“We ain’t coming back to L.A.”
Pierce yells out to the Laker faithful.
Now the series has truly begun. The Lakers came out swinging in Game 1
and knocked Boston back on its heels. Game 2 was the counter-punch !
After taking one in the gut in Game 1, Boston struck back to win the crucial second game it needed to avoid a statistical and emotional cliff. Teams that are down 0-2 in a series in NBA history only win 10% of the time, not very good odds, and specifically not when playing against Phil Jackson, who is a perfect 47-0 after winning Game 1 of a 7 game series.
So who has the advantage now ? Why was Kobe so damn serious at the
press conference after the Game 2 loss ? Why was Phil Jackson still
commenting about the officiating ? What about all of the pundits that were about to write off the Celtics after they lost Game 1 in convincing fashion ?
The Celtics won despite poor performances from KG and Pierce. KG's output was particularly painful to see (6 points, 4 boards, 0 offensive confidence). But they got monster games from Ray Allen (a record 8 3-point shots), a triple-double from Rajan Rondo, sparks from the bench ( 7 points each from Wallace and Robinson and 8 from Big Baby). More important than the points were Wallace spelling Garnett while he got into foul-trouble, and Robinson allowing Rondo a much needed rest.
The Lakers, meanwhile, had pretty good games from their bigs again (Gasol and Bynum for 46 points and 14 boards), and 21 from Kobe in a foul-plagued game. The problem was that the other two starters had next to nothing (Artest and Fisher combined for 12), and they got absolutely nada from Lamar Odom (again – when is the real Odom going to show up ? Oh wait a minute, this is the real Odom).
So what were people thinking writing off the Celtics after only one
game ? That they won, on the Lakers home court, with two of their big stars, having sub-par games, is simply due to the fact that when they're on, the Celtics can play better defense than the Lakers, and that defense will always beat the Lakers high-octane offense.
Not that I think the Lakers will wilt. They have a laser-focused Kobe and the best coach in the world. But they must prove that they can maintain their offensive efficiency, ruggedness, and desire against the best defense in the league, and in Boston, they'll have to play some rugged defense themselves.
LA won Game 1 impressively. But it is difficult to keep up the intensity over a series, especially when you have guys like Artest (whose mind can drift), and Odom (who makes a habit of disappearing in big series). If there's any consolation for LA it's that the Celtics are as good a road team as they're a home team. LA will need at least one win to take this back
to Tinsel Town.
Indeed, this series has truly begun. The roller-coast ride is about to
continue. The difference, I believe is this: the Lakers can win in Boston,
but the Celtics have already proved they can win in LA. I think this Celtic team can repeat the feat of the 1969 Celtics, when Russell and Jones beat a loaded LA team (West, Chamberlain, Baylor) at the Forum in Game 7 and left all of the balloons hanging in the arena rafters.
No comments:
Post a Comment