The NBA Playoffs

[The Cid]

Homefield advantage is always relevant.

In baseball, it's because each park has unique dimensions.

In football, it's because a loud background can make audibles harder to hear.

In basketball and hockey, it's because you're in a building with fantastic acoustics where ten to twenty thousand people are right on top of you. Sound bounces off the ceiling, the floor and the walls to amplify itself more and more. And especially in younger players, momentum carried by a home crowd can help players find that extra little something late in games.

Two things are often called overrated in sports but always seem to decide championships:
-Homefield/Homecourt/Home Ice advantage
-Team chemistry

Don't believe the hype, both of those things are more important than many would have you believe.

[The Cid]

A few thoughts on last night's game:

-No wonder DC-area Papa Johns franchises made those crybaby shirts for LeBron. Anyone catch how he drew a flagrant foul by falling into a reach-in foul (causing his neck to collide with a player's wrist) and then laying on the ground until they called a hard foul a flagrant? Like I've been saying, I guess that's well within the rules and all, but it still irritates me that you can get away with crap like that in the NBA.

-If, sometime in the next ten years or so after he gets fired, Doc Rivers comes along and says he wants to coach your kid's eight-and-under team, don't let him. If the C's win it all this year, they'll do it in spite of their coach, not because of their coach.

-Rajon Rondo must have set a record for the most open shots over the course of a game that were never taken. The Cavs stopped guarding him in the second quarter. I know he's used to passing because Allen and Pierce are the better shooters, but when you're that open you take the damn shot!

-Disappointing as this game was, I'm comfortable in the knowledge that the Celtics seem to know how to handle LeBron. And it's San Antonio that showed them how. They're making James take mid-range jumpers and three pointers--not his strong suit--much like the Spurs did in last year's Finals. Ilgauskas and West might take a game or two in this series, but the Cavs with a cold LeBron aren't going to win three of their next four games.

[ampersand]

I heard on the radio this morning a conversation between Garnet and Bill Russell, apparently done after Game 2. If it weren't for the sappy music, I would have expected to have heard razors buzzing and the patrons of the barbershop chiming in with Russell and Garnet. I also am assuming that Garnet can grow hair on the top of his head. I think I heard Russell say to KG at one point something to effect of "I want you to win five championships here."

Jamal Mashburn, a former NBA player and now current ESPN basketball analyst then said he remembered watching an NBA game and sitting next to Russell and noticing that he was wearing the green socks that the Celtics players wear on the court at home.

Then he and the host got into a discussion between who was better: Russell or Chamberlain. It was a very interesting discussion driving back from Mass.

One other thought: Orlando is done. Done, done, done. Detroit might be able to get Billups back for the Eastern Finals.

[Deacon]

Spurs, baby! WHAT!

[The Cid]

Then he and the host got into a discussion between who was better: Russell or Chamberlain. It was a very interesting discussion driving back from Mass.

Better at basketball, alone: Chamberlain.
Better at winning: Russell.

I've got both of them in my all-time top five, with Jordan, Bird and Jerry West. But hearing Russell say to Garnett that Garnett is his favorite player, then going on to say that he expects Garnett will win "at least two or three here," there's something to that. (Side note: the city of Boston wasn't exactly an open-minded, tolerant kind of place in the sixties. That Russell does not hold a grudge against this city for the way he was treated while his Celtics were on that run of eleven titles in thirteen years is nothing short of amazing.)

Throughout sports I enjoy watching the old guys that stick around their old team for years after retirement. Russell will always be part of Celtic basketball in that way, much like Tommy Heinsohn. (By the way, I wish they'd let him announce just one playoff game. I felt bad for Tommy last year, giving out Tommy Points just to keep up appearances. "Well, West didn't get to that ball and didn't keep it in bounds, but he came close. That's good for a Tommy Point!")

For those who are confused: Tom Heinsohn is a former Celtic that announces their games on local channels. He's loud, he has a super-thick Boston accent, he's incredibly biased, and he gives out "Tommy Points" to Celtic players that make good plays. He's a sort of caricature of himself at this point, but a booth with him and Marv Albert would be high comedy.

The Spurs looked good at home, and their semifinal whittles down to a "best of three" set now. Credit to them for mature play. Frankly though, I was expecting the Spurs to make a run, unlike the Utah Jazz, who evened up with the Lakers.

[Deacon]

I don't understand that last sentence. What were you expecting, exactly?

That Russell does not hold a grudge against this city for the way he was treated while his Celtics were on that run of eleven titles in thirteen years is nothing short of amazing.

What is it they say? Winning cures all ills and soothes all wounds?

[The Cid]

What were you expecting, exactly?

For the Spurs to go at least six games against the Hornets. In fact, I expect the Spurs to WIN that series. They looked good last night to say the least, but I expect dynastic teams like San Antonio to win playoff games at home and hold a young team at bay.

[Deacon]

Oh, so perhaps this would clear things up:

Frankly though, I was already expecting the Spurs to make a run, unlike the Utah Jazz, who surprised me when they evened up with the Lakers.

Would that be an accurate representation of what you intended to say?

[ampersand]

I know it's way early in game 4 in Cleveland, but so far in the 3+ games, Lebron has done absolutely nothing scoring wise. Very, very odd.

[The Cid]

Doc strikes again! Honestly, is this idiot on Cleveland's payroll?! "Sure, my team's just missed eight straight shots in the fourth quarter, but timeouts are for the weak! They can calm themselves down!"

"Yeah, Rondo's scored thirteen and he's found his stroke, but Sam Cassell looks so funny he might intimidate Cleveland!"

"No, I don't think we have a better clutch shooter than Pierce. Maybe Sam Cassell or James Posey...not like the team traded the #5 pick in last year's draft to get a clutch shooter or anything."

Next time they go on the road, maybe they'll leave Doc and Pierce back in Boston so they can actually win a damn road game.

PS: Nothing infuriates me like professional basketball players that can't make a free throw. That the league average on foul shots is under 90% is disgusting. By the time you've played enough ball to get to the NBA, how can you miss those shots?! Every position takes them!

[Deacon]

I was delighted at the Cavs' win last night. I was this close to feeling kind of sorry for the Celtics, but their continued big-dick attitude still puts me off. I guess being from a laughingstock background--from Dallas in the 80's back when the Mavs were just awful and then later in San Antonio where even despite a championship or two everyone continued to (and sometimes still do) look past the Spurs at the glittering talent elsewhere--it frustrates and annoys me when someone cobbles together a team designed to win one or two championships before falling apart. I'm sure it's bought the Celtics ownership a new yacht and all, but today's Celtics are nothing like the glorious Celtics of yesteryear.

[The Cid]

*Sigh*

Thanks, Deacon. I appreciate that assessment.

Oh, wait, I don't. I resent the Hell out of it. I understand what it's like to be a laughing stock as a sports fan, dude. It's not like this year has undone the awful decade of Celtic basketball that preceded it. All the shit luck, bad coaching, bad front office decisions and bad Paul Pierce three-pointers...yeah, there's history in Celtic basketball, but it was evaporating in front of us.

We like the sport. It's not just a hometown thing. Basketball is a very popular sport here. And that's why we as fans vocally demanded a better team. Just because they won a lot of championships twenty years ago, what, they should step aside and refuse to put a contender on the floor to make room for the little markets?

it frustrates and annoys me when someone cobbles together a team designed to win one or two championships before falling apart.

1) You know that this cost more in terms of players than it did in terms of money, right? To get Garnett and Allen the Celtics had to trade away most of their existing team.
2) I don't think the plan is to let this team stagnate until the "big three" are too old. It's actually a long-term rebuild that's starting with imports who will inevitably pass the torch to the young guys waiting in the wings. Lots of young guys on this team for a rental, no?
3) They didn't do it to buy a yacht so much as they did it to keep the team. Last year at this time people were boycotting the team. Danny Ainge did this to keep his job, Wyc Grysbeck did this so there wasn't a mass public outcry to sell the team.
4) The fear was that the Celtics would turn into the Bruins: once, the Bruins were a passion for the city. From Bobby Orr to Cam Neely to the great Raymond Borque, the B's were a big part of Boston sports. Then they were purchased by a cheapskate, and the team was run by a jackass. Today, the Bruins are all but dead to us. After last year, it looked entirely likely the Celtics would go the same route. People stopped going to the games, or they'd go with bags on their heads.

but today's Celtics are nothing like the glorious Celtics of yesteryear.

No shit, Sherlock. Paul Pierce is an overrated ballhog and Doc Rivers is a joke of a coach--neither characteristic there reminds me of the old Bird teams. Garnett's an awesome player to watch and he needed out of a situation where Minnesota's owner would rather make money off a star than win a title. And I like Ray Allen as a shooter and a veteran leader. But no, these are not the Celtic teams that dominated, these are not the Russell Celtics or the Bird Celtics. You think a Bostonian would rant about the team the way I do, if they were the old Celtics?

Luckily, we pretty much put all our civic pride into one team and it ain't the Celtics, and they ARE winning championships. Put it this way: they won't be naming any tunnels after Bill Russell. There's a sign outside Logan Airport saying "welcome to Massachusetts: home of the World Champion Boston Red Sox." You'll never see a Celtic logo on that sign, title or no title.

My point is that you've got it wrong: this isn't a patchwork team seeking a title, it's a patchwork team trying to save a quickly sinking ship. If they don't at least make the Finals before 2010, it could be the death knell for the definition of a dynastic franchise. But if you were to ask me, I'd say I'm afraid the Old Celtics, the team with all the history and the special place in the city's heart, were boxed up and buried with the great Red Auerbach. ...Maybe this team will keep holding it down at home, and somehow manage to not screw this up and make the Finals, maybe even win it all. I doubt it, but maybe.

Deacon, believe me when I say you're lucky that when the Mavs and Spurs were laughingstocks, they didn't fall from a long, successful history. They might have been laughing, but they weren't laughing nearly as loud or as spitefully.

[Deacon]

My point is that you've got it wrong: this isn't a patchwork team seeking a title, it's a patchwork team trying to save a quickly sinking ship.

...by winning a title. As you noted, if they don't at least make the Finals in the next year or two, it could be disastrous.

Deacon, believe me when I say you're lucky that when the Mavs and Spurs were laughingstocks, they didn't fall from a long, successful history. They might have been laughing, but they weren't laughing nearly as loud or as spitefully.

The bigger the ego, the louder the pop when the bubble bursts, eh? The bigger they are, the harder they fall, etc, etc, etc? I can see that, but that goes along with strutting around in the clouds of euphoria. Eventually that pride's going to be bruised. Plus, as I mentioned before, there's still something that's exacerbating that problem: their continued big-dick attitude still puts me off. They act like they're already champions, like they're entitled, the anointed, the chosen ones without having earned it yet. Clinching the top seed in an anemic East isn't really the accomplishment they seem to think it is, and they seem to be confused and befuddled by actually facing legitimate challenges to their smug superiority.

The crazy thing is that if this cobbled-together team can actually spark any real chemistry and start working together and hitting on all cylinders, they really do present a very strong prospect for winning it all. But that's part of the problem with throwing together your foundation in an attempt to create an all-star team...you don't know whether they're going to be solid together. If they manage to survive the Cavs, it'll help, but they can't rely on the continued exuberance of long-suffering fans misty eyed with the vague memories of past glories to help propel them to victory at home--especially when they fall off on the road.

PS I didn't know Cleveland had a wharf, but it sure seemed like your boys were flopping like fish out there last night. After all your bullshit about it, I was amused to see it going on in a desperate effort to get some calls.

PPS I swear to god the Cavs pass the ball like a high school team, awkward and stiff and unnecessary and looking right at the recipients the whole time, especially when it's coming from Varejão...

[The Cid]

And as I implied in the last post, it's entirely likely that before long the city gives up on them, and even if they make the playoffs New Englanders will be hard-pressed to switch off the early-regular-season Red Sox game to tune in. That's their future if they don't turn things around.

In large part it has to do with personality. At the end of Bird's career the Celtics weren't entirely great, but it was easily forgiven because Bird was still around, and because the old Garden had a way of putting a loss in perspective. The Celtics had a culture then. To be honest, Deacon, that culture--that history--the only thing connecting today's Celtics to that anymore is the team name and uniform.

The Boston Garden, where the great teams played, has been torn to rubble and replaced with the same arena that 90% of the NBA has. No different than Cleveland's arena, or Philly's, or Atlanta's or anyone else's. Believe me when I say that the Celtics aren't the same team in the former FleetCenter that they were in the great Boston Garden. And titles or none, they never will be that team again. The NBA is too deep, there's too much money and too much talent.

I wish they renamed the C's last year after Red died, changed the uniform and color scheme. Because in many ways, the NBA they played in has died. The league is nothing now like it was in 1986. The Celtics sure aren't the same.

Rick Pitino was right when he said that Bill Russell is not walking through that door, nor is Larry Bird or John Havlicheck. And sadly, Paul Pierce WILL walk through it, and promptly put up three or four bricks.

Who knows? Maybe Glen Davis will mature into a force at center, and Rondo will grow into a great point guard. Maybe Davis will become a fan favorite for his personality--something today's Celtics lack sorely--and they'll sign or draft some players to take the place of Garnett and Allen. Maybe they'll trade Pierce, or he'll finally do something worthwhile in an important game. Maybe they'll get a coach that can keep them composed on the road next year.

I just don't see it. I think the next two or three years, title or none, will be our goodbye to a league that's passed this city by.

[Hirschof]

What an embarassing photo.