win, and despite some sloppy play and a late game scare, it was beautiful to watch. The Celtics need to take care of the ball and focus a little bit more on running better offense, but they are well on track to capturing the 18th title in franchise history. Prior to game 5, neither the Celtics or the Lakers had won back to back games in this Finals, so winning three in a row seemed ridiculous. After watching Kobe go into mamba mode for the past two games and seeing the way the Celtics have played, I think that Boston could very well wrap up this series on Tuesday. They pretty much have to, because as good as the Celtics have been thus far I don't know if they can win a game 7 in LA.

Though each game of the 2010 Finals has been maddeningly different than the previous contest, the correlation between winning the battle of the paint and the glass and winning the game has remained constant. Without a healthy Andrew Bynum, it seems as though the Lakers will have a tough time winning those battles and the ball games. Although the Celtics only won the rebounding battle by one board, they had a field day in the paint unlike any of the other games in this series thus far. Some of those points in the paint came in transition (which was great to see), but lots of them were made possible by the fact that the Lakers were missing Bynum's physicality and shot-blocking on the interior. Without their young and talented center, the Laker bench hurts (because Lamar Odom has to start) and their interior defense and offense struggles mightily.

As a Celtics fan I hope that Bynum is still hobbled after a long flight to Los Angeles and that the Celtics come out with twice the focus and intensity that they displayed yesterday. It is so on right now I am running out of hyperbole to conjure, so I shall leave it at that. You owe it to yourself to watch game six on Tuesday, so don't make excuses!

Know Your Enemy

Oh yes, it's officially on! The Lakers and the Celtics are just two days away from tipping off what promises to be a hard fought, close series to decide the NBA championship, and in the spirit of the Finals I thought it might be nice to get to know the Lakers a little bit so we can all appropriately hate them once game one of the Finals tips off on Thursday evening. Before we get too far into dissecting their roster, let's try and remember that this is not 2008, even though many of the faces on the court are the same. Both teams are different than they were two years ago, so I'm going to try and avoid drawing from that series to predict what will happen this time around. With that being said, let's get right to it.

The Los Angeles Lakers have perhaps one of the deepest and most talented teams in all of basketball and along with the Boston Celtics are one of the most balanced, dangerous teams in the NBA. Their roster features plenty of guys who can kill you on any given night, and they play a brand of basketball that maximizes their talents and presents opponents with match-up nightmares all over the floor. While they are still a finesse team that likes to outscore their opponents rather than relying on stifling defense for victories, these Lakers are not the same cream puffs that the Celtics eviscerated in June of 2008, especially when it comes to playing the Celtics.

Like most of Phil Jackson's teams that run the triangle offense, the Lakers do not feature a traditional distributor/dribble penetrator type of point guard. Instead, the Lakers have the time tested Derek Fisher, a left handed guard who has made a career of spotting up on the perimeter and hitting big shots in high pressure situations. Fisher punishes defenses for over committing to Kobe Bryant and always seems to hit one or two momentum changing shots per series. At this point in his career, Fisher is a defensive liability, especially when it comes to defending the pick & roll, which favors Boston immensely due to the emergence of Rajon Rondo as the Celtics' best player. The Celtics' coaching staff would be salivating at that match-up if they were likely to see it much in the Finals, but the truth is that Kobe Bryant (more on him soon) is going to spend the most time guarding Rondo, but fear not because Fisher will still have to try and guard somebody.

Next to Derek Fisher in the backcourt, the Lakers feature some guy named Kobe Bryant who is supposedly one of the greatest players of this era. If you look at the numbers for this postseason, Kobe has been playing out of his freaking mind and has performed well above even his own lofty standards. Kobe has gone for more than 30 points in 10 of his last 11 playoff games with far greater efficiency than normal and has also been stuffing the stat sheet with around 8 rebounds and 8 assists per game as well. Some extra rest before the playoffs seems to have revitalized him, and the challenge of beating a boston team that got the best of him two years ago is more than enough motivation for Bryant to stay extra focused during these NBA Finals. This is trouble for the Celtics, but it may not be as bad as it initially seems.

Yes, Kobe has been on fire from the field and is playing with incredible efficiency, however if you watched the Phoenix series you know that his shot selection is still questionable at best. Kobe unleashed a barrage of contested two point jumpers against Phoenix and just happened to make an astounding number of them. It happens. The shots he took are still, by and large, terrible for his team over the long run. Although Kobe makes more of those shots than anyone else in the league, he is selling himself short by settling for those looks, and if he doesn't hit at such an astonishing rate during the Finals the Lakers could be in deep trouble. In 2008, the Celtics gave Kobe those shots and lived with the results and I fully expect them to follow the same strategy this year. Although James Posey is gone and Kobe has grown as a player since 2008, the 2010 Celtics were able to disrupt LeBron James and Dwyane Wade in these playoffs with their current personnel, so it's not out of the question that they could do the same to Kobe.

In 2008, Paul Pierce and the Celtics feasted on the Lakers' small forward corps. Luke Walton and Vlad Radmanovich had no answer for Pierce defensively and barely made him work on both ends of the floor, and the mismatch was a major reason that the Celtics won the series. Unfortunately for the Celtics, the Lakers now feature Ron Artest at small forward who still remains an elite defender and has a long history with Paul Pierce. Though Artest has lost a step since his peak, he is still more than capable of shutting down more physical wing players thanks to his incredible strength and tenacity. Paul Pierce doesn't have the quickness to exploit Artest and has no hope of winning the physical battle, so despite his success in the Conference Finals against the Orlando Magic I am worried about Pierce's production in these Finals. Also, it is impossible to underrate the effect of having Artest on Pierce instead of Kobe Bryant, who should have much more energy for offense and will be free to defend Rajon Rondo. I'll live with whatever offense Artest can give the Lakers in this series, but I am terrified of the potential effect he could have on the defensive end.

Up front, the Lakers feature one of the biggest and longest tandems in all of basketball with Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol. Bynum provides all of the rebounding and interior toughness that the Lakers were lacking in 2008 (he missed the Finals with a knee injury) and was a big key to the Lakers' championship run last year. Fortunately for the Celtics, Bynum is once again battling a knee injury, and although he has played and will participate in the FInals, he has been inconsistent and isn't moving at full speed. The Celtics should go right at Bynum and involve him in the pick & roll, which will force him to move on defense and takes him out of his most effective role as a help defender and draw him away from the hoop. The Lakers have always been terrible at defending the pick & roll, and with Bynum hobbled, I expect to see a healthy dose of it in this series.

Pau Gasol is another matter completely. Gasol may be the most skilled big man in the NBA along with Dirk Nowitzki, and his passing, post game and soft touch with either hand are sure to give the Celtics some problems this year. While the lanky Spaniard was soft in 2008 and got ruthlessly picked on by Kevin Garnett in the Finals, he has used that bad memory as motivation and has worked on his toughness, defense and rebounding in the two years since then. Having Bynum to protect him has helped a lot, but Gasol is a different player than he was in 2008, especially when it comes to playing against the Celtics. Gasol's length won't bother the Celtics too much, however he is a dangerous player who may very well be the key to the series.

The Laker bench is not incredibly strong, yet it is also not weak and does have the potential to give the Celtics problems. Lamar Odom is a versatile forward who has unparalleled quickness and a reliable handle, though he lacks a jumper and sometimes disappears in big games. He has played better since getting punked by the Celtics in 2008, and like Gasol has used the lingering embarrassment as motivation to stick it to Boston every time they play. A healthy Garnett should be able to contain Odom to some degree, but his presence will be a major one in this year's Finals.

Flanking Odom on the bench is a shit sandwich composed of Shannon Brown, Sasha Vujacic, Jordan Farmar, Luke Walton, Josh Powell and DJ Mbenga. At times, Brown and Farmar have been effective, but overall the Laker bench is weak aside from Odom. While the Celtics' bench isn't exactly the deepest in the NBA, they should be able to handle the Laker reserves. Glen Davis, Nate Robinson, Tony Allen and Rasheed Wallace will all have favorable match-ups at times and will need to play big in order for the Celtics to win the championship this year.

Overall, this match-up is very even across the board. The Celtics have a distinct advantage at point guard and are even just about everywhere else, so I expect this series to be very close and hard fought throughout. In my mind, Kobe is likely to get his no matter what the Celtics try and do to stop him, and in most cases paying too much attention to Kobe just allows the other Lakers (many of whom are more than capable of creating their own offense) to get better shots. I would like to see the Celtics focus on shutting down Odom and Gasol and limiting Fisher in certain situations. As magnificent as Kobe Bryant is, he won't be able to bat the Celtics by himself (I wish he would try), so limiting the other Lakers and taking them out of their comfort zone will be key this series. Hopefully, Kobe will see single coverage and get the tunnel vision that has been a defining characteristic of his career and the Laker offense will sink into the muck against a tough, committed Celtic defense that is unlike anything Los Angeles has had to experience thus far.

Much like 2008, the Lakers have looked awfully impressive up to this point, but haven't had to play another elite defensive team in these playoffs. Without a healthy Bynum, this team slightly resembles the squad from 2008 that relied on simply outscoring its opponents to gain victory. The Lakers have learned since then and will play better defense this series, so I am more worried now than I was two years ago. I think Ron Artest could be a huge difference maker for the Lakers, but at the same time these Celtics are so balanced that they have been able to punish the best of the NBA even without stellar contributions from Paul Pierce. I'll have plenty more material tomorrow and on Thursday, just make sure you tune in and watch the games!

How Valuable is a Year in College Anyhow?

I've been trying unsuccessfully to write a column about Kendrick Perkins for several days now, but with the news this morning of Congressman Steve Cohen's call to the NBA to lift its age restrictions on incoming players, I feel compelled to throw my two cents in.  In case you didn't know, the NBA placed an age restriction on players entering the NBA draft in 2005, forcing young basketball players to be one year removed from high school before giving them eligibility for the NBA Draft.  I won't bother recounting the Association's excuses or arguments for this limit because frankly, they're all totally bogus.  I'm sorry, I just don't see how one mandatory year of college or some other equivalent is supposed to create better educated, more mature players for the league.

What I do see in this age limit is the league exploiting young men because they are lazy and incompetent.  First of all, this age limit forces players to donate a year of their lives to playing for the NCAA.  Though they usually receive free tuition from the schools that recruit them and a healthy amount of exposure in the process, prospects are sacrificing a year of pro salary and risking serious injury every time they take the floor for their schools.  The schools, the NCAA and CBS all make a killing off of these young men and give them minimal compensation in return.  It isn't quite slavery (after all they DO receive something in exchange for their services), but in many ways this system is very close to indentured servitude.  The schools presumably feed, clothe and "educate" the young men in exchange for their hard work at what appears to me as an appallingly unfair rate.  

Secondly, the NBA's current age limit creates a huge double standard for incoming talent by forcing American teenagers to wait a year before entering the draft while talented youngsters from Europe and elsewhere are allowed into the draft regardless of their age.  For example, Spain's Ricky Rubio will be one of the top prospects in this year's draft (likely going second or third overall) despite the fact that he doesn't turn 19 until the end of October 2009.  By contrast, point guard sensation Brandon Jennings was not allowed to enter into the 2008 Draft directly out of high school (choosing instead to play professionally in Europe instead of going to college) because of this rule even though his age situation is almost exactly the same as Rubio's (Jennings was born in September of 1989, Rubio was born in October of 1990).  Though Jennings got paid for his year in Europe, his stock has fallen from being a potential top three pick last year to being a late lottery pick with some question marks this year.  This will end up costing him millions of dollars immediately and perhaps throughout his entire career in the NBA, while Rubio will essentially be following the path Jennings would have and will be handsomely rewarded for it by the NBA.  

So why does Ricky Rubio get to play before he's 19 and many young stars-to-be like Brandon Jennings have to wait?  Aside form the exploitation and the money tied up in college ball and the interests of the NCAA etc. etc., the dirty truth is that most NBA scouts and GMs are so horrible and inept at judging basketball prospects that they need to send all of these boys to college to have even a slight chance of accurately evaluating them.  The competition that these young men play against in high school is so uneven and unpredictable that it can make it harder to get an accurate picture of their abilities as a player, whereas in the NCAA, the competition is easier to judge and generally holds to a certain standard (games are also more often televised, which cuts down on the need to send scouts out to random gyms across the country).  By pitting these prospects against tougher, more standardized competition, it becomes much easier for scouts and GMs to make informed decisions about a player's strengths, weaknesses and potential.  

Why else would there be an age limit if not for this benefit?  I can't honestly believe that Stern thinks these kids are actually getting any kind of real education in one year at college which has become simply an extended pro tryout, nor do I believe that he sees this program as a way to make players more mature (anyone heard of Michael Beasley?).  No, Stern and the owners and executives did this to make their jobs easier.  Because NBA teams were having trouble telling the difference between Josh Smith and Gerald Green, they came up with a stupid rule (in classic NBA fashion) that solves the problem on their end without addressing the real issues at hand.  Heaven forbid that the scouts and GMs across the NBA develop better methods for evaluating high schoolers or put more time and energy into dissecting the potential flaws of a player from high school, no that simply wouldn't do.  Instead, the league chooses to punish the players by robbing them of salary to solve the problem.  

But other sports have age limits, so why not basketball?  Sure, football has an age limit because if they let 18 year-olds onto an NFL field with Julius Peppers or Ray Lewis they'd get killed, plain and simple.  An age limit makes sense there, but not in the NBA where players as young as 18 and 19 can not only hold their own against veterans but dominate a game.  Even in sports with considerably more contact than basketball, 18 year-olds fresh out of high school are allowed to compete at the highest level as long as they're ready to do so (does the name Sydney Crosby ring a bell?).  Baseball takes players straight out of high school, and although most spend years in the minor leagues developing their skills, those who are ready to play immediately are not prevented from doing so.  The only sane reason to put an age limit on professional sports is to protect the players from the level of competition they face.  The NBA says this is the reason for their ban on high schoolers, but really they're doing it to cover their own asses.

To me, it's as plain as day that the NBA panicked and instated this ludicrous rule because they were either too stupid or too unwilling to take the bull by the horns and work hard on evaluating these high school players.  Instead of using discretion when it came to evaluating high school players, NBA GMs and scouts went crazy and thought that every high school phenom would be the next KG or Kobe.  Discretion, judgement and common sense went out the window and then players like Sebastian Telfair, Gerald Green, Eddy Curry, Kwame Brown and Darius Miles were taken way too soon and suddenly all hell breaks loose.  I'm not about to say that any of these guys belonged in the NBA right out of high school, but what I will say to the death is that it isn't their fault that NBA teams were too stupid or too blind to see their flaws.  The onus for giving contracts to players has to fall on the teams and the executives who are paid handsomely to do just that, shifting the burden onto the players is simply outrageous.  

And while we're at it, I don't buy for one minute the argument that sending players to college for ONE YEAR makes them more mature human beings or more productive members of society, the evidence simply doesn't support that.  For every head case from high school that could have used a year or two of college (think of the names from the previous paragraph as a good starting point), there are also a slew of NBA players who were very successful in their transition from high school to the NBA.  Want names?  How about LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Rashard Lewis, Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum, Travis Outlaw, Al Jefferson, Kendrick Perkins, Al Harrington, Josh Smith, Jermaine O'Neal, Amare Stoudemire and Moses Malone (all off the top of my head) just to name a few.  And beyond that, I could probably come up with a list of players who went to college and still turned out to be busts or head cases or worse (think Ron Artest, J.R. Rider, Zach Randolph, Dennis Rodman etc.).  College does not equal maturity, nor does it always equal an education.  There is no proof that I'm aware of that shows that college players are better humans than high schoolers or that college players do better in the pros than high schoolers do.

I'm not advocating that every prospective pro player declare for the draft right out of high school, because most of them simply aren't ready for the NBA.  Most players could use at least two seasons of college to learn and refine their game before making the difficult leap to the pros, but I don't see that as a good reason to bar ALL high school athletes from making the jump.  Some basketball players are physically and mentally ready for the NBA straight out of high school, and forcing them to sacrifice millions of dollars is a crime.  Sometimes I can't help but wonder if Stern and the NBA did any research at all before making this inane decision, but then I remember that this is the NBA and that stuff like this happens in all arenas of the pro game all the time.  A difficult solution exists (scout better, draft high schoolers with caution) but the league opts for the solution that's easiest for them but skirts the real issue.

So how valuable is a year of college for these basketball players?  I think it has some value but not nearly as much as a contract in the NBA does.  These young men are being unjustly forced to sacrifice their bodies for a system that makes millions off of them and provides them with very little in return.  Though the age limit was implemented to supposedly help players make the tough journey to the NBA and provide them with greater opportunities for success, in truth it does little more than shield the suits running the teams.  If this doesn't seem crazy or wrong to anyone else, let me know and I will check myself into a hospital.  Until then, I'm going to watch game one of the Finals, which will feature two high school superstars in Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard, and drink until my brain can't fathom this egregious and ridiculous hypocrisy.  

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.

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!

Defending and Defeating Dwight Howard

Admittedly this post is a few days late, but I had to quell my own internal debate about how much weight I was willing to put into the Celtics' last victory against the Orlando Magic in Florida last Thursday.  I don't like the idea of regular season games holding any weight as "statement games," but after some careful consideration, I've decided that last Thursday's victory over the Magic contained a few tell tale signs that could come in handy a few months from now in the playoffs.  

While it certainly was nice to see the Celtics come away with another impressive victory over an elite team, I think that the contest actually said more about the Magic than it did about Boston.  The Celtics pretty much performed the way they should have and won the way they always do, with stifling defense, teamwork and effort.  In fact, the only thing that made this particular win noteworthy was the fact that the Celtics were going through a rough patch and couldn't handle business in their usual way, so seeing them perform as they should became the exception rather than the rule.

The Magic, on the other hand, were riding a seven game win streak that saw them set offensive records against Sacramento and sweep their season series against both the Spurs and Lakers.  During this time, the Magic had leapfrogged the Celtics in the Eastern Conference standings, and were looking like they might just rip like a buzz saw through the rest of the NBA and make the Finals this year.  Heck, people were starting to make the Dwight Howard/Shaq comparisons and prognosticate about a second round series between the Celtics and Cavaliers (assuming that the Magic would finish ahead of either one or both of those teams).  

And then the Celtics proceeded to dismantle the Magic, despite surrendering eight offensive rebounds in the first quarter.  Most impressive was the way in which the Celtics handled Dwight Howard, holding him to a pedestrian 11 points, 11 rebounds and only three blocks before fouling him out with five minutes to go.  In fact, the Celtics pretty much shut Howard down after the first quarter behind some inspired defense from Kendrick Perkins and Glen "Big Baby" Davis.  No, that's not a misprint, Dwight "the-best-center-in-the-game" Howard was absolutely shut down by Glen freaking Davis.  Would you like to know how?  (That's a rhetorical question, by the way.  I'm going to tell you whether you want to hear it or not).

The Celtics employed an absolutely brilliant strategy to stop Howard, and to be honest, it was so complicated I doubt that most of you will be able to follow it, but here it goes anyways.  The Celtics kept Howard out of the paint and away from the basket, and magically, he couldn't score (Ta-Da!).  Gee, that was complicated, almost as deep as trapping Kobe in a late game situation in order to throw the Lakers off their game and make somebody else beat you when all the chips are down (Sarcasm alert, sarcasm alert!).  You know, it's that kind of intricate defensive game-planning that gives Tom Thibodeau the image of a coaching genius.  I mean, not just anyone can do this to Dwight Howard, right?

Wrong.  In fact, the Charlotte Bobcats did an even better job on Howard earlier this year than the Celtics did on Thursday night, holding the big man to 4 points and 7 rebounds in just 26 minutes (though the Bobcats did lose that game by 5).  And wouldn't you know it, they used the same strategy that the Celtics did to contain Howard, making it a priority to keep Howard more than five feet away from the rim for most of the game.  And if the Bobcats can do that to Dwight Howard, I'd reckon that the Celtics could probably do the same thing more than once.  Oh wait, they already have (check the splits vs. Boston this year, you may have to scroll down a little bit).

I mean, the logic is so simple even Vin Diesel could understand it.  If you have a player who is only effective (albeit extremely effective) near the basket, then keep him away from it and you should have success in defending him.  You see, as good and as dominant as Dwight Howard is, he has only one reliable move on offense, which is the slam dunk.  Almost half of Howard's baskets this year have been dunks, and after watching him several times this year, I can honestly say that he really doesn't have another reliable move in his arsenal.  

Howard's jump-hook looks only slightly better than Greg Oden's at this point, and his footwork isn't even that much better.  Although Dwight did hit two early jump hooks against the Celtics (one with each hand), after that he returned to form and missed pretty much everything that wasn't at point blank range.  Howard was consistently getting the ball outside of the paint, and because of his poor footwork (and Big Baby's giant ass), he wasn't able to get to the rim and find the same high percentage looks he normally gets.  

And even worse than getting shredded by Big Baby on the other end (Davis went off for 16 points on 6-of-8 shooting and 4 rebounds in 21 minutes), was the fact that the Celtics didn't even have to double Howard down low.  Even though Baby was giving up more than 6" of height to Howard, he was able to effectively defend Howard 1-on-1 for most of the evening.  With such a height advantage for Howard, the Celtics were effectively conceding any kind of over-the-top move Howard wanted all night long, but because Howard has no other reliable moves, this mismatch didn't matter a lick and the other Celtics were able to concentrate on defending Orlando's other dangerous weapons.

Now, I haven't gotten this officially confirmed by the Association yet, but I'm proposing that if you get shut down by Glen Davis, then you don't deserve to be in the MVP discussion that season.  Actually, even if it hadn't been Davis who had shut Howard down, I'd still say that Howard doesn't deserve any MVP nods or votes for defensive player of the year, for that matter.  I'd put him up there in the discussion for most overhyped player of the year (though I fear he might lose that one too to Kobe Bryant), but that's about it (he's a guy with one move who can't pass, hit free-throws or do anything but block a shot into the third row and give is opponents another chance to run a set play.  And he got shut down by Glen Davis!!!!!!!!  End of discussion).

While I'm not about to go way out there and say after Thursday's win that the Celtics will repeat as champions and that they're the greatest thing since sliced bread, I will say that as good as Orlando is, I don't fear them that much and I don't think that the Celtics should either.  Also, I fear Jameer Nelson, Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis far more than I fear Howard at this point.  A few years from now if Dwight can actually refine his game (like Amare Stoudemire did in Phoenix) and become a dynamic player who plays with consistent intensity on both ends of the floor, things will change for sure.  But until then, I'm only prepared to acknowledge one legitimate obstacle in the Celtics' path towards a repeat championship, and he wears #23 and plays in Cleveland.