-
-
Winner take all
Paul Jones | June 17, 2010
-
-
So could the NBA have asked for anything more? Two of the league's most storied franchises, the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers, are playing in the final and it will all be decided in seventh game. Cue the TV ratings spike.
It hasn't been great for the Lakers in past Game 7's against the Celtics as they sit at 0-4 all time, and with Los Angeles not having won two straight games in this series you wonder if they can now.
So which numbers do you believe? The team that wins Game 3 (Lakers) of a series tied at one apiece wins 78 percent of the time? The team that wins Game 5 (Boston) when a series is tied at two apiece wins it all 84 percent of the time? The home teams have won 13 of 16 Game 7s (Lakers), or Boston being two for two in Game 7s on the road in the final. How about Phil Jackson having never won a game seven in the Finals - actually he's never needed one but you catch my drift, the numbers are conflicting.
Will the "Leprechaun" work his magic and tap a Celtic player on the head providing a great performance like one of those in the past. There was the nifty 30-point, 40-rebound performance by Bill Russell in 1962, and another Russell gem when he dropped 25 points and hauled in 32 rebounds in 1966. And then there are the ghosts of past Celtics like Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Tommy Heinsohn, John Havlicek and Dennis Johnson who always seemed to come up with big plays at timely moments.
But the Lakers have their own way of haunting the Celtics with names like Magic Johnson, Michael Cooper, Jerry West, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and James Worthy who earned the moniker of "Big Game" James as he dropped a triple-double on the Pistons in the seventh game of the 1988 Finals.
Oh yes and the Lakers do have this guy who will go down as the best player of his generation - bar none - thanks to his intensity and ability to make plays when it counts. You might have heard of him, Kobe Bryant. He'll try to equal Magic's feat of winning five rings and move within one of the man, Michael Jordan, that everyone is comparing him to right now.
The one guy Boston won't have on Thursday night is Kendrick Perkins who will not play after he injured his knee in Tuesday night. The Celtics forward suffered two torn ligaments, a torn medial collateral ligament and a torn posterior cruciate ligament. Boston will miss Perkins on the boards and on the defensive end. True it was almost like four on five offensively as "Perk" was giving Boston very little on the offensive end but his rebounding, shot-blocking and presence in the lane will be missed.
There is very little time for head coach Doc Rivers to adjust and that can be both beneficial and detrimental at the same time. If Rivers can orchestrate the right scenarios, it's the Lakers that will have to adjust. The Celtics bench boss has yet to determine a starter, be it Glen "Big Baby" Davis or Rasheed Wallace, to replace Perkins while hinting that the "close to human victory cigar", Brian Scalabrine will be activated, True, Los Angeles will talk about playing their game, but if Boston surprises them, there is no "next game" to make an adjustment. On the other hand, the Celtics could be totally out of sync without Perkins. It says here that the Celtics should start Wallace to keep the rest of the rotation in place bringing Davis off the bench. Wallace would also give them some length against the towering front line of the Lakers.
But expect a close game, and a battle that will rival Lakers-Celtics match-ups from year's past. For those of you that think the Lakers have the momentum, you're wrong. There is no such thing as game to game momentum in the Finals. If there is, then how does Ray Allen make a Finals record eight three point buckets in one game and then go "ofer" in the next. How does Pau Gasol look like the softy he was in 2008 in game five of this series and then almost record a triple double in the next game? How does Boston's bench look like world beaters in game five and then struggle scoring 13 points total in game six without recording a point in the first half? No such thing as momentum from game to game. Now, within the contest, well that's a different story.
So its one and done and its fitting that two of the NBA's landmark franchises are close to another title and the opposing squad, that happens to be the archrival, stands in the way. Should be great, the personification of "win or go home."
Related
Recent Columns
-
All Columns
-
- Grange on Raptors: Five heads are better than one
- Davidi on World Series: Everybody likes Mike
- Brophy on Leafs: Connolly debuts on Broadway
- King on CHL: Why the Q needs new rinks
- Davidi: Team Canada worth their weight
- Spector on Oilers: Getting even
- Davidi on World Series: Cards get wires crossed
- Brophy on Maple Leafs: The nation's best
- Grange on Blue Jays: Hands off!
- Lang on NFL: Forte continues to shine
-
- NBA has too much flopping
May 24, 2012 - Lakers tripling out?
May 17, 2012 - Matchup of old rivals
May 12, 2012 - Giving Canada credibility
May 8, 2012 - Changes coming in Dallas
May 6, 2012 - Lack of discipline
May 1, 2012 - A familiar dilemma
April 29, 2012 - The value of experience
April 28, 2012 - And the winner is?
April 26, 2012 - World Peace or Ron Artest?
April 23, 2012
About
|
Paul Jones
...
|
