I'm going to start by trying to put things in perspective, because if I don't, I'm going to start ranting about negative stuff and never get to the less-negative stuff. So here goes: We're not as far off the pace as our recent results have made it seem. We're too good and too experienced for moral victories, but isn't about moral victories, it's about reality. And the reality is that we weren't 100% healthy on Sunday; we got above-average performances from Rajon Rondo and Tony Allen, an average day from Eddie House, and below-average afternoons from everyone else; and we still were within one possession of taking down the defending champs. Granted, the Lakers aren't exactly healthy (Kobe Bryant's apparently playing through all sorts of injuries), nor did we get their best shot, but it was a much more even performance by the visitors. The point is that though we're not even the favorites in the East anymore, we're still a contender as constructed, provided we're healthy (a big if, but there's not much we can do right now to change that).
Really, I have just one general complaint about this game, and it's the way we played the final few minutes. Yes, we turned the ball over 18 times and gave Andrew Bynum five offensive rebounds, but we would have won had we executed on a few more possessions down the stretch. Our failure to do was due, I feel, to our insistence on slowing the pace of the game way down and relying on isolating Paul Pierce for offense late in the shot clock. To casual observers, this strategy may appear to be that of a team with shaken confidence, a team trying desperately to hang on rather than proactively trying to win the game. Of course, those who follow this team closely know better: This is our default strategy in the fourth quarter of tight contests. I'm generally not a fan of this tactic, but I grudgingly accept it on occasions where Pierce is going well. Sunday was not one of those games. Pierce picked up two fouls within the first three minutes and had to sit; as a result, he never found his rhythm. He made four field goals for the entire game -- a trio of second-quarter three-pointers (wide open looks from Rondo assists) and a fastbreak layup in the third quarter. Not once on Sunday did he take his man into the high post, face up, and hit a midrange jumper, his standard move in those spots. On days like that, at least, we need to go with what's working. Rondo entered the fourth quarter with 21 points and 11 assists; he finished with 21 and 12 despite playing the final eight minutes.
It'll be interesting to see where the team goes from here. They're back at it Monday night, against a dreadful Washington team. The next real challenge comes Wednesday night against Miami on ESPN (8 p.m. Eastern).
3 comments:
Hayden and I have discussed many times our strong hatred for when our offense stagnates late in the game. But I thought this quote from Doc in Ian Thomson's SI.com column was interesting: ""With five minutes left, we went into the stall mode offensively, walked the ball up the floor, took forever to run stuff,'' said Boston coach Doc Rivers. "That's just not who we are."
Now, this could be a case of some revisionist history from Doc, but I've always assumed that when we slow down like that it's because he's calling those plays. But this suggests that it's the players themselves (I would say most notably Pierce) who are choosing to survive on slowing it down and using isolations. To me, this makes the situation even scarier, because it suggests it might be a harder habit to break.
Here's the link to the rest of the column: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ian_thomsen/01/31/lakers.celtics/index.html
Absent the first quarter and the final 8 minutes, the Lakers played miserable basketball. Kobe couldn't make a shot, Pau wasn't doing much down low (fortunately, set off by a good performance by Bynum), and no one could stop Rondo and the screen and roll.
It's good to come out of that game with a win, but the fact is that neither team looked much like "contenders" in that one. Here's to hoping that there's some better basketball in both of our futures.
Two comments, plus a spam comment. That's a new RwH record.
@ the distinguished Ass. Commish, thanks for that quote. Whether the playcall comes from the sideline, however, it's still Doc's responsibility to say "hey fellas, knock it off."
@ K.C.R., I agree that the Lakers played pretty poorly, but good opponents can force you to play some bad basketball. See, e.g., Boston's first two contests with Orlando this year. (Oh yes, I did!)
I actually thought that when Boston "took control," so to speak, in the second and third periods on Sunday, there was a little bit of the disparity in toughness and edge that we saw in the 2008 Finals. I thought the soft side of Pau and Odom disappeared last year, and I certainly expected more with Artest around.
Boston shrunk offensively down the stretch, and I thought the defense on both ends was good. I wouldn't say LA executed well offensively; the deciding hoops were an Artest layup that hit the underside of the rim before crawling up and in and a very well-contested jumper that Kobe made because he's Kobe.
Post a Comment