The NBA Playoffs...

Remove all ads!

... are underwhelming thus far this year. Most of the game have been entirely uncompetitive. The only one that looked entertaining was the Grizzlies and Clippers on Monday night, but because that game didn't even START until 10:30 at night east coast time, I obviously didn't watch the end of the game.

It's in years like this that I think the NBA can make due with just 4 playoff teams per conference. In fact, that's true of most years. When was the last time a 5-seed or worse got to the championship series? The last one I remember was the Houston Rockets in their 2nd of their consecutive championships, circa 1994. And they actually won. (thinking...) Hmmm... weren't the Knicks a 7th or so seed the strike-shortened year they played the Spurs in the Finals? That was (I'm guessing) around 1999. They lost - swept IIRC.

Anyway, this 1st round kinda sucks. I'm left to wonder if the examples above are cases where the exception proves the rule, rather than an argument in favor of a playoff format that allows more than half the league to get in. Does anyone really expect the Celtics, Bucks, Lakers, and Rockets to offer more than token resistance in the 1st round?

 

In the last 10 years or so, the West has had more teams that were "playoff worthy" than the east. The east has been dominated mostly by Boston, Chciago & Miami as possible contenders. With a few others mixed in for a year or two, here and there. There have been many good teams from the various franchises in the West, unfortunately, they had to get past the Lakers and San Antonio.

 

The only way my Celtics make it to a game 5 (never mind winning the series) is if the refs give it to them. They have looked beyond horrible.

 

I agree DMC. The Heat don't really have any roadblocks to the title. Of course, there is a lot of basketball to be played. You never know when an injury or two will occcur. Usually happens in seasons just like this. Lebron lands on someone's foot and turns an ankle real bad....the whole thing goes up for grabs.

 

Celts will get swept, Lakers and Bucks are so far playing like they will get swept.

For the title, Miami is undoubtedly the favorite right now. I think the Thunder could unseat them. I think San Antonio, at least the way they are playing right now, could possibly win it too, but I'd put them on the outside looking in. (For all the talk about the "rejuvenated Big 3," what I keep noticing when I watch the Spurs is what seems like 10 young, athletic, long-armed, decent-shooting, fresh-legged swingmen than the Spurs keep throwing out against their opponents).

Can't figure the Clippers-Memphis series. Memphis isn't getting Gasol or Randolph involved (who, last I checked, were their real go-to players) and without their low-post offense, Memphis isn't good enough to beat the Clippers (or, frankly, about half the teams in the league).

 

The only reason why I disagree with all of the "sweep" calls, is that the NBA doesn't want to lose out on the tv revenue. Beware of the refs, it is going to be epically bad.

 

Snook, you sound like my wife. Whenever a playoff series goes beyond the minimum, she says "of course, because they want to make more money!".

She's very cynical.

 

I am a life-long Celtics fan and I still must point out that putting Jeff Green and Dwight Howard in the same sentence when it comes to "talent" is going too far. Jeff Green is a serviceable player but he's no All-Star and I anticipate he never will be.

 

^^ Yeah, wow. OKC may not even beat Houston now, without Westbrook.

 

I think OKC will get by Houston - they aren't blowing that 3 game lead. TBH, while no one really talks about it in OKC, this year's team wasn't as good as last year's team even before Westbrook went down. I can't believe they decided against paying Harden in the offseason. He was far and away their 3rd best player, and there's really no one else there to pick up the slack.

I do not recall if the NBA reseeds after the first round. Assuming OKC advances, do they automatically get the winner of Grizzlies-Clippers, or would they reseed the teams if there's an upset in Warriors-Nuggets? Regardless, the real beneficiaries here are the Spurs.

Still, I'm underwhelmed overall. The Spurs and Heat already advanced, and I view the Knicks and Thunder advancing as inevitable. It's kind of hard to get fired up about the other four teams in the east, because I can't see anything happening there other than a Heat-Knicks eastern finals (and even there the Heat will almost surely win). In the west, OKC's chances are hurt, but other than the Spurs, who does this really help? I have a hard time seeing the Clippers or Grizzlies (and that series has 7 written all over it), beating the Thunder and Spurs consecutively.

 

Well, Martin plays the role they wanted Harden to play. Stand on the outside and shoot, maybe drive once in a while, be the second or third ball-handler. The problem is, statistically, going back about 10 or 15 games, Martin's shot has deserted him. He's averaging about 12 points, 1 assist, and 2 rebounds, and his FG% is below 40%, I think, over that amount of time.

Harden expanded that role far beyond what OKC really wanted or needed, I guess. While I really liked his game, I had the impression he disrupted Scott Brooks' offensive schemes at times last season, and it seemed to me that Westbrook and he lacked on-court chemistry.

The other thing is OKC is a small-market team. They couldn't afford to pay Harden $18 million a year (or whatever it is he is getting paid by Houston) plus keep Westbrook, Durant, and Serge Ibaka (Ibaka is a near-All Star PF right now, and he's only 24 or 25 or something like that). This year, or last year, I can't remember which, the NBA's salary cap penalty gets pretty onerous (it wasn't a terribly expensive penalty before). That is why, for the last couple of seasons, lots of teams across the league, especially small-market teams, have been shedding cap like crazy (remember Memphis and Rudy Gay?).

Nope.

 

Yeah, I understand the idea was to let him go this year and get something in return rather than keep him this year, and run the risk of not being able to pull off a sign and trade in the offseason. Then you're either salary cap hosed, or worse yet, you lose him and get nothing in return. I just feel that team is better with Harden on it. I didn't like when they let him go to Houston last year - I thought the smarter play was to keep him for one year, and figure out how to work it out in the offseason. I know it's an all-in move for a championship, and it could blow up in your face, but the potential reward was proportionate to the risk.

 

Yeah, this new CBA is pretty prohibitive. It's going to change the face of the NBA, but it might take a couple of years for people to really notice.

 

Wow. Of course I was rooting for the Celts, but in the end, they won this game because they played less awfully than the Knicks.

Was the Knicks game-plan really for Carmello Anthony and JR Smith to completely ignore their teammates, launch J's that they almost invariably bricked, react to the refing like petulant rookies, and to play defense so atrociously on the Celtics that I actually laughed out loud at least once? Surely it wasn't.

Amazing how little coaching matters for most of the teams during most of the season, but how much it matters in the play-offs.

 

I admit that I am surprised that both this series and the Rockets-Thunder are going to a game 6. Although I still like the Knicks and Thunder to win - even if it goes 7.

 

If history is any indication, the Warriors will have their hands full. Their record against San Antonio in the Tim Duncan era is 3-29 (including 0-16 at San Antonio).

I just have to ask Rose: What up with that injury? He was cleared medically to play back in March. It's been a year now since his injury. He says he's not mentally prepared to play, and I guess I understand how that can be. But I don't see how you can recover mentally without actually stepping foot on the court in a game. He shoots jumpers in practice... The knee can't be that bad if he's doing that...

EDIT: One more thing on LeBron failing to receive a unanimous selection for MVP based on one writer voting for Carmelo Anthony. No one has ever done this. Shaq equalled LeBron's accomplishment by also coming one vote shy of a unanimous selection in 2000. All I have to say is this: If MJ can't win a unanimous MVP in any of his seasons, then I have to say the whole process sounds rigged.