I’m not a professional lip reader, but after LeBron James took five or six straight jumpers in the fourth quarter (hitting most of them), Shaq came up to him at a timeout and said, “Go to the f**kin’ hole.” On the next possession, LeBron did just that and threw the ball out of bounds. But two plays later with under a minute to play in a tie game, LeBron attacked the glass in secondary transition and gave the Cavs a two point lead.
Kobe Bryant sat for the first seven minutes of the fourth quarter, and when he finally came in, he was ice cold, missing four of his five shots in the final period. Pau Gasol also played weak inside and missed several shots from close range. After LeBron’s driving layup, Gasol had a chance to tie the game with 0:24 to play, but missed both free throws. (He’s an 86% shooter on the season.) Cleveland just showed more toughness down the stretch.
It was an impressive win for the Cavs, who were playing without (arguably) their second best player, Mo Williams, who will be sidelined 4-6 weeks with a separated shoulder.
One thing that struck me as odd: After Gasol missed those free throws, LeBron was on the sideline lip-syncing all of the lyrics to a Eminem song — almost to the point when the ref threw him the ball. I realize he’s just trying to have a good time, but the old schooler in me just shakes his head. A few moments later he went to the line and missed one of his free throws.
Still, it’s hard to complain about a guy who just posted 37-9-5 against the defending champs.
As I sit here waiting for the (inevitable?) Cavs/Lakers Finals, I started to wonder — how does playoff seeding relate to Finals appearances?
The salary cap was (sort of) implemented during the 1984-85 season to level the playing field, so that’s where we’ll start. Since the ’85 Finals, #1-seeds have accounted for 58% (28 of 48) of the Finals participants. But that trend has changed over the last five years, where #1-seeds only accounted for 20% (2/10) of Finals participants. (This means that from ’85 to ’03, #1-seeds made up 66% of Finals participants.)
Over the last 24 years, teams seeded #4 or higher made the Finals just three times: the ’95 #6-seeded Rockets, the ’99 #8-seeded Knicks and the ’06 #4-seeded Mavs. Only the Rockets managed to win the NBA Championship, so that means that 23 of 24 title winners were seeded #3 or better at the beginning of the playoffs. In fact #3-seeds have won just three titles over the last 24 years (’02, ’04 and ’07), so 83% of title winners start the playoffs as #1- or #2-seeds.
Since 2001, we’ve had the vaunted #1/#1 matchup just once — last season’s Boston/L.A. matchup. From ’85 to ’00, that matchup occurred eight times, or 50% of the time.
What does this all mean? Who knows. Even though the salary cap age has brought more parity to the playoffs, it seems to have only spread the wealth down from the top three or four teams to the top five or six teams. Teams not seeded in the top three are longshots to make the Finals. This is due to the seven-game format of each series. It’s completely feasible that a #4-#8 seed to take a game or two from a top seed, but far less feasible that they can win four out of seven.
These playoffs would have been more interesting had Manu Ginobili, Kevin Garnett and Jameer Nelson stayed healthy. Still, we’re talking about teams that are seeded #3 or higher, so it wouldn’t have changed the fact that really only the top six teams in any given year have a legit shot at the Finals.
After all of that, I think we’re still destined for a Cavs/Lakers matchup in the Finals.
Sure, with its seven-game format, the NBA Playoffs aren’t quite as consistently dramatic as March Madness, but there are a number of compelling storylines as we head into this year’s postseason. Will KG return in time to help the Celtics try to repeat? Will LeBron and the Cavs ride home court advantage to the Finals? Can Chris Paul and the Hornets put a less-than-stellar regular season behind them and make a run? Can Kobe finally win a title without Shaq?
The Playoffs start on Saturday, and looking at the matchups, I think I have a pretty good idea how things will play out. Granted, I’m likely to make a few mistakes along the way, but that’s part of the fun, right?
EASTERN CONFERENCE FIRST ROUND
#1 Cavaliers vs. #8 Pistons
Let’s see – the Pistons limped into the playoffs, going 8-9 in March and 3-5 in April. Earlier in the season, they traded away arguably their best player (Chauncey Billups) and the guy they got in return (Allen Iverson) is (rumored to be) spending his time getting banned from the local casinos. If Detroit had held onto Billups, maybe they’d be able to make this a series, but without him, they’re floundering. I hope Joe Dumars has fun with that cap space!
#4 Hawks vs. #5 Heat
Here’s a first round battle between two teams that don’t have a legitimate chance of making the Finals. If the NBA were to adopt a single-elimination format (or even three-game series across the board), maybe….maybe…one of these teams could get hot and make a run. As it stands, the winner will have the right to face a determined Cavs team in the second round. Not that it matters, but I’m going with the Hawks here. They have home court advantage, have won three of four against the Heat this season and are simply a better team. Hats off to Dwyane Wade for willing the Heat this far, but I don’t think we’re going to see a LeBron/D-Wade matchup in the second round. (Not unless Jermaine O’Neal discovers the Fountain of Youth by this weekend.)
