It's THE FINALS... dun dun dun.....

Ok, maybe not so dramatic as people expected. Lakers were definitely the safe pick coming out of the West, but I had definitely been backing the Magic this whole time. I'm glad that they could make it. I'm sure it's not much of a secret that I don't like the Lakers very much. Sure they're a great team on paper, Kobe's probably the best player currently in terms of basketball ability (LeBron is awesome, but I would still currently give it to Kobe), they have a solid bench, likeable guys (except maybe Vujacic). So before Lakers fans start getting all indignant and self-righteous about how I should give the Lakers more props, let me quickly say, that that is exactly the reason I don't like the Lakers (that is, Lakers fans getting all indignant and self-righteous because I don't think Lakers are undefeatable). I'll admit as much as the next guy that Lakers should win it all, they certainly have the talent to do so, so I'll be as much on the bandwagon as anyone else in saying that it's all a mind game.

I thought the Finals were like the Playoffs in that the series would be 2-2-1-1-1, but I was wrong, and it in actuality is 2-3-2, which changes my prediction a little. For some reason, given that it's 2-3-2, I have a hard time seeing this go to 7 games, though it is possible, but only if both teams win all their home games in the first 5. If this year's Playoffs have taught us anything, it's that you can't really bank on anything that should happen. Manu Ginobili and Kevin Garnett should have been healthy, LeBron should have been defeating the Celtics in the Conference Finals because Mo Williams should have made the difference for the Cavs, Lakers should have swept all competition out the door easily because the Rockets should have folded when they discovered Yao Ming's foot fracture instead of taking the Lakers to 7 games.

Ok, we're past all that now, so lets get down to what is going to make or break this series for either team: the matchups. While regular seasons don't mean everything when it comes to a seven-game series, you can't blatantly disregard them either, John Hollinger did that, and he picked Cleveland to win in 5. Matchup wise, it's rather swung in the Lakers' favor currently, as the this is the major matchup in which the loss of Jameer Nelson will seriously hurt the Magic. From a position reference, the only clear cut advantage any team can really get on the Lakers, on paper or otherwise, is at the point guard position, and Jameer Nelson is just the type of guard that would give the Lakers fits. He was crucial to the Magic's two victories over the Lakers both at home and at Staples, Nelson is basically Aaron Brooks at an All-Star level. So the question(s) end up being: is Derek Fisher bad enough to make Rafer Alston look that good? (and the answer is likely no) so therefore, who can replicate Nelson's production? All eyes should naturally turn to Rashard Lewis and Hedo Turkoglu. Courtney Lee and Mickael Pietrus will definitely have their hands full trying to guard Kobe, and the matchups between Odom and Ariza on Lewis and Turkoglu are pretty comparable. Should Bynum be used in limited minutes, Gasol could really stretch the Magic defense by pulling Howard out of the paint. For the Lakers it's all about staying focused on offense, getting Howard out of the paint, and hitting the subsequent cutters from the high post. While I would argue that outside of Howard, Alston, Lee, Pietrus, Turkoglu, and Lewis are all long and above-average man defenders, the Lakers just have too many weapons. On defense, Lakers have to keep Dwight Howard off the glass, while Lewis isn't a great rebounder for his height, they still can't afford to let him have a good rebounding game either.

Magic I think will go back to their newfound strategy of running a Dwight Howard/Hedo Turkoglu high screen and roll with Lewis, Alston, and Lee/Pietrus spotting up from the 3pt mark. Howard really needs to dominate the glass, especially on the offensive end. I know it sounds stupid and cliche to say this, but basically, the Magic need to hit their open threes. I'm sure several Magic fans, and probably a lot of Rockets fans will cringe at this as well, I think at least 1 game will be decided by the play of Rafer Alston, he's going to have to be big, as that is the only position that Magic can really exploit. Specifically, it's "whatever guy Derek Fisher has to guard".

While the change in the schedule has sort of thrown me in for a loop, I'm going to call it this way, the way I originally called it...

Magic in 6, otherwise Lakers in 7.

Actually you know what? I'm feeling gutsy again...

Magic in 5 on sheer momentum based on the fact that they have 3 home games in a row.

As we've seen though in this year's Playoffs, it could swing either way.

Let's get to it.

What will it take?: San Antonio Spurs

I'm not going to hide it, I'm a Spurs fan. For this reason alone, I'm not allowed to post on Bright Side of the Sun, though they do have some good stuff, which I would love to comment, but, I'm a Spurs fan. Honestly, the only two spots that I really enjoy reading and posting on would have to be Pounding the Rock or Third Quarter Collapse. Anyways, that's not what I'm writing about here. However, as a final side note, if I were to actually get League Pass and start watching games on a regular basis, I would become a Spurs blogger, maybe I should... I'm seriously thinking about it. Anyways...

Onwards... I think Spurs are one of the other teams with a better chance of upsetting the Lakers in a 7-game series. Of course, there's a lot that has to go right in order for that to happen. What I want to do here, is discuss the things that "have to go right" in order for said upset (which I hope will happen) to happen. Spurs currently stand 3rd in the Western Conference, 1/2 a game behind Denver, 1/2 a game ahead of Houston, two teams, who, honestly, I don't think really have much of a chance. Should the season end with no change to the standings, the Spurs would be playing Portland for the first round and the winner of Denver/Utah (I pick Utah) in the second. Let me just say, those are two tough matchups. My personal hope is that Utah jumps to 5 to play Houston so then Lakers would have to go through them first before matching up with the Spurs (assuming both advance to the Western Conference Finals). Hope. Yeah.

So from a purely basketball standpoint, what do Spurs need? Well, firstly, the obvious answer is they need to be healthy. They need to be back 100%, full speed. The most noteable players they need to be certain are healthy are Manu Ginobili and Drew Gooden. Of course, they have to keep Tony Parker and Tim Duncan healthy for the remainder of the season too. One of the primary reasons I say this is because the Rockets and Nuggets are such good regular season teams, that I don't see them falling to a spot where the Spurs will play them (though maybe the Spurs might fall to a spot where they'll play them given their last two games). While I don't anticipate the Rockets or Nuggets making a whole lot of noise in the postseason (read: 1st round exit) I think they can stay in the top 4 spots and retain homecourt advantage. Additionally, I don't see Dallas gaining any ground to play anyone besides the Lakers, but that all could change, still, I think it's pretty unlikely. That means that the Spurs have to hit the playoffs running, because their first matchup is likely to be pretty challenging from the getgo, Portland, New Orleans, and Utah are the choices, and I'd really rather not have to face any of them in a playoff series. Manu is slowly working his way back, but he's not quite 100% yet, hopefully he makes a full recovery by playoffs.

If everyone is healthy, then we have to have Tony Parker continue to have a career season into the offseason. Next, Tim Duncan has to be, well, Tim Duncan. The big questionmarks then kind of fall to the role players. I know this all sounds kind of obvious, in the effect of saying "all the Spurs players just need to play well" but there does have to be some level of consistent production from Matt Bonner, Bruce Bowen, Drew Gooden, Kurt Thomas, and Roger Mason Jr in order for the Spurs to have a chance. While the core of Duncan/Parker/Ginobili is a formidable offense (if healthy), you can't really bank on them wresting control of the game and pulling the team out of the fire as regularly or reliably as say Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, or even Paul Pierce. Parker has done it a couple of times, and it might save the Spurs in a couple of close ones, but it's not something to bank on. I think Bonner, Mason, and Bowen (and Udoka I guess) all know their role in the system, so I think the biggest x-factor here is going to be Drew Gooden. If Drew Gooden can play smart and work efficiently (i.e. not jack up flat-footed wing jumpers) then the Spurs are in good shape. What they need Gooden to do, is to grab rebounds (especially offensive ones) and get his points off those putbacks, and also to be able to keep his head on defense, which he's not known for doing, but still, a little effort wouldn't hurt.

Finally, I think Popovich needs to figure out his rotations. How to most effectively use his players.

MAKE MANU THE SUPER SIXTH MAN AGAIN
Firstly, I'm in agreement with most people that Manu should come off the bench. What this does is give the bench a lot of firepower and instant offense. I think that the most effective starting 5 for the Spurs thusfar this season has been Parker, Mason, Finley, Bonner, Duncan. It works, assuming (a fairly large if I guess) Mason, Finley, and Bonner can hit their open shots. Graydon a solid Spurs blogger makes a note of this in regards to the previous Spurs loss to OKC, well, not specifically in regards to the lineup but in regards to how Pop needs to work his rotations, there are other posts on it at Graydon (and co)'s blog. I know the subs aren't going to get tons of time come playoffs, but hey, the starters also need their rest, but I'd much rather see Hill, Ginobili, Bowen/Udoka, Gooden, Thomas off than Vaughn, Mason, Bowen/Udoka, Gooden, Thomas.

PLAY LESS MICHAEL FINLEY
One thing about this season I think that Pop has gone with is more firepower at the expense of some defense, which, I believe, given this roster is understandable. However, I don't know if that really dictates playing Michael Finley 30+ minutes per game. Right now, Finley's role is to hit open threes, which I believe given the minutes, either Udoka or Bowen can do effectively. So the second thing with the rotation is to limit Finley's minutes. I think those extra stops that Bowen/Udoka come up with will ultimately be more important, especially late game than the extra shots that Finley gets, especially when Finley isn't shooting well (in the last two losses Finley, while averaging 13 points has been shooting 10-28, that's 35.7%, ugh). In previous years, there was a lot of help from the middle from Duncan and one of Fransisco Elson, Fabricio Oberto, or Kurt Thomas, however, now with Bonner inserted as a key role in the lineup, I don't know that they can really afford to have another defensive liability on the floor.

PLAY MORE GEORGE HILL
Ok, so Hill might not be as great of a shooter as say Finley or Mason, but the idea is like that of playing less Finley and more Bowen/Udoka, the stops will be more important than the shots. One item of note that I found from the box score of the OKC game was really the rotation. I mean really, why is Jacque Vaughn playing 13+ minutes while George Hill gets a DNP? I know he's a rookie and inexperienced and all that, but isn't the last few games of the season a great time to get him that experience? While Vaughn knows how to make the offense go, he's really not much good on either end of the floor. Especially if Ginobili is the 6th man, I think that Hill wouldn't need to facilitate as much, since Ginobili will be there with him. This also moves Mason, who's not a great facilitator back to being the SG instead of the backup PG. I understand that Pop might want Mason on the floor, without getting considerably smaller (playing Mason at 2). While end-game situations might get iffy if Mason stays an SG since you might have to play Manu as a SF, I don't think that'll be as bad as more floor time for Michael Finley or something. I think he'll be crucial defensively especially as playoffs include the prospects of matching up against Chris Paul and/or Deron Williams.

I was discussing this with a friend (a Lakers fan) and while I think that a healthy Spurs outfit could sneak a 7 game series from the Lakers, there's one thing I failed to consider: David Stern hates the Spurs. That, I suppose is another uphill battle that the Spurs have to face, but at this point, it's all conspiracy theories. So these are what I think it will take for the Spurs to win. I believe that should everyone figure out the system and Pop sticks with a rotation that works, then Spurs have as good of a shot as anyone. Plus, it's an odd year.

Again Pop, here's my recommended rotation:

PG - Tony Parker, George Hill
SG - Roger Mason Jr, Manu Ginobili
SF - Michael Finley, Bruce Bowen, Ime Udoka
PF - Matt Bonner, Drew Gooden
C - Tim Duncan, Kurt Thomas

Don't play anyone else, though, I suppose you could stick Fab in there somewhere if he gets healthy again.

What will it take?: Cleveland Cavaliers

I know, I know, I'm pretty long overdue with this post. I was hoping to get some of the more prominent names in the blogosphere involved, but alas, I don't really know anyone in the Cavs blogosphere, as I don't really follow the Cavs outside of the plethora of LeBron news that assaults my reader daily. So I guess that means I'm stuck doing my own analysis. Shucks. I'm sure that's what some of you are thinking.

Anyways, the Cavs have had a pretty strong showing ever since LeBron has been on the team, because well, LeBron is LeBron. The Cavs have made the playoffs for since the 2005-2006 season, and it's largely been on the shoulders of LeBron James, especially since Cleveland got shafted by Carlos Boozer in the 2004 free agency. Regardless, with a supporting cast featuring the likes of Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Drew Gooden, Donyell Marshall, Sasha Pavlovic, Eric Snow, Larry Hughes, and the like, LeBron carried the Cavs into the playoffs (albeit in a weaker Eastern Conference), and even as far as the NBA Finals past the Detroit Pistons in 2007, only to be swept by the San Antonio Spurs. I'm sure you're all familiar with the history so I'll try to fast-forward to today.

Basically, everyone (including Mike Brown) realized that the Cavs, while a strong defensive team, desperately needed offense outside of LeBron James. LeBron just wasn't the Allen Iverson type that dominated the ball, and honestly, good defensive teams were able to stop the Cavs' offense by simply bottlenecking the point of origin, LeBron, and since he was the only point of origin, it worked. During the past offseason, the Cavs realized this and made a three-way move sending Joe Smith to Oklahoma City, who in turn sent Luke Ridnour to Milwaukee, who subsequently handed Mo Williams over to Cleveland (and Desmond Mason to OKC). At that juncture, Mo Williams was the second most reliable scorer on the Bucks behind Michael Redd, but the emergence of Ramon Sessions had rendered Williams somewhat expendable. Williams was averaging 17.2 points, 3.5 rebounds, and 6.4 assists during his last season as a Buck.

What Williams added, was a player who could create his own shot, someone who didn't have to rely on LeBron to make offense, i.e. a second point of offensive origin. Currently, Mo Williams, is doing his Mo Williams thing, just on a better team (17.9 points, 3.5 rebounds, 4.0 assists). It's definitely improved the Cavs significantly, as it has made their offense flow better, that and the fact that Mike Brown has developed an offense outside of "pass LeBron the ball at the top of the key". However, despite having the best record in the league (58-13), there is still no guarantee that the Cavs will win a title or even make it to the Finals. They still have to fight through an improved Eastern Conference playoff bracket and then take out whoever the West throws out at them. If they do make it to the Finals again, it won't be the trouncing they received 2 years ago, but again, it's not a given that they'll take it either.

So what's it gonna take? Well, ideally I would've said another scoring option, because to me honestly, I don't think that Mo Williams is a very good second option (I think Zydrunas Ilgauskas is a crappier third option), not that he's a bad player, but I think if you had another player who could score, maybe on the low block or something, they'd be more effective. However, that essentially fell through with the lack of a trade come the deadline. Mo Williams will have big shooting nights, but not consistently as say like Ray Allen, so what's going to have to happen, is that the role players are going to have to step it up.

One of the Cavs biggest weaknesses is offense in the low post, if you look at their front court, you have some pairing of Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Joe Smith, Anderson Varejao, and JJ Hickson. Let's assume that they get Ben Wallace back healthy, because I think they're going to need him come playoff time, so throw him into the mix too (Lorenzen Wright does not count). While Big Z is consistent, he's not a guy that can really score at will, and really makes a living off of open face up 12 footers than anything else.

Production-wise JJ Hickson and Joe Smith are virtually identical on a per 36 minute basis. The primary difference being that JJ Hickson coughs up the ball a lot more than Smith. While they're both solid, they, and Big Z, are by no means extraordinary offensive threats in the low block. I haven't seen much of Hickson play, but I'd imagine that he's not great or that his IQ isn't as high as Cavs might like if Brown is leery of playing him as a rookie in the post season and therefore is going with tried and true Joe Smith and his veteran exerpience. If we look at Varejao and Wallace, while Varejao isn't completely useless on offense, like Ben Wallace is, they're both more of an impact on the defensive end, which means they are even less of a scoring option than Big Z, Hickson, and Smith.

The offense then has to come from the shooters. Mo Williams, Delonte West, Daniel Gibson, and Wally Sczerbiak have to keep up their solid shooting from this season in order to carry the team over the top. LeBron is going to find them, but they need to be able to make the shots that they get, and do so consistently, which I suppose is the case for most teams. However, I emphasize this for the Cavs simply because there really just aren't that many weapons to rely on, while Williams was certainly an upgrade (from Larry Hughes and Eric Snow), I don't know that it's necessarily enough to carry them over in 7 games straight, especially since they are a little weak in the low post (see Dallas Mavericks from 2005-2007). My focus in terms of offensive production I think really has to be Delonte West, who's definitely stepped it up for the brunt of the season, but really has to maintain that high level of play for the Cavs to win it all.

While the Cavs have always been a good defensive team, they can't really take all that for granted. With Ben Wallace down, the team really suffers defensively on the block, as Joe Smith and Zydrunas Ilgauskas are by no means stoppers. Joe Smith may know the system and is probably pretty good with the help, but honestly, we can't forget that he was criticized so much last season for his inability to guard Kevin Garnett in the playoffs. Joe Smith is not a young guy, and so his defense isn't really going to get better. They have to really help a lot on the defense with teams that play physical like Boston and Atlanta (and Orlando I guess), while I don't know that they'll win a lot of the frontcourt battles, they can't afford to be beat too much by the opposing bigs.

Of course the big assumption is that LeBron will be enough to tide this better team over. I think that in this off season if they can acquire a major piece, say a solid PF scorer or maybe another explosive swingman then they'd be solid. With what they have now, LeBron will have to continue to be pretty darn amazing, and everyone else is going to have to step it up.

What will it take?: LA Lakers

I was considering doing a piece on how Shaq needs to learn how to shut his mouth, but there's already a lot of literature out there on that (ok maybe not "literature, but there's a bit of writing on it). Then, I thought about maybe talking about how Celtics defense maybe isn't so much stifling as it is dirty. So I decided, to move forward with a post that I've been meaning to get to for a while, that is, a closer look at all the different contenders in the league, which I boiled down to 2 per conference with a "dark horse" type team thrown in for kicks. I've tried to get some external input on this as well, so here goes:

The Lakers are currently the best team in the league, at least record-wise. A lot of people are gearing for a rematch of last year's finals showdown (Boston and LA). Kenny Smith continually talks about how the Lakers are the only team to improve their roster from last season (it's on one of the Inside the NBA episodes, don't remember which one) significantly. I can agree with his analysis that having Gasol for a whole year and having a healthy Ariza, even without Bynum again, the Lakers are improved, yes. While the other teams in the West haven't made a significant move, but it's hard to say that other teams haven't "improved" either. I'm not going to get into that though.

Last season, the Lakers had a solid run through the Western Conference, starting with a sweep of Denver in the first round, a fairly even 6 game matchup against Utah, and then a convincing 5 game rout of San Antonio (despite some controversy). I'm sure they're looking for another run again this season, but this time, hopefully overcome the Eastern Conference team that they face. After losing to Boston in 5 games in last year's Finals, the Lakers were accused of being soft, unable to bang with the more physical Boston frontline of Kevin Garnett and Kendrick Perkins. Maybe that was the case, and they hoped that the return of Bynum would add some physicality to their game, which it did, until he got hurt, again.

One thing that the Lakers have definitely established thusfar this season is that they play very good team basketball, be it on the offensive end or defensive end. Phil Jackson's triangle offense emphasizes a lot of ball movement and when it's clicking, it's nigh impossible to stop. The offense has always been there, the defense however, is what the Lakers need. Kurt from Forum Blue and Gold says:

"When the Lakers have wanted to, they have been a very good defensive team this season, playing a much more aggressive style in the sense that there is a lot of help from bigs to keep guys from driving into the lane and getting easy buckets (think Paul Pierce in the Finals last year). The Lakers are going to make teams beat them from the outside, not in the paint. The Lakers played that system well early in the season, but since their focus and commitment on the defensive end has been spotty. It can't be in the playoffs, especially the later rounds. I think you'll see the last few weeks of the season that playing more focused defense will be something the coaching staff and players will talk a lot about."

It kind of goes without saying that one of the first priorities for the Lakers is to get Bynum back for the post-season, to get him back healthy, because the main culprits of the Lakers' interior softness would be their current frontcourt tandem of Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom. Should Bynum get back healthy, it provides a solid interior presence that the Lakers desperately needed against more physical bigs. One thing Kenny Smith notes in his preview of this Thursday's Lakers/Spurs matchup is that the Lakers have a really hard time guarding Tim Duncan. If you notice from the highlights, a lot of times it's just Duncan scoring over Lamar Odom, who isn't a great post defender. Bynum gives that big body that can press against Duncan and force him out of the paint, that doesn't completely nullify Duncan, but it does make his shots more difficult. Additionally, while Derek Fisher is a smart defender, he's also an aging player, he's not quite as fast as he once was, and so guards like Tony Parker usually have their way with him, the damage done by those kind of slashing guards is mitigated significantly with an interior help presence of someone like Andrew Bynum. Again, Kurt addresses this issue:

"They need Andrew Bynum back, not for any scoring but for the way he protects the paint on defense and grabs rebounds. Bynum also provides depth — right now the Lakers second unit is struggling because it cannot generate offense outside the fast break. So Odom or Gasol have to stay in with them, racking up a lot of minutes, to provide a good scoring option in the half court. Bynum's return will mean more regular minutes for everyone (Bynum may come off the bench, at least at first). In the playoffs, the depth matters less because the key players can and will take on more minutes, but the Lakers need that depth because it gives Phil Jackson more matchup options in the playoffs. It allows him to go big or small, to do a number of things that will frustrate opponents."

Of course, while it's certain that the Lakers will likely clinch the top spot in the Western Conference, a good regular season record isn't really indicative of post season success. However, this Lakers team does look a lot more balanced than the 2007 Dallas Mavericks did. Granted there's a little luck involved, what with the matchups, but the first round looks like it'll be against a floundering Dallas Mavericks, which I think the Lakers should take easily. However, they really can't let that get to them. For the Lakers, the talent is all there, I'm sure having been so close to winning the Larry O'Brien trophy, the desire should be too, I think the main thing is for them to focus on each game in front of them as each series progresses. If the 2007 Golden State Warriors taught us anything, it's that you can't really take anyone for granted in a 7-game playoff series. Certainly it would help if there was an upset here or there, however, and none of the teams ranked 2-7 in the West will be an easy out, since they all deserve to be there.

I think the most serious threats though that the Lakers will face would be Utah Jazz and the San Antonio Spurs. I feel like Denver, Houston, and New Orleans will falter when it switches over from one-and-done regular season games to the grueling 7-game matchups against such high caliber teams. Portland honestly, just hasn't really been there, so while that might be held against them, they are something of an x-factor. Nonetheless, I think the Blazers still have some growing so experience wins out in the end. In terms of favorable matchups, despite having homecourt advantage, the Lakers would really want the Jazz to beat out the Rockets for the 3rd place spot, so that San Antonio and Utah would play each other before facing the Lakers, instead of the Lakers running the possibility of having to play both of them (again) in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

I personally don't think there's a team that's invulnerable to defeat, and I think the other contenders in the West have as equal a chance as the Eastern contenders to keep the Lakers from winning that championship. That being said, I think it's equally likely that the Lakers could win it all this season. There are still a number of games left in the season, and too many unknowns both in LA and on the other squads for anyone to say for sure.

Finally, I think for the Lakers taking home a championship banner, is beyond Kobe doing his Kobe thing, the rest of the players need to step it up. The entire Lakers team needs to be playing at that higher level and not have to fall back on Kobe shooting them out of holes. That means that the "gel" guys, I think namely Lamar Odom, have to be able to pick it up when their number is called. Kobe's going to get a ton of defensive attention, and to a lesser extent Gasol, which means that the reserve roles have to be willing to take big shots. Fisher doesn't have that problem, but my concern would be more for Lamar Odom, Luke Walton, and the like. While the reserves usually don't get as much burn with starters willing to play more minutes, progressive fatigue can still catch up, especially if series start dragging on to 6-7 games, so the role players really have to go out and get their own on the floor.

That was pretty dense so let me bullet point what I think the Lakers need for success, adding on a few peripheral notes while I'm at it:

• A healthy Bynum to return for the post season
• Focus on the defensive end, especially in the paint
  
• Kobe being Kobe
• Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom not being fatigued by too many minutes with Bynum out
• Odom and Luke Walton have to step it up
• Keep running the triangle
  

That's it for now, if you have a comment feel free to leave it, this is how I see it. I'll be posting my predictions for the other contenders hopefully soon.

Game 3: Did the Lakers dodge a bullet? or did the Celtics simply miss?

I didn't get to see the game from tip off to the closing buzzer, but I saw enough of it to know that this was an ugly game. Shots just weren't fall, players were making bad decisions, forcing up bad shots because they couldn't run their sets before the shot clock ran out, etc... I can't honestly say that the Lakers deserved the win. Sure Kobe Bryant went crazy, getting his 36 points on 12-20 shooting, but seriously, what the heck happened here? Everyone's already telling me how different it's supposed to be next year with Bynum back, and of course Michelle Tafoya seemed to insult Phil Jackson during an interview after the 3rd quarter saying, "It looks like it's 12 minutes away from Boston taking a 3-0 lead in the series..." everything is pointing at Boston winning the series (I'm gonna say it just because, "I told you so"). Tonight in Game 3, the Lakers were saved by 3 players, 2 of them wearing Celtics green.

Games 1 and 2 definitely shook up the young Lakers, they're not used to the competitiveness and raw energy that is Boston, thus Kobe Bryant was forced to drag the entire team through the trenches just to pull off this ugly 87-81 win, only 4 players scored double digits in the entire game, total (Ray Allen, Kobe Bryant, Sasha Vujacic, and Kevin Garnett). Thankfully for the Lakers Vujacic was actually hitting the random slew of shots he normally takes, thus tallying up 20 for the night. Even more luckily for them, Garnett's 13 came off of 6-21 shooting, and Paul Pierce had a bad night with 2-14 shooting, scoring only 6 points and tallying 5 fouls in the process. Lakers were outrebounded on the offensive glass 14-9, making it up on the defensive end simply because the Celtics weren't hitting their shots.

End of the line is that the Lakers not wearing a number 24 jersey just don't seem to have the toughness to keep up with this older, scrappy Boston team. Gasol and Odom, the two purportedly big scorers in the Lakers' frontcourt were completely lost throughout the game, shooting a combined 5-18. Gasol finished 3-9 with 9 points, 5 of those coming off of put backs and a free throw in the 4th quarter. Gasol just looked frightened to be on the floor, he wasn't going for rebounds, he was tenative on defense, he didn't box out, half the rebounds I saw him get were ones that landed in his lap, and the only rebound I saw him fight for was the one he ripped out of the hands of Kobe.

Despite pulling themselves back into the series, these young Lakers that everyone had going all the way, these young Lakers that everyone thought was the best team in the league, really haven't shown much fight in them throughout this finals series. The fans are already talking about next year, while analysts continue to rant on how the Lakers' interior defense is too soft, and how Kevin Garnett needs to just be more aggressive inside. I'll stick with Celtics in 7, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they take it in 5 or 6. The Lakers that played in Game 3 looked like the Lakers of old, nothing but Kobe pulling them through, and there's a reason why the Lakers of old never made it out of the first round.

L.A. Lakers: Greatest Strength, Biggest Weakness

No one ever doubted (and I would guess still doubts) that LA is very much Kobe Bryant's team. There's nothing really to it, when the show gets on the road, it's Kobe's show to run, everyone else is just along for the ride. So if you tell me that the team is still dependent on Kobe Bryant, I'd believe it. Sure you wouldn't necessarily be gutting the Lakers as badly if you removed Kobe as you would the Cavs if you removed LeBron, but you'd be coming pretty close. Despite the anchor that is Pau Gasol, I think that the Lakers are still too Kobe reliant. Sure, they don't need him to score his 40 points a game as much anymore, he can confidently distribute the ball, certain that Odom, Vujacic, Radmonovic, Fisher, etc... can put in the open look.

So what am I saying when I say that the Lakers are still too Kobe reliant? They don't need him to carry the team scoring wise as I mentioned, right? They got rid of Kwame Brown and Smush Parker, brought back good friend and vet Derek Fisher, and stole Pau Gasol (only the best Spanish player on the planet). However, Pau Gasol has shown that he's not a team leader, he's better suited in a backup role, a second scoring option, likewise Lamar Odom has shown that he's camera shy, he doesn't like the spotlight, taking over games is not something he can do. He's a role player, a very good one, but a role player nontheless.

This epiphany sort of came to me watching a rather embarassing performance by the Lakers (or I should say an impressive defensive showing by the Celtics) in Game 1. The Celtics defense has been constantly frustrating the Lakers, especially Kobe, and the rest of the Lakers (except maybe Fisher) look to him for their own confidence. Under pressure, they crack. They make bad decisions, sloppy plays, force shots, it happens when their offense doesn't flow according to plan, and then, they look to Kobe to take over games. Maybe it's just youth, hopefully they get over it as they progress. We'll see.

NBA Finals 2008: The Return of Showtime

Everyone keeps saying, it's Showtime again, Boston vs LA, the return of classical basketball. Unfortunately, I don't think I was old enough to grasp the concept of basketball during the Showtime era, so all Showtime means to me is the ridiculous Midway NBA game released in 1999 in the arcades and on Playstation based on the mold of NBA Jam and NBA Hangtime for the Super NES. It simply meant big heads, crazy dunks, 95% hot spot 3 pt shooting, and Patrick Ewing getting his jump shot stuffed by Mugsy Bogues. Now, if that actually happened, it'd be pretty cool, but, I don't think we'll be seeing Sam Cassell flying out of the weak side to reject Pau Gasol on a put back shot.

As much history as these two teams have, and as much as David Stern roots for it, and as much as the gold vs green jerseys bring back waves of nostalgia (for everyone except me as I started watching basketball when Phil Jackson was winning all his rings), this series is no different than the others before it. To be brutally honest, if it weren't for the hype surrounding these teams and the nostalgia of Showtime, you could say that this series has been remarkably boring, there were no major upsets, all the wins have gone to the higher seeded (and arguably better) teams, and now we have the no. 1 Western Conference LA Lakers facing off against the no. 1 Eastern Conference (and league-wide) Boston Celtics. Most of it was hype, and a lot of that hype/tension was released last week when the Lakers dethroned the returning champs in the Spurs and the 2nd best team in the league (Detroit Pistons) was ousted out of the Conference Finals for the 3rd time since their 2004 championship (sorry Flip Saunders).

But we're here to talk about basketball, not rant and rave about media hype, so let's get to the basketball. Firstly, I think Peter May's column in Yahoo! Sports is 100% accurate. There really isn't that strong of a case to call Boston the underdogs beyond their inconsistent playoff play. Granted, that's a big knock against the Celtics, but hey, you have to say that they're all kind of new to it. I mean, it's a pretty quick turnaround turning from a draft lottery team to the Eastern Conference champions (granted it's the Eastern Conference). Still, we're looking at three All-Star/potential hall of famers, and a slew of not so shabby looking backup cast. The Lakers, seem to have won a substantial amount of support and confidence because of the strong play from its role players and the MVP performance of Kobe Bryant.

Let's look at the matchups, and see what happens.

PG - Boston: Rajon Rondo; LA: Derek Fisher
I'm honestly going to have to go with Rondo on this one. I will give that Fisher is a catch and shoot kind of guy, so he doesn't have to make the plays that Mike Bibby and Chauncey Billups did, but Rondo did amazing against those two so defensively, I don't think he's going to have much trouble dealing with Fisher, that kid is long. On the flip side, while Rondo doesn't have a jump shot, he is fast, he has kind of the lookings to be like a lanky Tony Parker. I honestly don't think Fisher can keep in front of him.

SG - Boston: Ray Allen; LA: Kobe Bryant
Ray Allen has received a lot of criticism for not being able to find his shot and fading during this playoff series. Honestly, as I've said I think on a Yahoo! board, I don't think people are looking at Allen very fair. He moved from being the Sonics' no. 1 All-Star scoring option in front of Rashard Lewis and Chris Wilcox to becoming the no. 3 scoring option behind Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett. Yes, Allen is older, but he's not a pure shooter, never was, never will be. I'm not saying Allen can't shoot, but they Celtics optimally would work even better with a Reggie Miller type player, the ultimate catch and shoot, and that is a player that Ray Allen is not. However, I think he's going to find ways to score nonetheless, being finding his shot off the double-screen, or just putting the ball on the floor. The big question will be, if Phil Jackson keeps Kobe on him, and how much Kobe invests into defense. On the other side of the floor, I've really only got one thing to say; it's Kobe Bryant. Of course, this is the league-wide no 1 defense he's going against, and his previous two outings against Boston he's shot a combined 15-46, that's 32.6% for a guy who normally averages 45.9%. Expect to see Kevin Garnett and Kendrick Perkins to come out and help alot, but of course, still expect Kobe to try to get his 30 per game. He's not considered the MVP and the best player in the game for nothing.

SF- Boston: Paul Pierce; LA: Vladamir Radmonovic
I wouldn't be very surpised if Phil Jackson opted to go with Trevor Ariza or Sasha Vujacic depending on whether he puts Kobe on Pierce or Allen. Radmonovic has size on Pierce and nothing else. A lot is going to be on Pierce, and while he won't have to replicate his showdown with Lebron James, it wouldn't hurt if he pulled out another 41 point performance. None of the above players mentioned are huge offensive threats, so I don't think Pierce will have too hard of a problem covering any one of them, please smack me if Radmonovic or Ariza suddenly go off for 29 points.

PF- Boston: Kevin Garnett; LA: Lamar Odom
This is where the matchups get a little muddy, but I'm going to base it on the starting lineups that the two teams seem to favor. The biggest question of matchups is here in the front court, and how Odom and Gasol will be matched up against Garnett and Perkins. Some have Gasol on Garnett and Odom on Perkins, and others have Garnett on Odom. I think that either way, one of the Lakers' major offensive threats will be shut down with Kevin Garnett on him. I personally would have Garnett body up against Gasol, but who knows? On the other side, the same problem persists, Odom is just not a good enough post player to guard Garnett, and against Kendrick Perkins he's giving a good 34 pounds in the paint. That's a lot of size. Gasol on the other hand, would do a better job, but I think Garnett does everything Gasol can do better (except maybe shooting), and will still find ways to produce. Perkins is just sort of the garbage man, benefitting off all the attention Garnett draws in the post and that Pierce and Allen draw off their slashing, with the dunk off the double team.

C- Boston: Kendrick Perkins; LA: Pau Gasol
As mentioned above, Perkins will kind of be the beneficiary of any double teams and help defense LA will throw up against the Big 3, and he's no slouch on defense. I think he could give Pau Gasol some trouble if he guarded him, and he definitely will force Odom to pass out or go to his jump shot, and that's probably shakier than LeBron's. Odom won't be able to finish at the rim the way he likes to, and he'll likely have to work that much harder on the glass for rebounds if he's matched up against Perkins. Gasol will likely be experiencing a very physical brand of basketball between Perkins and Garnett, granted he survived San Antonio with Tim Duncan and Kurt Thomas (and Fabricio Oberto), but I think that they'll lock down on him even more in Boston. We'll see how he fares, but given Bostons strong defense, I really don't anticipate him averaging 20 pts a game through the series, I think even 10 rebounds will be tough for him.

Bench- Boston: Sam Cassell, Eddie House, James Posey, Glen Davis, PJ Brown; LA: Jordan Farmar, Trevor Ariza, Luke Walton, Sasha Vujacic, Ronny Turiaf
As good as the Lakers bench has played, I still like Boston's bench better. I'll take James Posey over Luke Walton and Trevor Ariza any day. The fact is, is that most of LA's bench has been relegated to a role playing position, and despite the inconsistencies of Boston's bench, I think they're more liable to make a bigger difference in the game than the reserves from LA. PJ Brown has shown that he can make key put backs and clutch shots, Big Baby has really stepped it up, and Eddie House and Sam Cassell can still make their shots. Farmar and Vujacic have shown sparks of being great role players, but when it comes down to the wire, I think the veterancy will pay off. Posey, Cassell, and Brown just bring too many intangibles to the floor that the Lakers' bench is lacking. If we assume that Gasol and Bryant cancel out the Big Three, then it comes down to the reserves and role players, and as far as the reserves are concerned, I think that the Boston bench can and will contribute more than the Lakers.

Having home court advantage definitely makes it a very, very promising situation for Boston as well. They like playing in the Garden. It'll be the long, drawn out, Showtime series that David Stern was looking for, but in the end, I think Boston just wants it more. Too much desire from too many snubbed All Stars, Kobe's been there, done that, and he and his team know that they're still young, they've still got their chances, Kobe's already got his rings and now he has his MVP. Between Garnett, Pierce, and Allen (and you could throw in Sam Cassell for good measure), there's too much desire, having been so close, having the taste of being champions, but never quite getting there, now's their time.

Boston in 7, you heard it here. Someone's gotta predict something in order to be right or wrong.

Why Lebron James Will be Swept Again if He Goes to the Finals

I've said it many times before, and I'll say it again, if Detroit and Boston are somehow upset in the playoffs, I expect the NBA Finals to be painfully short and an unspectacular romping of whichever team comes out of the Eastern Conference. Let's say any of the top 5 teams in the West have a shot at the Finals (Lakers, Spurs, Suns, Hornets, Mavericks), in any given 7 game series against an Eastern Conference team not called the Pistons or the Celtics, will likely be resolved within 5 games (more likely a sweep, though Orlando might make it to 6). Let's look at the team that probably has the biggest x-factor to once again make it to the Finals, that would be the Cleveland Cavaliers. Here's why, if they do by some freak accident, make it to the Finals, they will lose, again:

1.) Just because Sasha Pavlovic did a "good job" guarding a lethargic Vince Carter last season against the Nets does not mean that he can stop Kobe Bryant or Manu Ginobili (maybe with Peja and Jason Terry and Raja Bell). The reason; Kobe and Manu actually care. Rod Thorn has already spent seasons and $60 million trying to get the former All-Star and slam dunk champion to at least try when he's playing. Carter's kind of resigned himself to the fact that he'll always play on mediocre teams that don't go anywhere though. Avery Johnson said he tried every kind of defense conceivable to stop Kobe, and it didn't happen. Manu Ginobili has been on a hot streak and just won't be denied, he's had over 30 pts in 4 of the last 9 games that the Spurs played (all Ws for the Spurs btw).

2.) The Cavs will have a harder time shutting down Tim Duncan or Pau Gasol (or David West or Amare Stoudamire or Dirk Nowitzki) than the other team will have shutting down Ben Wallace. Seriously, for a guy that has a good game a 6pts, 10 rbds this season, you're not really going to need a lot to limit his scoring, and you know that Wallace will see a lot of play time trying to stop the bigs inside. Sure he'll cut them down by a couple of FGs, but when they sub in Joe Smith they'll go crazy, and not like Ben Wallace will make a big enough difference to matter in the end anyway.

3.) The Cavs' added perimeter threat isn't overly threatening. Only about as much as say the Spurs perimeter with only Michael Finley and Bruce Bowen shooting, but when you tack on Ginobili, Barry, and the occaisional clutch 3 from Robert Horry, Sczerbiak, West, and Gibson don't look that scary. From the Lakers you have Fisher, Vujajic, Farmar, and Kobe, Mavs have Terry, Howard, and Nowitzki, Hornets have Peja and Mo Pete (I don't include the Suns because they don't play defense anyway, but they still have Nash, Bell, and occaisionally Grant Hill).