NBA Round 2 Predictions
Well, now that Boston has finally taken care of Atlanta (thumbs up to the Hawks for making it a series) I can get to my semifinal predictions, which is kind of silly since two of the series have already finished game 1, and the Lakers/Jazz are in the first quarter as we speak. For the record, I didn't correctly predict the length of any of the series, but I did pick all the winners correctly. But I also picked the higher seed to win every time, so big deal, right?
Boston vs. Cleveland: Both teams wrapped up series against opponents that got pretty physical. The difference is Cleveland did it faster, against a better opponent. Which doesn't exactly bode well for Boston. I don't know, maybe the Celtics were a little too full of themselves, and needed a wakeup call to get serious (which they certainly seemed to be in Game 7 against Atlanta). Sounds a lot like the problem the Pistons have, except the Pistons have actually won a title to allow for such over-confidence. These Celtics (except Cassell) can't make that claim. LeBron still doesn't seem to be getting much help from the rest of the team, at least not consistently, which ought to work in Boston's favor. They're supposed to be a top defensive team, so in theory they can clamp down on LeBron and force those other fellows to actually do something. I think if you can force Wally, Zydrunas, Big Ben and Joe Smith to beat you four times in a seven game series, you're probably in pretty good shape. Problem being, I'm not sure the Celtics can shut LeBron down, and after that last series, my confidence in Boston isn't exactly high. So, Cavs in 7. {Actual result: Celtics in 7. Right number of games, wrong team. Somehow, I don't think Boston can pull off the "win all your home games, lose all your road games" shtick against the Pistons. At least it's over.}
Detroit vs Orlando: Well, I thought the Magic would be able to steal some games, as the Pistons would coast like they often do. If Game 1 was any indication, that may not be happening, as Detroit shut all Orlando's players down, while having a balanced offensive attack of their own, and blew the Magic right out the doors. In a coaching battle, I'll take Stan van Gundy over Flip Saunders (who I was a big fan of in his Minnesota days, since he often seemed to coax 45 or so wins out of a team of Garnett and a bunch of schmoes. I mean, Troy Hudson?), but it comes down to players and I think Detroit has the advantage. The Magic are going to win a couple of games, through a combination of being fired up at home and Detroit coasting again (I'll believe they're past that when I see it for an entire series), but Detroit in 6. {Actual result: Detroit in 5. Hmm, maybe the Pistons actually are taking this seriously. Or maybe the Magic just aren't all that good.}
Los Angeles vs. Utah: The Lakers mopped the floor with Denver, and Utah struggled to put Houston away. Of course, Denver doesn't play any defense, so I expect things to be a little harder for Mamba and Friends this time around. Of course, Phil Jackson teams tend to play good defense too, so it won't be easy for Utah either. I really don't know a lot else to say about this match up. Derom Williams and Boozer are a good combo, but I think Kobe/Gasol is a better one. Who's responsible for containing Kobe? Kirlienko? Is he up to that, with all the talk about whether he's mentally soft? Who does Kobe guard, and can they wear him out on D, take away some of the spring in his legs late in the game? I think the Lakers are the better team, and that they'll win the series. Lakers in 5. {Actual result: Lakers in 6. Hooray! Someone other than the Pistons managed to win a game on the road!}
New Orleans vs. San Antonio: I have to say, I didn't expect the result we got in Game 1, with the Hornets just running away from the Spurs. I don't expect Tim Duncan to be held to five points again (though I'd love it if he was), and I while I can see the Hornets winning, I can't seeing it being that easy. I wonder about fatigue, though, for both teams. The Spurs are an old bunch, especially when you factor in all the playoff games to go along with their regular seasons, but the Hornets aren't a particularly deep team, if I recall. Granted, postseasons are you about seven or eight man rotations, but the Spurs depth could come in handy, just for giving some of the old legs an extra few minutes. I really want the Hornets to win this series, but I think Game 2 is the critical one. I know they still won't have gone back to San Antonio yet, but I want to see how both teams respond to Game 1's result. Do the Hornets get cocky, and how much do the Spurs have left to respond with? That kind of thing. But if you're pressing me on it, I'll give the Hornets the nod (kiss of death alert!), in 7. {Actual result: Spurs in 7. We're never going to be rid of the Spurs are we?}
Labels: nba
4 Comments:
So after watching two games of the Celtics completely shutting down LeBron, I have a feeling your prediction may not come true. That said, I think everything hinges on game 3. If the Celtics can, you know, actually win a game on the road here, they'll go back to being completely unstoppable. If not, this series goes to the Celtics in seven.
jason: I actually hope the Celtics win this series, and keep winning, 'cause I'd like for KG to get a ring and get the critics off his back a little (on a certain level I'd like to see him get it against the Spurs, since he's always getting compared to Duncan, going through him for his first ring would be a nice touch). But I figured they didn't deserve to be favored after that mess with Atlanta.
And it looks as though Boston still hasn't figured out that "win on the road" thing, although maybe the scale of this ass-beating they're currently receiving will have some effect on Game 4. We can hope.
I just want to see a Celtics - Lakers finals because I think it would be classic. Also, I have a feeling a Pistons - Celtics Eastern finals would be pretty darn cool too.
I'm just left wondering if the complete failure of any team in these playoffs to win on the road (except for the Lakers, and that required maximum effort against a lacking oppnent) is a bad sign for the league? If the worst teams and the best teams in the playoff are all that close to each other, it signals to me that there aren't any truly "great" teams in the playoffs. I want to watch great teams, not a bunch of equally good teams.
As long as it's entertaining, I don't care a lot whether they're good or great. the problem is, most of these games aren't entertaining. They're either blowouts (like Hornets/Spurs), or they're callbacks to the Knicks/Heat contests of the '90s (Celtics/Cavs Game 1), and I never wanted to see that again.
The cynical side of me wants to say the refs are too easily influenced by the crowds, and that screws over the road teams. But I think part of it might be the roster turnover from one year to the next. The Lakers added Gasol, the Celtics added KG, Allen, Cassell, Posey, the Cavs got Wally, Wallace, Joe Smith, the Jazz added Korver, even the Hornets added Bonzi Wells to their rotation. It's probably more important to have everybody on the same page when you're in hostile territory, where your opponent is (theoretically) more pumped up than usual by their crowd.
The only teams that seem to be largely the same as they were last year are Detroit and San Antonio, and they both managed to win a couple on the road so far (Spurs took one in Phoenix, Pistons took one in Philly and one in Orlando so far). Actually Orlando might have stood pat too, but I think they got this far by playing in a weak division (the Heat and the Bobcats), and playing a Raptors team that looked out of sync when the playoffs started, so they really aren't in the same league as the others.
Post a Comment
<< Home