NBA Second Round Predictions

The first round of the NBA playoffs ended last night, and the second round starts today. Not much turnaround time. At least we got some competitive series. For awhile there it looked like everything was going to be a sweep.

Miami vs. Chicago: So the Heat swept the Bucks, like I (and everyone other than Brandon Jennings) predicted. As for Bulls/Nets, I got the # of games right, but the winner wrong. The whole time I was typing that entry, I kept feeling like I wanted to pick Bulls, but didn't trust it. I basically convinced myself they were too banged up, and the Nets 3 best players were good enough it didn't matter how bad the rest were. Obviously, that was a mistake. At least Deron Williams' number of trips to the second round of the playoffs (3) still exceeds the number of coaches whose careers he's killed (2)!

As for this series, even if the Bulls were completely healthy, meaning they even had Rose, I'd still pick Miami. With no Rose, hobbled Noah, hobbled Hinrich, who the hell knows about Luol Deng (bad side effects of a spinal tap), the best I can do is figure the Bulls will win one. They'll make a game effort, and surely slow down Miami's offense a bit. But Miami's D is pretty good, too, and the Bulls' offense isn't nearly the same challenge. Heat in 5.

New York vs. Indiana: Did we travel back to the '90s? Are Reggie and John Starks going to be firing away from beyond the arc? The Knicks dicked around just enough that my prediction wound up being on the nose, while the Pacers took an extra game to finish Atlanta. What is it with Atlanta and unwatchable playoff series? Practically every game in this one was a blowout. It was like that first-rounder they had against Orlando a few years ago. At least the Pacers managed to win one on the road eventually.

I think they'll find New York a tougher challenge in that department, but I really don't know. The Pacers are supposed to be a good defensive team, but so was Boston. The Pacers are certainly better offensively than the Celtics, but are they a lot better? Who guards Carmelo? David West, or Paul George? George would seem likely to get beat up, while I'm not sure West is fast enough? I'm not sure a dinged up Tyson Chandler can handle Roy Hibbert either, but Hibbert's not as likely to explode for 40 points as Carmelo.

So much of the Knicks is tied up in whether they hit 3s or not. If they go cold for an entire series, they're toast. If they got hot (say 45%) for an entire series, I'd bet they could beat anybody, including Miami. But you don't know how that's going to play out. Off hand, I'm going to say I trust Carmelo being the best player in the series, the Knicks' capacity to win on the road (compared to Indiana's), and I'm worried about the Pacers' offense. Knicks in 6.

Oklahoma City vs. Memphis:  I got the Memphis/Clippers series right on the nose, which I wasn't expecting after LA went up 2-0. The Thunder took a couple of extra games to win, but I wasn't expecting Russell Westbrook to hurt his knee. Neither was OKC, I'd imagine. Credit to the Rockets for not rolling over even after they went down 3-0. I was worried they'd just give up and say, 'Hey, at least we made the playoffs!'

I've seen some discussion about whether Durant can haul this team to the Finals the way LeBron did the Cavs in 2007. I'd point out Durant has a much tougher road to hoe. LeBron, by virtue of playing in the suckass Eastern Conference, drew the 41-win Wizards (outscored by their opponents by 0.6 points per game that year), the 41-win Nets (outscored by their opponents by 0.7 points per game, and then the 53-win Pistons (outscored their opponents by 4.2 points per game). Durant drew a 45-win Houston team in Round 1 (outscored their opponents by 3.5 points per game), a 56-win Memphis team (outscores opponents by 4.1 points per game), and if they make it to the Conference Finals, will probably face 58-win San Antonio (outscores opponents by 6.4 points per game). There's no question LeBron had an easier path, and if we recall, once he reached the Finals, and had to face a Western Conference team, the Cavs were swept.

All of which is to say, I'm not holding it against Durant when the Thunder get bounced in this round. Two years ago they needed 7 games to beat the Grizzlies. That was when OKC had Durant, Westbrook, and Harden. Now they just have Durant, while Memphis still has Gasol, Z-Bo, and a much improved Mike Conley. Oh yes, and Tony Allen, probably the best perimeter defender not named LeBron. I'm picking Memphis in 6, and even that feels like I'm not giving the Grizz enough credit.

San Antonio vs. Golden State: Denver kind of let me down. I got the games right, but the team wrong. I really though the Nuggets had it, especially once David Lee went down, but what can you say about Steph Curry? And now Bogut looks like a force again. Meanwhile, it appears the Spurs looking 'off-kilter' as I put it, really was Popovich playing possum. Either that, or I gave the Lakers way too much credit. To be fair, they played the last two games mostly without their starting backcourt, and their backup backcourt. Once you're down to your backup backup backcourt, you're probably screwed.

I don't know, there's a part of me that thinks the Spurs should be worried. That the Warriors are a very athletic team, not unlike OKC last year, and that will enable them to overcome the Spurs movement and scheming. Then another part of me points out I'm underestimating the Spurs again, and that while Curry may be a shooter on par (or better) than Durant, he's probably not the athlete, and certainly not the defender Durant is. I feel like the Spurs are better equipped to take advantage of the Warriors' size deficit than Denver was, and that if the Warriors try to go small against San Antonio, well, that might mean Pop can get some playoff use out of Matt Bonner for once. I just can't see small-ball being enough to beat a healthy Spurs team. San Antonio in 5.