The Rake Magazine

^{(Photo by Evan Gole/NBAE via Getty Images)}

For casual basketball fans who stop by only in the postseason to get their taste of the NBA, the Los Angeles Lakers made their four-outta-five domination of the defending champion (now ex-champion) San Antonio Spurs exceeding simple to understand. MVP Kobe Bryant played exceptional basketball, particularly on the offensive end and especially in the second half, when the aging, dinged up Spurs were most vulnerable. Kobe racked up 52 points (or an average of 10.4) in the first halves of the five games, and 94 (18.8) in the second halves. And yet Bryant has become so talented that this almost effortless 29.2 points per game licking he put on the Spurs probably enhanced the defensive reputation of his primary matchup, Bruce Bowen. Whereas Bowen was beaten, his replacements were embarrassed, casually demolished, unable to even slow Kobe down a little bit, let alone prevent him from proving that this matchup would decide the game in LA's favor without plentiful reinforcements. Kobe's hang times were longer, his dribble penetrations quicker and smoother, his competitive instinct just a tiny bit keener. Best of all for Laker fans, and for Kobe's Laker teammates getting fitted for rings, his conference finals performance wasn't spectacular but clinical, and serious as a heart attack.

Who else on the Lakers had a really good series at both ends of the court? Certainly not the two long, quick, big men, Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom, nor point guard Derek Fisher. Role players Vlad Radmanovic and Jordan Farmar played better than expected, but neither one averaged double figures in points, or made the Spurs think twice about adjusting their priorities to try and stop them. No, take Kobe out of the equation and this is a 4-1 series the other way, even with Manu Gibobili hobbled.

On the other hand, the Lakers are very long, very quick, and very deep, and defensively, although their focus wandered and their immaturity showed on occasion, their athletic talent and persistent energy frustrated the hell out of San Antonio. Their rotations were rapid and varied, and that speed and unpredictability coupled with their obscuring length effectively robbed more open looks away from the Spurs than either Phoenix or New Orleans had been able to manage in the first two rounds.

It really would have been fun to see this series had Ginobili been at full capacity. In the normal course of events, the likes of Gasol/Odom/Vlad Rad/Turiaf/etc would have thwarted some of Manu's patented kamikaze penetration. And Ginobili's ankle woes likewise would have thwarted some of that penetration even against an ordinary team. But put the two together--the Lakers' interior D and Ginobili's lack of mobility to cut and twist in traffic--and that aspect of the Spurs offense was effectively eliminated. It thus became all about how many treys San Antonio could sink. And while that is an important part of the Spurs' attack, it can't be the meat *and* the potatoes of what they do.

Before we turn to the Celts and Pistons, a few words about the horrible officiating at the end of Game Four, and the equally horrible reactions by the players and commentators.

First of all, I understand it is the final seconds of a crucial playoff game. I understand that Bones Barry didn't "sell the call" by leaping up with a shot attempt into the body of Derek Fisher as Fisher leapt toward him. And I agree that both of these can be mitigating factors that keeps the whistle out of the officials' mouths-- *if* the play and the infraction are a borderline call. But this was a foul, flat out, and to argue that it wasn't is to engage in stupidity or delusion. Derek Fisher jumped into Barry, landed with his hands and elbows on Barry's neck hard enough to buckle his knees and torso and knock him off balance as he tried to dribble his way clear to attempt the shot. Does anyone disagree with that? If you don't call that, then where do you draw the line?

The NBA has a code of honor that you don't whine to or about the refs on a make-or-break play. The problem with having pretty much nothing but former players doing postgame commentary--Reggie Miller, Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith--is that they don't think rationally because they are following the code. Ditto Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, who obviously didn't want the controversy distracting his team's preparation for Game Five, and obviously instructed his players not to utter a peep of protest or rebuttal over the accuracy of the non-call. Consequently, the three commentators--who looked stricken, as if they were at a funeral, immediately after the game, knowing they'd have to render a judgment on something upon which their heads and hearts disagreed with their eyes--came around to blaming Barry, or patronizing him for "not being in that situation much before." Miller said it was "a good non-call," Barkley actually said that because the Lakers had outplayed the Spurs so thoroughly, the refs were reluctant to award potentially game-winning free throws to San Antonio. Smith at least acknowledged it was a foul, but essentially agreed with Miller.

I actually wrote a long item about this after the game, but it got eaten by the computer and I went to bed. But the gist of my sentiment, then and now, is that the refs swallowed their whistles three times in the final 90 seconds or so, an incompetent display that sets a very bad precedent. First, Tony Parker should have gotten a free throw as Lamar Odom ran through him as they tumbled out of bounds after Odom's goaltended on Parker's layup--that should have been a potential three point play. Second, the Lakers should have gotten a new 24 second clock after their jumper grazed the front iron on the next possession. This would have forced the Spurs to foul to get the ball back, sending the Lakers to the line for two shots. Third, Barry was obviously fouled while he was trying to get in position to shoot, meaning that, with LA over the limit, it was a two-shot foul (this is what the league office ultimately ruled the next day). Add it up and the Spurs should have had three foul shots, the Lakers two. Of course if Parker hits his free throw and/or the Lakes hit their free throws, who knows how that would have affected the final Barry possession. Bottom line, it was a tainted win for the Lakers, who were clearly the better team in this series, and deserved an unblemished demonstration of that.

On to the Celts and the Pistons. Once again, I'm late to the instant commentary party (I'll probably try to rectify that by posting three pointers for games during the Finals), and know that you don't need to hear me repeat kudos for the monster Game Five effort delivered by Kendrick Perkins, or to note Ray Allen's return to accuracy on his jumper. So I'll be a little counterintuitive and instead remind everyone how vital it is to have players delivering consistently strong performances this far into the postseason. That's another reason why Kobe was so obviously the MVP of the Lakers-Spurs series. In the Celts-Pistons matchup, barring any earthshaking, melodramatic development in the next game or two, the hands-down MVP should Kevin Garnett if Boston wins, and Rip Hamilton if Detroit triumphs.

Both KG and Rip play with all-star teammates in lineups that are renowned for spreading the scoring around to at least three players, and yet both are leading their respective teams in scoring by at least 6 points per game. The reason for this is consistency. While Allen or Perkins or even Paul Pierce for Boston, and Billups or McDyess or 'Sheed for Detroit have all had significant dropoffs in production during at least one of the five games that have been played thus far, Garnett and Hamilton keep delivering double-digit totals, while putting up gaudy or at least respectable numbers in other facets of the game such as rebounding, assists, blocks or steals. Each player's opposing coach has burned a lot of brain cells trying to figure out how to deter this high level of production, to no avail. That's impressive, and yet too easily overlooked as we anoint heroes on a game-to-game basis.

That said, there are some fascinating subplots involved as we head into Game Six in Detroit tonight: Will Lindsay Hunter's on-ball defense continue to checkmate the Celts' backup point guards to the degree that Rondo plays nearly the entire game again? And will the Celts finally counter by giving Pierce more play-making and ball-handling responsibilities while Rondo gets a blow? Given the stakes involved--two veteran teams with windows closing on shots at a ring, trying to avoid plummeting from highly successful regular seasons (the two best records in the NBA) to not even reaching the Finals--and the intensity of the suffocating defense each team plays--are the incidences of technicals, flagrants, and controversial non-calls going to continue to rise, and if so, which team keeps its cool? Is Ray Allen back for good this time? Will Flip Saunders continue to ride his veteran starters even if Stuckey is outplaying Billups and Maxiell keeps proving he deserves more burn? Should PJ Brown and Kurt Thomas announce that they won't sign with anybody until February and then again pick the playoff-bound team that is most complementary with what they bring to the table?

My answers: Yes, no, yes, Detroit in Game Six, nearly back but not all the way, yes, and emphatically yes.

I don't see Detroit winning two straight--remember, the Celts, like the Lakers, have never been behind in a series during this postseason--but I wouldn't bet against them at home.

^{Photo by Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE via Getty Images}

Eastern Conference Finals, Game #4: Boston 75, Detroit 94

Series record: Tied 2-2

1. The "Little 3"

I'm not the first one to unimaginatively pervert the "Big 3" sobriquet for tonight's no-show troika of Celtic stars, and the way they are playing, I certainly won't be the last. Among Boston's starting five, the two role players stepped up fine, especially Kendrick Perkins. But the stars were all dim bulbs, collectively shooting 11-38 FG and refusing to take control of what remarkably, all things considered, was a winnable game until about 3 minutes left to play.

Begin with Paul Pierce, the man whose guidance of the offense in the half-court is what ultimately swung the Celtic series versus Cleveland. Tonight Pierce had his shot blocked as many times as it went in the hoop, making just 3-14 FG while getting housed three time. Worse than that, though, was that he doled one measly assist compared to four turnovers. Yes, his defense on Tayshaun Prince was stout, and yes he got to the line 11 times and sank ten of them. But in the half-court sets, Pierce, who has become the floor general and go-to creator, never really made anything happen via either the pass or the jumper.

On to Kevin Garnett, who had an embarrassing night first getting his shot blocked from behind by Jason Maxiell on a breakaway, then getting shown up on two straight defensive sets, the first on a spin move and layup for 'Sheed Wallace, quickly followed by a Stuckey alley oop lob to Maxiell over KG's leaping fingers. Now with the exception of the 'Sheed spin, a charitably inclined individual could say Garnett was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. But there is no excuse or justification for Garnett's disappearance in the first quarter. During the regular season and the first three games of these finals, KG has owned 'Sheed and the Pistons from about 16 feet on in, averaging 24 points and converting well over half his shots. So tonight the Pistons come roaring out with a 10-0 run and Detroit's matchup nightmare is MIA. The other nine starters on the floor had all attempted at least one field goal before Garnett deigned to clank a jumper with the score already 16-4 Detroit and the first quarter more than half over with 5:19 to play. His second shot was the breakaway dunk attempt swatted away by Maxiell with 2:22 to play. He sat about a minute later with his team down 20-12.

During that entire first quarter, in other words, Garnett followed through on a post-up move exactly once. That is ridiculous and typical of the self-effacement that crops up enough to stain his reputation. He finished with decent numbers, given the context of the Celtics offense: 6-16 FG, 16 pts, 10 rebounds, 3 assists (vs. 3 turnovers) and two steals. But when your team is up 2-1 on the road with a chance to essentially make your winning inevitable and your desperate, talented opponent races to a lead, and you are the best mismatch for your ballclub, you make yourself available and then you succeed or fail on that availability. You don't shoot 0-2 FG with one of the shots being a breakout in transition.

Which leaves us with Ray Allen. I am sick and tired of color commentator Mark Jackson (and to a lesser extent his colleagues Breen and Van Gundy) detailing every imagined flaw in Rajon Rondo's game, especially on offense, while Allen gets a free ride for a stretch of abysmally cold outside shooting that has gone beyond a slump and is entering Nick Anderson or John Starks territory for historic, career-footnoting ineptitude. Less than 6 weeks ago, Allen ranked with Peja Stokjaovic and Steve Nash as one of the NBA's best outside shooters. Tonight he once again failed to hit a single jumper, going 2-8 FG in four seconds less than 35 minutes, with both buckets being layups. He missed three treys and turned down about 15 other open looks. Compared to the way Allen is shooting, Rondo is Pete Maravich.

I know that none of this is Allen's "fault," in that he's been lax or malicious or brought this on by any karmic retribution that would make sense. He's been forthright and classy about his woes. He's moved the ball relatively well and has been mostly automatic from the free throw line. But it is getting to the point where patience is appearing to be less and less of a virtue. Allen has already had his breakthrough game to end the doldrums when he shot 9-16 FG in the Celts' Game Two loss--then promptly went back to abject clanking in the next two games. Tonight's fourth quarter had to be a bad dream for him: Not only couldn't he buy a basket, he missed two crunchtime free throws (!) and had Rip Hamilton toy with him on two crucial crunchtime buckets en route to Rip's 10 4th quarter points and game line of 8-10 FGs. It might be time to experiment with Rondo on Hamilton and either Cassell or Eddie House guarding Billups at the point, at least for brief stretches. That's two tough matchups on the defensive end, but maybe a little more offense--some shots that go in, in part because they are attempted by someone not worrying about being an albatross every time they pull the trigger. The Celtics as a team shot 31% tonight, and Allen's 2-8 didn't elevate that putrid accuracy. I understand that the Celtics don't win the NBA Finals against the likes of LA or SA without Allen being on his marksman-like game. But that doesn't mean you can't rattle the mix--Tony Allen, even?--for four or five minutes stretches, just to see if you can stir a change.

2. A Night For Large Role Players

As in large guys who are role players, but also guys who play large roles. The consensus among those who saw tonight's tilt would be that Antonio McDyess was the player of the game, and not just because he scored more points (21) and grabbed more rebounds (16) than anybody else. Although he continues to be deadly from midrange, McDyess was perhaps most valuable as the team's emotional leader. With Rip and 'Sheed bedeviled by fouls, Billups obviously not right in his hamstring, and Prince experiencing shooting woes, McDyess became the regulator, the one to keep things on a consistent keel that blended both passion and self-control. He came up huge. Ditto Maxiell, who in additon to his signature block and nifty alley oop played staunch half-court D and was a perfect 6-6 FG in 20:28 off the bench. And over on the other sideline, Kendrick Perkins was probably Boston's best player tonight, ensuring that nobody got anything easily in the paint and warring for defensive boards and putbacks while stoking the desire in what seemed a curiously blase, or perhaps just disspirited, Celtics ballclub. After a horrible series against the Cavs, it has been enjoyable to watch Perkins's series-long revival vs. Detroit.

3. Quick Observations

If I've got a rooting interest in either team, it is Boston, who I picked to win in 7 and who stars one of my favorite players in Garnett. But without the refs blowing their whistles, the Celts lose by 30 tonight, as Hamilton (8-10 FG) and 'Sheed (6-9 FG) were both limited by foul trouble while the Celts lived at the line, registering more than half of their first 53 points via free throws. That said, the refs are getting wise to Hamilton's arm-locking manuvers and push-offs to get open, and 'Sheed still commits some really obvious and circumstantially dunderheaded infractions, like 4th foul showing hard on the pick and roll with more than 7 minutes to play in the third.

Flip Saunders and Mark Jackson seem to want to agree that Chauncey is more rusty than dinged up, but the rest of us don't have to buy that bullshit. Billups has always moved like a cat, he a bunched-up and spring player with a great first step. That stuff is nowhere to be seen in this series. Instead we see Billups missing badly on his jumper (3-12 tonight) and walking with a hitch during breaks in the action.

I understand that Lindsay Hunter's on-ball defense is preventing Eddie House from getting much burn, but have the Celts forgotten that Pierce was frequently bringing the ball up in Game Seven of the Cleveland series? For that matter, KG and Ray Allen also have pretty good handles. It sure would have been interesting to see if House's microwave act from way outside could have made up that perpetual 5-10 point margin that existed from midway through the first until about 4-5 minutes left in the game. Boston was 1-9 from trey territory tonight, and that was Posey in the corner off a KG double team. I mean, if Sam Cassell is going to chuck a trey with 16 seconds on the shot clock in the fourth quarter and the Celts down 6 without nobody under the hoop for a rebound, is there any justification for keeping House under wraps?

^{AP Photo/Matt Slocum}

It occurs to me that the best way to recap the first three games of the Spurs-Lakers series is to point out all the places I was wrong. There are plenty of examples so let's get to it.

* A high scoring series

When I looked over the various matchups between San Antonio and LA, I foresaw a lot of offense. But last night's combined 187 points has been the most prolific game of the three. Part of this is because the series has been played at a pace more to SA's liking, which spells trouble for their current one-game deficit. Part of it is because both teams are missing more open looks than is customary (and it is different people different nights, although Odom and Parker have not been able to exploit what I perceived as their mismatches), a likely sign of fatigue and/or pressure. But the bulk of it is simply great defense, particularly by the Lakers in their Game Two blowout. I have never seen Parker's penetration stymied so effectively, not only by Derek Fisher but by the bigs doubling and switching up coverages on the pick and roll.

* A loooong series for Derek Fisher

Fisher has not shone in Games One and Three, but he also hasn't been toasted by Parker the way I thought it would happen. Again, the Lakers' superb team D had a lot to do with that in Game Two, but Fisher's foot speed has been better than I expected, and the vast improvement by Jordan Farmar, who has found his confidence again, is getting him more rest. If he and Farmar can cut the distance in point guard production between the two teams, the Lakers are in good shape.

* Kobe would toast Bowen and Udoka equally

Maybe it is just a prejudice against gritty, slow-footed vets, because I also underestimated Bruce Bowen's value in this series, and overestimated how much Udoka could spell him. Doug Collins pointed out last night that Kobe salivates over getting Udoka as his matchup, and even as he spoke, Pops was getting Bowen up to guard the MVP. I think Bowen slipped a bit on defense during the regular season, and wasn't that effective in either of the first two rounds. But his ability to slow Kobe down a titch and make him work for points and dimes has given San Antonio hope. Given Kobe's maturity as a distributor, it is crucial that the double teams aren't automatic and predictable. Bowen's inexorable hustle has made that possible--and he's even hit a few of those patented corner treys of his.

* The Spurs would trade off nights from Ginobili for off nights from Odom

Wrong again. Ginobili's value to his team was borne out again last night--his catalytic role on the Spurs is vastly greater than Odom's versatile and important, but not crucial, contributions to the Lakers, where he remains a distinct third option. That said, if Odom does start to get his act together, San Antonio is in trouble. What is frustrating for him is that he's missing makeable shots.

But back to Ginobili for a minute. First of all, the guy comes up big at the most important moments, giving San Antonio someone akin to a poor man's Kobe. That's huge. The fact that neither Detroit nor Boston boasts an equivalent presence (do you still believe Billups is Mr. Big Shot? and who on the Celtics side--Paul Pierce?) is one of many reasons why the trophy will likely be held aloft by a Western Conference team in about two weeks.

But if you are looking for a reason why the Spurs are still in this series--and are a 18-minute collapse away from being up 2-1, check out how well Tim Duncan and the trio of Oberto-Thomas-Horry have defended Pau Gasol and Odom. Now Odom's problems are becoming well documented--he's getting ripped by most of the Laker media, with some justification. After shooting well over 50% in the first two rounds, he's shot 12-33 in the three games thus far, or barely over 36%, this despite the fact that the Spurs don't have a natural counter for his size and quickness. But Gasol's underachievement has arguably been just as profound. He also was much better than 50% for the playoffs coming into the Spurs series, and the dip to 46.5% (20-43 FG) is exacerbated by the facts that his shot selection has been generally solid--he's missing makeable attempts--and that he has only gotten to the free throw line 5 times in the three games, after shooting 59 FTA in the previous 10 playoff games. He's also grabbing two fewer rebounds per game, his assists rate has been cut in half, and his defense on Duncan has been, as expected, inconsistent. These dips bear watching as Gasol continues much deeper into the postseason than he has ever been before.

Before we look at the Spurs side of the ledger, I want to point out something about Jordan Farmar and Sashia Vujacic, who provided such a great lift off the bench in Games One and Two, but much less so last night: They've both been gunning fools. Give Farmar credit for being LA's third-leading scorer (10.7 ppg) in this series despite averaging only 20.7 mpg, a testament to his gaudy 11-21 FG shooting. But Farmar, the backup point guard, has zero assists in 62 minutes. Even on a team where Kobe Bryant justifiably hogs the ball and which features the triangle offense that reduces the importance of a point guard, you'd think Farmar would have dropped at least one dime. Maybe there's a connection between the low shooting percentages of Gasol and Odom and the jack-it-up philosophy of Farmar and Vujacic, who rank 8th and 7th, respectively, in assists-per-minutes played among the nine Lakers who logged double digit minutes of court time thus far in the series (Vlad Rad is last).

By contrast, little used Brent Barry came off the bench last night and delivered four assists in 21 and a half minutes without a turnover, chipped in a pair of treys and was plus +11. Properly derided for his shooting, Horry's defense on Odom and tenacity in the paint got him plus +11 in 18 minutes. Add to the bigness of the Big 3--Ginobili had 30 and sparked the resurgence with a pair of first quarter treys; Duncan pulled a 20-20 game (actually 22-21) and is averaging more than 18 board per game in the series, and Parker was a game-best plus +26--and these savvy veteran role players have an acute appreciation of what is required to bag a ring. The Lakers are without question the more talented of the two teams, especially in the depth of their talent. But with the obvious exception of Kobe, and Fisher, they don't know what it takes to win this deep into the postseason.

Specifically, they didn't realize Pops would emphasize nothing but offense--an unprecedented move for the coach--in the practice between Games Two and Three, to counter the sliding traps and pick-and-roll D that Phil Jackson had instituted so effectively. And they didn't appreciate how many times San Antonio has been counted out in the past few years, only to come up big when it counts. It will really count in Game Four tomorrow night. Will Kobe decide to seize the game with a 30-shot effort, something his miraculous 4th quarter stint in Game Three indicates might be a way to vanquish the Spurs in San Antonio, or will he continue distributing and hope his backcourt mates follow his lead and that his front line finally comes to play in the paint? I'm guessing a little of both, and that the wild cards for the two ballclubs--Ginobili and Odom--will determine the winner.

But, as we noted at the outset, I've been wrong before.

Tomorrow, a look at the Celts-Pistons after four games.

Let's start with the Celts disposing of Detroit in Game One of the Eastern Conference finals. The ESPN color crew was clearly in the tank for the Pistons during the pregame, on the supposition that having a week off after playing a numbskull Orlando Magic team was better than finishing off a grueling seven-game battle with the Cavs just 48 hours before. They were wrong, of course: If the Celts are going to be hurt by the war with LeBron and company, it will be later, 'round about Games Five, Six and Seven, and the erosion will be as much mental as physical. I expect the Pistons to play much better in Game Two. I also don't think the world will end for the Celts if they lose at home. They've never *had* to win a game on the road yet, and if they do I think, at least in this series, they will.

As for Game One itself, let's understand that the dynamic has shifted for the boys in green since the Cavs' Game Seven: Paul Pierce is the clearcut igniter on offense, be it passing, shooting, tempo, whatever. This is all to the good for Boston because it gives their next two offensive threats, Garnett and Rondo, the freedom to play off Pierce's decision-making. For KG it is a welcome luxury--he can concentrate on defense, where he almost never makes a bad decision, never mind choking, and still remain a guy you have to double-team in the low block at the other end. As Jeff Van Gundy pointed out last night, the pick and roll with Pierce and KG was very effective, and unless Jason Maxiell hits that extra gear like Paul Millsap occasionally achieved in Utah, it can be a Celtic bread-and-butter throughout, freeing up Pierce and KG for jumpers and drives, and almost guaranteeing the availability of safety valve dishes to Rondo. For Rondo it is luxury not to have to handle the ball all the time, which likewise frees him up for stellar defensive energy and open outside looks. You know all those shots Ray Allen is either missing or turning down? Give them to Rondo and Eddie House, especially if Billups is dinged up.

It was a joy to read Doc Rivers proclaiming his faith in Rondo in Marc Stein's Daily Dime at ESPN.com today. I've been waiting for people, but especially Rivers, to lavish praise and heavily massage Rondo's ego, rather than that idiotic comment he made in the Cavs' series about avoiding "heroic shots." But I understand I'm repeating myself here, so I'll let it go at that. Ray Allen? Lose all expectations for the guy, because he is pressing, and pressing hard. He is intelligently doing the other things to minimize his inability to stick the outside jumper, including ball movement, penetration, and decent defense. The Celts just have to consider him a 4th or 5th option right now, and muck along. And consider this: If the law of averages works itself out and Allen returns to vintage form with a vengeance, Boston has a viable shot at a championship. In fact that about the only way I see them beating either the Spurs or the Lakers.

Before we get into Lakers-Spurs, I want to harp back on the original point: Cleveland did Boston an enormous favor by pushing them to the brink and forcing them to configure different options and adjustments, and, most importantly, to determine a pecking order. These post-Cavs Celts are no longer democratizing the Big 3, and if the question were posed to them about who should take the game-ending shot to win or lose, both Pierce and KG wouldn't simultaneously say "Ray" as they did before the Atlanta series. Meanwhile, Kendrick Perkins is no longer having to fend off tag teams of bigs like Z and Wallace and Smith and Varejao and coping with LeBron knifing down the lane. Detroit can still win this series, of course: They are experienced and resilient and synergistically talented. But this Celtics team has found its groove through adversity, which makes it a lot tougher, and more complicated, for the Pistons to triumph than it was a couple of weeks ago.

Breaking down the Spurs versus the Lakers, it looks to be an immensely enjoyable, high-scoring affair. How does LA defend Tim Duncan, with Gasol, Odom, or mix-and-match? (This is when a healthy Andrew Bynum would really come in handy.) Do the Spurs really think Bruce Bowen is going to contain Kobe? Derek Fisher doesn't have the foot-speed for Tony Parker (and doesn't know the Spurs' sets and tendencies the way he knew Deron Williams and the Jazz), and at the offensive end, Odom will be his usual matchup nightmare. Lots of points are to be had here, especially considering that both teams are very adept at turning turnovers into buckets.

After watching the Spurs the last three or four years, plus the regular season this year, I made up my mind I'd pick them in every series until they lost or held the trophy. Before the playoffs began, I realized that if any team was going to test that faith, it would be the Lakers. They've got a cold-blooded closer in Kobe, a beautiful mixture of size, speed, and depth, and one of the few very coaches as wise and playoff-wizened as Pops. In my eyes, this is the real finals.

It's a cliche to say about any close, competitive series between two very deep teams, but the role players really do have a chance to tip the balance here. Ime Udoka seems to be as viable an option on Kobe as Bowen, and when Bowen inevitably gets toasted and/or in foul trouble, it will be interesting to see how Udoka fares. On the other side, Sasha Vujacic seems like the latest in a long line of players to pattern his game after Manu Ginobili, and if Vujacic can indeed hit those dagger treys and become the foul-drawing pest that is Manu the Great, it is a big lift for the Lakers. It is also not that far-fetched.

Kobe and Duncan are not only going to get theirs, they'll make sure their teammates share in the wealth. But can the Thomas/Oberto tandem stop Gasol, or hold him to mid-teens in points? How aggressively will Phil Jackson wield the Odom mismatch--I'd pound Odom off the dribble and in post-ups until San Antonio makes clear their response, then freelance off of that via Kobe and the three-point shooters. If Odom goes into one of his mental funks, it will be a huge problem for the Lakers; he really is the biggest wild card either way in this series.

San Antonio in 6 or 7. But the Lakers in 6 or 7 wouldn't exactly shock me.

Longtime readers know I basically punt the draft lottery and defer to other, wiser, observers of the college, high school, and international game. My guess/advice for the Wolves in the last column was to prioritize their draft options as Rose/Beasley/Mayo/Lopez/trade down. Now that the ping-pong balls have given them a #3 pick, my excitement and interest goes up a notch. Taking a player you think will be at least the third best performer who is eligible for the pros this season is a big, big chip. I know the conventional wisdom is that it is a two-player draft, and I have no reason to dispute that. But here are the #3 picks from 2000-2007:

2000  Darius Miles

2001  Pau Gasol

2002  Mike Dunleavy

2003 Carmelo Anthony

2004 Ben Gordon

2005 Deron Williams

2006 Adam Morrison

2007 Al Horford

The only flop is Morrison, and he still has a shot at redemption. Miles was a chucklehead, but when healthy, oh could he play. Dunleavy showed signs of becoming a player this year, while the stock of Gordon and Melo fell a bit from some lofty heights. Gasol, Williams and Horford are cornerstones. That's a pretty good historical record. And remember, that's just the #3 pick. If we look at the third best player taken in the first round from 2000-2007, it goes like this:

2000: K-Mart of Mike Miller (behind Pryzbilla and Turkoglu, bad draft)

2001: Gasol (behind Tony Parker and Tyson Chandler)

2002: Tayshaun Prince or Caron Butler (behind Amare and Yao)

2003: Bosh or Melo (behind LeBron and Wade)

2004: Luol Deng or Iguodala (behind D Howard and Jefferson)

2005: Bynum (behind Paul and Williams)

2006: Rudy Gay or Rondo (behind Roy and Aldridge)

2007: Kevin Durant (behind Horford and Oden, although you can flip 'em)

Okay, enough covering up my lack of detailed knowledge about these picks with thumbnail history. The abiding point is, this third overall pick is a very valuable commodity. It is hard to totally screw it up, and possible to resurrect your franchise. Kevin McHale says he likes eight people in this draft and others have said it is very deep. If true, the Wolves should consider a trade, especially if the guy(s) they like is somewhat under the radar. With that, I'll let my smart commenters take over.

^{(AFP/Getty Images/Chris Graythen)}
 

In just a few hours, the San Antonio Spurs will either add another bullet point on their dynasty-like resume, or flip the championship torch toward the winner of the Hornets-Lakers series. I called the series for the Spurs in 6 or 7 and will gladly ride my choice-is-made-for-me decision to pick San Antonio until I see an opponent drive the stake through their enormous heart.

Have six relative blowouts in a row ever been this much fun to watch? Whoever owns home court seems to exert their will over the other team--to the tune of double-digits. Here's why I think that changes tonight:

* The Spurs have three guys who come up huge at crunchtime. In what order does New Orleans seal them off? If I'm Byron Scott, I try and single-cover Tim Duncan with Tyson Chandler and pray for lenient refs. If the Hornets can limit perimeter ball movement and force Ginobili to put it on the floor rather than pop treys from outside, the odds of victory rise in their favor. If Ginobili is the Spurs' leading scorer and gets more from behind the arc than he does in the paint, I don't see how the Hornets win. And that's what I think is going to happen.

* David West's aching back. Chris Paul is becoming as reliably spectacular as LeBron or Kobe, but if West is at all compromised, Paul will need a game for the ages--say, 35-40 points and 12-18 assists--to put his team into the conference finals. Peja has been a pleasant surprise a couple of times in this series--more than just a catch and shoot guy--but I don't think he exerts his will over Bowen in a Game 7. If West doesn't get his usual 24-38 points, it will have to be Pargo or MoPete or maybe Julian Wright, plus elevation in Paul's numbers. BTW, the Spurs fans chanting for Horry after he put an extra nudge into West's sore back the other night, plus all the flopping and bitching and Pops hack-a-whoever, plus the innate charm of West, Paul and Chandler, has this confirmed lover of Spurs style basketball not minding very much if New Orleans short-circuits that San Antonio legacy tonight.

* Veterans off the bench. It still blows my mind that the Spurs have Kurt Thomas. When teams are as closely matched as these two, having a tough, smart vet who knows when to shoot and when to pass, when to foul and when to concede the hoop, when to show hard on the pick and roll and when to stay home--and he's either playing beside Tim Duncan or giving Duncan a precious breather--is huge. Then there are the outside gunners: Finley, Barry, Horry, and even Udoka is no spring chicken. The pressure is really on the Hornets bench, especially Pargo and Wright, to negate that advantage. It might happen, but a better case can be made that it might not.

Of course Hornets' fans have some nice cards to play in their game-winning scenario. Paul consistently gets in the paint and drives the Spurs nuts. Chandler and the oddly timed double team frustrate Duncan. West has enough pain-killers and will-power to work his marvelous midrange game, a platter of foul line jumpers and left block left handers mixed with the occasional transition hoop off turnovers. Parker gets joustled off his game. And this young and very talented team doesn't know from pressure, expects and then experiences their four straight home thrashing of the older, finally vanguished Spurs.

Just before yesterday's Celts-Cavs Game 7 I had decided to pick Detroit over Boston or Cleveland over Detroit in the Eastern Conference Finals. Then I saw the game. Hey, the Celtics have a go-to guy, and with it, a genuine pecking order! Okay, give me the Celts over the Pistons.

I understand that going with Boston at this juncture is as shaky as picking the Spurs tonight. And I know the Pistons have formidable matchups for each one of the big three--Prince on Pierce, 'Sheed on KG, Rip on Allen. Plus Jason Maxiell might be a tad too quick for Kendrick Perkins and Chauncey Billups a tad too large for Rajon Rondo. But in retrospect, I'm sort of amazed the Celtics survived two series without having established alphas and betas among their stars. That's an incredible amount of uncertainty that no longer exists: This is Pierce's team on the offensive end as much as it is KG's on the defensive end. I know Prince did a nice job on him in the three games they played this season; that the numbers favor KG being the man. But Pierce just got through with seven games against LeBron James; Prince is going to feel like balsa wood after that.

That said, the Pistons have a big edge in the backcourt. If Eddie House drinks the same crate of adrenaline he swallowed for Game 7, I'd stick him on Billups for a little rubber hose action. Even so, it is time for Rondo to step up his consistency; he needs to stick more open jumpers (and take more treys to open up the floor), and either get more steals or draw more charges--generate turnovers on Detroit, in other words, to be truly effective. As for Rip Hamilton on Ray Allen, well, hopefully Allen sleptwalked through the Cavs series to store up energy to chase Hamilton through multiple picks. And that Game 7 plan of putting House and Rondo and Allen into a rotation, until Allen's shooting eye warrants more minutes, should remain in effect.

All the games during the regular season were low scoring affairs, but I expect that to rise some this time; the Celts are freed from uncertainty and the Pistons should score plenty from midrange according to Flip's fat playbook. Who knows, the winner might even hit 100 one of these times.

Celtics in 7, with each team winning once on the road.

Quick hits...

Aside from Kobe, the most valuable Laker in the Jazz series was obviously Derek Fisher. How classy is the Utah franchise for letting Fisher go so he could have a better place to take care of his daughter? The Jazz were not only deprived of a gutsy, cool-headed crunchtime performer, but Fisher spent the previous two years helping Deron Williams learn the offense Fisher wound up defending. That was a huge advantage.

But we'll get into the Lakers during the Western Conference Finals preview in a day or so.

Count me among those who think Mike D'Antoni in New York is idiotic. Hey, it's not too late for a coaching swap: Scott Skiles to the Knicks, where he knocks Curry's and Zach's heads together and gets Balkman and Lee excited about real 94-foot basketball; and D'Antoni to Milwaukee, where Redd and Mo Williams and Yi and Bogut are tailor made for his flash and pass go-go ball.

Last and least, my uninformed preferences on Wolves' draft picks:

Rose/Beasley/Mayo/Lopez/trade down