Jack’s Blog

When the Lakers got Steve Nash, they got older but much wiser - and better.  Fans of the Lakeshow were hopeful the Magic would think Andrew Bynum would be better than nothing for Dwight Howard, giving LA a starting unit of Nash, Howard, Kobe, Pau and, naturally, World Peace.

Sure, the Heat are the defending champs and the Thunder are the current runners-up.  And there are 27 other teams that are going to at least try.  But Nash, with his experience and savvy, gives the Lakers a way to get easy baskets.  No more having to give it to Kobe with a short shot clock.  Defense would be somewhat of a problem but Superman, or in this case, Superman II, would be erasing at least as many mistakes as Bynum and, believe it or not, would raise the maturity level of the team’s center position.  And scoring at such a prolific pace (which Nash would mean to LA’s offense) would compensate for lesser D - although having played that many years in the league makes him crafty enough to be an adequate defender.

All that talk became moot when the Heat inked Ray Allen.  If Nash once said it would be tough putting on a Lakers’ jersey, imagine the emotions playing for Miami ought to evoke in Allen.  Maybe that’s what a perfect fit does for an aging player.  The one area, until the Finals, that the Heat had was they didn’t have a reliable three point shooter.  No need to worry now.  Talk about “spreading the floor.”

With LeBron, DWade - and even Mario Chalmers - being able to get to the basket as effectively as any trio in the NBA, Allen will just have to spot up beyond the arc.  Imagine the pressure on the opponent’s defensive coordinator when he realizes helping off the NBA’s best-ever three point shooter means stopping two only to give up three.

Coaches and players of the other 29 teams must have been sick when they heard about the move.  But NBA assistant coaches make upwards of a quarter of a mil.  The league’s coaches and players are millionaires, except for those who are multi-millionaires.  Which can only mean that even though the Heat just signed Ray Allen:

“Life isn’t fair, but it’s still good.”

No one has ever doubted Ron Artest is a complicated human being.  His well-documented past is made up of highs (a championship ring which he later auctioned off to raise money for mental health awareness & a citizenship award which followed many internal battles) and lows (being a major part of the worst NBA melee ever & now, being suspended for a dangerous cheap shot).  In an interview yesterday, all he would say was that everyone needed to move on because they had an important game to win, albeit without his services.

What Artest’s intentional foul stands for is the playoff mentality that has permeated the NBA culture.  How many times does a guy get mauled driving to the basket and the commentator’s response is, “That’s just a hard playoff foul.”  What, exactly, is a “playoff foul?”

Are we to believe what everyone’s always said about NBA games - that the players don’t really put out during the regular season, that to watch a NBA game, it’s only necessary to check out the last two minutes?  Of course, intensity rises during a run to a championship.  It’s only natural that players throw it into another gear when they can actually see the trophy - and not just the $113/day meal per diem and another television game.  It used to be that guys went harder because of the playoffs shares but with what players make now, that money just goes to defray the costs of a posse.

Are playoff games being refereed differently?  Is a “playoff foul” something that would be a flagrant foul during the regular season?  Or does it revert to the question regarding the fans getting shortchanged during the regular season by paying maximum price but not seeing maximum effort?

In the twisted mind of Ron Artest who, prior to clotheslining Berea, received a foul for shoving Shawn Marion out of bounds fighting for a loose ball, was it okay to act like he did . . . because it was a playoff game?  He apparently made a great deal of progress as can be witnessed by David Stern’s quote to Dan Patrick regarding his receiving the NBA’s citizenship reward:

“I’ve been watching him grow and become an adviser to others and recognize his own vulnerabilities.”

Did he revert or do we give him a pass because it’s the playoffs?

Each year, the NBA’s contending teams make moves they hope will pay off with a title.  This past NBA season saw a flurry of activity, with each move trumpeted as “the one” to push that team ahead of the others.

In San Antonio, the addition of Richard Jefferson was supposed to add offense and athleticism to the (aging) Big Three (Duncan, Parker & Ginobli).  The Spurs never have replaced the lockdown defense that Edison (Fresno) High’s Bruce Bowen gave them.  With Jefferson, a hard-to-guard three man, moving into the lineup, the thought was the Spurs would be a formidable threat.

The Cleveland Cavaliers picked up Shaquille O’Neal and Antawn Jamison.  People who praised the move said he’s still a beast (for brief periods) and one who could guard Dwight Howard.  In addition, the big guy wanted to show he’d gladly be regulated to sidekick so he could to bring a championship to the Cavs (mainly LeBron) like he did for DWade.  Critics of O’Neal said opponents would put him in pick & roll situations, a fact not denied by anyone in basketball.  Jamison was supposed to take some of the scoring load off of James.

The Orlando Magic, came so close last year to winning it all, but having lost Hedo Turkoglu, realized they needed serious help - which came in the form of Vince Carter.  Never have fans and pundits swayed to and fro when it came to assessing whether obtaining VC was a good move or not.  They’d win and - if Carter played well - the blockbuster move was brilliant.  A Magic loss, or a few in a row, and VC was the on the receiving end of brutal criticism.  One reason was that there was no move the Magic could have made that would have replaced what they lost in Torkoglu’s game.

Boston made a huge move when they acquired Rasheed Wallace.  Sheed gets a bad rap from fans, mainly because of his on court rantings and the number of T’s he picks up.  However, talk to any NBA insider and they’ll tell, to a man, what a great teammate and locker room guy Wallace is.  Then, late in the season, the Celtics picked up controversial and talented Nate Robinson from the dysfunctional Knicks - a move that paid off exactly as Doc Rivers had predicted.

However, the Lakers addition of Ron Artest, also a lightning rod for controversy, paid off the most.  Why?  Because LA won the championship and as the saying in professional sports goes:

“Winning isn’t everything.  It’s . . . Forget it, winning IS everything.”

 Â

Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith do nothing to hide their disdain for the seemingly unlimited number of statistics that are thrown about during playoff time.  Independent of what you think of TNT’s duo in the booth (I happen to think they, along with Ernie Johnson, do a better job than anybody in that role), no one (who enjoys the game) can disagree with their assessment of stats.  Sure, these type of numbers are necessary - for fans in bars trying to win an argument (although many of the ones you hear in that venue are made up), for “stat guys” (the number of unemployed is high enough; don’t put them on the street - 76.2% of them would never find another job) and for commentators to use, especially as filler during a blowout.

But come on already: “Out of the 16 NBA championship Game 7’s, the home team has won 13.”  “Of the three times the road team won, the Boston Celtics have won all three.”  And here we were in a Game 7 - with Boston as the road team.

“The team that wins the first quarter has won every game in the series.”  “The team that outrebounds its opponent has won every game in this series.”  At the end of the first quarter, the Celtics were ahead but the Lakers were slaughtering them on the boards.  Thought for sure it was a sign of the apocalypse.

Other insights: “If LA loses, they’ll look at all those missed free throws.”  “If Boston loses, they’ll look at all those offensive rebounds they gave up.”  Duh!  Isn’t there always something the losing team will regret - and isn’t is usually obvious?  “Well, guys, we might have lost tonight but there’s absolutely nothing we could have done better that would have turned this loss into a victory.  We got all the loose balls, we blocked out, contested their shots, took good shots ourselves, got back in transition, kept them off the free throw line and got there ourselves - and converted - made the proper rotations on defense, were unselfish, . . . Wait, those damn refs!”

Next observation: last night’s game was decided by the referees.  And not because they lack integrity nor because they’re incompetent.  It’s because the NBA game is impossible to officiate.  How many times, after seeing the replay - from several angles - would the ruling on the floor stand - independent of which way the call was originally made?  There were several times in this series (including last night) when Jeff Van Gundy would watch a replay and say something about the call and Mark Jackson, after watching the same replay on the same monitor, would disagree.  As with the (missed non-)call on Pau Gasol when he jumped and his foot hit the floor a nanosecond before he got the shot off, Van Gundy made the statement, “That should have been a travel - but it is much harder making that call seeing it in live action.” 

Although Ron Artest played a key role in the Lakers’ victory and championship season, I found some levity in, I believe, Mike Breen’s comment after a mistake by Artest.  “Not a smart play by Ron Artest.”  Isn’t that an oxymoron?

Really, there was no need to even play this series after the first game because as the “stat guys” told us:

“Phil Jackson is 47-0 when his team wins Game 1 of a series.”    Â

Everybody’s an expert.  What I’ve always found interesting is how people evaluate situations and/or make predictions, especially in the field of sports, and if what they say comes true, how they’re ready and more than willing with an “I told you so.”  When the opposite takes place, they’re either difficult to find or develop a temporary case of amnesia. 

Two days ago, this blog space or blogosphere or whatever the proper techno-word or phrase is, contained my observations on Game Five of the NBA Finals.  I made three points: 1) the Celtics beat the Lakers to every loose ball, 2) the Celts won because they played a team game as opposed to the individual (Kobe Bryant, for those who haven’t watched an NBA game for the past ten years) effort LA gave and 3) and this is the clincher, Ron Artest, if he’s not locking down his matchup (usually Paul Pierce), is an offensive liability for the Lakers.

So, Game Six started and everything I said was right on the money - in reverse.  The Lakers came out energized, made all the hustle plays, played as a finely tuned machine and the offensive spark was none other than Ron Artest.

Some people have told me that when a blog makes the person who created it look ridiculous, the great thing about blogging as opposed to putting the thoughts in other forms of print, is that the blogger can always go back and delete it.  Since I’ve posted more than 150 blogs that have something to do with integrity, deleting Monday’s blog would seem to fly in the face of one of my favorite topics.  Plus, I’d have to spend too much time deleting all those too.  Suffice to say that I won’t be predicting a winner for Game Seven.  Flip your own coin.   

What inevitably must be the case is that Monday’s blog received the greatest number of hits of any I’ve posted thus far because, according to Hartley’s First Law (and I paraphrase):

“The probability of someone reading your blog is directly proportional to the stupidity of the post.” �

The Boston Celtics beat the Los Angeles Lakers in Game Five of the NBA Finals because:

1) In addition to the Celtics beating the Lakers to nearly every loose ball, they also won the battle of fourth quarter “hustle” plays, e.g. after Rajon Rondo reached back to knock the ball away from Kobe Bryant as he drove to the basket, Ray Allen made a great save which ignited a Boston fast break, culminating with a Rondo layup; Rondo somehow tipping in an offensive rebound although he didn’t have inside position; Tony Allen’s anticipation of a lob pass being thrown to Pau Gasol and coming from the help side, over 20 feet away, to block Gasol’s sure deuce; with only four seconds to get the ball over midcourt, Paul Pierce making a miraculous catch of a Kevin Garnett pass and then, somehow, finding Rondo who once again, laid it in; , and at games’s end, when the Lakers were making a comeback and Boston was missing shots, the Celtics managed to extend possessions by retrieving several offensive rebounds which allowed them to run more clock.

2) ESPN’s Linda Cohn called it “a team vs. an individual.”  It’s difficult to argue with that analysis.  Yet, I believe the was a reason for it and that was confidence on one side and lack of confidence on the other.  In the beginning of the game, Kobe Bryant was aggressive offensively, but when he drove and attracted numerous defenders, he’d find open teammates - each of whom either passed up open shots or looked tentative shooting them.  Boston’s guys - from 1 through 8 - seem to understand and accept their roles.  Each displays the ultimate confidence to shoot when he has “his” shot or do whatever is required to execute the game plan.

In the second half, Kobe came out and scored the first 19 Laker points (which actually was 23 in a row as he scored the last four of the first half).  The Lakers, however, couldn’t stop the Celtics and wasted a sensational offensive performance by Bryant because not only was Kobe scoring, but the degree of difficulty of his shot-making was incredulous.

3) If Ron Artest isn’t locking down his man (Paul Pierce so far in the series but maybe Ray Allen or even Rondo in Game Six - since the Lakers may feel the need to make a radical defensive adjustment, unless they believe the Staples Center will be that much of a difference), he becomes a liability for LA.  Offensively, Artest either takes bad shots or misses a lot of good ones.  Plus, he is the ultimate example of a player who overdribbles and doesn’t follow in any way, shape or form what the coaches want on offense, i.e. the famous “triangle offense.”

With the series moving to the west coast, it will be interesting to see what changes are made to the above three areas.  If they don’t, they’re putting a tremendous amount of faith in the home crowd energizing them.  If they don’t change, they’re philosophy might be regarded as:

“I like hitting my head against the wall because it feels so good when I stop.”          Â

At this time of year, with the World Cup capturing the interest of such a large segment of society, with the NBA Finals grabbing record TV shares, with Major League Baseball revitalized - mainly due to superb pitching - and with NFL camps in full OTA swing, the world of sports is teaching the lesson that, in order to win, teams need to pull together.  Even John Wooden’s passing last week reminded us of his teachings (preachings) of togetherness and winning as well-oiled units. 

Why is it then, as I have blogged on other occasions, that in politics, the main message is, “Don’t vote for the clown who’s running against me!  And to prove I mean it, I’m going to put my money where my mouth is - television ads!”  Living in California, I know so much dirt on Meg Whitman that I feel like the people here voted for a major loser!  Of course, I would feel the exact same way had Steve Poizner won.

Imagine a basketball game between the Celtics and the Lakers in which the winner was decided by a fan vote.  Paul Pierce ( a crowd favorite) would tell the crowd (including a national TV audience), “Remember that Ron Artest (who has a strong following of his own) was the guy who went into the stands at The Palace in Detroit and fought with a fan,” to which Artest would say, “Oh yeah?  Didn’t you get that scar on your face after you got into a fight in a bar?”

Then Rajon Rondo (an extremely popular Celtic) would jump in and say, “Lamar Odom is a guy who went to Rhode Island because no other school would even try to get him in after they saw his transcript.”  Then Lamar (a true swingman) would retaliate with, “Hey, Rondo, you want to talk about violatin’ NCAA rules?  Man, you went to Kentucky!”

Naturally, (the magnetic) Kevin Garnett would come to his buddy, Shorty’s, aid and deflect the Kentucky-NCAA issue (which certainly could swing the voters away from a Celtics’ victory) by attacking the Lakers’ main strength, Kobe Bryant (who, if left unscathed, could deliver the Lakers a victory nearly by himself).  “Let’s not put Kobe too high on a pedestal.  Don’t forget Colorado.”  The Black Mamba, being the competitor that he is (and realizing that in a war of words, he has a distinct advantage over KG), retaliates with, “KG, at least I can speak.  As a matter of fact, I’m bilingual.  Oh yeah, I forgot.  So are you - English and profanity.”

As the “game” wore on, somebody would bring up that Doc Rivers did something bad when he was in high school in Chicago, followed by a report that insinuated Phil Jackson might have been involved with “Mary Jane” during the long-haired time of his life.  Then the campaign will talk about Kendrick Perkins spending time in the principal’s office when he was nine and Pau Gasol being part a protest in Spain during his teenage years.

At some point, there will have to be a vote to determine the “winner.”  Really, these votes determine the worse of the two losers.  And we get stuck with the runner-up as a representative.  What brought this to my attention was a Q&A in the recent Time magazine (6/21/10) with Florida’s governor, Charlie Crist, who’s running for the Senate.  In it, Crist said, in answer to the question about his leaving the Republican party to run as an independent, “Washington is stuck in gridlock.  There’s a lot ‘party first.’  The purpose of good government is to fight for the people, not the party.”

His quote that attracted me was: “There’s all this bickering back and forth.  People want our leaders to be better than that, to rise above it.

“If we’re just arguing with each other, how are we making progress?”

Or know who’s winning?  

  Â

The Los Angeles Lakers were up 18, the Phoenix Suns fought back.  The, with under a minute to go, Ron Artest, with the Lakers up three, missed a free throw line jumper.  LA got the ball back & promptly kicked it out to Artest, who was standing wide open beyond the three-point line. 

For reasons unknown to knowledgeable basketball people, Artest, with 22 seconds on the shot clock, hoisted a three.  The result was identical to the others he’d shot from beyond the arc - a miss (other nouns would have described the shot more accurately).

The Suns rebounded the errant toss and jacked up 3 three’s of their own, the final one by Jason Richardson, which he banked in.  Tie game, 3.5 seconds left, time out Lakers - their ball at midcourt.  No one in the Staples Center was surprised when the inbounds pass went into Kobe Bryant.  I must admit I was shocked that Kobe turned and, while being double teamed, hurled the ball toward the hoop. 

With three-and-a-half seconds, I thought for sure Kobe would try and split the double team, attempting to draw a foul or at least, because the last thing Phoenix wanted to do was put him on the line, get a little closer for one of his game-winning baseline jumpers.

J-Rich, who displayed a ton of emotion following his (non-called) banker, must have been thinking about what he was going to say about his clutch 3.  Replays showed him ball watching - as Ron Artest, who just moments prior, was being vilified for taking the ill-advised shot when they could have run off 20 more seconds, possibly scored or got fouled and, for all intents and purposes, iced the game, dashed to the bucket and stuck back Kobe’s air ball as the horn expired, ending the game and giving the Lakers the oh-so-important Game Five victory.

I enjoy watching games but, honestly, I look forward to the analysis (before, halftime and post-game) as much as I do the actual contest.  Quite shocking were the remarks made by Kenny Smith and Reggie Miller, each saying he thought Artest’s decision was a good one.

Come on, guys.  Of course, Reggie, you’re right in saying he was wide open, had his feet set and it was a great look.  And Kenny is dead on when he said that if the shot goes down, it’s game over.  That’s what they would have - and possibly, should have - done!  But they were great shooters - in Miller’s case, the all-time leader in NBA made threes.  The guy with the ball in his hands, though, was a guy who is shooting 25% from beyond the stripe in the playoffs, meaning the probability of a pressure shot going down would about halve the percentage.

All that said, it was the comments from the leading characters that was most amazing to me.  When asked about the wisdom of the shot, given time and score (not even mentioning ineptness of the shooter), Artest talked about how you have to play the game, something about the playgrounds, yada, yada - meaning he still didn’t think it was a bad decision.  Although elated with the win, Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson alluded to an error in Artest’s judgment.  Although hes a big-time talent, who gives it his all, there are times you’d swear Artest would play the game exactly the same if he had a frontal lobotomy.

As for the flip side, i.e. “hero to goat,” Richardson talked of how he thought Kobe’s shot was going to hit the rim, of how he checked his man just before the shot went up and of how Ron “slipped inside” (although it’s clearly evident that he stood flat-footed and watched the flight of the ball), never giving any consideration to attempting to block out his man.  He even mentioned about how Channing Frye said he should have grabbed it (in a good teammate’s way of trying not to throw his buddy under the bus at such a crucial time).  Once again, the video showed Frye tied up, attempting - and succeeding - to keep his man, Pau Gasol, from rebounding the miss.

As I blogged about a couple of days ago, this game was chock full of player complaints to officials (”What, no foul?” or “Who, me foul?”).  They are the world’s best athletes, but I’m beginning to think NBA stands for:

“N-o B-ody’s A-ccountable.”Â

While players always talk about taking it “one game at a time,” bloggers have the liberty to look ahead.  As far as the current NBA playoffs, why not?

The Lakers are up 2-0, having won both games at the Staples Center.  But their wins were more than just holding home court.  Phoenix just doesn’t look like a team that even thinks they can beat the Lakers.  Granted, they do make the outcomes tantalizingly close, but in the end, it’s too much - what’s the new (new, as in a few years now) word - length.  Teams used to be tall.  Nowadays tall’s not enough.  Your team has to be long too.  And if you don’t understand what I’m referring to, just watch the Lakers.  Long fits them - with no explanation necessary. 

The other series is also 2-0, but looks even worse for the team in the hole.  Orlando has lost both games at home and just doesn’t seem to have an answer for the Celtics’ - for lack of a better description - game plan.  If anyone listens to the TV broadcast, they’d have to be pretty dense if they didn’t come away with the point that color commentator Mark Jackson feels the best way for the Magic is NOT to run the initial offense through Dwight Howard, especially if they feel there best option is to have Howard try to score with his back-to-the-basket game.

So, rather than dissect the remainder of those games, let’s jump ahead to the Lakers and the Celtics (inevitable) series.  The match ups are fascinating.  Fisher vs. Rondo at the point.  If Fish thought guarding Steve Nash was a difficult task (and it is), he might consider using some sick leave against Boston.  However, where the Magic struggle guarding Ray Allen - chasing him around all those screens (not exactly Vince Carter’s forte) - LA has a couple of guys who are rather adept defenders.  Whether Kobe or Ron Artest guards Allen isn’t as much of a concern because their defensive prowess is such that the other could D-up Paul Pierce.  Now, defending Pierce isn’t a slice of heaven but being shadowed by Bryant or Artest is no day at the coast either.  In addition, one of those Celts (but probably not both at the same time, as the Suns discovered in Game 2) has to guard Kobe - and that takes several ounces of energy, as well as providing a feeling of humility.

Next, the match up of Gasol and KG.  Advantage?  I’d give it to whichever guy is on offense.  Finally, Perkins and Bynum, the nearly forgotten fifth starters, might be the X-Factor, although because each club has a deep bench, the center position is, more than likely, a wash.  So, what about the benches?  Both provide spark. 

Odom (in reality a starter) is probably the most talented of anyone not out there for the opening jump, but Big Baby and Tony Allen have found their confidence.  ‘Sheed never lost his.  On the other side, Jordan Farmar has made momentum shifting plays (example: last night) and Shannon Brown can be a freakish human highlight video.

Not lacking for interest - or impact - is the coaching match up between two master motivators, Phil Jackson and Doc Rivers.

One day at a time?  Sorry, as far as most fans are concerned. the cry is:

“Bring it on!” Â

After 82 games (many of those last week being played by guys who won’t see much action from here on out, so the key guys would be well-rested), the NBA playoffs are finally here.  It sure seems like a long season just to eliminate less than half the teams.

The final week of the NBA schedule was like training camp - it gave most teams a chance to see some of its “prospects” in game action, even though the games meant nothing.   Except for the Bulls and Raptors (and with Chris Bosh’s season-ending injury, it was much better for all concerned the Bulls got the 8th spot) and, maybe, a few others jockeying for a chance to move up a spot, most of the teams were resting for the playoffs (or the lottery). 

Now, the level of play will certainly ratchet up several notches (except for Joakim Noah, Chris “The Birdman” Anderson and Edjuardo Najera who are always ratcheted up) and interest in the NBA will increase in direct proportion.  I know many basketball coaches who won’t watch a pro game until the playoffs.  Ask them why and they’ll say they’re bothered by the less-than-all-out effort during the regular season.  Ask them why they like the playoffs and the answer’s usually, because then, we get to watch the greatest athletes in the world.

When the season began, and even as it progressed, many thought a Lakers-Cavs showdown was inevitable.  Now, there are diverse opinions as to whether either or both may not even be there when the finals roll around (in June, as amazing as that sounds).  Will Shaq’s return raise the level of Cleveland’s game (after all, he is one of the greatest players to ever put on a uni and has four championships on his resume) or will his presence slow them down, clog the lane and mess with what’s been pretty good chemistry to date?  He’s allegedly been working out during Cavs’ games - even on the road, where he burns a game’s worth of calories by riding the bike and working out in the weight room, on the road as well as home.  Supposedly, he’s in the best shape of his career and totally focused on fulfilling his promise of bringing a championship to Cleveland.  Shaq has been known to blow smoke every once in a while, however.

How about LA?  Is Kobe’s finger healed?  Don’t ask him.  We know what that answer will be - even if he comes out to shoot with only four of them on his hand.  What about the addition of Ron Artest?  He’s a lightning rod for controversy, but has also been a lockdown defender - and if his head is right, he’d be an major asset.  Incredible as it sounds for someone of his talent, all he’s expected to be is a role player, albeit a significant role.

Consider the potential road blocks for these two along the way.  Although Boston occasionally looks old, the every other day off format of the playoffs aids veteran teams.  Think all the way back to the Celtics when Bill Russell was at the end of his career and the Knicks a few years later.  Because of KG’s injury last season, the Celts still consider themselves the defending champs, i.e. no one’s beaten them when they’ve been at full strength.  As for their X factor, Rasheed Wallace has a bad rep with officials (and deservedly so), but, throughout the league, he’s known as a great locker room guys and is as crafty as he is talented.   Plus, now is the time Doc Rivers is at his button-pushing best.  The flu bug has hit Boston (mainly Rajon Rondo and Glen “Big, But Don’t Call Me Baby” Davis), but what could cause Boston to be really sick is if Dwayne Wade takes over the games, as he is able - and prone - to do.

There are those who feel Orlando will repeat in the East (and they have the best chance to take down the Cavs) but they have to get through Charlotte first.  Larry Brown is as good as any coach at game-planning and now that he has quelled the rumor that he’s headed to the Clips or the Nets (for at least a week), the Bobcats and Magic series is an intriguing one.

Forget even attempting to handicap the West.  The Mavs had a terrific season, got the number two seed and their reward is they get to play the Spurs.  All the other match-ups in this division are just as compelling.  In a best-of-seven series, it’s usually the better team that wins.  Yet, with all the injuries this year, no one’s sure which is the better team!

The games start today, so as far as analyzing the NBA playoffs any further, it’s time to follow the advice from the Al Pacino-Robert DeNiro movie, Heat, in which the famous exchange ends with the line: 

“Yeah, stop talking, OK, Slick?” Â