What the Warriors Could've Had

I was talking to a co-worker and he mentioned how the Warriors really don't know what to do with their first round picks and have had a history of making major draft busts. I decided to look it up, and indeed it seems to be true. If we assume that in retrospect Warriors retain all of their draft picks up to the present despite picking the right person we see a glaring disparity.

Here is a list of all the warriors that were drafted since 1995:
Joe Smith (1st pick 1995)
Todd Fuller (11th pick 1996)
Adonal Folye (8th pick 1997)
Vince Carter (5th pick 1998, traded to Toronto for 4th pick Antawn Jamison)
Jason Terry (10th pick 1999, traded to Atlanta, received 21st pick Jeff Foster, later traded for Vonteego Cummings, the 26th pick and a future pick)
Troy Murphy (14th pick 2001)
Gilbert Arenas (31st pick 2001)
Mike Dunleavy Jr (3rd pick 2002)
Steve Logan (29th pick 2002)
Mickael Pietrus (11th pick 2003)
Derrick Zimmerman (40th pick 2003)
Andris Biedrins (11th pick 2004)
Ike Diogu (9th pick 2005)
Monta Ellis (40th pick 2005)
Chris Taft (42nd pick 2005)
Patrick O'Bryant (9th pick 2006)
Kosta Perovic (38th pick 2006)

Now a list of who they could have drafted since 1995:
Antonio McDyess (2nd pick 1995)
Jerry Stackhouse (3rd pick 1995)
Rasheed Wallace (4th pick 1995)
Kevin Garnett (5th pick 1995)
Kobe Bryant (13th pick 1996)
Peja Stojakovic (14th pick 1996)
Steve Nash (15th pick 1996)
Jermaine O'Neal (17th pick 1996)
Zydrunas Ilgauskas (20th pick 1996)
Tracy McGrady (9th pick 1997)
Corey Maggette (13th pick 1999)
Ron Artest (16th pick 1999)
Andrei Kirilenko (24th pick 1999)
Manu Ginobili (57th pick 1999)
Zach Randolph (19th pick 2001)
Gerald Wallace (25th pick 2001)
Tony Parker (27th pick 2001)
Amare Stoudamire (9th pick 2002)
Caron Butler (10th pick 2002)
Tayshaun Prince (23rd pick 2002)
Carlos Boozer (34th pick 2002)
David West (18th pick 2003)
Leandro Barbosa (28th pick 2003)
Josh Howard (29th pick 2003)
Maurice Williams (47th pick 2003)
Al Jefferson (15th pick 2004)
Josh Smith (17th pick 2004)
Kevin Martin (26th pick 2004)
Andrew Bynum (10th pick 2005)
Danny Granger (17th pick 2005)
Ronnie Brewer (14th pick 2006)
Rajon Rondo (21st pick 2006)

Well we'll see if it gets better from here on. Brandan Wright and Marco Bellinelli seem like steps in the right direction, let's see what Warriors do with pick number 14 this year.

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.

Western Conference Wrapup

The better team won. That's right, you heard me say it, in overall talent and ability, I think the LA Lakers are a better team than the San Antonio Spurs. They just have more dynamic pieces to work around. Doesn't mean I like the Lakers any more or that I'm jumping on their band wagon, I'm stating a simple fact, the team with the better roster won. Despite a valiant effort by both Tim Duncan and Tony Parker, the rest of the Spurs were simply out hustled and out played by a younger Lakers team. Robert Horry didn't hit the big shots like they needed him to, Michael Finley played his usual Jekyl and Hyde basketball, no one on the rosters outside of Parker and Duncan are tremendously consistent. Sure Ginobili played the best season of his career, but when it came to the playoffs, he didn't have much left to give. He beat his body up again and again and this time, it just didn't have enough juice to run through the last stretch. All in all, it was a good run, I thought that the older team with the experience and the desperation would be able to pressure the younger Lakers (especially the bench) into bad plays, they proved me wrong.

I never expected the Spurs to stop Kobe, I likely won't expect anything short of an early exit from the game (due to injury or ejection) to keep me from pencilling him in for at least a good 25 points every game. I think that all in all, Kobe did a good job of stepping up the bar for his young teammates and leading them to this hard earned win. He's building a team that understands, despite having the best player in the game, they can't just sit and watch him do his magic, they're on the floor for a reason, and they have to do their part. He's convinced Lamar Odom, Pau Gasol, Derek Fisher, Sasha Vujajic, Luke Walton, Vladamir Radmonovic, etc... that they need to play together, and they've done it well. They look at the Spurs and realized that this is what made them a championship team, it wasn't Tim Duncan's amazing fundamental post ability (though that sure does help), it isn't Tony Parker's speed and penetration ability (that helps too), it wasn't Manu Ginobili's ability to make so many "impossible shots" (certainly doesn't hurt), but it was the fact that they functioned as one unit that made them so deadly. They stepped up to the challenge, and in the end, the younger legs and better talent won out. Certainly it doesn't hurt to have the best player in the league on your team too.

Spurs have realized that they need fresher and younger legs, while I admit that the Lakers are a better team talent wise, I think much of it was that the Spurs beat themselves. Role players weren't playing their role (a kudos as well to good Lakers defense), weren't able to play their roles, and the lumbering machine from San Antonio was brought to a grinding halt. I think the defense that Spurs played was phenomenal, the series produced some of the Lakers' worst offensive performances in this postseason. However, when they needed the shot to fall, it wasn't there. With Tony Parker being the youngest player to crack the rotation (age 26), and all other players hitting their 30s, Popovich and the Spurs front office need to bring and infusion of youth into their roster. It's obvious that while Ginobili is still kicking, the aggresive style of play that he so favors is wearing on his body. As Spurs slip into a quiet phase of rebuilding (I imagine they'll be just as quiet if not more so than Detroit), they'll continue to contend, they have to. The teams in the West are young and talented, we've seen this with Utah, with New Orleans, and now with the Lakers (don't even get me started on the Blazers).

I could go into the David Stern "Showtime" conspiracy, but, I hold no grudges, I thought the veteran team could pull the win, but I was wrong. Good job Kobe, way to hold your team together.

"Deserved"? That's stretching it

I'm not going to say that Spurs were robbed. I didn't see the entire game, but from what I can gather from the box score and the lines, aside from Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, and Brent Barry, the Spurs played horribly. Did they deserve to win? I doubt that Popovich or any of the Spurs think so. Should they have won? That's a completely different story altogether. Sure there could have been no calls and controversial calls on the Lakers, yeah, it's hard to believe that Kobe got his 29 points without a single trip to the charity stripe. Let's face it though, this one was obvious, Derek Fisher landed on Brent Barry, and the refs just sat there looking. I don't know what they were looking at, each other? In exit interviews you'll hear Barry and Popovich both say that the no call was the right call, because the refs don't want to deter the "outcome of the game". The fact of the matter is, call or no call, something happened, which invariably altered the outcome of the game. Simply put, the refs don't want to be responsible.

Putting aside all conspiracy theories of David Stern's dream of an NBA Showtime revival, let's simply look at the play. Barry fakes, Fisher bites, lands on Barry and Barry tries to get around for an open shot, chucking up a prayer that was more of a blind heave before the buzzer than any real attempt at making a shot. Had this happened 1 minute earlier, Fisher would have had his 5 personal foul and Barry would've gotten his two free throws. Assuming he makes them and no one scores, the Spurs and Lakers go into overtime. I've heard the argument that the Lakers "deserved" the win more. Sure they played better ball, but if they deserved it that much Kobe wouldn't have been rushing shots at the end of the 4th giving the Spurs back posession of the ball. Of course there's the no resetting of the shot clock after Fisher's toss skimmed the rim, ok, I can buy that, and the whole "poetic justice" of the next no call against the Spurs. To argue that the no call was made simply because the Lakers "deserved" the win? Excuse me? If that's not game fixing I don't know what is. The Lakers deserve the win if Brent Barry had clanked it off the front of the rim with Derek Fisher's hand in his face, if he had bricked it off back iron on an off balance shot, or if Kobe came around the weak side and swatted it, but don't tell me that the Lakers, who had let the Spurs come back within two, "deserved" the win when a 6'1", 200 lb point guard is sitting on Brent Barry's shoulder at the last shot. Lakers made mistakes at the end, sure the refs made mistakes but so did the Lakers. Kobe tried to drive it in instead of eating clock, Fisher bit on the pump fake, doesn't matter how well you played for the remaining 47 minutes of the game, mistakes cost you points, and sometimes mistakes cost you games.

Again, I'm not saying the Spurs were robbed, I'm not going to say that the Lakers were nearly robbed. If the Spurs played the way they were supposed to, they wouldn't have been in that situation to begin with (as most of you that read this would likely know I'm a Spurs fan). However, to say that the no call was the right call because the ref didn't want to affect the outcome of the game and hand the "undeserving" team the victory, that's bogus, by not calling it, the ref simply says, "This team should win, and the other one, well, jump through these burning hoops and if you make the impossible shot, then we'll give you your miracle". I don't get what the Lakers fans yelling at me are all defensive about, the foul wasn't in continuation. Barry gets a foul on the floor, gets his 2 free throws, presumably if he makes them both the game goes into OT and the Lakers can just prove how much more they "deserve" the win in the extra minutes of play. I'm not gonna say whether or not the refs called the game perfectly, because it's obvious that they're human and they didn't, but the fact is, they saw this one, and deliberately decided not to. Sure the Spurs didn't play like they "deserved" to win, but sometimes, even if you don't, you should. This is basketball, not figure skating, refs don't decide who "deserves" the win, they're just there to make the calls when they happened, and please don't tell me that this didn't happen.

It's the Conference Finals!

So the Conference Finals are here, and Game 1 of the East is already done with the home team (Boston) winning. Game 1 of the West occurs tonight and this is year, and these series will be off. These four teams are, hands down, the four best teams in the NBA, and now it comes down the essentially, the professional Final 4. A potential 14 games (7 potentially from each conference) of good ol' slug 'em out basketball. As your resident non-expert NBA follower, here are my following predictions and theories (someone's got to make them, and if JE Skeets and Kelly Dwyer can, why not me? Not like I get paid to do this like them).

Eastern Conference:

Boston Celtics vs Detroit Pistons

Looking at the Eastern Conference you honestly have to ask yourself, is there any reason these two teams shouldn't be here? Now, someone might have the courage (I'd like to say audacity) to say, Yeah, what about that guy named, LeBron James? And of course I would reply, "Seriously, is there any reason these two teams shouldn't be here?" No knock on LeBron, but I'm still going with the fact that last year was a fluke. Looking at the team around Lebron, they still don't have what it takes, LeBron either needs better help or he needs to leave (some would say to New York or New Jersey in 2010). Regardless, he didn't make it and here we have the two best teams of the regular season (record-wise) duking it out in the Eastern Conference Finals.

I've said this to several people already, but during Round 2, I said that if Cavs force a Game 7 on the Celtics, despite winning the series, they (the Celtics) are going to be in trouble. I think to say they have road woes is something of an understatement, but to put it succinctly, they are the only team in the Conference Finals that has not won a road game. They're playing some crazy ball in the Garden, but I wouldn't hold it above the Pistons, or should they advance, whoever wins in the West, to steal a game there. The Celtics now have at least 2 (maybe 3) road games to show that they can do what they do somewhere other than Massachussets.

Pistons have been playing the way they're supposed to be and competing nicely in the postseason, clearing out the Orlando Magic even with a sidelined Chauncey Billups. Now with Billups back in the lineup, I don't expect Detroit to fold like last year. They've been 0-2 in their previous two Eastern Conference Finals appearances, disappearing after a commanding 2-0 lead to LeBron James last year and then falling to the Miami Heat the year previous. The main thing that Detroit has to work on is keeping their head in the game, but then again, I think both teams need to do that, and if Boston does it, I like their chances better.

I think the best matchup would be Rasheed Wallace on Kevin Garnett. Both players are solid defensively and have a range that eludes many power forwards. The Celtics have much more to attempt to stop as the Pistons use a much more balanced offense and attack than the Cavs did. Rajon Rondo has the length and speed to bother even a guard like Billups, and really has an opportunity to at the very least disrupt the Pistons offense as Billups is known to hold on to the ball too long. While he's no LeBron, Paul Pierce has shown he is still one of the most effective scorers in the game, and Tayshaun Prince will have a tough time guarding him. If anyone is up for the task though, it would be Prince. Richard Hamilton we look to be his usual consistent self, finding thing spot up jumpers and cutting to the rim with regularity, of course Boston will work extra hard to stop him. The key I think to this matchup though, I think will be whether or not Ray Allen will be able to find his postseason shooting touch. He didn't look to hot in the Cavs series, and still hasn't seem to be able to find his shot. I think once his touch is back, the Pistons are going to be in a lot of trouble. Allen isn't exactly a great catch-and-shoot kind of guy, which is what the Celtics need, but if they can run a couple of plays for him, then I think he'd find his groove very fast. I think because of his poor shooting Allen has been criticized as "disappearing" in the playoffs, but I think that it's because the team needs him to be a Reggie Miller, that is, a Reggie Miller that's a third scoring option. Allen is more comfortable making his own shots off the dribble, but he doesn't get the option very often. Catch-and-shoot like Jason Kapono, Eddie House, Daniel Gibson, even Peja, isn't Allen's forte. In my opinion, he's still adjusting.

Regardless, I see Boston waking up on the road, finally.

Celtics in 6.

West:

Los Angeles Lakers vs San Antonio Spurs

The last time I remember a competitive matchup between the Spurs and the Lakers was when the Lakers still had Shaq, and when Allen Iverson's 51 point Game 1 in the NBA Finals kept abruptly halted the Lakers' 12 game post season win streak. The Lakers who promptly finshed the post season with championship rings on a 16-1 post season record (I'm sorry, I didn't follow in 2002, but apparently they won then too). Ok, so maybe it hasn't been that long, say 3 years, since Shaq was traded. Anyways, it's something of a revival of two major powers in the Western Conference, of course Spurs are always a perennial contender, so I would argue that anyone is a rival, but the fact that they've won all save 2 (Detroit in 2004 and Miami in 2006) of the last 9 championships, I suppose you could say it's something.

Now the Lakers summarily tidied up Denver Nuggets, who simply collapsed after Game 1 and essentially invited the Lakers over for 2 games of practice scrimmages prior to Round 2 (who knew? I thought they could steal a game). Afterwards, it was deja vu for Jerry Sloan (well not quite) as Phil Jackson exited him and his Jazz out of the running for the NBA Finals again in Game 6. Now the Lakers are rested up and once again ready to make their run for the NBA Finals, of course, only one thing standing in their way, wait, that's right, the defending champions. San Antonio has shown that despite their age, their players can still complete. They proved Steve Kerr and idiot by summarily handing Phoenix and their Spurs stopper Shaquille O'Neal an early 4-1 exit out of the first round. Then showed why they are the defending champs and how experience does matter when they finished out the New Orleans Hornets in a tight 4-3 series.

Now as far as matchups go, neither one of these lineups have been complete, the Spurs having won prior to the Gasol trade and the Lakers later winning when Ginobili was out with a groin injury, so we have yet to actually see these two rosters go at each other full force. As hard as Bruce Bowen will try, there really isn't anyone or anything short of season ending injury that can stop Kobe Bryant. What the Spurs are going to have to do then, is play the Lakers soft interior. They have to out body inside on all the rebounds where their overall size and physicality can help them win out. Of course to do so, the shooters from the outside are going to have to do their jobs as well. As for the Lakers, they just have to pass, do what they do well and they're nigh impossible to stop. I get the feeling though, the bench is going to need this year as a growing experience, as they seemed to fade a little in Utah series. Tough call, but experience is not dead or overrated, not if you have the talent to go with it (sorry Dallas).

Spurs in 7.