Friday, June 29, 2012

NBA Draft: Lottery Recap

I've written a long post about the lottery picks from Thursday night on my other blog. You can find it here.

Celtics Draft Report Card

Boston added three guys in Thursday night's draft. Let's talk about them.

With the 21st overall pick, the Celtics grabbed Jared Sullinger, the sophomore power forward out of Ohio State. If you read my pre-draft post, you know much I love this pick.

I said it before, but let me reiterate it now: At the time Sullinger announced he was returning to the Buckeyes after his freshman season, he was projected to be the top pick in the 2011 draft. Now, maybe he would have dropped a bit after individual workouts, and maybe the doctors last year would have found the back problems that they discovered this year, which caused him to fall all the way out of the lottery. But taking solely his basketball ability into account, getting Sullinger at 21 is unprecedented value.

The rub, of course, is his health. Boston's saying that they consider him low risk, particularly given the potential reward, but that's precisely what you'd expect a team to say right after they spent a first-round pick on a guy. For me, though, whether that's true or not doesn't really matter. For his potential at that position, I'd be willing to take on quite a bit more risk.

I'm not a doctor, so enough talk about his injury risk. Obviously, if he can't play, then the following is moot, but here's my brief analysis of Sullinger and how I think he fits in.

At just a tick under 6'8" in bare feet (he measured 6'9" in sneaks), Sullinger seems a bit short to be a consistent NBA low-post threat. But an uncomfortably common topic of conversation during Ohio State broadcasts during his two years at the school was Sullinger's rather ample backside. At 268 pounds, the dude is big, even if he's not tall by NBA power forward standards, and he used that size to average more than 17 points and nearly 10 rebounds across two collegiate seasons. He's one of those guys who produces consistently if unspectacularly, the kind of guy about whom people like to say things like "he just knows how to play." In reality, what that means is that he knows how to use his best asset -- his size -- to score around the basket, despite not being blessed with uncommon height or athleticism. I'd feel very comfortable throwing the ball into the post to him right off the bat.

His interior game is where he's most effective, but he showed improved range his sophomore season, hitting 40% from the college three-point line on about one attempt per game. His ability to step out and hit the jumper should come in handy throughout his NBA career, even if his most immediate role in the offense, given current team construction, is in the pivot.

Sullinger's defense isn't terribly noteworthy -- he wasn't a prolific shotblocker in college and won't be in the pros. His size and strength should keep him from getting pushed around on the low block, however, and one of his great strengths is rebounding -- which translates very well, historically, from college to the pro game.

Boston's roster is in so much flux right now that it's hard to predict how Sullinger might fit in on next year's team. Kevin Garnett is mulling retirement and Brandon Bass declined his player option. Other than JaJuan Johnson, who played sparing in his rookie season, we have no bigs currently under contract. Obviously, if we lose Bass and can't find replacement in free agency, Sullinger could slide right into the starting lineup. Assuming we get both KG and Bass back, Sullinger could conceivably start over Bass or play on the second unit alongside Bass if we find a center to start and let Garnett play his preferred power forward position, but Bass probably isn't re-signing in Boston for a backup's pay. For these reasons, and because I'm convinced that Garnett and Bass are coming back, I think the most likely scenario is that Sullinger becomes the first big off the bench to spell KG.

I've been critical of Doc for his development of rookies in the Big Three era, and for Sullinger to contribute in the short term he'll have to buck the trend of young Celtics not getting much burn until their second year. But Sullinger is perhaps the most NBA-ready rookie Doc has had since coming to Boston in 2004, and certainly the most since Rajon Rondo. I expect that Sullinger will have a big role on next year's Celtics team.

I really can't emphasize enough how excited I am about this pick. If things go our way and Sullinger's back holds up and allows him to have a career of any sort of length, it's the kind of pick that can change a franchise's fortunes.

I'm considerably less excited about Fab Melo, the Syracuse sophomore who Boston took immediately after Sullinger with the 22nd pick. Melo, a native Brazilian, was one of the top centers in the high school class of 2010, and was predicted by many to be the Big East newcomer of the year the following season. He was completely overmatched in his first year of college ball, though, playing around 10 minutes per game and averaging 2.3 points and 1.9 rebounds per contest. He came back for his sophomore season in much better shape and was something of a revelation for the Orange last year, and he declared for the draft after averaging about eight points and six rebounds on a very deep and balanced Syracuse team.

The justification for this pick really rests on two grounds: the potential that made him so highly-touted coming out of high school; and his one NBA-level skill, his shotblocking. I can't speak to the former because I don't follow prep ball on a national level. As for the latter, his 2.9 blocks per game last year are impressive, particularly considering he only averaged around 25 minutes per night.

I've got my concerns, though. Melo is an obvious project on offense -- while he improved his scoring his sophomore year, everything of his that wasn't a dunk looked awkward, like he was lucky it went in. And while I like his shotblocking, I have no idea what kind of defender he'll be in the NBA because he spent his whole college career playing zone -- and not just any zone, but a zone that encourages the opponent to make paint catches and go up with shots; in other words, a zone that facilitates shotblocking. Will Melo be able to hold his own defending an NBA post-up? I have no idea. I do know that he's prone to foul trouble, which isn't a great sign given that he was playing zone. It's not at all clear to me that Melo is any better than Greg Stiemsma.

Of course, when you evaluate a draft pick, you have to take into account not only the player picked, but the opportunity cost of that player -- the players who could have been chosen instead. Sullinger and Melo came at the end of a big man run in the middle of the first round; John Henson, Royce White, Tyler Zeller, Terrence Jones, and Andrew Nicholson all were taken in the seven picks immediately leading up to 21 and 22. The big-man cupboard was getting bare -- only three were selected in the final eight picks of the first round after Boston made its picks. Of those three, Miles Plumlee was a surprise first-rounder; Festus Ezeli was projected a bit later in the first round; and Arnett Moultrie had some character concerns that had him ping-ponging up and down the mock draft boards all season. If Boston was going to take a big, it's not like there were obvious choices available other than Melo, though in retrospect I probably would have preferred Ezeli.

Center is an obvious need for the Celtics. We've got none under contract, and all the ones we have ties to have age or injury concerns, and/or they are career role players. On the other hand, Melo is highly unlikely to make any sort of positive contribution in his rookie season, and center is hardly the only position of need on the Celtics. There were plenty of shooters available when we took Melo, and at the time, I wanted Jeff Taylor, preferring him over his Vanderbilt teammate John Jenkins (a better shooter) mainly due to his size and defensive reputation. A small part of the reason I liked the Sullinger pick in theory was that we had the second first-rounder as a safety valve, something to help ensure that we didn't come out of this draft empty-handed if Sullinger's health becomes a big issue. Melo is a project, and so that risk is still there.

Finally, at 51, we took Melo's college teammate, Kris Joseph. I like the idea of drafting a wing player -- we had addressed the big man issue earlier in the draft, and there weren't any we left on the board that I had strong positive feelings about. We need wings, too, and with the emergence of Avery Bradley and E'Twaun Moore showing flashes of competence during his rookie season -- not to mention the potential return of Ray Allen -- it seemed like small forward was a bigger need than shooting guard. (That might change if Allen leaves and we sign Jeff Green and Mickael Pietrus.) When Detroit grabbed Kim English at 44, I was relatively indifferent about who we got. Darius Johnson-Odom is an NBA level athlete, but he may be too small to guard shooting guards, never mind power forwards; Kevin Jones' motor and rebounding ability make him a little bit intriguing, but he's undersized (and ultimately went undrafted); and Marcus Denmon is a pure scorer who at 6'3" is probably too small for our needs. I was a little surprised that Ohio State's William Buford went undrafted, but there's nothing wrong with preferring Joseph over him.

Joseph, by the way, played four years at Syracuse. He appears to me to be a strong leader, the kind of guy who leads by example, and he made a lot of big shots for Cuse over the course of his career. He reminds me a little bit of Paul Pierce, actually; a deceptively athletic slasher who can shoot it a little bit, good rebounder, and at least the potential to be a decent defender. Obviously, I don't think his ceiling is nearly as high as Pierce's turned out to be, but with the 51st pick, you're not really worried about the guy failing to pan out and any positive contribution at all is worth it. With Joseph's experience and polish, he's got a good chance of meeting that minimum standard.

This is allegedly a report card, so I guess I should give a grade. I'll give it a B+. Sullinger is an obvous A, while Melo strikes me as a C; the "+" comes in because, as discussed, I don't really think there were any obvious alternatives to Melo.

Free agency starts Sunday, and it's only then that we'll start to get a picture of what the Celtics are going to look like in 2012-13. KG is the first domino to fall, and his decision will likely determine whether Sullinger is a contributor to another run, or a piece around which to rebuild.

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Quick Pre-Draft Thoughts

I love the NBA Draft. It's my third-favorite sports day of the year, behind the Saturday before Selection Sunday and the first day of the NCAA Tournament. Thursday night is like Christmas morning for me.

However, for whatever reason, I find myself less and less interested with the whole mock draft scene. There are too many x-factors -- too many trades, too many surprise picks, too many red herrings in the days leading up -- for it to be a meaningful exercise. (Not, I should point out, that I have anything against meaningless exercises.) A couple of people have built dream careers on the Internet out of draft prognostication, and good on 'em. It's just not for me.

So I'm not going to sit here and speculate on who the Celtics are going to take at 21 and 22. To do so would require me to try and guess who gets taken 1 through 20, and that's just too hard once you get past the lottery and into the teens. I do, however, have a couple of things on my wish list.

1. Whatever we do, I hope that we don't trade our two first-round picks to move up just a couple of spots. There are reports that Danny Ainge asked Iowa State power forward Royce White to shut down his workouts, which is basically a promise that we'll take White if he's available when it's our turn to pick. I never know whether to believe these things -- there are enough false reports in the days leading up to every draft to seriously discount just about everything you hear.

Regardless of whether it's true, I think it'd be a big mistake to put all of our eggs in one basket by exchanging our two picks for one slightly better pick. The Celtics have serious personnel needs in both the frontcourt and the backcourt, and this draft is loaded with value all the way down through the first round. I'm not talking about stars, but solid players with potential for very productive NBA careers. If another team snags White before we get a chance to pick him, there are plenty of consolation prizes: Andrew Nicholson, the center from St. Bonaventure; Arnett Moultrie, the rebounding machine from Mississippi State; Jeff Taylor, the sweet shooting wing from Vanderbilt who is one of the best defenders in the draft; trust me, the list goes on and on.

There's something to be said for getting the guy you really want, but White -- or any other player we're likely to try to trade up a few spots to get -- isn't the kind of sure thing that's worth two picks. The obvious counterargument is Rajon Rondo, who Phoenix drafted at 21 on our behalf in the 2006 draft. Ainge saw his guy in Rondo and made the move to get him, and it's obviously worked out incredibly well for the Celtics. But the price for Rondo was relatively cheap -- we basically just bought the pick from the Suns. Passing up the chance to draft another guy who could have a similar impact to White (or whoever) is just too large of a price.

I'm not totally against the idea of a trade, but if we do it, it has to be for the right reasons. And the right reasons are getting an established veteran and/or freeing up cap room for free agency, not moving up to take a guy who may or may not pan out.

2. If Jared Sullinger is available when we pick, I hope we take him. Sullinger was a potential top overall pick after his freshman year at Ohio State, but he chose to return to school for his sophomore season -- after which his draft stock dropped, in part due to a somewhat lackluster year, comparatively, and in part because this draft is perceived to be deeper than last year's was (although last year's class turned out to be rather underrated). Even so, he was a projected in the top ten this year ... until team doctors started examining him and raised questions about his back. These concerns go well beyond the back spasms that caused him to miss some games this past season; we're talking long-term durability issues, concerns of the same kind that ruined the careers of, for example, Greg Oden and Brandon Roy. Teams are worried enough about his health that the league's intel suggests he's likely to fall out of the lottery entirely, and the NBA therefore elected not to invite him to sit in the Green Room during the draft.

Sullinger may well go before we pick, and if he does, it's a moot point. Even if he is available, he's an obvious risk. But Sullinger is a good kid, a hard worker, and a smart basketball player. He's not a monster athlete, but he knows how to score around the basket, and he's a good rebounder. He has some range, too. Some people look at him and see a little bit of Kevin Love in him -- though Love's blossoming into a legitimate star isn't the kind of thing we should project for anyone. But Sullinger possess the kind of talent that is rarely available in the bottom third of the first round, and particularly with back-to-back picks serving as kind of an insurance policy on Sullinger's health, I think it'd be a mistake not to roll the dice with him if the opportunity is there.

Ainge has some history of taking high-potential guys who, for whatever reason, fall in the draft, with mixed results; Avery Bradley (#19 in 2010) turned out well, while Billy Walker (#47 in 2008) didn't. Those guys fell mostly for performance reasons, though, and health issues are a different ballgame. Still, it's a risk I hope we have the opportunity to take.

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Miami 101, Boston 88

[recap] [box score]

What do you say after your team lays it all on the line in the biggest game of the season, only to come up short? Nothing, it turns out. Instead, you go down to your local Boston bar to have a beer among sympathetic friends and fellow fans.

And what do you say after more than one of those beers and a sack full of fast food? Nothing, it turns out. Instead, you go to sleep, if you can.

And what do you say the morning after? Not much, it turns out.

I owe these Celtics a long post for the glorious, unexpected playoff run they just took us on. I don't seem to have it in me at the moment, though.

I'm disappointed. I wonder what might have happened had Doc switched Brandon Bass off of LeBron James in the fourth quarter. I wonder what might have happened had we made a couple open looks in the second half and Chris Bosh hadn't made three three-pointers and James hadn't thrown in that 30-footer. I wonder what might have happened had Avery Bradley, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce had been healthy.

But then I remember what James did to the Celtics in Game 6 with Pierce on him. I remember that young legs tend to make more shots than older ones, especially as the season nears its end. I remember that had Bosh been healthy for the whole series, there might not have been a Game 7. Hell, if Derrick Rose were healthy, there probably wouldn't have been a Game 1.

I'm disappointed, even though I shouldn't be. Unlike 2010, it doesn't feel like we gave anything away. What's difficult is that an upset of the Heat would have been so satisfying that it was hard not to fall in love with the idea of it. And so, with that result seemingly in reach just a couple of days ago -- or even just a few hours ago -- it's disappointing that we couldn't achieve it.

But I would never ask for more than the effort.

Friday, June 8, 2012

Thoughts in Advance of Game 7

Lately, my recap posts seem to be focusing on the intangibles; the story, rather than the Xs and Os. The Celtics' resilience and LeBron James' ability to rise to the occasion will no doubt play a part in determining who wins Saturday night, but there's actual basketball to be played, too. I want to spend a few minutes talking a little bit about some "basketball things" that I've got my mind on heading into Game 7. They're in no real order.

1. Paul Pierce is due for a big game. We showered him with praise after he that dagger in Game 5, so it's fair to say that he was awful in Game 6. I'm inclined to forgive him more for the defensive end (no one was stopping LeBron in that one) than for the offensive end, where he shot 4 for 18, including missed layups and clanged jumpers. The problem is that Pierce really hasn't been very good all series, with just two games of shooting that could even be considered decent. Given the shots he's getting, and missing, I assume that it's his knee, and I'm not bringing this up to criticize him. Rather, I mention it to say that anyone who expects him to come to our rescue with a huge game akin to Cleveland in 2008 is probably going to be disappointed.

2. With that said, Pierce is still a key component to our offense and one of the game's most clutch performers. To that end, we need to figure out a way to keep him on the floor. He's fouled out twice this series (in addition to getting DQ'd from Game 7 against Philly), and he picked up 3 fouls in the first half of Game 6. He's had success guarding James in the past, and he hasn't gotten any favors from the officials, but I think it's clear that the knee is hampering his performance on that end, as well, just as you'd expect it to. Some of this is on Pierce, who needs to play smart and not take bad fouls, but some of it is also on Doc. If you're willing to let Mickael Pietrus and Marquis Daniels and even Brandon Bass check James when Pierce is out of the game, then you have to be willing to put one of those guys on him to protect Pierce when he's in the game. For example, in Game 6, when Pierce came back into the game in the second quarter with two fouls, he went right back on James, picked up his third foul with like six minutes to go, and had to sit the rest of the half. To start the third, Doc put Bass on James, ostensibly to protect Pierce. But by waiting until Pierce was already in serious foul trouble before making a move, Doc kept Pierce off the court for a big chunk of the second quarter. The key is to start protecting him before it affects his playing time.

3. We only saw a possession or two of zone in Game 6, and absent truly exigent circumstances, I hope that means we've seen the last of it in this series. Miami was reasonably effective scoring against the zone in Game 5; what worked is that Boston was changing defenses and disguising what they were running, and that led to confusion and some wasted possessions when we went back to man-to-man. The element of surprise is gone, however, and Miami not only is ready for the zone, they are ready for us to switch it up. That particular trick isn't going to work anymore, and the zone itself isn't effective enough on its own.

4. Rajon Rondo has to be aggressive. He is charged with a nearly impossible task; he's the only Celtic who is able to consistently get easy baskets for himself, and yet he also has to get the other guys going, too. What Rondo must realize is that his offense opens up the floor for everyone else; when he is penetrating and getting into the lane, shots open up for others, whether it's Kevin Garnett on the pick and roll, Garnett and Bass on the pick-and-pop, or Pierce and Ray Allen spotting up along the perimeter. It's fine to run a few plays for Pierce and Allen early to try and get them a few jumpers, but if that isn't working, Rondo needs to shoulder a heavier scoring load himself, quickly. We can't afford to waste half a quarter trying to get the other guys going. If Rondo's attacking, then the rest of the offense should establish itself.

5. We need something from the bench. While a performance like the one we got from Pietrus in Game 5 would be nice, something to that degree isn't even necessary. I expect Rondo to play the full 48 minutes, and I expect that James will, as well. But Garnett won't, and neither will Pierce and Allen. Pietrus, Daniels, and Keyon Dooling must play their usual strong defense while scoring at least enough to keep us in striking distance.

6. I don't think that home court advantage will affect the players; we've played our two best games of the series in Miami's barn. I do worry that the home crowd will affect the refs. Officiating played a huge role in Boston's Game 2 loss. While I don't know who is assigned to Game 7, I do know that I don't want to see Eddie Malloy or Billy Kennedy, two officials who have shown anti-Boston proclivities and who seem overmatched by big games. And regardless of who is officiating, the players need to put any bad calls behind them quickly.

7. Finally, Boston must be resilient. Miami is a strong defensive team with a couple remarkably talented offensive players. It's nearly impossible to play a game against the Heat without them going on a couple of six- or eight-point runs. The key will be preventing them from turning those spurts into 12- and 14-point surges. Boston can win this game if they are down a few points entering the fourth quarter, but if they're down double-digits after the third, the task may be too hard. The Celtics were resilient in Game 5, and it paid off; Boston stayed in it when things weren't going right in the first half, then made their run when the shots started falling in the third quarter. They were resilient in Game 6, too; the difference is that we couldn't get anything to fall even as we continued to hang around. As long as we stay resilient, then we'll have a great shot at this. Fortunately, staying resilient is one of the things we do best.

Game 7 starts at 8:30 Eastern on ESPN. Let's do this!

Miami 98, Boston 79

[recap] [box score]

Two stories are dominating the headlines in the aftermath of Game 6. LeBron James' incredible 45-point (deservedly) gets top billing, and Boston's inability to keep the game close in the second half plays second fiddle. Here, I'm going to address them in reverse order.

How to explain the way Boston played tonight? It's a question I've been mulling since the game ended. I'm sure there are no shortage of theories floating around out there among the media and in the blogosphere, but I'm avoiding those outlets for now. I can imagine what they're saying, though:

The Celtics choked. I don't know if anyone is actually saying this. I do know that if, say, Miami had played a closeout game the way Boston did tonight, the talking heads would be all over the Heat (and James) for not coming through in big moments. Mostly by virtue of their title in 2008, this group of Celtics should evade that particular criticism. (It's amazing what a ring will do, isn't it?)

The Celtics didn't fully appreciate the magnitude of the moment. Miami was facing elimination, and teams facing elimination generally take their play to another level (that's why Game 7s are often so intense). Might Boston not have realized this and failed to match Miami's intensity? I suppose it's possible, but again, their playoff experience over the last five years makes this unlikely. The Celtics know exactly what it takes to close out a series. I'd believe that the opposite was true -- that the Cs were overhyped for the game, something that's happened with KG before -- before I believed this.

The Celtics are out of gas. The conference finals started just two days after Boston finished a seven-game series with Philly, and the Celtics expended an extraordinary amount of energy in games 2 through 5, including two overtimes. All this with a short rotation, on old, tired, injured legs.

The Celtics were complacent. The more I think about this one, the more I have to give it at least a little credit. I don't think the players ever thought "this one's in the bag," but after outplaying the Heat for four straight games and hearing two days' worth of stories about the Miami being on the ropes, maybe the mindset wasn't quite right. Professional athletes are always walking a fine line between confidence and over-confidence, between not psyching themselves out and having appropriate respect for the moment. Maybe, for whatever reason, the formula was a little out of whack. It wouldn't be the first time -- look at the Philly series. It was just one of those nights. This, more or less, is what I believe. All the other things may have played smaller roles in the defeat, but there are nights when things just don't go right. Your shots don't fall while the opponent's shots do, the ball bounces the other way a couple times, your timing is just a fraction of a second off. It's not because you aren't prepared or succumb to the moment -- it's just one of those nights.

I thought Boston's effort level, at least up until the early part of the fourth quarter, was good. The Celtics weren't flying around the court or anything, but they were getting back on defense, running when they had the opportunity, hitting the boards, and fighting for loose balls. Everything was just a little off, and as James made tough shot after tough shot, Boston started pressing a little bit. When that happens, unless you start making shots, the game can get out of control in a hurry. In the third quarter, Boston threatened to make it a game, but they never got to the point where they were making shots consistently. Eventually, that was too much to overcome.

In other words, I don't really know what caused Boston to turn in what must be fairly described as a disappointing performance in Game 6. I do know, however, that these guys have earned the benefit of the doubt. So I'm not going to criticize their effort or preparation.

On to James. What a performance! Truly one for the ages. James at least temporarily shut up his critics who say that he doesn't perform in big games. He was a one-man show, no doubt.

That's the thing, though: He was a one-man show. Udonis Haslem was a monster on the boards, a few other guys hit a few shots, but for the most part, this was all LeBron -- scoring machine LeBron, not facilitator LeBron.

Here's the honest truth, though: I don't mind 45 points from LeBron James. If you had shown me only Miami's half of the box score before the game, I would have taken it. LeBron was prolifically, brutally efficient, but his team members weren't involved, and when the other guys aren't involved, they they don't defend as well and miss more often when they are finally called upon. That's not meant as a criticism of James -- I fully recognize how brilliant he was tonight -- it's just a fact. I've said it before and I'll say it again now: One player cannot defeat a great team if that team is playing well. Kobe couldn't do it in Game 5 in 2010. LeBron himself couldn't do it in Game 7 of the 2008 Eastern Conference semis.

The difference between Boston wins like those two games an what happened Thursday night is, of course, the Celtics. Against the Lakers in 2010, when Kobe scored 23 straight LA points during one stretch, the Cs scored 33 points, and every Boston player on the court had at least one bucket, and the team had assists on 10 of its 15 baskets. Against the Cavs in 2008, Paul Pierce matched LeBron nearly point for point (41 points to James' 45), and the Celtics supporting cast took care of the rest. Tonight, however, Boston's offense wasn't clicking. Rajon Rondo and Brandon Bass did their best to keep the team in it during the first half, but unlike the second half of Game 5, the shots just didn't fall. Boston can beat the Heat even with James playing like a deity, but to do so, they have to put the ball in the basket.

Towards the very end of the game, maybe with two-and-a-half minutes left and the benches emptied, a "Let's go Celtics!" chant slowly emerged from the Boston fans still on hand. As the game dragged on longer than it needed to, the cheer continued, and in fact grew even louder. Quite a few fans had left the Garden early, but by the final buzzer, there wasn't a green-clad fan in the stands who wasn't on his or her feet, yelling and clapping. On the bench, the Celtics' starters -- Pierce and Allen, Rondo and KG -- slowly nodded their heads, their mental preparation for Game 7 already begun.

Game 7 is in Miami on Saturday, and could mean the end of Boston's season, and so the question has to be asked: Were the fans cheering on the Celtics in advance of Game 7, a "we believe in you!" type message? Or were they thanking them for a great run this year -- and, let's face it, for the last five years, since there's a good chance that if Boston loses on Saturday, we won't see at least one key piece of this team in a Celtics uniform again?

We'll never know what the person who started the cheer intended, and the answer to the question will probably be provided by what happens in Game 7. But I ask you to consider Boston's performance following a loss in these playoffs. They are 4-1 in such games this year, including wins without Rondo (Atlanta Game 2) and without Pierce in the final minutes (Philly Game 7). The sole loss, the lone exception, was Game 2 against Miami just days ago -- when Boston played arguably its best game of the playoffs.

I'm not going to go so far to say that Boston has Miami right where they want them. "Right where they want them" is home on their couches in Miami, while we get three days to rest up for Oklahoma City. But every time their backs have been against the wall over the last six weeks or so, the Celtics have responded. They clearly aren't ready to say goodbye. And I'm not ready to say goodbye to them.

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Boston 94, Miami 90

[recap] [box score]

You want to know when I knew the Celtics were going to win Game 5?

It was well before Kevin Garnett grabbed Dwyane Wade's desperation three-pointer and flung it downcourt as the final seconds ticked off the clock. It was well before Garnett hit a pair of free throws to keep the Boston lead at four points in those final seconds, and before Ray Allen knocked down a pair the possession before. It was even before Paul Pierce, his team clinging to a one-point lead with less than a minute left, shook off a 5-for-18 shooting night, stared down the MVP, and drilled perhaps the Truthiest shot of his career.

It was with 9:37 left in the game. Not a moment you remember? Read on.

With Boston leading 70-67, Garnett picked up his fourth foul on the offensive end, having allegedly thrown Dwyane Wade to the floor while fighting for post possession. KG took a few steps downcourt while cradling the basketball, raised it to his lips for a quick kiss, then flipped it to a referee.

I didn't know at that moment. I didn't know until a couple of seconds later, when they showed the replay, and I saw that Garnett hadn't touched Wade; Wade had gotten his feet tangled up with James as the latter was chasing a Celtic on the perimeter. It was a bad call at a crucial moment -- and Garnett didn't say a word.

"These guys are dialed in," I thought. And that's when I knew.

Really, I should have noticed it earlier. Doc Rivers did; at halftime, he said was proud of his guys for sticking it out in the first half, which was a nightmare of missed layups and clanked jumpers. (Despite shooting just 33% in the opening half, they went into the break down just two.) They survived two early fouls on Rajon Rondo and some quasi-foul trouble on other key players. Garnett had a monster dunk in the third quarter while getting fouled by James Jones, and didn't so much as look at Jones, never mind bark at him or brush shoulders as he walked to the free throw line -- the kind of stuff we've come to expect. There were some lapses -- Rajon Rondo's backcourt violation, Rondo allowing Norris Cole to chase him down from behind on a two-on-one break, Brandon Bass picking up a technical for spiking the ball in frustration -- but for the most part, this was the most focused the Celtics have been in this postseason.

This was in contrast to the Heat. They were once again preoccupied with the officials, though perhaps not as badly as in previous games, had some major lapses in transition defense, and at times seemed afraid to take shots or run any offense whatsoever.

Boston's focus culminated in what seemed like a postseason's worth of loose balls in the fourth quarter. The first, and the one that everyone's talking about, was the Rondo tap-out to Mickael Pietrus after Wade made an incredible block of a Bass dunk. It was an incredible play and gets a lot of attention because of it staved off a major momentum shift in favor of Miami -- the Heat were already up six, and Wade's block was so spectacular it would have taken the roof off the building. But the second Rondo deflection, this time off an Allen miss, was an even more remarkable play. Instead of simply tapping the ball to a nearby teammate, on this play Rondo -- while moving forward and slightly to his right -- essentially threw a tap bounce pass across his body to the left, past a Heat defender and into an open space where Pietrus could retrieve it. MP got the ball to Pierce, who penetrated and kicked to Garnett, whose jumper gave Boston a one-point lead.

The final loose ball that went our way was the luckiest. Pierce threw a bad pass to Allen that was deflected, bounced off a Heat player, then off Allen's leg. Allen dove on it, and from the floor, kicked it out to Pierce, who hit Pietrus in the corner. Pietrus hit his second huge three of the quarter, balancing out a Mario Chalmers three on the previous possession. These were plays that we simply hadn't made earlier in the playoffs.

This was a huge win, but the series isn't over yet, and Boston has to be ready to play a full 48 minutes of focused basketball on Thursday. There's always the chance, I suppose, that the Celtics can deliver an early knockout punch like they did in Game 6 of the 2008 Finals -- these Heat aren't mentally tough the same way those Lakers weren't mentally tough -- but huge games from James and Wade are a more likely scenario. Garnett was huge, again, but he may have his hands a bit more full in Game 6 with Chris Bosh, who inexplicably played just 12 minutes in his return to the corner. Pietrus had his best game of the postseason, on both ends of the court. Other than those two, however, no one could really get going, and the Celtics will have to find a way to get the offense going while being prepared, like they were tonight, for things to get cold again. They must anticipate that James and Wade will get every call in a close-out game, and keep their composure and play through any frustration. They can't count on Miami missing open looks, or being confused by Doc switching defenses the way they were in Game 5.

They can close it out at home, but to do so, they'll have to play their best game yet.

Monday, June 4, 2012

Boston 93, Miami 91 (Overtime)

[recap] [box score]

This team really is unlike any other I've ever seen.

When it's clicking, Boston's offense is as pretty as anybody's in the NBA, unselfish, the ball flowing from the hands of a young point guard whose creativity and court vision is unmatched, to one of history's best passing big men, to the franchise's second-leading scorer, to the greatest outside shooter in the history of the game, ending in a jumper so pure you can feel the snap of the net even as you're sitting in your chair. In the same game -- hell, in the same quarter -- that same offense can deteriorate into what ESPN's Bill Simmons calls a clogged toilet, a series of forced isolations that are now in their fifth straight year of accomplishing nothing but letting the opponent back in the game. They've played more playoff games than any other team over the last five years -- more often than not getting the job done -- and yet they have inexplicable trouble closing out a game, or a playoff series. They do nothing easily, and watching them barely scrape by or hang on, you get the feeling that it's going to come back to bite them in the collective ass.

Watching this team, in essence, is an exercise in waiting for the other shoe to drop.

You'll forgive me, then, for thinking that Dwyane Wade -- standing alone, 24 feet from the home goal at the Garden, with Boston up two and the final seconds of overtime ticking away -- was that proverbial other shoe. You'll forgive me for thinking that his three-pointer was going in.

But it didn't. It was short -- just barely, maybe an inch (probably less) -- but short. And so Boston, which had given up all of an 18-point first half lead, was let off the hook. Doc Rivers was let off the hook for mismanaging the end game in regulation (more on this later). Paul Pierce was let off the hook for fouling out for the third time in five games. Kevin Garnett was let off the hook for the late offensive foul that gave Miami a chance to win it in regulation. Mickael Pietrus was leaving LeBron James wide open -- and I mean [i]wide open[/i] for the game-tying three with 37 seconds left. Rajon Rondo was let off the hook for his petulant kick at Shane Battier (and ensuing technical) late in the first half. Marquis Daniels was let off the hook for letting Wade shake him with a pump fake for that final look. I could go on, but I won't.

If you read the above, you're probably under the impression that the Celtics were lucky to win this game and go back to Miami tied 2-2 instead of in a 3-1 hole. And it's true: Boston was fortunate to win, as any team must be when it continually lives so close to the edge. But it's also true that you make your own luck, and for everyone in the above list (and everyone else who played, for that matter), I could point to something they did that was absolutely instrumental in this win, whether it was helping build the big first-half lead or recovering after Miami surged ahead. It was yet another mix of brilliance, horror, and resilience -- and everybody played a part in all of it.

A few scattered thoughts:

1. I mentioned earlier that I thought Doc blew the endgame in regulation. Specifically, when James hit that three to tie it up with 37 seconds left, Boston had two timeouts remaining. This was a perfect two-for-one opportunity; Doc could've called timeout to advance the ball, then drawn up one of his signature out-of-bounds plays for a quick shot, leaving enough time on the clock that they'd get the ball back after a Miami possession (after which they'd once again be able to advance the ball with a timeout). It's basic NBA strategy -- you get two possessions to your opponent's one -- and while I think it can be overused and teams often end up getting two bad shots, there was enough time to get something good on the first possession and still leave enough time for a good look on the second possession. And it would have been particularly appropriate in Sunday's game, when Boston had basically gotten nothing in the flow of the offense in the second half. But, to my shock, Doc let them go, and Garnett was called for a foul for trapping James' arm as a way of preventing him from challenging Rondo's drive. Boston was able to survive Miami's potential game-winning possession due to some strong defense and a really poor play on the part of the Heat and coach Erik Spoelstra, but had they been able to score and win the game there, Doc's error in the fourth would have the lead of this post.

2. Rondo turned in what is becoming a typical Rondo performance: brilliant first half, some dicey moments in the second half, big buckets when the team needed them down the stretch, and the frustrating, if momentary, loss of his cool (the Battier kick). He added something new: unprecedented candor during the halftime interview. After a 61-point outburst over the opening 24 minutes, Doris Burke asked him what holes the Celtics were exploiting. His response: "Them complaining and crying to the referees in transition."

I'm curious what the reaction will be. What he said was true: In what is becoming an annoyingly common occurrence in the NBA, the Heat actually were giving up buckets in transition because they were barking at the officials instead of getting back on D. The Heat players might try to use it as some sort of motivation, though I imagine Spoelstra wouldn't mind someone else pointing out to his guys that all the bitching actually hurts them. I also wonder if it was a calculated move on Rondo's part, or just him being honest. There certainly shouldn't be any fallout with the league -- he wasn't criticizing the officials.

3. I'm beginning to wonder if Boston's habit of slowing the pace down in the second half is an energy-conserving tactic. The Heat have been going to increasingly small lineups, which has shortened Doc's big man rotation (Greg Stiemsma played all of 32 seconds in Game 4 and Ryan Hollins didn't get off the bench). Garnett is playing too many minutes (43 on Sunday) and Pierce and Allen are battling injuries. I don't think we'll find out if that's the case -- it's not the kind of thing you admit during a series. But it's hard to find another rational explanation for why Boston goes to an offensive strategy that almost never works, then goes back to running their normal offense when they absolutely have to.

4. The officiating in the fourth quarter and in overtime was just bizarre. James flopped trying to deny a Garnett post-up, and the official -- Billy Kennedy, I think -- whistled a double foul. Pierce's sixth foul, a late call by Kennedy early in overtime, came on a minor bit of contact between him and Shane Battier, who flopped to the ground on the play. And James was disqualified with his sixth foul later in overtime by Joey Crawford for muscling Pietrus to the floor. I think that it was inconsistent enough that both teams had gripes and that you really couldn't say one team had the advantage over the other, but there were a bunch of weird calls, particularly late, that had me scratching my head once again.

5. Ray Allen looked more like himself on Sunday than he has since he came back. That's a great sign. I've got no doubt he's still hurting, but it's not affecting his shot as much as it was.

I think we should be feeling good heading back to Miami. Boston had some trouble closing out these last two games, but they outplayed Miami for big chunks of Games 2, 3, and 4. The Celtics seem to have figured out how to keep James and Wade out of the lane as much as possible, which is crucial to beating the Heat. Miami has been making big adjustments on what seems to be an almost constant basis -- playing different people at center, going small, trapping the pick-and-roll, switching the pick-and-roll, putting James on Rondo, etc. That makes them a little bit hard to game plan for, but it also suggests to me that we're a bit more comfortable than they are. There's also been some rumbling that Chris Bosh might return for some part of this series, which would be interesting -- I'm honestly not sure whether that'd be bad or good for Boston.

Game 5 is Tuesday night in Miami, at 8:30 Eastern on ESPN. We've got the momentum, but it's crucial to remember something that I keep reminding my girlfriend (an avid Spurs fan): Nothing's happened in this series yet. Both teams have held serve at home, and Miami has the advantage of being able to win the series without winning on the road. Boston, on the other hand, has to win at least once on South Beach. No better time than Tuesday -- if that's not too easy.

Saturday, June 2, 2012

Boston 101, Miami 91

[recap] [box score]

Going to do just a few quick points, since I didn't get a chance to post after the game last night:

1. Huge contribution in this one from Marquis Daniels, who basically has been out of the rotation ever since we got Mickael Pietrus and Avery Bradley stepped up. Daniels was part of the second unit that took control of this game at the end of the first quarter and the beginning of the second, and with Brandon Bass in foul trouble, was on the court for much of the stretch when Boston's lead ballooned as high as 24 in the third quarter. Daniels biggest contribution was probably defensively; LeBron James scored his share of points when Daniels was checking him, but those points did not come easily. Offensively, Daniels doesn't have the range Pietrus supposedly has, but his knack of finding the open spot moving off the ball -- something sorely lacking ever since Bradley was shut down -- was crucial to the Celtics' offensive success. I expect we'll see more of him.

2. Keyon Dooling's ball pressure off the bench during that same first half stretch was crucial. Miami didn't score for like seven minutes while Boston ripped off a 15-0 run, and Dooling's perimeter defense should get a lot of credit for taking the Heat out of an offensive rhythm that had put up 28 points in the first 9 and a half minutes.

3. It's rare that the bench -- particularly one as weak as Boston's -- is the difference in a playoff game, but these are unusual circumstances. With Chris Bosh out, Miami's been going small, and that means Brandon Bass has to chase guys out on the perimeter, which got him into foul trouble. Daniels and Pietrus replaced him, and in effect became "starters." I expect we'll see more of Daniels moving forward.

4. Dooling and Daniels scored some points, but their defense was really the big key. Boston had played fairly terribly on defense in the early minutes, and Dooling's tenacity, especially, changed the defensive tone of the game.

5. Boston went to Kevin Garnett early and often, which was key. And the officials finally recognized that Miami has been holding and grabbing KG as he tries to get position. If that trend continues, KG will be close to unstoppable.

6. Rajon Rondo's numbers aren't nearly as gaudy as they were in Game 2, but he made a number of momentum-shifting plays. I thought his layup in transition in the closing minutes was huge. The Heat had shifted to a super-small lineup with James at the 5, which not only spread the Celtics thin on defense, but also induced them into walking the ball up and trying to exploit size mismatches in the post -- a strategy which, surprise, didn't really work.

7. For the most part, Boston turned James and Dwyane Wade into jump shooters. James was red-hot to start, but even as he was draining jumper after jumper, I was thinking that it wasn't necessarily a bad thing -- that it might induce the Heat to fall in love with the long game and not take advantage of their ability to penetrate and the favorable treatment they get from the officials. We've had success doing this in the past, and it will be crucial to continue to do so moving forward.

8. One thing that needs to be fixed is Boston's transition defense. Miami burned us for easy layups several times in the first quarter, even after Boston hoops, and it's been a problem all series. It's inexcusable for a team that sends as few people to the offensive glass as Boston does. One problem is that as Rondo has become more of a scoring threat, the rest of the team hasn't adjusted to need to balance the floor, but really, just making a concerted effort to not let someone run by you and way downcourt is probably the only fix necessary.

9. Game 4 is Sunday, same bad time, same bad place. Game 3 means nothing if we don't win the next one.