[recap] [box score]
I don't believe in moral victories in professional sports, especially in the playoffs. However, as fans, we're allowed -- in special situations -- to appreciate, even in defeat, when a team plays its guts out and leaves everything it has out on the court. And that's what the Celtics did in Game 2 on Wednesday. Boston battled age, injury, adversity, the officials -- and, oh yeah, the Miami Heat -- to come within a possession, or an inch, or a whistle, of winning the game and tying this sucker up at one apiece. As fans, we pick a team to root for, and then we're kind of stuck with whatever we get. Over the years, of course, Celtics supporters have been very fortunate with the hand they've been dealt. But even now, down 2-0, staring elimination and the possible end of an era in the face, there's isn't a franchise I'd rather root for. There's isn't a team I'd trade for the guys who put on the green jerseys Wednesday. That's the honest truth.
Miami put this game away in the final minutes of overtime, but it was lost in regulation. Not during the third quarter, when Boston let the last of a 15-point first-half lead slip away. And not on Miami's last possession of the fourth quarter, when Kevin Garnett couldn't corral a LeBron James miss, costing Boston a chance at a buzzer-beating game-winner. It was lost during the two-minute stretch beginning with 3:13 remaining, when Ray Allen missed an open three-pointer in transition, and ending with Udonis Haslem's baseline jumper with 1:07 to go. During that stretch, Garnett missed a 12-footer in the lane over James and Allen missed another good look coming off a screen, while Shane Battier supplemented four James free throws on the other end with a three-pointer from the right corner. During that stretch, the score went from 94-89 Boston to 98-94 Miami, and though Boston battled back to tie the score on a three from Allen to send it into OT, they had lost their best chance to win it.
That's not meant as a criticism of Allen and Garnett. All three shots were on line and missed by the tiniest of margins: the first was maybe an inch short; the latter two perhaps an inch long. Basketball games are often won and lost by those small margins. Doc likes to say it's a make or miss league, and in the final minutes, the guys named Battier and Haslem made, and the guys named Allen and Garnett missed. It happens. I'd take those guys, those shots, in that situation again in a heartbeat.
If you watched the game, or saw the highlights, or looked at the box score, what I'm about to write is obvious: Rajon Rondo was straight-up unbelievable. He played every second of the game's 53 minutes, obliterated his career high with 44 points, added ten assists and eight rebounds, and tossed in three steals against just three turnovers. Miami had no answer for him, while he was Boston's answer to nearly everything Miami did. In the postgame, Magic Johnson called it one of the best performances he's ever seen in all his years in the game. I lack the writing ability to adequately describe the way Rondo played, and the technical details of just how he turned in his finest performance as a pro wouldn't do justice to the gravity of the moment. I'll say only this: From this moment forward, anyone who questions that kid's heart and his value to this team is wrong. Flat-out wrong.
I hate doing this, but I have to: The officiating was bad again. And unlike Game 1, it likely cost Boston the game. It was bad all night, uneven, overly protective of James and Dwyane Wade, but one call, or no-call, stands out: The reverse layup Rondo missed in the final 90 seconds of overtime with the score tied at 105, when he was raked across the face by Wade. This was an inexcusable miss by the officials, and it had double the consequences. Not only was Boston cheated out of a trip to the line, but -- because Rondo was on the deck, checking to make sure his eyes were still in the right place -- the Heat had a five-on-four going the other way that they quickly turned into a Haslem dunk. It was a huge, momentum-shifting play.
It's frustrating for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that this wasn't an isolated miss, but rather part of a pattern of calls going against the Celtics. But mostly, I'm irritated that this unbelievable performance, by Rondo and by the team, might have been enough if not for a missed call the the officials would have made 100 times out of 100 had it happened on the other end. (Perhaps Rondo should have thrown his arms in the air and kicked his legs out, the way Wade does when anyone breathes on him, in order to draw the foul.) As swollen with pride as my heart is as I type this, it also aches. Not because we lost, not because we're down 2-0, but because, to a man, the Celtics deserved to win this game, and certainly deserved to not have the opportunity taken from them in this fashion.
Game 3 is Friday. It's in Boston, in front of the home crowd, and with any luck, maybe we'll get a few calls. The most concerning thing for me is all the minutes the Celtics played tonight. I already mentioned that Rondo played all 53, but Garnett played 45 and Pierce and Allen played 43 on bad legs. It was necessary, but how these guys will have anything left is beyond me.
Knowing these Celtics, though, I wouldn't bet against them finding something.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Monday, May 28, 2012
Miami 93, Boston 79
[recap] [box score]
I don't want to spend too much time dissecting this one, because it really seemed like a night where almost nothing went right for the Celtics. If Boston is going to win this series, they need to play exceptionally well for at least four games, and they were far, far from that level in Game 1. If you thought Boston could win this series before Monday, I don't think there was anything in the game that should change that feeling. In other words, there wasn't anything that I thought the Celtics would be able to do that Miami took away. If we execute better, we have a shot.
With that said, I think there are two things that need to change:
1. Kevin Garnett was terrific once again, pacing the team with 22 points. Here's the deal, though: He has to be even better. He has to be even more aggressive. Sixteen shots aren't enough. It goes against his nature, the way he's played his entire career, not to mention the principles by which he (and the rest of the Celtics) believe the game of basketball should be played, but he's by far our most effective offensive option. If he shot the ball every time he caught it within, say, 15 feet of the hoop, it probably wouldn't be wrong. That's how big his advantage is, and that's how difficult it is going to continue to be for Ray Allen and Paul Pierce to score.
2. We need to do a much, much better on the defensive glass. I'm not talking about the latter half of the fourth quarter, when the Celtics had switched to a zone, but the rest of the game. Excluding that stretch, the Heat still had eight or nine offensive rebounds. That's too many in a series where points are at a premium. The solution to the problem is both simple, and complex. Doc Rivers noted after the game that the Heat beat the Celts to nearly every loose ball -- which he expected, because Miami is generally younger and more athletic. That's not going to change throughout the series. Quite simply, Boston needs to box out. That's the simple part. The complex part is -- Boston needs to box out. Somewhere between college and the NBA, basketball players stop boxing out, for the most part. I don't know why -- they just do. And I'm afraid that I see no other way to solve the rebounding problem.
Other than that, I think this really came done to execution. Doc is fond of saying that the NBA is a make or miss league, and I think we saw that tonight. I was pretty pleased with the shots Boston got, and for the most part, I thought we forced LeBron James and Dwyane Wade into some tough looks (which they happened to make). Pierce and Allen struggled, but given their injuries, that's expected now. The real difference seemed to be that the Heat hit their shots, while Boston didn't have anyone outside of Garnett who could consistently knock down a jumper. Boston went 11-for-21 from the line, too, and some makes there might have made a difference.
Quick note about the officiating: Horrendous in the first half. Eddie Malloy has a history of a quick trigger against the Celtics, and his tech on Doc was an absolute joke, while the one on Rondo was only marginally more warranted. Danny Crawford was too quick with the trigger with Ray Allen's technical as well (and he missed the call that caused Ray's brief reaction), and I can't believe that we had a delay of game tech, too. It didn't cost us the game -- the score was tied after the first half -- but it should be plain embarrassing for the NBA. Malloy, especially, has shown time and again that he's not cut out for big-game officiating. I said back on April 28, after a terribly officiated Miami-New York game, that Malloy should never ref again -- that's hyperbole, but he shouldn't be out there for any more playoff games, if you ask me.
No rest for the weary, as the series continues on Wednesday night. It's not quite must-win, but it'd be nice to have. I think we can get it -- we just need to execute.
I don't want to spend too much time dissecting this one, because it really seemed like a night where almost nothing went right for the Celtics. If Boston is going to win this series, they need to play exceptionally well for at least four games, and they were far, far from that level in Game 1. If you thought Boston could win this series before Monday, I don't think there was anything in the game that should change that feeling. In other words, there wasn't anything that I thought the Celtics would be able to do that Miami took away. If we execute better, we have a shot.
With that said, I think there are two things that need to change:
1. Kevin Garnett was terrific once again, pacing the team with 22 points. Here's the deal, though: He has to be even better. He has to be even more aggressive. Sixteen shots aren't enough. It goes against his nature, the way he's played his entire career, not to mention the principles by which he (and the rest of the Celtics) believe the game of basketball should be played, but he's by far our most effective offensive option. If he shot the ball every time he caught it within, say, 15 feet of the hoop, it probably wouldn't be wrong. That's how big his advantage is, and that's how difficult it is going to continue to be for Ray Allen and Paul Pierce to score.
2. We need to do a much, much better on the defensive glass. I'm not talking about the latter half of the fourth quarter, when the Celtics had switched to a zone, but the rest of the game. Excluding that stretch, the Heat still had eight or nine offensive rebounds. That's too many in a series where points are at a premium. The solution to the problem is both simple, and complex. Doc Rivers noted after the game that the Heat beat the Celts to nearly every loose ball -- which he expected, because Miami is generally younger and more athletic. That's not going to change throughout the series. Quite simply, Boston needs to box out. That's the simple part. The complex part is -- Boston needs to box out. Somewhere between college and the NBA, basketball players stop boxing out, for the most part. I don't know why -- they just do. And I'm afraid that I see no other way to solve the rebounding problem.
Other than that, I think this really came done to execution. Doc is fond of saying that the NBA is a make or miss league, and I think we saw that tonight. I was pretty pleased with the shots Boston got, and for the most part, I thought we forced LeBron James and Dwyane Wade into some tough looks (which they happened to make). Pierce and Allen struggled, but given their injuries, that's expected now. The real difference seemed to be that the Heat hit their shots, while Boston didn't have anyone outside of Garnett who could consistently knock down a jumper. Boston went 11-for-21 from the line, too, and some makes there might have made a difference.
Quick note about the officiating: Horrendous in the first half. Eddie Malloy has a history of a quick trigger against the Celtics, and his tech on Doc was an absolute joke, while the one on Rondo was only marginally more warranted. Danny Crawford was too quick with the trigger with Ray Allen's technical as well (and he missed the call that caused Ray's brief reaction), and I can't believe that we had a delay of game tech, too. It didn't cost us the game -- the score was tied after the first half -- but it should be plain embarrassing for the NBA. Malloy, especially, has shown time and again that he's not cut out for big-game officiating. I said back on April 28, after a terribly officiated Miami-New York game, that Malloy should never ref again -- that's hyperbole, but he shouldn't be out there for any more playoff games, if you ask me.
No rest for the weary, as the series continues on Wednesday night. It's not quite must-win, but it'd be nice to have. I think we can get it -- we just need to execute.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Sunday Thoughts
Scattered thoughts on last night, and the upcoming series with Miami:
1. I'm a little surprised at how unimpressed the NBA world seems to be with Rajon Rondo in the aftermath of Game 7. If you asked people how Boston would win a Game 7 with Paul Pierce on the bench for the final four minutes, Rondo hitting 50 feet worth of jumpers and going 4-for-4 from the foul line would be pretty far down the list. I suppose that in essence, all Rondo did was knock down a couple of open jumpers, but this was a most improbable way to close out a playoff series. And I'm guessing that if, say, Jrue Holiday had hit some similar shots to propel Philly to victory, we'd be hearing a lot more about him individually. As it stands, most of what I've read has framed everything in the context of the Celtics grinding out a series win, with less of a focus on Rondo's jumpers.
2. Maybe I'm making too much of it, but I think this was a big step forward for Rondo. As I've said before, while he's had plenty of big-time performances in crucial games in his career, he rarely has stepped up in big *moments*. A big part of that, of course, has to do with the fact that he has three Hall of Fame teammates who naturally get the ball in those moments, so he hasn't had a lot of opportunity. But coming through in the clutch -- in a Game 7, no less -- is big step, particularly since he did via the shakiest parts of his game (his jumper and his free throw stroke).
3. One last note here about Rondo: I thought he took a disproportionate amount of the blame for the Game 6 loss (he was bad, but so was everybody else) and in reading some stuff today, people weren't really in love with his Game 7 performance until the final few minutes, either. I agree that he wasn't spectacular Saturday night, but I really think that people are underestimating just how extraordinarily much Rondo is being asked to do. He is in charge of running an offense which has two of its biggest weapons significantly hobbled by injury. There is no one else to create offense for others, and maybe one other guy who can create his own shot. Boston's offense is, at this point, little more than a bunch of jump shots, which means Rondo is encouraged to push the tempo in order to get some easy early offense -- only there's no one to run with him. Everyone expects him to know exactly when he should abandon his struggling teammates and look for his own shot, even though he's never had to do that before and it goes against all his instincts. He's a table-setter, not a high-volume scorer, and of all the point guards in the NBA, the only one I can think of who shifts as effortlessly between the two roles as we seem to expect Rondo to is the Clippers' Chris Paul. The dude deserves a little slack if he doesn't always do the right thing.
4. Jackie MacMullan touched on it a bit in her column for ESPN, but Boston's defense didn't get enough credit for winning Game 7 -- or the whole series, really. Last night's telecast really annoyed me because Mike Breen and Jeff Van Gundy kept talking about Philly's defense and how it was keeping them in the game despite a poor shooting night, while making almost no mention of the fact that Boston was shooting nearly as poorly and actually leading the game.
5. I didn't get a chance to mention this last night's recap column, but Keyon Dooling had a key steal late, reaching in from behind and knocking the ball off of Holiday's leg with Boston up eight and 53 seconds left. Holiday had a clear path to the basket and a bucket there certainly would have tightened the Celtics up a bit; we probably still would have won, but there's no doubt the basket would have gotten a little bit smaller on Boston's ensuing free throws had it been just a two-possession game.
6. Miami's next, and the big question has to be how we're gonna guard Dwyane Wade. Without Avery Bradley, the primary responsibility for Wade will fall on Ray Allen. Wade is a tough cover for Allen even when Allen is healthy, and we all know that Allen isn't healthy.
7. In reality, stopping Wade and Lebron James will be a team effort, and Boston has been pretty good in the past at taking away the pair's opportunities at the rim, turning them (and the rest of the Heat) into jump shooters. We'll have to do that again, and the possible absence of Chris Bosh would help. Bosh missed most of the Indiana series with a strained abdominal muscle, and his status for the Boston series in unclear. Bosh is not the toughest of customers, and so I have to think that even if he does return, he won't be quite as dangerous as he normally is. However, his mere presence on the court would require Kevin Garnett to pay attention to him in a way that he wouldn't have to worry about his replacement in the lineup, whether it be Rony Turiaf or Joel Anthony.
8. As good as LeBron James is, I think I'd rather have that he, and not Wade, have the mismatch. Wade will exploit a mismatch the entire game if you let him, while James' unselfish nature occasionally prevents him from taking full advantage of the opportunities he gets on the court. I don't think doing something crazy like switching Pierce on to Wade is a good idea -- this is just an observation.
9. Offensively, option number one has to be Garnett. He's been pretty much unstoppable in the playoffs, and we need him to be even better against a Heat team that isn't going to make scoring any easier than it was against Philadelphia. Similarly, we're going to need Brandon Bass to step up the way he did at times against Philadelphia.
10. Allen's obviously hurting, but one way to limit Wade's effectiveness is to make him work on defense. As hard as it is going to be one Ray's bone-spur-afflicted ankles, I think we need to run him off of and around screens as much as we typically do, to try and tire Wade out. Wade also hates getting hit and has shown a tendency to lose his cool, so this could have some added benefits, as well. I'm not talking about anything dirty; just making life as physically taxing as possible.
11. As much as I hate to say it, especially after my opening few paragraphs of this post, we absolutely need a monster series from Rondo if we're going to win. He needs to be careful with the ball, because Miami is deadly in transition. He needs to be in attack mode from the get-go, recognizing that James can neutralize Pierce to an extent and that Ray isn't himself. And on the other end, he needs to not lose track of Mario Chalmers, Miami's third-most dangerous offensive player if Bosh is out. It's a huge ask, but I'm afraid I just don't see another way around.
1. I'm a little surprised at how unimpressed the NBA world seems to be with Rajon Rondo in the aftermath of Game 7. If you asked people how Boston would win a Game 7 with Paul Pierce on the bench for the final four minutes, Rondo hitting 50 feet worth of jumpers and going 4-for-4 from the foul line would be pretty far down the list. I suppose that in essence, all Rondo did was knock down a couple of open jumpers, but this was a most improbable way to close out a playoff series. And I'm guessing that if, say, Jrue Holiday had hit some similar shots to propel Philly to victory, we'd be hearing a lot more about him individually. As it stands, most of what I've read has framed everything in the context of the Celtics grinding out a series win, with less of a focus on Rondo's jumpers.
2. Maybe I'm making too much of it, but I think this was a big step forward for Rondo. As I've said before, while he's had plenty of big-time performances in crucial games in his career, he rarely has stepped up in big *moments*. A big part of that, of course, has to do with the fact that he has three Hall of Fame teammates who naturally get the ball in those moments, so he hasn't had a lot of opportunity. But coming through in the clutch -- in a Game 7, no less -- is big step, particularly since he did via the shakiest parts of his game (his jumper and his free throw stroke).
3. One last note here about Rondo: I thought he took a disproportionate amount of the blame for the Game 6 loss (he was bad, but so was everybody else) and in reading some stuff today, people weren't really in love with his Game 7 performance until the final few minutes, either. I agree that he wasn't spectacular Saturday night, but I really think that people are underestimating just how extraordinarily much Rondo is being asked to do. He is in charge of running an offense which has two of its biggest weapons significantly hobbled by injury. There is no one else to create offense for others, and maybe one other guy who can create his own shot. Boston's offense is, at this point, little more than a bunch of jump shots, which means Rondo is encouraged to push the tempo in order to get some easy early offense -- only there's no one to run with him. Everyone expects him to know exactly when he should abandon his struggling teammates and look for his own shot, even though he's never had to do that before and it goes against all his instincts. He's a table-setter, not a high-volume scorer, and of all the point guards in the NBA, the only one I can think of who shifts as effortlessly between the two roles as we seem to expect Rondo to is the Clippers' Chris Paul. The dude deserves a little slack if he doesn't always do the right thing.
4. Jackie MacMullan touched on it a bit in her column for ESPN, but Boston's defense didn't get enough credit for winning Game 7 -- or the whole series, really. Last night's telecast really annoyed me because Mike Breen and Jeff Van Gundy kept talking about Philly's defense and how it was keeping them in the game despite a poor shooting night, while making almost no mention of the fact that Boston was shooting nearly as poorly and actually leading the game.
5. I didn't get a chance to mention this last night's recap column, but Keyon Dooling had a key steal late, reaching in from behind and knocking the ball off of Holiday's leg with Boston up eight and 53 seconds left. Holiday had a clear path to the basket and a bucket there certainly would have tightened the Celtics up a bit; we probably still would have won, but there's no doubt the basket would have gotten a little bit smaller on Boston's ensuing free throws had it been just a two-possession game.
6. Miami's next, and the big question has to be how we're gonna guard Dwyane Wade. Without Avery Bradley, the primary responsibility for Wade will fall on Ray Allen. Wade is a tough cover for Allen even when Allen is healthy, and we all know that Allen isn't healthy.
7. In reality, stopping Wade and Lebron James will be a team effort, and Boston has been pretty good in the past at taking away the pair's opportunities at the rim, turning them (and the rest of the Heat) into jump shooters. We'll have to do that again, and the possible absence of Chris Bosh would help. Bosh missed most of the Indiana series with a strained abdominal muscle, and his status for the Boston series in unclear. Bosh is not the toughest of customers, and so I have to think that even if he does return, he won't be quite as dangerous as he normally is. However, his mere presence on the court would require Kevin Garnett to pay attention to him in a way that he wouldn't have to worry about his replacement in the lineup, whether it be Rony Turiaf or Joel Anthony.
8. As good as LeBron James is, I think I'd rather have that he, and not Wade, have the mismatch. Wade will exploit a mismatch the entire game if you let him, while James' unselfish nature occasionally prevents him from taking full advantage of the opportunities he gets on the court. I don't think doing something crazy like switching Pierce on to Wade is a good idea -- this is just an observation.
9. Offensively, option number one has to be Garnett. He's been pretty much unstoppable in the playoffs, and we need him to be even better against a Heat team that isn't going to make scoring any easier than it was against Philadelphia. Similarly, we're going to need Brandon Bass to step up the way he did at times against Philadelphia.
10. Allen's obviously hurting, but one way to limit Wade's effectiveness is to make him work on defense. As hard as it is going to be one Ray's bone-spur-afflicted ankles, I think we need to run him off of and around screens as much as we typically do, to try and tire Wade out. Wade also hates getting hit and has shown a tendency to lose his cool, so this could have some added benefits, as well. I'm not talking about anything dirty; just making life as physically taxing as possible.
11. As much as I hate to say it, especially after my opening few paragraphs of this post, we absolutely need a monster series from Rondo if we're going to win. He needs to be careful with the ball, because Miami is deadly in transition. He needs to be in attack mode from the get-go, recognizing that James can neutralize Pierce to an extent and that Ray isn't himself. And on the other end, he needs to not lose track of Mario Chalmers, Miami's third-most dangerous offensive player if Bosh is out. It's a huge ask, but I'm afraid I just don't see another way around.
Boston 85, Philadelphia 75
[recap] [box score]
Ever since Paul Pierce saved Rajon Rondo from his Beckham moment by scoring 36 points in the point guard's absence in Game 2 of the Atlanta series, I've been waiting for Rondo to repay the favor. Saturday night, in Game 7 against the Philadelphia 76ers, Rondo did.
If you're reading this, you probably watched the game, but for posterity's sake: With 4:16 left and Boston clinging to a three-point lead, Paul Pierce fouled out on a bang-bang charging call drawn by Thaddeus Young. (That's all I'm gonna say about the call.) With the momentum shifting suddenly, almost unbelievably, the other way, Rondo took over, scoring the game's next seven points. He started with a driving layup, added to it with a long two-pointer at the end of the shot clock, then completed his personal 7-0 run with a deep three-pointer, 27 feet, probably as long a shot as I've ever seen him make.
Philly's Elton Brand stopped the bleeding with a tip-in at the 1:54 mark, but Rondo drew the disqualifying foul on Brand on the other end, then calmly drained both free throws. After a Jrue Holiday three and a one-for-two trip from the line from Kevin Garneett, Rondo sealed the game with another pair of free throws that put the Celtics up by ten with 53 seconds left.
Was it at least a little lucky? Sure. The two long jumpers were broken plays, end-of-the-shot-clock jobs that Rondo had little choice but to hoist. Obviously, Rondo shooting from 20-plus feet is not how Doc drew it up, and I'm sure that Philly was more than happy to let Rondo fire away from distance. But someone had to take those, and whoever took them was either going to make them or miss them. Rondo stepped up, took them, and made them.
This game was far from perfect. There were some good moments here and there -- Ray Allen drilled a couple of fourth-quarter threes after shaking off one of the worst performances he's ever had; Pierce had a couple big baskets in the third quarter to help keep the Sixers at bay; and Kevin Garnett and Brandon Bass were the team's most consistent offensive threats all evening -- but for the most part, the Celtics were once again bordering on disaster offensively. On the defensive end, they were very good, and that was enough to win the game. But the task ahead is an extraordinarily difficult one, and Boston can't play the way they did for most of the Philly series and expect to beat Miami.
As fans, though, we don't have to worry about the Heat right away. Doc and the rest of the coaching staff must concern themselves with that immediately, but for a few hours, anyway, we can enjoy this win for what it was -- a team with a championship pedigree winning in a most improbable way.
Ever since Paul Pierce saved Rajon Rondo from his Beckham moment by scoring 36 points in the point guard's absence in Game 2 of the Atlanta series, I've been waiting for Rondo to repay the favor. Saturday night, in Game 7 against the Philadelphia 76ers, Rondo did.
If you're reading this, you probably watched the game, but for posterity's sake: With 4:16 left and Boston clinging to a three-point lead, Paul Pierce fouled out on a bang-bang charging call drawn by Thaddeus Young. (That's all I'm gonna say about the call.) With the momentum shifting suddenly, almost unbelievably, the other way, Rondo took over, scoring the game's next seven points. He started with a driving layup, added to it with a long two-pointer at the end of the shot clock, then completed his personal 7-0 run with a deep three-pointer, 27 feet, probably as long a shot as I've ever seen him make.
Philly's Elton Brand stopped the bleeding with a tip-in at the 1:54 mark, but Rondo drew the disqualifying foul on Brand on the other end, then calmly drained both free throws. After a Jrue Holiday three and a one-for-two trip from the line from Kevin Garneett, Rondo sealed the game with another pair of free throws that put the Celtics up by ten with 53 seconds left.
Was it at least a little lucky? Sure. The two long jumpers were broken plays, end-of-the-shot-clock jobs that Rondo had little choice but to hoist. Obviously, Rondo shooting from 20-plus feet is not how Doc drew it up, and I'm sure that Philly was more than happy to let Rondo fire away from distance. But someone had to take those, and whoever took them was either going to make them or miss them. Rondo stepped up, took them, and made them.
This game was far from perfect. There were some good moments here and there -- Ray Allen drilled a couple of fourth-quarter threes after shaking off one of the worst performances he's ever had; Pierce had a couple big baskets in the third quarter to help keep the Sixers at bay; and Kevin Garnett and Brandon Bass were the team's most consistent offensive threats all evening -- but for the most part, the Celtics were once again bordering on disaster offensively. On the defensive end, they were very good, and that was enough to win the game. But the task ahead is an extraordinarily difficult one, and Boston can't play the way they did for most of the Philly series and expect to beat Miami.
As fans, though, we don't have to worry about the Heat right away. Doc and the rest of the coaching staff must concern themselves with that immediately, but for a few hours, anyway, we can enjoy this win for what it was -- a team with a championship pedigree winning in a most improbable way.
Friday, May 25, 2012
I don't mean to alarm you ...
... but when you settle into your recliner (or barstool at your favorite watering hole) to watch Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen join the rest of the Celtics in taking on the Sixers in Saturday night's Game 7 (8 p.m. Eastern, ABC), you may be doing so for the last time.
When those two signed up to join Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo in green in the summer of 2007, Celtics fans knew two things: We were now contenders for multiple NBA championships, and we had better get those titles fast, because a window propped open by 31 years of NBA experience doesn't stay open long. Due to contracts and the practical considerations of the age of the "Big Three," three years seemed like a reasonable statute of limitations.
Due to the improvement of Rajon Rondo, the now-departed Kendrick Perkins, Avery Bradley, and yes, coach Doc Rivers -- plus the remarkable longevity of the vets -- the Celtics have stayed postseason-relevant for a bit longer than expected. But this run is coming to an end, sooner rather than later. As recently as the trade deadline, with the Celtics foundering, Danny Ainge was shopping his aging stars, and every NBA junkie with a publishing outlet was urging him to "blow up" the team and position it for the next run. This is no time to speculate or get into the details of how much money it might take to re-sign Garnett and Allen and whether the team will want to pony up, but it suffices to say that if both of those guys are on the roster next year, it'll be a surprise. Which means, in turn, that if things go bad on Saturday, it'll likely be the end of this chapter in Celtics history.
I, for one, don't expect things to go bad. If there's one thing that's been apparent to me from this series, it's that Philadelphia isn't good enough to beat a Boston team playing moderately well. Even with all the injuries, this series should have been over in five games, and the Cs were in position to win Game 6 despite playing some of the worst basketball they've played in years. I would expect a much different Boston team to show up on Saturday. As poorly as the Celtics have fared recently in road closeout games (2-11 in the last five years), they've been nearly as good in series-clinching games at home (7-1 over the same period, the lone blemish being Orlando in the conference semis without Garnett).
If those statistics strike you as irrelevant, I won't blame you. But in recent years, I -- against all logic -- have come to believe in sort of an order to the NBA universe. By and large, the NBA postseason is a pyramid that must be scaled step-by-step. It's the reason the Heat didn't beat the Mavericks in last year's Finals, the reason the Clippers got swept in the second-round this year, the x-factor that I think tips the scales in favor of the Spurs in their much-anticipated Western Conference finals matchup with Thunder. And beating two solid, battle-tested teams in a row -- even with the help of big-time injuries to those teams -- is just too big a jump.
Finally, I just can't believe that this era will end at home in the conference semis to a team like Philadelphia. That's not the personality of these Celtics. A championship attitude will only take you so far (see last year's loss in five games to Miami), but it should be enough to beat an inferior team like the Sixers. Boston's season may well end in a loss, but if it does, it will be to the Heat or the Spurs.
Not Philly. Not in the Garden. Not in Game 7.
When those two signed up to join Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo in green in the summer of 2007, Celtics fans knew two things: We were now contenders for multiple NBA championships, and we had better get those titles fast, because a window propped open by 31 years of NBA experience doesn't stay open long. Due to contracts and the practical considerations of the age of the "Big Three," three years seemed like a reasonable statute of limitations.
Due to the improvement of Rajon Rondo, the now-departed Kendrick Perkins, Avery Bradley, and yes, coach Doc Rivers -- plus the remarkable longevity of the vets -- the Celtics have stayed postseason-relevant for a bit longer than expected. But this run is coming to an end, sooner rather than later. As recently as the trade deadline, with the Celtics foundering, Danny Ainge was shopping his aging stars, and every NBA junkie with a publishing outlet was urging him to "blow up" the team and position it for the next run. This is no time to speculate or get into the details of how much money it might take to re-sign Garnett and Allen and whether the team will want to pony up, but it suffices to say that if both of those guys are on the roster next year, it'll be a surprise. Which means, in turn, that if things go bad on Saturday, it'll likely be the end of this chapter in Celtics history.
I, for one, don't expect things to go bad. If there's one thing that's been apparent to me from this series, it's that Philadelphia isn't good enough to beat a Boston team playing moderately well. Even with all the injuries, this series should have been over in five games, and the Cs were in position to win Game 6 despite playing some of the worst basketball they've played in years. I would expect a much different Boston team to show up on Saturday. As poorly as the Celtics have fared recently in road closeout games (2-11 in the last five years), they've been nearly as good in series-clinching games at home (7-1 over the same period, the lone blemish being Orlando in the conference semis without Garnett).
If those statistics strike you as irrelevant, I won't blame you. But in recent years, I -- against all logic -- have come to believe in sort of an order to the NBA universe. By and large, the NBA postseason is a pyramid that must be scaled step-by-step. It's the reason the Heat didn't beat the Mavericks in last year's Finals, the reason the Clippers got swept in the second-round this year, the x-factor that I think tips the scales in favor of the Spurs in their much-anticipated Western Conference finals matchup with Thunder. And beating two solid, battle-tested teams in a row -- even with the help of big-time injuries to those teams -- is just too big a jump.
Finally, I just can't believe that this era will end at home in the conference semis to a team like Philadelphia. That's not the personality of these Celtics. A championship attitude will only take you so far (see last year's loss in five games to Miami), but it should be enough to beat an inferior team like the Sixers. Boston's season may well end in a loss, but if it does, it will be to the Heat or the Spurs.
Not Philly. Not in the Garden. Not in Game 7.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Philadelphia 82, Boston 75
[recap] [box score]
Atrocious. Simply atrocious.
There's really no other way to describe the Celtics' performance in Game 6 Wednesday night. They were out of synch almost from the tip, looking for long stretches like a group of guys who had never actually played together before. The effort was there, but that's something you should be able to take for granted in a closeout playoff game. It takes more than effort to win a playoff series, and the Celtics simply didn't bring it.
These things happen, I suppose, though perhaps not often as wholly as they did Wednesday night. The most frustrating thing is that Philly didn't play all that well, either. With just a modicum of offensive execution, the Celtics could be getting some much-needed rest in front of the TV, hoping Indiana and Miami go the distance. Instead, they'll be preparing for Game 7 in a series they have to feel they should have won by now.
I'm not sure I've ever experienced a game quite like this, to be honest. You know how there are some games where one team is playing poorly but still hanging within a few points, and the fans of the team that's winning are nervous because they know they should be up more, while the team that's losing actually feels pretty good? This game was like that, only the feeling switched from quarter to quarter. The Sixers led by three points after the first period, and I felt good: Ray Allen had picked up a couple early fouls, we hadn't really made anything, and Philly hadn't been able to build any sort of lead. But by the time Mickael Pietrus' corner three-pointer gave Boston a 36-33 (yes, you read that right) lead at halftime, I had flip-flopped. Philly had been so bad in the second quarter that it felt like Boston had lost a big opportunity by not running them out of the place.
After the third quarter, which ended with Philadelphia up 60-56, I was back to feeling cautiously optimistic. Boston was still playing horribly and Philly had started to heat up a bit, and yet the game was still there for the taking. Moreover, Boston was doing the little things -- like making free throws and getting offensive rebounds -- that often decide who wins ugly games like this one. I can't say I was sure that Boston was going to come back and win, but I felt okay, all things considered.
Alas, it didn't happen. After making their first 17 free throws, Boston missed three in a row to start the fourth, while Philadelphia found a little bit of a rhythm offensively. There were opportunities to close the gap, but the Celtics simply could not find any sort of cohesiveness on offense, and Philly's small lineup started to give Boston the same problems it did in Game 4. The final margin reflects neither how easily the Celtics could have won this game nor how poorly they played.
There's really not much to analyze in terms of Xs and Os, simply because Boston's offense was so unrecognizable. I will say that I think the Celtics really missed Avery Bradley in this one. Philly did a lot of doubling, both in the post and on the perimeter, and, as Doc pointed out in the post-game presser, our spacing was horrendous. Bradley is excellent at moving without the ball, and I think his presence would have resulted in a few easy layups; at the very least, it would have relieved some of the pressure on the offense. Defensively, we had some trouble guarding the pick-and-roll, but that's a relatively easy fix. I'm not going to get on Doc for the small lineup that I hated in Game 4 and that he rolled out again in the quarter of this one -- at that point, he had to try anything to try and steal this win.
Two days of rest before Game 7 on Saturday, and Boston definitely needs them. Ideally, the extra day will give Bradley's shoulders enough time to recover that he can give us something. At a minimum, though, it should give Rajon Rondo (43 minutes), Paul Pierce (42), and Kevin Garnett (41) time to re-charge. I'm sure there will be plenty of hysteria between now and then, but remember that the last time they had two days off with questions swirling, they won Game 5 comfortably. Here's hoping history repeats itself.
(Thursday morning update: Various outlets were reporting late last night that Bradley will be shut down for the rest of the season. It's a blow for Game 7, but the implications are even greater for a potential conference final matchup with Miami.)
Atrocious. Simply atrocious.
There's really no other way to describe the Celtics' performance in Game 6 Wednesday night. They were out of synch almost from the tip, looking for long stretches like a group of guys who had never actually played together before. The effort was there, but that's something you should be able to take for granted in a closeout playoff game. It takes more than effort to win a playoff series, and the Celtics simply didn't bring it.
These things happen, I suppose, though perhaps not often as wholly as they did Wednesday night. The most frustrating thing is that Philly didn't play all that well, either. With just a modicum of offensive execution, the Celtics could be getting some much-needed rest in front of the TV, hoping Indiana and Miami go the distance. Instead, they'll be preparing for Game 7 in a series they have to feel they should have won by now.
I'm not sure I've ever experienced a game quite like this, to be honest. You know how there are some games where one team is playing poorly but still hanging within a few points, and the fans of the team that's winning are nervous because they know they should be up more, while the team that's losing actually feels pretty good? This game was like that, only the feeling switched from quarter to quarter. The Sixers led by three points after the first period, and I felt good: Ray Allen had picked up a couple early fouls, we hadn't really made anything, and Philly hadn't been able to build any sort of lead. But by the time Mickael Pietrus' corner three-pointer gave Boston a 36-33 (yes, you read that right) lead at halftime, I had flip-flopped. Philly had been so bad in the second quarter that it felt like Boston had lost a big opportunity by not running them out of the place.
After the third quarter, which ended with Philadelphia up 60-56, I was back to feeling cautiously optimistic. Boston was still playing horribly and Philly had started to heat up a bit, and yet the game was still there for the taking. Moreover, Boston was doing the little things -- like making free throws and getting offensive rebounds -- that often decide who wins ugly games like this one. I can't say I was sure that Boston was going to come back and win, but I felt okay, all things considered.
Alas, it didn't happen. After making their first 17 free throws, Boston missed three in a row to start the fourth, while Philadelphia found a little bit of a rhythm offensively. There were opportunities to close the gap, but the Celtics simply could not find any sort of cohesiveness on offense, and Philly's small lineup started to give Boston the same problems it did in Game 4. The final margin reflects neither how easily the Celtics could have won this game nor how poorly they played.
There's really not much to analyze in terms of Xs and Os, simply because Boston's offense was so unrecognizable. I will say that I think the Celtics really missed Avery Bradley in this one. Philly did a lot of doubling, both in the post and on the perimeter, and, as Doc pointed out in the post-game presser, our spacing was horrendous. Bradley is excellent at moving without the ball, and I think his presence would have resulted in a few easy layups; at the very least, it would have relieved some of the pressure on the offense. Defensively, we had some trouble guarding the pick-and-roll, but that's a relatively easy fix. I'm not going to get on Doc for the small lineup that I hated in Game 4 and that he rolled out again in the quarter of this one -- at that point, he had to try anything to try and steal this win.
Two days of rest before Game 7 on Saturday, and Boston definitely needs them. Ideally, the extra day will give Bradley's shoulders enough time to recover that he can give us something. At a minimum, though, it should give Rajon Rondo (43 minutes), Paul Pierce (42), and Kevin Garnett (41) time to re-charge. I'm sure there will be plenty of hysteria between now and then, but remember that the last time they had two days off with questions swirling, they won Game 5 comfortably. Here's hoping history repeats itself.
(Thursday morning update: Various outlets were reporting late last night that Bradley will be shut down for the rest of the season. It's a blow for Game 7, but the implications are even greater for a potential conference final matchup with Miami.)
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Boston 101, Philadelphia 85
[recap] [box score]
This was not your typical 16-point blowout.
I think most people expected the veteran Celtics to come out strong at home in Game 5 against Philadelphia, taking back the control they gave up in blowing a big second-half lead on Friday. But it was the Sixers who seemed to dominate the first 24 minutes, making shot after shot and being opportunistic in transition. Boston didn't play poorly in the first half, but with the halftime score 50-47 in favor of the visitors, it certainly felt like the Celtics were the ones hanging on for dear life. (Looking back, there was reason to believe that things would swing toward Boston in the second half. Philly was scoring mainly on jump shots -- leading to a big free throw advantage for Boston that helped us stay close -- and they were hitting some tough looks. Boston was often getting better shots, but they simply weren't dropping.)
And it got worse before it got better. Trailing by six early in the third quarter, Kevin Garnett threw an uncertain pass out front that Andre Iguodala stole. Trying to prevent an easy dunk, Paul Pierce reached out and grabbed the Sixers forward. It was a good thought and a defensible reaction, but the result was a clear path foul, two shots and the ball -- potentially a four- or five-point possession, one of the biggest momentum-grabbing moments that can happen in a professional basketball game. But Iguodala missed both free throws, and Philly turned it over on the ensuing possession. And then, as Philly coach Doug Collins pointed out, the game turned, irreversibly, in favor of Boston.
That was when Brandon Bass, of all people, took over. He scored 18 points in the third quarter alone, two more than the entire Philly team combined. He did it first inside, with a handful of explosive dunks in traffic, precisely the kind of finish we never got from Glen Davis. He then moved out to more familiar territory, drilling a number of the midrange jumpers that have been his staple all season. Bass, who had been solid but not spectacular in the Philly series after having a tough time against Atlanta, had a game-high 27 points, and tied for the team lead with six rebounds.
If Bass gets the game ball, he owes an assist to Rajon Rondo (which he gave, by the way, in his post-game comments to David Aldrich). Rondo was, of course, the catalyst for many of Bass' buckets. But while his primary role was distributor, particularly in the third quarter, he provided much needed scoring at crucial moments -- initially in the first quarter to keep the game close; most crucially in the fourth quarter, after Boston had extended its lead out to double digits, when the offense has historically bogged down.
Honorable mention to Greg Stiemsma, who had eight of his ten points in the first quarter and blocked three shots in just 14 minutes of game action. Stiemsma has played sparingly this series and didn't see the court in Game 4, which is an indictment of Doc, really, now that we know that the rookie's foot injury isn't what kept him out of action. He was a little late closing out on a couple of Lavoy Allen foul line jumpers, but his first-quarter offense was crucial and on one second-half possession, he made a great catch on a tough pass from Ray Allen, then made a pretty left-handed dish that resulted in a couple of Bass free throws. His health permitting, Stiemsma needs to be the first big man off the bench moving forward, not Ryan Hollins.
Speaking of Ray Allen, since I gave him a hard time for his defense in Game 4, I should wrap up this post by acknowledging his play on that end of the court in Game 5. Retaking his place in the starting lineup from Avery Bradley, whose bum shoulders kept him out of this game, Allen contributed little offensively, canning one three-pointer early but making just one other shot the rest of the way. But Allen was more or less as effective as he's ever been for Boston on defense, fighting through the pain of bone spurs in his ankles to stay in the faces of Philly's younger, quicker shooters. Boston's entire defense was really good in the second half, and it feels wrong to single out just one guy. But Ray deserves special mention because of everything he's going through.
Garnett and Pierce were their usual excellent selves. Garnett against Philly's bigs is a better matchup than Pierce (with the sprained knee) versus Iguodala, and so KG is carrying a bigger offensive load than we've come to expect. Garnett overcame a slow start to score 20 points on 8-for-17, while Pierce scored 16 points, going a perfect nine for nine from the free throw line.
Back to Philly for Game 6 on Wednesday (8 p.m. Eastern, ESPN). Twice before, Boston has seized the momentum in this back-and-forth series, and twice, Philly has answered -- though to be completely honest, Boston has been complicit both times. With all the injuries, avoiding Game 7 would be huge. Boston is fully capable of winning Game 6 -- Boston has fairly dominated three of the four halves of basketball played in Philly thus far in the series -- but it's not going to be easy. It'll take the same kind of effort, only better, with one less day of rest than we had between games 4 and 5. And I expect we'll have to do it without Bradley again; Doc's pre-game comments on Monday seemed to suggest that he may be only sporadically available the rest of the way. Things aren't getting any easier, but that seems to be when these Celtics play their best.
This was not your typical 16-point blowout.
I think most people expected the veteran Celtics to come out strong at home in Game 5 against Philadelphia, taking back the control they gave up in blowing a big second-half lead on Friday. But it was the Sixers who seemed to dominate the first 24 minutes, making shot after shot and being opportunistic in transition. Boston didn't play poorly in the first half, but with the halftime score 50-47 in favor of the visitors, it certainly felt like the Celtics were the ones hanging on for dear life. (Looking back, there was reason to believe that things would swing toward Boston in the second half. Philly was scoring mainly on jump shots -- leading to a big free throw advantage for Boston that helped us stay close -- and they were hitting some tough looks. Boston was often getting better shots, but they simply weren't dropping.)
And it got worse before it got better. Trailing by six early in the third quarter, Kevin Garnett threw an uncertain pass out front that Andre Iguodala stole. Trying to prevent an easy dunk, Paul Pierce reached out and grabbed the Sixers forward. It was a good thought and a defensible reaction, but the result was a clear path foul, two shots and the ball -- potentially a four- or five-point possession, one of the biggest momentum-grabbing moments that can happen in a professional basketball game. But Iguodala missed both free throws, and Philly turned it over on the ensuing possession. And then, as Philly coach Doug Collins pointed out, the game turned, irreversibly, in favor of Boston.
That was when Brandon Bass, of all people, took over. He scored 18 points in the third quarter alone, two more than the entire Philly team combined. He did it first inside, with a handful of explosive dunks in traffic, precisely the kind of finish we never got from Glen Davis. He then moved out to more familiar territory, drilling a number of the midrange jumpers that have been his staple all season. Bass, who had been solid but not spectacular in the Philly series after having a tough time against Atlanta, had a game-high 27 points, and tied for the team lead with six rebounds.
If Bass gets the game ball, he owes an assist to Rajon Rondo (which he gave, by the way, in his post-game comments to David Aldrich). Rondo was, of course, the catalyst for many of Bass' buckets. But while his primary role was distributor, particularly in the third quarter, he provided much needed scoring at crucial moments -- initially in the first quarter to keep the game close; most crucially in the fourth quarter, after Boston had extended its lead out to double digits, when the offense has historically bogged down.
Honorable mention to Greg Stiemsma, who had eight of his ten points in the first quarter and blocked three shots in just 14 minutes of game action. Stiemsma has played sparingly this series and didn't see the court in Game 4, which is an indictment of Doc, really, now that we know that the rookie's foot injury isn't what kept him out of action. He was a little late closing out on a couple of Lavoy Allen foul line jumpers, but his first-quarter offense was crucial and on one second-half possession, he made a great catch on a tough pass from Ray Allen, then made a pretty left-handed dish that resulted in a couple of Bass free throws. His health permitting, Stiemsma needs to be the first big man off the bench moving forward, not Ryan Hollins.
Speaking of Ray Allen, since I gave him a hard time for his defense in Game 4, I should wrap up this post by acknowledging his play on that end of the court in Game 5. Retaking his place in the starting lineup from Avery Bradley, whose bum shoulders kept him out of this game, Allen contributed little offensively, canning one three-pointer early but making just one other shot the rest of the way. But Allen was more or less as effective as he's ever been for Boston on defense, fighting through the pain of bone spurs in his ankles to stay in the faces of Philly's younger, quicker shooters. Boston's entire defense was really good in the second half, and it feels wrong to single out just one guy. But Ray deserves special mention because of everything he's going through.
Garnett and Pierce were their usual excellent selves. Garnett against Philly's bigs is a better matchup than Pierce (with the sprained knee) versus Iguodala, and so KG is carrying a bigger offensive load than we've come to expect. Garnett overcame a slow start to score 20 points on 8-for-17, while Pierce scored 16 points, going a perfect nine for nine from the free throw line.
Back to Philly for Game 6 on Wednesday (8 p.m. Eastern, ESPN). Twice before, Boston has seized the momentum in this back-and-forth series, and twice, Philly has answered -- though to be completely honest, Boston has been complicit both times. With all the injuries, avoiding Game 7 would be huge. Boston is fully capable of winning Game 6 -- Boston has fairly dominated three of the four halves of basketball played in Philly thus far in the series -- but it's not going to be easy. It'll take the same kind of effort, only better, with one less day of rest than we had between games 4 and 5. And I expect we'll have to do it without Bradley again; Doc's pre-game comments on Monday seemed to suggest that he may be only sporadically available the rest of the way. Things aren't getting any easier, but that seems to be when these Celtics play their best.
Friday, May 18, 2012
Philadelphia 92, Boston 83
[recap] [box score]
I don't want to write about this game any more than you want to read about it, so this will be uncharacteristically brief. If you hadn't heard, Boston went up 14-0, had an 18-point lead in the third quarter, and lost.
Philly's execution was much better than Boston's in the fourth quarter, but this game was really lost in the third. Boston went cold, stopped going to Kevin Garnett in the post, and started forcing passes and turning the ball over. Meanwhile, some questionable calls against the Celtics allowed Philly's free throw advantage to balloon to something like 30 to 12, and Rajon Rondo, Avery Bradley, and Brandon Bass all picked up their fourth fouls. With our short bench, and the fact that Bass was having his first good game in a while, having those guys sitting really hurt -- Garnett couldn't take his normal rest (which hurt in the fourth) and the offensive sparkplugs we so desperately needed were on the sidelines.
I thought Doc made some tactical errors in the fourth, too. Most importantly, I thought it was a big mistake to counter Philly's small lineup of Jrue Holiday-Louis Williams-Andre Iguodala-Thaddeus Young-Lavoy Allen with Rondo-Bradley-Ray Allen-Pierce-Garnett. Specifically, Allen instead of Bass or Mickael Pietrus made little sense to me. Allen is not a good defender, and this lineup has him trying to guard bigger men -- Iguodala or Young -- while dealing with bone spurs in his ankle that make it impossible for him to establish a strong, solid base.
Under normal circumstances, it wouldn't be so bad, because Allen, when healthy, poses obvious matchup problems on the other end. But Allen isn't healthy, and whether it's because he's out of game shape or because his ankles are really bothering him, he's been almost a complete non-factor in this series. Because he's not able to free himself up on offense, he doesn't balance out the liability on the other end of the court.
I get that Doc trusts Ray, and that Young, a combo forward, poses a tough matchup for Bass, as well. But if you have to live with a mismatch on the defensive end, you need to be able to balance it on the offensive end, and Bass does that better than Allen in Allen's current condition. And if not Bass, then how about Pietrus, who was a non-factor on offense but who at least has a chance of guarding someone.
The other mistake, I thought, was putting Rondo on Williams and Bradley on Holiday. The Sixers were playing through Williams, who came up with some big buckets. Rondo is no slouch defensively, but Bradley's supposed to be our lockdown guy, and Rondo was having problems with Williams.
We've got an extra day of rest before Game 5 on Monday, and it's one we need. Garnett played 40 minutes tonight, and this should give us some time to get Allen and Pierce (whose knee, for the second straight game, didn't appear to hamper him much) a little healthier. It does mean an extra day to stew while the Sixers have an extra day for their confidence to grow, something that could be a concern under certain circumstances. But the Celtics are veterans, familiar with this process, and used to not having things come easily. I expect they'll answer the bell yet again and win Game 5, and eventually, the series. But games like this, in addition to being frustrating to watch, may come back to haunt the team -- if not this series, then the next one.
I don't want to write about this game any more than you want to read about it, so this will be uncharacteristically brief. If you hadn't heard, Boston went up 14-0, had an 18-point lead in the third quarter, and lost.
Philly's execution was much better than Boston's in the fourth quarter, but this game was really lost in the third. Boston went cold, stopped going to Kevin Garnett in the post, and started forcing passes and turning the ball over. Meanwhile, some questionable calls against the Celtics allowed Philly's free throw advantage to balloon to something like 30 to 12, and Rajon Rondo, Avery Bradley, and Brandon Bass all picked up their fourth fouls. With our short bench, and the fact that Bass was having his first good game in a while, having those guys sitting really hurt -- Garnett couldn't take his normal rest (which hurt in the fourth) and the offensive sparkplugs we so desperately needed were on the sidelines.
I thought Doc made some tactical errors in the fourth, too. Most importantly, I thought it was a big mistake to counter Philly's small lineup of Jrue Holiday-Louis Williams-Andre Iguodala-Thaddeus Young-Lavoy Allen with Rondo-Bradley-Ray Allen-Pierce-Garnett. Specifically, Allen instead of Bass or Mickael Pietrus made little sense to me. Allen is not a good defender, and this lineup has him trying to guard bigger men -- Iguodala or Young -- while dealing with bone spurs in his ankle that make it impossible for him to establish a strong, solid base.
Under normal circumstances, it wouldn't be so bad, because Allen, when healthy, poses obvious matchup problems on the other end. But Allen isn't healthy, and whether it's because he's out of game shape or because his ankles are really bothering him, he's been almost a complete non-factor in this series. Because he's not able to free himself up on offense, he doesn't balance out the liability on the other end of the court.
I get that Doc trusts Ray, and that Young, a combo forward, poses a tough matchup for Bass, as well. But if you have to live with a mismatch on the defensive end, you need to be able to balance it on the offensive end, and Bass does that better than Allen in Allen's current condition. And if not Bass, then how about Pietrus, who was a non-factor on offense but who at least has a chance of guarding someone.
The other mistake, I thought, was putting Rondo on Williams and Bradley on Holiday. The Sixers were playing through Williams, who came up with some big buckets. Rondo is no slouch defensively, but Bradley's supposed to be our lockdown guy, and Rondo was having problems with Williams.
We've got an extra day of rest before Game 5 on Monday, and it's one we need. Garnett played 40 minutes tonight, and this should give us some time to get Allen and Pierce (whose knee, for the second straight game, didn't appear to hamper him much) a little healthier. It does mean an extra day to stew while the Sixers have an extra day for their confidence to grow, something that could be a concern under certain circumstances. But the Celtics are veterans, familiar with this process, and used to not having things come easily. I expect they'll answer the bell yet again and win Game 5, and eventually, the series. But games like this, in addition to being frustrating to watch, may come back to haunt the team -- if not this series, then the next one.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Boston 107, Philadelphia 91
[recap] [box score]
As I was thinking about Game 3, in the hours leading up to it, I was struck by the thought that in the past five seasons, you could predict Boston's success in a post-season series based on how they played immediately following a game they weren't supposed to or shouldn't have lost:
1. In the 2007-08 season, the championship season, Atlanta and then Cleveland each took Boston to seven games -- but the Celtics went 8-0 in the Garden. It wasn't until the Eastern semis against the Pistons that the Celtics coughed up home court advantage, in Game 2. Boston went to Detroit, won Game 3 by 14 and the series in six.
2. The following year, Boston dropped Game 1 in Boston, eked out a win in Game 2, then took home court back in a Game 3 blowout that was the only lopsided affair of a truly epic playoff series.
3. In 2009-2010, Boston went up 3-0 on a pre-Big Three Miami, lost Game 4 in South Beach, then closed the series out in five. They then lost a winnable first game in Cleveland to LeBron James and the Cavs, bounced back with a Game 2 victory, then mysteriously didn't show up for Game 3 and got blown out at home. Rather than pack it in, the Celtics turned the momentum of the series, winning the fourth game -- then the fifth, then the series-deciding sixth. In the Finals against the Lakers, Boston rebounded from a Game 3 loss to take the next two at home, putting them on the brink of a championship that went unfulfilled when Kendrick Perkins tore his ACL in the opening minutes of Game 6.
There are exceptions, but generally speaking over the last five seasons, when Boston has found itself in a tough spot in the postseason and immediately dug themselves out of it, they've won. When they haven't, they've lost. Other than those first two series way back in 2007-08, the Celtics hadn't won a series in which they lost consecutive games -- and hadn't lost a series in which they'd avoided back-to-back losses.
Having written that all out, it seems sort of obvious -- avoid consecutive losses, and you'll do well. But before the game Wednesday night, I was nervous, and thinking "Boy, we'd better win tonight." The pressure was particularly heavy because of how poorly the team had played in both Games 1 and 2 -- we sort of assumed that the problem was a lack of focus, a failure to take Philadelphia seriously, but in this compressed season, with Paul Pierce and Ray Allen hurting, there was always the chance that we simply didn't have what we needed. A third straight lackluster performance, especially from Pierce, would have severely shaken my confidence.
Writing this a few hours after the game, I obviously feel much better. The Celtics did more or less what I hoped they'd do, which was come out and defend like they had in Boston while finally playing with some energy and purpose on offense.
What was particularly interesting about this game, however, is that despite the large margin of victory, Boston wasn't in control from the beginning. In fact, the opening moments went about as poorly for the Celtics as they could have gone. Kevin Garnett was called for two early touch fouls and Pierce missed something like his first six shots, while Philly came out hot from the field. But Rajon Rondo kept us within striking distance and Pierce finally broke through, moving quickly on the catch to escape the double team and driving and dunking on two consecutive possessions. Still, all the loose balls seemed to be falling Philly's way; down two at the end of the first quarter, Rondo made a steal but couldn't quite corral it, and the ball bounced right to Louis Williams, who made a long three-pointer at the horn. Coming on the heels of the lucky shots the Sixers hit in Game 2, and the fact that the refs had taken KG (our best offensive weapon with Pierce ailing) out of the game, it suffices to say that I was very frustrated at the end of the first quarter.
I didn't have to worry long. Boston took control in the second quarter and didn't look back. Garnett came back in and scored three straight buckets, and Boston set the tone for the rest of the game with a 33-17 second quarter. The loose balls kept finding Philly -- at one point in the third quarter, the Sixers scored on three consecutive possessions on which the Celtics deflected a pass or dribble right to another Sixer -- but Boston never lacked for a response.
Almost everyone got into the act, but credit for this win should be distributed more or less equally among Pierce (24 points, 12 rebounds), Garnett (27 and 13), and Rondo (23 points, 14 assists). Pierce shook off his knee injury, two bad games, and a rough opening few minutes to register the first real Truth-like performance since he re-tweaked his knee in Game 4 of the Atlanta series. The Sixers simply cannot guard Garnett, who is getting no protection from the officials and would be putting up even bigger numbers if Elton Brand weren't allowed to manhandle him in the post. And Rondo responded to the (oft-aimed) criticism that he too often subordinates his scoring in favor of passing by doing both beautifully. He had a number of brilliant assists in this game, including a sweet behind-the-back dish to Pierce in traffic on the break, but my favorite was a much simpler play late in the game, with the outcome more or less decided. Philly trapped the ball in the left corner and Rondo flashed in to the paint. He received a pass in the middle of the lane and was momentarily wide-open for a layup or short jumper. Most players would have taken the shot themselves. But Rondo, knowing that a) Mickael Pietrus was spotting up in the right corner, and b) the guy who was supposed to guard Pietrus would be coming over to try to challenge his shot, pivoted quickly and fired the ball to Pietrus almost before he had a chance to look. Pietrus caught the pass, and with enough time to make and eat a Croque Madame (and wash his hands afterwards!), drained the three. It was just a great instinct play from a point guard who sees the floor the way very few have in the history of this game.
The Celtics won convincingly despite getting a combined three points (on just three shots) in a combined 45 minutes at the two-spot from Avery Bradley and Ray Allen. If there's one negative about this game, that was it -- both are nursing injuries, and it'd be nice to have some assurance of meaningful offensive contribution from these two going forward. But all in all, this was a very satisfying -- and more importantly, reassuring -- win.
Game 4 is Friday night inBostonPhiladelphia (8 p.m. Eastern, ESPN). It's a must-win for Philly, and it'll be interesting to see how they react. Here's hoping that the Celtics' focus from Game 3 carries over.
As I was thinking about Game 3, in the hours leading up to it, I was struck by the thought that in the past five seasons, you could predict Boston's success in a post-season series based on how they played immediately following a game they weren't supposed to or shouldn't have lost:
1. In the 2007-08 season, the championship season, Atlanta and then Cleveland each took Boston to seven games -- but the Celtics went 8-0 in the Garden. It wasn't until the Eastern semis against the Pistons that the Celtics coughed up home court advantage, in Game 2. Boston went to Detroit, won Game 3 by 14 and the series in six.
2. The following year, Boston dropped Game 1 in Boston, eked out a win in Game 2, then took home court back in a Game 3 blowout that was the only lopsided affair of a truly epic playoff series.
3. In 2009-2010, Boston went up 3-0 on a pre-Big Three Miami, lost Game 4 in South Beach, then closed the series out in five. They then lost a winnable first game in Cleveland to LeBron James and the Cavs, bounced back with a Game 2 victory, then mysteriously didn't show up for Game 3 and got blown out at home. Rather than pack it in, the Celtics turned the momentum of the series, winning the fourth game -- then the fifth, then the series-deciding sixth. In the Finals against the Lakers, Boston rebounded from a Game 3 loss to take the next two at home, putting them on the brink of a championship that went unfulfilled when Kendrick Perkins tore his ACL in the opening minutes of Game 6.
There are exceptions, but generally speaking over the last five seasons, when Boston has found itself in a tough spot in the postseason and immediately dug themselves out of it, they've won. When they haven't, they've lost. Other than those first two series way back in 2007-08, the Celtics hadn't won a series in which they lost consecutive games -- and hadn't lost a series in which they'd avoided back-to-back losses.
Having written that all out, it seems sort of obvious -- avoid consecutive losses, and you'll do well. But before the game Wednesday night, I was nervous, and thinking "Boy, we'd better win tonight." The pressure was particularly heavy because of how poorly the team had played in both Games 1 and 2 -- we sort of assumed that the problem was a lack of focus, a failure to take Philadelphia seriously, but in this compressed season, with Paul Pierce and Ray Allen hurting, there was always the chance that we simply didn't have what we needed. A third straight lackluster performance, especially from Pierce, would have severely shaken my confidence.
Writing this a few hours after the game, I obviously feel much better. The Celtics did more or less what I hoped they'd do, which was come out and defend like they had in Boston while finally playing with some energy and purpose on offense.
What was particularly interesting about this game, however, is that despite the large margin of victory, Boston wasn't in control from the beginning. In fact, the opening moments went about as poorly for the Celtics as they could have gone. Kevin Garnett was called for two early touch fouls and Pierce missed something like his first six shots, while Philly came out hot from the field. But Rajon Rondo kept us within striking distance and Pierce finally broke through, moving quickly on the catch to escape the double team and driving and dunking on two consecutive possessions. Still, all the loose balls seemed to be falling Philly's way; down two at the end of the first quarter, Rondo made a steal but couldn't quite corral it, and the ball bounced right to Louis Williams, who made a long three-pointer at the horn. Coming on the heels of the lucky shots the Sixers hit in Game 2, and the fact that the refs had taken KG (our best offensive weapon with Pierce ailing) out of the game, it suffices to say that I was very frustrated at the end of the first quarter.
I didn't have to worry long. Boston took control in the second quarter and didn't look back. Garnett came back in and scored three straight buckets, and Boston set the tone for the rest of the game with a 33-17 second quarter. The loose balls kept finding Philly -- at one point in the third quarter, the Sixers scored on three consecutive possessions on which the Celtics deflected a pass or dribble right to another Sixer -- but Boston never lacked for a response.
Almost everyone got into the act, but credit for this win should be distributed more or less equally among Pierce (24 points, 12 rebounds), Garnett (27 and 13), and Rondo (23 points, 14 assists). Pierce shook off his knee injury, two bad games, and a rough opening few minutes to register the first real Truth-like performance since he re-tweaked his knee in Game 4 of the Atlanta series. The Sixers simply cannot guard Garnett, who is getting no protection from the officials and would be putting up even bigger numbers if Elton Brand weren't allowed to manhandle him in the post. And Rondo responded to the (oft-aimed) criticism that he too often subordinates his scoring in favor of passing by doing both beautifully. He had a number of brilliant assists in this game, including a sweet behind-the-back dish to Pierce in traffic on the break, but my favorite was a much simpler play late in the game, with the outcome more or less decided. Philly trapped the ball in the left corner and Rondo flashed in to the paint. He received a pass in the middle of the lane and was momentarily wide-open for a layup or short jumper. Most players would have taken the shot themselves. But Rondo, knowing that a) Mickael Pietrus was spotting up in the right corner, and b) the guy who was supposed to guard Pietrus would be coming over to try to challenge his shot, pivoted quickly and fired the ball to Pietrus almost before he had a chance to look. Pietrus caught the pass, and with enough time to make and eat a Croque Madame (and wash his hands afterwards!), drained the three. It was just a great instinct play from a point guard who sees the floor the way very few have in the history of this game.
The Celtics won convincingly despite getting a combined three points (on just three shots) in a combined 45 minutes at the two-spot from Avery Bradley and Ray Allen. If there's one negative about this game, that was it -- both are nursing injuries, and it'd be nice to have some assurance of meaningful offensive contribution from these two going forward. But all in all, this was a very satisfying -- and more importantly, reassuring -- win.
Game 4 is Friday night in
Monday, May 14, 2012
Philadelphia 82, Boston 81
[recap] [box score]
I'm going to get to the officiating in a second, but I want to be clear about one thing: It didn't cost us the game. The Celtics take sole responsibility for this loss. They came out with good energy and a good pace, scored the first nine points of the game, and then decided that -- just like in Game 1 -- they didn't need to show up again on the offensive end until the fourth quarter. Boston played with fire, and got burned when the Sixers hit a couple of big, tough shots.
Now, the officiating. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Kevin Garnett sets more moving screens than anyone in the league, that he had been setting them all night, and that the screen he set on Andre Iguodala to free up Paul Pierce on Boston's final meaningful possession was, in fact, a bad one. You still can't suddenly start calling moving screens in the final seconds of a game like that. You want to call moving screens? Fine: Do it early, make it clear that you're not putting up with it tonight. But you can't let a guy screen one way all night and then ding him for it on the game's most crucial possession.
The really frustrating thing for me is that I don't think it was a bad screen at all. The initial contact was fine, and then you can see KG leaning towards Iguodala ... but he never actually touches him. I suppose I can see why the ref called it, but he was standing right there and looking right at it. And I'm doubly frustrated because KG had been getting mauled all night inside without getting anything from the officials. It's annoying that the guy who was fouled all game is the one hit with the ticky-tack foul in the crucial moment.
But, again, the bad call didn't cost Boston the game, and as Charles Barkley said afterwards, that's why you don't screw around in the playoffs. Boston didn't put forth a maximum effort, and as a result, they lost. A bunch of weird stuff unlikely to repeat itself had to happen in order for them to lose, but Boston deserves the blame for letting themselves get into a position where that stuff could beat them.
A few additional comments:
1. Pierce was moving better to start this game, but he looked out of synch all night and was totally ineffective on offense. Down the stretch, you could see Rondo was hesitant to go to him, looking him off in the marginal situations in which he used to force the ball to him. The knee has to be bothering Pierce more than he wants us to believe.
2. In the first half we gave Philly a heavy dose of Brandon Bass pick-and-pop, but it was all baseline, and not at his preferred spot, the elbow. I'm not sure if the Sixers were forcing us into that or what, but Bass has been struggling in the playoffs and a good way to get him going would be to start giving him the ball in the spots in which he's comfortable.
3. The role players were really good tonight. Ryan Hollins and Greg Stiemsma brought a lot of energy, as did Keyon Dooling, and Mickael Pietrus nailed a couple huge three-pointers in the fourth quarter. They gave the starters more than they should need to win.
Back to Philly for Game 3 on Wednesday. If this is the Sixers' best shot, and I think it might be, then we should win the series without too much trouble.
As long as we show up, that is.
I'm going to get to the officiating in a second, but I want to be clear about one thing: It didn't cost us the game. The Celtics take sole responsibility for this loss. They came out with good energy and a good pace, scored the first nine points of the game, and then decided that -- just like in Game 1 -- they didn't need to show up again on the offensive end until the fourth quarter. Boston played with fire, and got burned when the Sixers hit a couple of big, tough shots.
Now, the officiating. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Kevin Garnett sets more moving screens than anyone in the league, that he had been setting them all night, and that the screen he set on Andre Iguodala to free up Paul Pierce on Boston's final meaningful possession was, in fact, a bad one. You still can't suddenly start calling moving screens in the final seconds of a game like that. You want to call moving screens? Fine: Do it early, make it clear that you're not putting up with it tonight. But you can't let a guy screen one way all night and then ding him for it on the game's most crucial possession.
The really frustrating thing for me is that I don't think it was a bad screen at all. The initial contact was fine, and then you can see KG leaning towards Iguodala ... but he never actually touches him. I suppose I can see why the ref called it, but he was standing right there and looking right at it. And I'm doubly frustrated because KG had been getting mauled all night inside without getting anything from the officials. It's annoying that the guy who was fouled all game is the one hit with the ticky-tack foul in the crucial moment.
But, again, the bad call didn't cost Boston the game, and as Charles Barkley said afterwards, that's why you don't screw around in the playoffs. Boston didn't put forth a maximum effort, and as a result, they lost. A bunch of weird stuff unlikely to repeat itself had to happen in order for them to lose, but Boston deserves the blame for letting themselves get into a position where that stuff could beat them.
A few additional comments:
1. Pierce was moving better to start this game, but he looked out of synch all night and was totally ineffective on offense. Down the stretch, you could see Rondo was hesitant to go to him, looking him off in the marginal situations in which he used to force the ball to him. The knee has to be bothering Pierce more than he wants us to believe.
2. In the first half we gave Philly a heavy dose of Brandon Bass pick-and-pop, but it was all baseline, and not at his preferred spot, the elbow. I'm not sure if the Sixers were forcing us into that or what, but Bass has been struggling in the playoffs and a good way to get him going would be to start giving him the ball in the spots in which he's comfortable.
3. The role players were really good tonight. Ryan Hollins and Greg Stiemsma brought a lot of energy, as did Keyon Dooling, and Mickael Pietrus nailed a couple huge three-pointers in the fourth quarter. They gave the starters more than they should need to win.
Back to Philly for Game 3 on Wednesday. If this is the Sixers' best shot, and I think it might be, then we should win the series without too much trouble.
As long as we show up, that is.
Game 2 Tonight
Obviously, I didn't get around to posting a Game 1 reaction. My general thoughts are probably the same as yours: We stole Game 1, and Kevin Garnett is playing out of his mind. KG was even better in the first Philly game than he was in the last Atlanta game, keeping the team in it so that Paul Pierce, Rajon Rondo, and Avery Bradley were in a position to make the big plays they made down the stretch. I was particularly pleased to see Rondo bury those two late jumpers on his way to another triple-double -- it's just not the kind of shot we're used to seeing him make.
Game 2 is Monday night on TNT at 7 p.m. Eastern. Hanging out to home court would be huge; the easier we can make this series, the better.
Game 2 is Monday night on TNT at 7 p.m. Eastern. Hanging out to home court would be huge; the easier we can make this series, the better.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
A Few Thoughts on the Sixers
I know Game 1 is just a few hours away (8 p.m. Eastern), but I fell asleep at like 9 o'clock last night. This is a hurried attempt to get a few words up about Philly before the series starts.
1. The regular season games weren't competitive. The teams played three times, each registering a blowout, with Philly taking the other game rather comfortably. How much does this matter? Not a whit. This is the playoffs, and as hard as it is to glean anything useful about a playoff series from regular season games, it's even harder when the regular season matchups were as anomalous as these were.
2. Additionally, it's even harder to predict postseason success based on regular season performance with Philadelphia because of how deep they are. They've got eight guys who averaged around 25 minutes or more this year (Boston has five). But rotations tend to tighten up in the postseason, and that obviously negates some of the advantage of having a deep bench. Against the Bulls in the first round, for example, Thaddeus Young played three or four minutes per game fewer than he did in the regular season, and Jodie Meeks' playing time all but disappeared.
3. With a deep bench usually comes balanced scoring, and Philly is no exception. All eight of those guys who play at least 25 minutes per game average at least 8.4 points, but no one averages more than Louis Williams' 14.9. In fact, two of their top three scorers, Williams and Young, come off the bench.
With that said, their best player is Andre Iguodala, who has subordinated his own scoring in recent seasons to adjust to the brand of ball Philly has been playing. (He was rewarded with his first All-Star appearance this year.) Iguodala creates for his teammates from the three position as well as anyone in the league right now not named LeBron James, but he's a capable scorer who will have the ball in his hands in crunch time. It was just last year, in fact, that Iguodala scored a couple of tough baskets late in games against the Celtics; if memory serves, one was a game-winner and the other would have been if not for some last-second heroics from the Celtics. Iguodala is also a good defender, and while it's not like Paul Pierce has struggled against the Sixers in his career, he'll have to work hard for everything he gets.
4. I really believe Pierce's knee is the x-factor here. He's really hurting. Atlanta doubled him a couple of times in the second half of Game 6 and Pierce turned it over, both times because he was unwilling or unable to put all his weight on that injured leg and make a strong, assertive pass out of the double. He left a couple crucial jumpers in the Hawks series woefully short, likely due to not getting his usual lift. Even on the late layup he did score in Game 6, he barely got off the ground. Philadelphia is pretty good defensively, and if Pierce isn't close to 100 percent, then it's hard to see where the points are going to come from.
5. I wouldn't be totally surprised if Doc puts Ray Allen back in the starting lineup at some point during this series. Avery Bradley really struggled offensively in the Hawks series, shooting just 37 percent from the field and making two of ten three-pointers. With Pierce hobbled, Boston may want to spread the floor for him, and Allen does that in a way that Bradley doesn't. Doc also might want to make sure the first unit has enough offense, in case Pierce struggles, to avoid getting into a hole early. Most importantly, though, is that moving Bradley back to the second team means that he's in a better position to guard Williams, Philly's most dangerous scorer.
6. Finally, I'm a firm believer that in the playoffs, experience really matters. Both teams were equally unimpressive in closing out their first-round victories, but Chicago -- without Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah, remember, gave away Game 6 by missing some free throws and not getting back on defense on Iguodala's game-winning coast-to-coast drive. Boston, on the other hand, won it by making some big stops and big baskets (and, okay, getting a little lucky that Al Horford missed a free throw). When it was over, Philly celebrated like crazy, while Boston looked relieved and a little annoyed that they hadn't taken care of business more convincingly. This stuff matters.
I haven't been able to articulate this very well, but I also think Doug Collins respects Boston and Doc too much for his team's good. Collins has done a good job in Philly, but I always feel like he talks about the Celtics not as an opponent, but more as an analyst, which was his role before he went back to the bench. In recent days, we've seen a number of coaches making public statements about the other team; Frank Vogel of Indiana, for instance, came out and said that Miami, the Pacers second-round opponent, were the floppingest team in the league. I don't think actually saying that makes a difference to the referees, but it shows the players that you're on their side. Collins, on the other hand, came out in March and said that he wouldn't sleep on Boston in the East -- this while the two teams were battling for the top spot in the Atlantic division. It may be nothing, but I'd choose my words more carefully if I were him.
1. The regular season games weren't competitive. The teams played three times, each registering a blowout, with Philly taking the other game rather comfortably. How much does this matter? Not a whit. This is the playoffs, and as hard as it is to glean anything useful about a playoff series from regular season games, it's even harder when the regular season matchups were as anomalous as these were.
2. Additionally, it's even harder to predict postseason success based on regular season performance with Philadelphia because of how deep they are. They've got eight guys who averaged around 25 minutes or more this year (Boston has five). But rotations tend to tighten up in the postseason, and that obviously negates some of the advantage of having a deep bench. Against the Bulls in the first round, for example, Thaddeus Young played three or four minutes per game fewer than he did in the regular season, and Jodie Meeks' playing time all but disappeared.
3. With a deep bench usually comes balanced scoring, and Philly is no exception. All eight of those guys who play at least 25 minutes per game average at least 8.4 points, but no one averages more than Louis Williams' 14.9. In fact, two of their top three scorers, Williams and Young, come off the bench.
With that said, their best player is Andre Iguodala, who has subordinated his own scoring in recent seasons to adjust to the brand of ball Philly has been playing. (He was rewarded with his first All-Star appearance this year.) Iguodala creates for his teammates from the three position as well as anyone in the league right now not named LeBron James, but he's a capable scorer who will have the ball in his hands in crunch time. It was just last year, in fact, that Iguodala scored a couple of tough baskets late in games against the Celtics; if memory serves, one was a game-winner and the other would have been if not for some last-second heroics from the Celtics. Iguodala is also a good defender, and while it's not like Paul Pierce has struggled against the Sixers in his career, he'll have to work hard for everything he gets.
4. I really believe Pierce's knee is the x-factor here. He's really hurting. Atlanta doubled him a couple of times in the second half of Game 6 and Pierce turned it over, both times because he was unwilling or unable to put all his weight on that injured leg and make a strong, assertive pass out of the double. He left a couple crucial jumpers in the Hawks series woefully short, likely due to not getting his usual lift. Even on the late layup he did score in Game 6, he barely got off the ground. Philadelphia is pretty good defensively, and if Pierce isn't close to 100 percent, then it's hard to see where the points are going to come from.
5. I wouldn't be totally surprised if Doc puts Ray Allen back in the starting lineup at some point during this series. Avery Bradley really struggled offensively in the Hawks series, shooting just 37 percent from the field and making two of ten three-pointers. With Pierce hobbled, Boston may want to spread the floor for him, and Allen does that in a way that Bradley doesn't. Doc also might want to make sure the first unit has enough offense, in case Pierce struggles, to avoid getting into a hole early. Most importantly, though, is that moving Bradley back to the second team means that he's in a better position to guard Williams, Philly's most dangerous scorer.
6. Finally, I'm a firm believer that in the playoffs, experience really matters. Both teams were equally unimpressive in closing out their first-round victories, but Chicago -- without Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah, remember, gave away Game 6 by missing some free throws and not getting back on defense on Iguodala's game-winning coast-to-coast drive. Boston, on the other hand, won it by making some big stops and big baskets (and, okay, getting a little lucky that Al Horford missed a free throw). When it was over, Philly celebrated like crazy, while Boston looked relieved and a little annoyed that they hadn't taken care of business more convincingly. This stuff matters.
I haven't been able to articulate this very well, but I also think Doug Collins respects Boston and Doc too much for his team's good. Collins has done a good job in Philly, but I always feel like he talks about the Celtics not as an opponent, but more as an analyst, which was his role before he went back to the bench. In recent days, we've seen a number of coaches making public statements about the other team; Frank Vogel of Indiana, for instance, came out and said that Miami, the Pacers second-round opponent, were the floppingest team in the league. I don't think actually saying that makes a difference to the referees, but it shows the players that you're on their side. Collins, on the other hand, came out in March and said that he wouldn't sleep on Boston in the East -- this while the two teams were battling for the top spot in the Atlantic division. It may be nothing, but I'd choose my words more carefully if I were him.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Boston 83, Atlanta 80
[recap] [box score]
There's no disputing that in his five years in green -- has it been that long already? -- Kevin Garnett has been a franchise-changing player. From the little things, like racing over to pick up a fallen teammate or knocking the opponent's deadball jumpers away from the rim, to the big things, like a single-minded devotion to defense and team play or an obnoxious-to-some swagger, the Celtics of this era have been heavily influenced by No. 5. Paul Pierce may be the captain and Rajon Rondo the flashy future, but these Boston teams have Garnett's mark all over them.
And yet, through nearly five seasons of big games and big moments, there have been only a handful of times where the big fella has really put the team on shoulders and carried it to victory. Part of it is because he has one of the game's best closers and one of the great deadeye shooters of all-time as teammates; Pierce and Ray Allen rightly command the ball a great deal, particularly in crunch time. But part of it is KG's personality and playing style: his endearing unselfishness, sometimes to a fault; his frustrating refusal to play a power game. Garnett is consistent as they come from 17 feet out and every night he brings an intensity that is unmatched by anyone in the league, but in terms of being a go-to offensive option, night-in and night-out, well, that's just not him.
So nights like Thursday are always fun, because they are so rare. Garnett was assertive from the game's opening minutes, gave us the breathing room that should have been enough to win the game in the second half, then hit the game-winning bucket in the final minute.
The last bucket was my favorite, and not only because it was the game-deciding points. The Hawks trapped Pierce and he got the ball to Allen in right corner with KG flashing to the middle and Brandon Bass on the strong-side baseline. Allen found KG with a great pass, and the Hawks had one defender between Garnett and Bass and another recovering off of Allen on the baseline. Watching the play develop, I was terrified that Garnett would pass up the short jumper in favor of a tricky drop-down to Bass that, at best, would have been knocked out of bounds. It's exactly the kind of pass we've seen for all these years from KG, the kind of pass we wish he wouldn't throw, but can live with because we know where it comes from. I should have known better, though, because Thursday night was different. It was KG's night, and he went up confidently and feathered it in, the last of his game-high 28 points.
Garnett was great on defense, too -- he had five blocked shots and three steals to go along with 14 rebounds -- but it was Pierce who came up with the most timely defensive play. After Garnett's go-ahead basket, the Hawks had an uninspired possession that ended in a long Josh Smith jumper that was well short -- the exact reason the Celtics have always been willing to let Smith take (and make) those shots early in games. Allen made just one of two from the line -- he's 8 for 14 in the series and I think his ankles are bothering him at the line -- and after a timeout, Atlanta got the ball to Joe Johnson, who went to work on Pierce. Pierce's knee is really affecting his play, and Johnson got by him fairly easily. Pierce didn't give up, however, and he gritted his teeth and recovered just in time to block the shot. It was fitting that on a night when Garnett made the big offensive plays, Pierce came up with the biggest one on the defensive end.
This wasn't a particularly good game for the Celtics. They came out sluggish, and I honestly think that if Atlanta hadn't been so concerned with merely surviving the first quarter, we might have been in some real trouble. The second quarter was strong, the third was alright, and about midway through the fourth it looked like we were going to put Atlanta away. But we missed some good opportunities to extend the lead when Garnett went to the bench for some rest, and had to come from behind to win.
Philly beat Chicago by the skin of their teeth Thursday night, too, so we'll be playing the Sixers in the second round. There's a quick turnaround for Game 1; it's Saturday at 8 Eastern in Boston. I'll try to get a post about the Philly series up on Friday.
There's no disputing that in his five years in green -- has it been that long already? -- Kevin Garnett has been a franchise-changing player. From the little things, like racing over to pick up a fallen teammate or knocking the opponent's deadball jumpers away from the rim, to the big things, like a single-minded devotion to defense and team play or an obnoxious-to-some swagger, the Celtics of this era have been heavily influenced by No. 5. Paul Pierce may be the captain and Rajon Rondo the flashy future, but these Boston teams have Garnett's mark all over them.
And yet, through nearly five seasons of big games and big moments, there have been only a handful of times where the big fella has really put the team on shoulders and carried it to victory. Part of it is because he has one of the game's best closers and one of the great deadeye shooters of all-time as teammates; Pierce and Ray Allen rightly command the ball a great deal, particularly in crunch time. But part of it is KG's personality and playing style: his endearing unselfishness, sometimes to a fault; his frustrating refusal to play a power game. Garnett is consistent as they come from 17 feet out and every night he brings an intensity that is unmatched by anyone in the league, but in terms of being a go-to offensive option, night-in and night-out, well, that's just not him.
So nights like Thursday are always fun, because they are so rare. Garnett was assertive from the game's opening minutes, gave us the breathing room that should have been enough to win the game in the second half, then hit the game-winning bucket in the final minute.
The last bucket was my favorite, and not only because it was the game-deciding points. The Hawks trapped Pierce and he got the ball to Allen in right corner with KG flashing to the middle and Brandon Bass on the strong-side baseline. Allen found KG with a great pass, and the Hawks had one defender between Garnett and Bass and another recovering off of Allen on the baseline. Watching the play develop, I was terrified that Garnett would pass up the short jumper in favor of a tricky drop-down to Bass that, at best, would have been knocked out of bounds. It's exactly the kind of pass we've seen for all these years from KG, the kind of pass we wish he wouldn't throw, but can live with because we know where it comes from. I should have known better, though, because Thursday night was different. It was KG's night, and he went up confidently and feathered it in, the last of his game-high 28 points.
Garnett was great on defense, too -- he had five blocked shots and three steals to go along with 14 rebounds -- but it was Pierce who came up with the most timely defensive play. After Garnett's go-ahead basket, the Hawks had an uninspired possession that ended in a long Josh Smith jumper that was well short -- the exact reason the Celtics have always been willing to let Smith take (and make) those shots early in games. Allen made just one of two from the line -- he's 8 for 14 in the series and I think his ankles are bothering him at the line -- and after a timeout, Atlanta got the ball to Joe Johnson, who went to work on Pierce. Pierce's knee is really affecting his play, and Johnson got by him fairly easily. Pierce didn't give up, however, and he gritted his teeth and recovered just in time to block the shot. It was fitting that on a night when Garnett made the big offensive plays, Pierce came up with the biggest one on the defensive end.
This wasn't a particularly good game for the Celtics. They came out sluggish, and I honestly think that if Atlanta hadn't been so concerned with merely surviving the first quarter, we might have been in some real trouble. The second quarter was strong, the third was alright, and about midway through the fourth it looked like we were going to put Atlanta away. But we missed some good opportunities to extend the lead when Garnett went to the bench for some rest, and had to come from behind to win.
Philly beat Chicago by the skin of their teeth Thursday night, too, so we'll be playing the Sixers in the second round. There's a quick turnaround for Game 1; it's Saturday at 8 Eastern in Boston. I'll try to get a post about the Philly series up on Friday.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Atlanta 87, Boston 86
[recap] [box score]
On April 15, 1965, John Havlicek stole the ball ... and tipped it to Sam Jones, who dribbled out the clock on a Celtics championship.
On May 26, 1987, Larry Bird stole the ball ... then found Dennis Johnson for the game-winning layup that gave Boston a 3-2 lead in its Eastern Conference finals series against the Pistons.
Tuesday night in Atlanta, Rajon Rondo stole the ball ... then lost the handle on the ensuing possession as the clock ran out, sending the Celtics' first-round series with Atlanta back to Boston for Game Six.
Yes, the steal is a storied part of Celtic history (and yes, I realize I'm leaving Gerald Henderson out of this), but the steal isn't enough. "Havlicek stole the ball!" doesn't become the most famous radio call in league history if the Celtics weren't ahead at the time. There's no "Now there's a steal by Bird!" without "Underneath to DJ" and, most importantly, "He lays it in!" And so, because Rondo couldn't turn the turnover into a basket, his late steal -- a potential series-winning play -- will likely soon be forgotten by most.
In case you missed it, let me set the stage. A few moments earlier, Paul Pierce had cut a four-point deficit to one, and Boston had gotten a stop on Atlanta's next possession. Pierce then missed a jumper, and Atlanta ran about nine seconds off the clock before the Celtics used their foul to give. Atlanta called timeout, then a second one when they couldn't find anyone open. After that, well, let's let the video take over:
A few things about this play:
1. Let's start with the obvious. Great read by Rondo, horrible pass by Josh Smith.
2. As bad as Smith's pass was, he made a very good play in the immediate aftermath. Rather than compound his error by charging recklessly after the ball, giving Boston the odd-man rush and possibly committing a foul, Smith did an excellent job of squaring up to Rondo and making him change direction. With no timeouts left, Boston's best opportunity for a bucket was something in transition. Smith stopped Rondo in his tracks and took away the transition opportunity.
3. Smith made a second smart defensive play once Rondo crossed halfcourt and ran a pick-and-pop with Kevin Garnett. Al Horford, guarding Garnett, jumped out on Rondo, and Smith resisted the urge to chase the ball, instead shading towards Rondo while staying in the passing lane.
4. After setting the screen, Garnett stayed in place for half a count before taking a step back out toward the three-point line, which was about the least helpful thing he could have done in that spot. That whole side of the floor was open -- a rim-run would have put pressure on the defense, and popping laterally to the foul line would have given him a better look and, at the very least, drawn Smith away from Rondo. As it was, Smith was able to stay within reach of Garnett while also being close enough to Rondo to discourage a drive into the paint. And even if Rondo had been able to find KG with a pass, it would have been a very long jumper, probably a step outside KG's comfort zone.
5. A few comments on Celtics Blog mentioned that they thought Rondo was trying to play "hero ball" at the end, and that that "selfishness" cost the Cs a chance to get up a game-winning shot. I think the opposite is true. Rondo's initial instinct is to pass in that spot, and by looking back to KG for a second, he let Horford catch up and trap him along the sideline. If he was in attack mode from the beginning, there's no way Horford could have stayed in front of him. Atlanta would have had to help from the weakside. Whether Rondo would have made a contested shot or had time to find an open teammate is anyone's guess, but it would have put the pressure on the Hawks.
6. Here's the real criticism: Rondo has to attack there. Even with the delay caused by his first look towards KG, he could have slithered past Horford to the baseline. From there it likely would have been a difficult finish, but no more difficult than the look he would have gotten had he been able to successfully bring it back to the right, which would have been a long, contested fallaway. (I seem to remember him doing something very similar at the end of a playoff game against Chicago and having the shot blocked by Derrick Rose.) And there's the very real chance that Horford would have fouled him.
A lot of people are saying we gave this one away, and I sort of agree: Rarely do you see a team facing elimination play as uninspired as Atlanta did in the first half, and we let them stay in it in the first quarter, before they got hot from three in the second. At the same time, how many elimination games are really won that easily? The doomed team almost inevitably makes a run. I do not believe that Boston could have effectively won this game in the first quarter.
The Hawks still don't worry me. Even getting a surprise contribution from Horford and sporadically strong play from Smith, Joe Johnson, and Jeff Teague, their offense is still pretty pathetic. It's not that they don't execute; they don't run anything to execute. It's the kind of one-dimensional offense that has never worked long-term against a Boston team in the last several years. Aside from some crucial missed assignments by Brandon Bass on pick-and-roll, Boston's defense was excellent (though our work on the defensive glass was not).
What does worry me, however, is Pierce's knee. The Celtics can still lose this series, and if they do, it likely will be traceable to the Captain not being at full strength. After Pierce came back for the first few minutes of the second half of Game 4, I figured the knee was nothing to worry about. But then I read today that the knee, which Pierce originally hurt in the shootaround on the morning of Game 4, was painful enough that Pierce almost didn't go at all on Sunday. And then today, after a fast start, Pierce appeared to tweak it again and wasn't the same, sitting for a long stretch in the second half. He missed a contested layup in the final minutes, and the potential go-ahead jumper he missed on Boston's penultimate possession was an airball. Pierce isn't the most explosive player, but he was definitely lacking his usual physical assertiveness for much of this game, which is enough to erode his effectiveness -- particularly in this advanced stage of his career. If he doesn't get better, the task gets harder -- and even if we succeed in beating Atlanta, we may regret not being able to rest him for a few days before the second round begins.
Game Six, in Boston, is Thursday night at 8 p.m. Eastern, on TNT.
On April 15, 1965, John Havlicek stole the ball ... and tipped it to Sam Jones, who dribbled out the clock on a Celtics championship.
On May 26, 1987, Larry Bird stole the ball ... then found Dennis Johnson for the game-winning layup that gave Boston a 3-2 lead in its Eastern Conference finals series against the Pistons.
Tuesday night in Atlanta, Rajon Rondo stole the ball ... then lost the handle on the ensuing possession as the clock ran out, sending the Celtics' first-round series with Atlanta back to Boston for Game Six.
Yes, the steal is a storied part of Celtic history (and yes, I realize I'm leaving Gerald Henderson out of this), but the steal isn't enough. "Havlicek stole the ball!" doesn't become the most famous radio call in league history if the Celtics weren't ahead at the time. There's no "Now there's a steal by Bird!" without "Underneath to DJ" and, most importantly, "He lays it in!" And so, because Rondo couldn't turn the turnover into a basket, his late steal -- a potential series-winning play -- will likely soon be forgotten by most.
In case you missed it, let me set the stage. A few moments earlier, Paul Pierce had cut a four-point deficit to one, and Boston had gotten a stop on Atlanta's next possession. Pierce then missed a jumper, and Atlanta ran about nine seconds off the clock before the Celtics used their foul to give. Atlanta called timeout, then a second one when they couldn't find anyone open. After that, well, let's let the video take over:
A few things about this play:
1. Let's start with the obvious. Great read by Rondo, horrible pass by Josh Smith.
2. As bad as Smith's pass was, he made a very good play in the immediate aftermath. Rather than compound his error by charging recklessly after the ball, giving Boston the odd-man rush and possibly committing a foul, Smith did an excellent job of squaring up to Rondo and making him change direction. With no timeouts left, Boston's best opportunity for a bucket was something in transition. Smith stopped Rondo in his tracks and took away the transition opportunity.
3. Smith made a second smart defensive play once Rondo crossed halfcourt and ran a pick-and-pop with Kevin Garnett. Al Horford, guarding Garnett, jumped out on Rondo, and Smith resisted the urge to chase the ball, instead shading towards Rondo while staying in the passing lane.
4. After setting the screen, Garnett stayed in place for half a count before taking a step back out toward the three-point line, which was about the least helpful thing he could have done in that spot. That whole side of the floor was open -- a rim-run would have put pressure on the defense, and popping laterally to the foul line would have given him a better look and, at the very least, drawn Smith away from Rondo. As it was, Smith was able to stay within reach of Garnett while also being close enough to Rondo to discourage a drive into the paint. And even if Rondo had been able to find KG with a pass, it would have been a very long jumper, probably a step outside KG's comfort zone.
5. A few comments on Celtics Blog mentioned that they thought Rondo was trying to play "hero ball" at the end, and that that "selfishness" cost the Cs a chance to get up a game-winning shot. I think the opposite is true. Rondo's initial instinct is to pass in that spot, and by looking back to KG for a second, he let Horford catch up and trap him along the sideline. If he was in attack mode from the beginning, there's no way Horford could have stayed in front of him. Atlanta would have had to help from the weakside. Whether Rondo would have made a contested shot or had time to find an open teammate is anyone's guess, but it would have put the pressure on the Hawks.
6. Here's the real criticism: Rondo has to attack there. Even with the delay caused by his first look towards KG, he could have slithered past Horford to the baseline. From there it likely would have been a difficult finish, but no more difficult than the look he would have gotten had he been able to successfully bring it back to the right, which would have been a long, contested fallaway. (I seem to remember him doing something very similar at the end of a playoff game against Chicago and having the shot blocked by Derrick Rose.) And there's the very real chance that Horford would have fouled him.
A lot of people are saying we gave this one away, and I sort of agree: Rarely do you see a team facing elimination play as uninspired as Atlanta did in the first half, and we let them stay in it in the first quarter, before they got hot from three in the second. At the same time, how many elimination games are really won that easily? The doomed team almost inevitably makes a run. I do not believe that Boston could have effectively won this game in the first quarter.
The Hawks still don't worry me. Even getting a surprise contribution from Horford and sporadically strong play from Smith, Joe Johnson, and Jeff Teague, their offense is still pretty pathetic. It's not that they don't execute; they don't run anything to execute. It's the kind of one-dimensional offense that has never worked long-term against a Boston team in the last several years. Aside from some crucial missed assignments by Brandon Bass on pick-and-roll, Boston's defense was excellent (though our work on the defensive glass was not).
What does worry me, however, is Pierce's knee. The Celtics can still lose this series, and if they do, it likely will be traceable to the Captain not being at full strength. After Pierce came back for the first few minutes of the second half of Game 4, I figured the knee was nothing to worry about. But then I read today that the knee, which Pierce originally hurt in the shootaround on the morning of Game 4, was painful enough that Pierce almost didn't go at all on Sunday. And then today, after a fast start, Pierce appeared to tweak it again and wasn't the same, sitting for a long stretch in the second half. He missed a contested layup in the final minutes, and the potential go-ahead jumper he missed on Boston's penultimate possession was an airball. Pierce isn't the most explosive player, but he was definitely lacking his usual physical assertiveness for much of this game, which is enough to erode his effectiveness -- particularly in this advanced stage of his career. If he doesn't get better, the task gets harder -- and even if we succeed in beating Atlanta, we may regret not being able to rest him for a few days before the second round begins.
Game Six, in Boston, is Thursday night at 8 p.m. Eastern, on TNT.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Boston 101, Atlanta 79
[recap] [box score]
This was it. This was the performance I was hoping for in Game 3.
The Celtics just blitzed the Hawks on Sunday night. Came out strong, hit 'em in the mouth, knocked 'em down, and never let 'em back up. Boston came out with a purpose offensively, with Paul Pierce creating his own shot and Rajon R-ndo getting shots for others with sometimes spectacular assists. Pierce was on fire; he had 24 points in just 16:37 of court time, including several heat-check three-pointers. R-ndo had at least a dozen assists in the first half alone, and finished with 20 points to go along with 16 helpers and just 1 credited turnover -- though I remember two more turnovers in the second half that they didn't give to him.
The one piece of bad news is that Pierce tweaked his knee a bit in the second quarter. I heard him say after the game that he had actually initially hurt it during shootaround before the game, and then he got tangled up with Josh Smith on a screen and tweaked it a bit more. He came out of the game, but did return to start the third quarter. He drilled a couple of threes before Doc took him out, content with the big lead and seeing no reason to push the captain. I don't expect that the knee will cause any real problems -- Pierce plays through injuries like this in the playoffs all the time without ill effects.
Atlanta barely showed any fight. Perhaps their most courageous moment of the game actually came before tip, when Josh Smith decided to play through a sprained knee and Al Horford suddenly reversed course and suited up for the first time since tearing a pectoral muscle in January. The Horford decision seemed particularly odd, given that a week ago he had ruled himself out of the series. It doesn't seem like he could have healed that much in a week, and having been out of action for so long, it was going to be hard for him to have any sort of positive impact. Indeed, Horford was completely overmatched on an early Kevin Garnett post-up, and didn't improve much from there. He's unlikely to be a factor in this series, even if he does continue to play.
The only other time Atlanta showed signs of life was late in the third quarter, when they cut a 37-point lead to 22, with Pierce and Garnett out of the game and presumably done for the night, circumstances permitting. But R-ndo and Ray Allen hit back-to-back three-pointers to stop the rally, and Larry Drew didn't even bother playing his starters in the fourth quarter.
As well as the players played, give Doc some credit for this win, too. Recognizing how tired the team was after Game 3, he gave them Saturday off, and they responded with a performance that was infinitely more energetic and purposeful than the previous one. As much as I think some of Doc's in-game decisions are still questionable, he's one of the best in the biz at managing his players.
We shot extremely well in this game and played extraordinarily well overall, whereas Atlanta played pretty horifically. I wouldn't expect either team to repeat its performance in Game 5, which is back in Atlanta on Tuesday night. (I'm surprised at the lack of a travel day.) Philips Arena is a tough place to play and the Hawks will come out fighting. It's a winnable game, though, and it'd be nice to finish the series early so we can get some rest.
This was it. This was the performance I was hoping for in Game 3.
The Celtics just blitzed the Hawks on Sunday night. Came out strong, hit 'em in the mouth, knocked 'em down, and never let 'em back up. Boston came out with a purpose offensively, with Paul Pierce creating his own shot and Rajon R-ndo getting shots for others with sometimes spectacular assists. Pierce was on fire; he had 24 points in just 16:37 of court time, including several heat-check three-pointers. R-ndo had at least a dozen assists in the first half alone, and finished with 20 points to go along with 16 helpers and just 1 credited turnover -- though I remember two more turnovers in the second half that they didn't give to him.
The one piece of bad news is that Pierce tweaked his knee a bit in the second quarter. I heard him say after the game that he had actually initially hurt it during shootaround before the game, and then he got tangled up with Josh Smith on a screen and tweaked it a bit more. He came out of the game, but did return to start the third quarter. He drilled a couple of threes before Doc took him out, content with the big lead and seeing no reason to push the captain. I don't expect that the knee will cause any real problems -- Pierce plays through injuries like this in the playoffs all the time without ill effects.
Atlanta barely showed any fight. Perhaps their most courageous moment of the game actually came before tip, when Josh Smith decided to play through a sprained knee and Al Horford suddenly reversed course and suited up for the first time since tearing a pectoral muscle in January. The Horford decision seemed particularly odd, given that a week ago he had ruled himself out of the series. It doesn't seem like he could have healed that much in a week, and having been out of action for so long, it was going to be hard for him to have any sort of positive impact. Indeed, Horford was completely overmatched on an early Kevin Garnett post-up, and didn't improve much from there. He's unlikely to be a factor in this series, even if he does continue to play.
The only other time Atlanta showed signs of life was late in the third quarter, when they cut a 37-point lead to 22, with Pierce and Garnett out of the game and presumably done for the night, circumstances permitting. But R-ndo and Ray Allen hit back-to-back three-pointers to stop the rally, and Larry Drew didn't even bother playing his starters in the fourth quarter.
As well as the players played, give Doc some credit for this win, too. Recognizing how tired the team was after Game 3, he gave them Saturday off, and they responded with a performance that was infinitely more energetic and purposeful than the previous one. As much as I think some of Doc's in-game decisions are still questionable, he's one of the best in the biz at managing his players.
We shot extremely well in this game and played extraordinarily well overall, whereas Atlanta played pretty horifically. I wouldn't expect either team to repeat its performance in Game 5, which is back in Atlanta on Tuesday night. (I'm surprised at the lack of a travel day.) Philips Arena is a tough place to play and the Hawks will come out fighting. It's a winnable game, though, and it'd be nice to finish the series early so we can get some rest.
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Boston 90, Atlanta 84 (Overtime)
[recap] [box score]
Game 3 was ugly. That's all you can really say about it. Boston's defense was good throughout, but we only played well offensively for like a five-minute stretch at the beginning of the fourth quarter and then a few possessions in overtime. It was enough, though.
Rajon R-ndo is getting all the attention with a 17/14/12 triple-double in his return from a one-game suspension, but don't be fooled by the stat line or the headlines -- he didn't play that well. I was actually a little disappointed in him at the beginning of the game; I had hoped he'd come out with a lot of energy, determined to get his team off to a good start -- something like a "I've got this one, fellas" after his teammates picked him up in Game 2. Instead, he -- like the rest of them -- came out lackadaisical and uninspired on offense. There really wasn't any urgency from anyone, which bothered me, and given the circumstances, the lack of urgency from R-ndo bothered me the most.
With that said, R-ndo was the best player wearing white on Friday night and he's the reason Boston won. He was the catalyst for the aforementioned rare stretches where the Celtics played well offensively. And while Kevin Garnett sealed the game with a follow-up jam late in overtime that put the Celtics up, it was R-ndo who drew KG's defender, freeing the big fella up for the rebound.
Ray Allen came back, alleviating fears held by me, anyway, that he wouldn't suit up again this year. He made his first shot and finished with 13 points (despite uncharacteristically missing two free throws), but he definitely didn't look in rhythm with the offense. That'll come, though. What was encouraging was that he moved well out on the court and apparently held up well over 37 minutes of playing time (the extended burn necessitated, I guess, by Atlanta's "medium/small" lineup, discussed below). It's good to have Ray back; hopefully the ankle responds well and he'll be in the lineup moving forward.
Atlanta was without Josh Smith, making them even more shorthanded inside than they had been already due to injuries to Al Horford and Zaza Pachulia. When Jason Collins got into early foul trouble, they had really no choice but to go small, bringing in Tracy McGrady, who was surprisingly effective in the first half before spraining his ankle. With McGrady, though, Atlanta's "small" is really more of a "medium," which explains why Mickael Pietrus played as many minutes as Avery Bradley. As good of a defender as young Bradley is, he still struggles against guys who can shoot over him, fouling too often instead of making them make a tough shot. Joe Johnson got hot and hit a couple of big shots late in regulation, but Pietrus played well him well -- they were just really tough makes.
And while it's probably encouraging to the Hawks that they hung close despite missing so many key players inside, I'm still not that scared of them. Their offense has pretty much the same theme even when Smith is on the floor; it's just a lot of guys trying to do their own thing. Even when you have multiple guys who are having success getting their own on the same night, it's very hard to beat a very good defensive team like Boston. If you're not moving the ball and creating for others, the defense knows where to focus. On some nights, you'll make enough shots to win; in most games, you won't.
Smith promised he'll be back on Sunday for Game 4, so we'll see if he makes any difference. The game's at 7 p.m. Eastern on TNT.
I don't have any other place to write this, so I'm gonna write it here: Adam Yauch, the founding member of the Beastie Boys better known as MCA, died on Friday at the age of 47 after fighting cancer for three years. I love the Beastie Boys; while my musical tastes are mostly heavy metal these days, there was a time where I listened to almost nothing other than their first three albums. In fact, as I'm writing this, I'm playing Paul's Boutique and, despite the fact that I haven't listened to this album in years, I still know nearly every word.
Artists tend to be able to identify their influences. They know what they listened to growing up and know what inspired them to become musicians themselves. They know how their musical style. And outsiders, if they're paying attention, can figure it out, too; you can listen to Led Zeppelin and hear the way the blues are incorporated into their music, the way you can listen to countless rock bands these days and hear Zep's influence
As a non-artist, though, I've found that it's hard to pinpoint the influence that music in general and certain musicians have had on me, other than affecting the music I choose to listen to now. And so it wasn't until after the Celtics game last night, when I sat down for an hour or so to read some of the tributes that had been written in the aftermath of his death, that I thought, for the first time, about what effect the Beastie Boys had on me.
A lot, as it turns out. My love of wordplay and allusion, something I (mostly unsuccessfully) try to incorporate into my own writing from time to time, definitely comes from the Beastie Boys' whimsical, reference-laden lyrics. My love of alter egos -- I'm H.S. Slam, Ph.D on here for a reason -- no doubt is inspired by Nathaniel Hornblower, Yauch's alter ego who has several Beastie Boy video credits and who once stormed the stage at the MTV Awards to protest REM winning best video. Hell, even my hatred of Bill Laimbeer has remained bolstered all these years by "Tough Guy" (off of Ill Communication).
Mostly, though, I thought about MCA's transformation from arrogant kid to thoughtful activist. My life in no way parallels MCA's, but his (and the band's) maturation in some ways mirrors my own. It's too personal a story for someone of my limited writing ability to really articulate, and so I think I'll leave it at that.
I've spent my whole life quoting the Beastie Boys, and yet I can't think of one appropriate to pay tribute. And I think that's fitting. One thing that's great about the Beastie Boys is that they never took their music too seriously, and that they were always about the bigger picture, particularly later in their careers. To try to pay tribute to the man's life with some silly rhyme he wrote years ago is as inapt as it is futile.
That being said, I know that tomorrow, as I watch New York probably get swept by Miami, I'll hear his words from "Unite" in my head: "Will someone on the Knicks please drive the lane?"
Thanks, Adam. RIP.
Game 3 was ugly. That's all you can really say about it. Boston's defense was good throughout, but we only played well offensively for like a five-minute stretch at the beginning of the fourth quarter and then a few possessions in overtime. It was enough, though.
Rajon R-ndo is getting all the attention with a 17/14/12 triple-double in his return from a one-game suspension, but don't be fooled by the stat line or the headlines -- he didn't play that well. I was actually a little disappointed in him at the beginning of the game; I had hoped he'd come out with a lot of energy, determined to get his team off to a good start -- something like a "I've got this one, fellas" after his teammates picked him up in Game 2. Instead, he -- like the rest of them -- came out lackadaisical and uninspired on offense. There really wasn't any urgency from anyone, which bothered me, and given the circumstances, the lack of urgency from R-ndo bothered me the most.
With that said, R-ndo was the best player wearing white on Friday night and he's the reason Boston won. He was the catalyst for the aforementioned rare stretches where the Celtics played well offensively. And while Kevin Garnett sealed the game with a follow-up jam late in overtime that put the Celtics up, it was R-ndo who drew KG's defender, freeing the big fella up for the rebound.
Ray Allen came back, alleviating fears held by me, anyway, that he wouldn't suit up again this year. He made his first shot and finished with 13 points (despite uncharacteristically missing two free throws), but he definitely didn't look in rhythm with the offense. That'll come, though. What was encouraging was that he moved well out on the court and apparently held up well over 37 minutes of playing time (the extended burn necessitated, I guess, by Atlanta's "medium/small" lineup, discussed below). It's good to have Ray back; hopefully the ankle responds well and he'll be in the lineup moving forward.
Atlanta was without Josh Smith, making them even more shorthanded inside than they had been already due to injuries to Al Horford and Zaza Pachulia. When Jason Collins got into early foul trouble, they had really no choice but to go small, bringing in Tracy McGrady, who was surprisingly effective in the first half before spraining his ankle. With McGrady, though, Atlanta's "small" is really more of a "medium," which explains why Mickael Pietrus played as many minutes as Avery Bradley. As good of a defender as young Bradley is, he still struggles against guys who can shoot over him, fouling too often instead of making them make a tough shot. Joe Johnson got hot and hit a couple of big shots late in regulation, but Pietrus played well him well -- they were just really tough makes.
And while it's probably encouraging to the Hawks that they hung close despite missing so many key players inside, I'm still not that scared of them. Their offense has pretty much the same theme even when Smith is on the floor; it's just a lot of guys trying to do their own thing. Even when you have multiple guys who are having success getting their own on the same night, it's very hard to beat a very good defensive team like Boston. If you're not moving the ball and creating for others, the defense knows where to focus. On some nights, you'll make enough shots to win; in most games, you won't.
Smith promised he'll be back on Sunday for Game 4, so we'll see if he makes any difference. The game's at 7 p.m. Eastern on TNT.
I don't have any other place to write this, so I'm gonna write it here: Adam Yauch, the founding member of the Beastie Boys better known as MCA, died on Friday at the age of 47 after fighting cancer for three years. I love the Beastie Boys; while my musical tastes are mostly heavy metal these days, there was a time where I listened to almost nothing other than their first three albums. In fact, as I'm writing this, I'm playing Paul's Boutique and, despite the fact that I haven't listened to this album in years, I still know nearly every word.
Artists tend to be able to identify their influences. They know what they listened to growing up and know what inspired them to become musicians themselves. They know how their musical style. And outsiders, if they're paying attention, can figure it out, too; you can listen to Led Zeppelin and hear the way the blues are incorporated into their music, the way you can listen to countless rock bands these days and hear Zep's influence
As a non-artist, though, I've found that it's hard to pinpoint the influence that music in general and certain musicians have had on me, other than affecting the music I choose to listen to now. And so it wasn't until after the Celtics game last night, when I sat down for an hour or so to read some of the tributes that had been written in the aftermath of his death, that I thought, for the first time, about what effect the Beastie Boys had on me.
A lot, as it turns out. My love of wordplay and allusion, something I (mostly unsuccessfully) try to incorporate into my own writing from time to time, definitely comes from the Beastie Boys' whimsical, reference-laden lyrics. My love of alter egos -- I'm H.S. Slam, Ph.D on here for a reason -- no doubt is inspired by Nathaniel Hornblower, Yauch's alter ego who has several Beastie Boy video credits and who once stormed the stage at the MTV Awards to protest REM winning best video. Hell, even my hatred of Bill Laimbeer has remained bolstered all these years by "Tough Guy" (off of Ill Communication).
Mostly, though, I thought about MCA's transformation from arrogant kid to thoughtful activist. My life in no way parallels MCA's, but his (and the band's) maturation in some ways mirrors my own. It's too personal a story for someone of my limited writing ability to really articulate, and so I think I'll leave it at that.
I've spent my whole life quoting the Beastie Boys, and yet I can't think of one appropriate to pay tribute. And I think that's fitting. One thing that's great about the Beastie Boys is that they never took their music too seriously, and that they were always about the bigger picture, particularly later in their careers. To try to pay tribute to the man's life with some silly rhyme he wrote years ago is as inapt as it is futile.
That being said, I know that tomorrow, as I watch New York probably get swept by Miami, I'll hear his words from "Unite" in my head: "Will someone on the Knicks please drive the lane?"
Thanks, Adam. RIP.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Boston 87, Atlanta 80
[recap] [box score]
I gotta admit it, I wasn't terribly confident heading into Game 2. Already without Ray Allen and now down Rajon R-ndo, our best player in Game 1, I figured Tuesday night was probably a lost cause. I was still pretty sure we'd win the series, but I was thinking we'd more than likely be heading back to Boston down 0-2.
But from the very moment that Paul Pierce stole the opening tip and powered past one defender, spun around another, and laid the ball in, I started to get a feeling that all was not lost, and that we were about to see a vintage Pierce performance. That feeling grew over the next few minutes, as Pierce scored Boston's next seven points, as well: a pull-up jumper; a skip between two Atlanta defenders for a running banker and the foul; another jumper. Largely due to his efforts, the first quarter ended with the score tied at 24.
Truthfully(!), I expected nothing less from the Captain. He was outstanding in the point forward role when R-ndo was out earlier in the year, and after a 12-point performance in Game 1, you just knew he would come up with a big-time performance in this one. The question, though, was whether it would be enough. At his age, in this season, there was no way he could carry us for the whole game. And he didn't. Instead, he paced himself after a 13-point first, coasting through quarters two and three with ten points, before exploding for another 13 in the fourth. All told, he racked up 36 points in 44 minutes, added four assists, and pulled down a game-high 14 rebounds for good measure.
Pierce was far from perfect in this game. He shot 12-for-26, which is good, not great. He made a couple of really strange, lazy passes early in the third quarter, and made a few crucial errors in the fourth quarter. Yet he made up the mistakes with more than enough huge plays. To wit: After Boston climbed back from down 11 to finally take the lead, Pierce tried an ill-advised spin move around Kirk Hinrich that Hinrich snuffed out; Pierce was called for a loose-ball foul trying to recover the ball. A few possessions later, however, Pierce got a dunk on the break, then hit an assassin-like three in transition to push the lead to seven. On Atlanta's next possession, Avery Bradley stripped Ivan Johnson, but Pierce double-dribbled in transition. To make matters worse, he bought Johnson's pump-fake on the ensuing play, and fouled the Atlanta rookie as he was draining a long jumper, resulting in an improbable three-point play that left the game in jeopardy. But on the very next trip, Pierce hit a tough pull-up, restoring order with 2:30 to go.
He wasn't perfect, but he didn't have to be. He was Paul Pierce. And Paul Pierce, when he's playing like Paul Pierce, is spectacular, flaws and all.
Pierce wasn't alone. Kevin Garnett had 15 points and 12 rebounds, and Avery Bradley looked much more comfortable than he did in Game 1 and provided some much needed offense and his usual strong D. Brandon Bass was quiet again, but better. No one off the bench really had a huge impact, but they all managed to play minutes without giving up too much.
A few words about the Hawks: Boston's defense was great tonight, along the lines of what it was in the final three quarters of Game 1, but the Hawks were positively puzzling on offense over the final 15 minutes or so, once they had stretched their lead to double digits. To say even that they have terrible shot selection is probably too generous, since it at least implies that they are being somewhat selective in the shots they take. Jeff Teague dazzled for much of the game, then failed to adjust when Boston clogged the lane against him and forced some tough shots. Joe Johnson was uncharacteristically unassertive for most of the night, then rocketed a crazy 26-footer off the backboard down five with 12 on the shot clock and 1:15 on the game, which effectively sealed Atlanta's fate. Ivan Johnson tried several times to create his own offense down the stretch, which is the last thing the Hawks want. It's hard to blame him, though; he's probably learned from Josh Smith, the classic "remembers-his-makes, forgets-his-misses" guy whose refusal to stay off the perimeter has put a ceiling on both his personal development and the development of his team.
Even worse for the Hawks, Smith hurt his knee while battling for rebounding position with Garnett, and missed the final 4:30 or so. (Incidentally, a lot of people will want to say that Smith's departure cost the Hawks the game, but Boston had taken the lead by then and Atlanta had been lost offensively for several minutes by that point.) There's no word, as of this writing, the extent of Smith's injury or whether he'll miss any time. As confounding as Smith can be at times, he's one of their catalysts on offense and is a huge presence on the boards and on the defensive end. He'd be sorely missed, particularly given that Atlanta is already down a couple of bigs.
Game 3 is Friday night in Boston, at 7;30 on ESPN. The Celtics need to win the next two to keep this momentum going. Boston started the year with one of the worst benches in the league; due to injuries and the suspension, 60% of our starting lineup was filled with guys who were slotted for reserve roles when the season began just four months ago. There's an understanding among NBA types that the bench only matters in the regular season, that starters win playoff games, but that presupposes that the second unit consists of guys who, at a minimum, are competent replacement-level NBA players. Not many guys on Boston's revamped second unit fit that category.
I gotta admit it, I wasn't terribly confident heading into Game 2. Already without Ray Allen and now down Rajon R-ndo, our best player in Game 1, I figured Tuesday night was probably a lost cause. I was still pretty sure we'd win the series, but I was thinking we'd more than likely be heading back to Boston down 0-2.
But from the very moment that Paul Pierce stole the opening tip and powered past one defender, spun around another, and laid the ball in, I started to get a feeling that all was not lost, and that we were about to see a vintage Pierce performance. That feeling grew over the next few minutes, as Pierce scored Boston's next seven points, as well: a pull-up jumper; a skip between two Atlanta defenders for a running banker and the foul; another jumper. Largely due to his efforts, the first quarter ended with the score tied at 24.
Truthfully(!), I expected nothing less from the Captain. He was outstanding in the point forward role when R-ndo was out earlier in the year, and after a 12-point performance in Game 1, you just knew he would come up with a big-time performance in this one. The question, though, was whether it would be enough. At his age, in this season, there was no way he could carry us for the whole game. And he didn't. Instead, he paced himself after a 13-point first, coasting through quarters two and three with ten points, before exploding for another 13 in the fourth. All told, he racked up 36 points in 44 minutes, added four assists, and pulled down a game-high 14 rebounds for good measure.
Pierce was far from perfect in this game. He shot 12-for-26, which is good, not great. He made a couple of really strange, lazy passes early in the third quarter, and made a few crucial errors in the fourth quarter. Yet he made up the mistakes with more than enough huge plays. To wit: After Boston climbed back from down 11 to finally take the lead, Pierce tried an ill-advised spin move around Kirk Hinrich that Hinrich snuffed out; Pierce was called for a loose-ball foul trying to recover the ball. A few possessions later, however, Pierce got a dunk on the break, then hit an assassin-like three in transition to push the lead to seven. On Atlanta's next possession, Avery Bradley stripped Ivan Johnson, but Pierce double-dribbled in transition. To make matters worse, he bought Johnson's pump-fake on the ensuing play, and fouled the Atlanta rookie as he was draining a long jumper, resulting in an improbable three-point play that left the game in jeopardy. But on the very next trip, Pierce hit a tough pull-up, restoring order with 2:30 to go.
He wasn't perfect, but he didn't have to be. He was Paul Pierce. And Paul Pierce, when he's playing like Paul Pierce, is spectacular, flaws and all.
Pierce wasn't alone. Kevin Garnett had 15 points and 12 rebounds, and Avery Bradley looked much more comfortable than he did in Game 1 and provided some much needed offense and his usual strong D. Brandon Bass was quiet again, but better. No one off the bench really had a huge impact, but they all managed to play minutes without giving up too much.
A few words about the Hawks: Boston's defense was great tonight, along the lines of what it was in the final three quarters of Game 1, but the Hawks were positively puzzling on offense over the final 15 minutes or so, once they had stretched their lead to double digits. To say even that they have terrible shot selection is probably too generous, since it at least implies that they are being somewhat selective in the shots they take. Jeff Teague dazzled for much of the game, then failed to adjust when Boston clogged the lane against him and forced some tough shots. Joe Johnson was uncharacteristically unassertive for most of the night, then rocketed a crazy 26-footer off the backboard down five with 12 on the shot clock and 1:15 on the game, which effectively sealed Atlanta's fate. Ivan Johnson tried several times to create his own offense down the stretch, which is the last thing the Hawks want. It's hard to blame him, though; he's probably learned from Josh Smith, the classic "remembers-his-makes, forgets-his-misses" guy whose refusal to stay off the perimeter has put a ceiling on both his personal development and the development of his team.
Even worse for the Hawks, Smith hurt his knee while battling for rebounding position with Garnett, and missed the final 4:30 or so. (Incidentally, a lot of people will want to say that Smith's departure cost the Hawks the game, but Boston had taken the lead by then and Atlanta had been lost offensively for several minutes by that point.) There's no word, as of this writing, the extent of Smith's injury or whether he'll miss any time. As confounding as Smith can be at times, he's one of their catalysts on offense and is a huge presence on the boards and on the defensive end. He'd be sorely missed, particularly given that Atlanta is already down a couple of bigs.
Game 3 is Friday night in Boston, at 7;30 on ESPN. The Celtics need to win the next two to keep this momentum going. Boston started the year with one of the worst benches in the league; due to injuries and the suspension, 60% of our starting lineup was filled with guys who were slotted for reserve roles when the season began just four months ago. There's an understanding among NBA types that the bench only matters in the regular season, that starters win playoff games, but that presupposes that the second unit consists of guys who, at a minimum, are competent replacement-level NBA players. Not many guys on Boston's revamped second unit fit that category.
One Game Suspension for Rondo
Nothing unexpected here. One game suspension, so we'll have him back for Game 3.
To beat Atlanta in Game 2, we're gonna need more from Paul Pierce, a more consistent effort from Kevin Garnett, and something from Avery Bradley and Brandon Bass. But we'll probably need something else, too; a contribution from an unexpected source, the way Reggie Evans sparked the Clippers to their incredible come-from-behind victory over Memphis in Game 1 of their series. If I had to pick a candidate, it'd be Marquis Daniels. He's played well recently when he's gotten minutes, and he's an experienced player who can score a little bit. Daniels gets this honor almost by default, too, as Sasha Pavlovic and Keyon Dooling have been far too bad/erratic to expect much from. It'd be nice if Mickael Pietrus got hot from three, too.
To beat Atlanta in Game 2, we're gonna need more from Paul Pierce, a more consistent effort from Kevin Garnett, and something from Avery Bradley and Brandon Bass. But we'll probably need something else, too; a contribution from an unexpected source, the way Reggie Evans sparked the Clippers to their incredible come-from-behind victory over Memphis in Game 1 of their series. If I had to pick a candidate, it'd be Marquis Daniels. He's played well recently when he's gotten minutes, and he's an experienced player who can score a little bit. Daniels gets this honor almost by default, too, as Sasha Pavlovic and Keyon Dooling have been far too bad/erratic to expect much from. It'd be nice if Mickael Pietrus got hot from three, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
