Category: NBA (Page 501 of 595)

Well, for all intents and purposes, the Finals are over. The Spurs got just 34 total points from Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, and they still won. That’s a telling statistic.

Game 3 was pretty brutal to watch, but at least it was close. The combined 147 points just missed the Finals low of 145 points that Syracuse and Ft. Wayne – yes, Syracuse and Ft. Wayne – put up way back in 1955.

Both teams shot poorly from the field, but the Cavs’ 3-19 showing from long range really stands out. Everyone (including this writer) called for Daniel Gibson to get the start, and he faltered, scoring just two points on 1-10 shooting. He is a rookie, after all.

Still, the Cavs had a shot to win the game, but some very poor execution down the stretch was their undoing. Cleveland got the ball, down by two with 26 seconds left, but elected to not call a timeout. I normally like it when teams push it up court in that situation, but only if they know how to get a good shot. After LeBron was turned away in the lane, he flipped the ball to Anderson Varejao, who decided to try to take Tim Duncan, a 10-time All-Defensive selection, on the dribble. Needless to say, he didn’t score. With 15 seconds left on the shot clock, he had plenty of time to get the ball back to LeBron.

According to Mike Breen, Mike Brown was trying to get a timeout, but he was (apparently) unable to get the attention of any of the Cavs on the floor or the officials, even though he had a full 10 seconds to do so. (He can call a timeout himself.) Any way you slice it, the failure to get a good shot on that possession is his fault. It’s clear that his team didn’t know what to do in that situation. Do they call a timeout and draw up a play? Or do they push it up court and run a clear out (or pick and roll) for LeBron? These are things that should be addressed in practice.

Are the Cavs really talking about extending his contract?

The first two games of the NBA Finals were eerily similar. Spurs dominate the game for three quarters and build a 20-point lead, then get distracted in the fourth while the Cavs play scramble ball to get the lead under 10. The run gets the attention of the Spurs, who manage to put the game away in the final minutes.

Those late game runs were good for the Cavs from a confidence standpoint, but they were equally valuable to Gregg Popovich and his staff to use as a motivational tool for Game 3. Obviously, the Cavs have to win Tuesday night if they hope to make this some sort of a series.

I figured that the Spurs would win the first two games and steal a game in Cleveland, finally winning the series in Game 6 back in San Antonio. But the way that the Cavs have played for long stretches in the first two games really makes me wonder if they have the maturity to win two out of three at home. I’m starting to think that the series will end in Cleveland.

Of course, the Cavs are young and should play a lot better in front of their home crowd. Mike Brown would be wise to find more minutes for Daniel Gibson, who is outplaying Larry Hughes at the point. Gibson did play 32 minutes in Game 2, but it just didn’t seem like enough.

But that’s not the problem. The Cavs simply don’t have an answer for Tony Parker, Tim Duncan or Manu Ginobili. The three shot a combined 54-99 (55%) in the first two games. Meanwhile, the Spurs have limited LeBron James to just 13-37 (35%). Add it all up and you’ve got two San Antonio wins.

Unless Brown has an epiphany and suddenly figures out how to stop the Spurs’ stars while at the same time finding a way to get own star off to a good start, I don’t see how the Cavs can win this series. To have a realistic shot, they need to win three straight at home, and beating a great team like the Spurs three straight times is a very difficult task, no matter where you play.

LeBron’s performance in Game 5 of the Detroit series sure seems like it was a long time ago, doesn’t it?

San Antonio Spurs All-Star center Tim Duncan told reporters yesterday that he is rooting for the Cleveland Cavaliers to win this year’s NBA Finals, stating that a Cavaliers victory is “exactly what the NBA needs right now.”

I love the Onion.

For most fans (including this writer), a Pistons/Spurs re-match in the Finals would have been a snooze-fest, but the Cavs’ triumph in the Eastern Conference Finals actually has me looking forward to Game 1 on Thursday night.

Don’t get me wrong, this doesn’t mean the series will necessarily go six or seven games, but the sheer presence of LeBron, the league’s youngest superstar, should make for some compelling basketball. We’re watching “King” James as he tries to finally earn that nickname. His performance in Game 5 against Detroit was phenomenal, but it’s going to take more than one great game to impress the hordes of critics who keep saying James is lacking in one area or another.

It seems like LeBron has been around a long time, but keep in mind he’s just 22 years old. It took MJ seven seasons to lead the Bulls to their first Finals (which they won). He was 28 at the time. He went on to win five more titles in the next seven years, and he might have won two more had he not retired smack dab in the middle of that historic run.

But back to LeBron, who faces a tougher challenge in his first Finals. The Bulls played an aging Lakers team on the decline, while the Cavs have to play the Spurs, a team that is still in its collective prime. A vast majority of pundits are picking the Spurs (the line is –500), and while some are saying that the Cavs will make it interesting, no one really thinks the Cavs have much of a chance to actually win the series. (Though the results of our current poll would indicate otherwise.)

Do they have a shot? Sure. The Spurs could come out rusty on Thursday and drop Game 1, which would even of the series considerably. And it doesn’t hurt that the Cavs won both meetings this season. While LeBron put up his usual numbers (27 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 4.5 apg), two of Cleveland’s young guns, Daniel Gibson and Sasha Pavlovic, didn’t get the minutes necessary to be factor in either game. The Spurs role players – Robert Horry, Michael Finley, Brent Barry and Fabricio Oberto – scored a total of 28 points, which just isn’t going to get it done. Manu Ginobili was also starting at the time, and just scored a total of 20 points in the two games. He plays much better when he comes off the bench (and when the pressure is on), so expect his scoring to double in the Finals. Tim Duncan and Tony Parker were their usual selves, so they should both have a strong series.

Even though the Spurs are the better team, I don’t think their personnel advantage will necessarily be the difference in the series. The Cavs’ Mike Brown faces his old mentor, Gregg Popovich, and is severely outmatched in terms of experience and ability. Brown is clearly a good defensive coach, but in the last two seasons he’s failed to realize his offensive limitations. The Cavs still lean on the “LeBron clearout” far too often instead of finding inventive ways of giving James and the other players the ball in positions where they can be successful. You can bet that Pop will have a scheme to limit both Gibson and Pavlovic, while keeping LeBron under control with Bruce Bowen (and his dirty ways). Nothing in Brown’s history leads me to believe that he’ll formulate a capable response.

Regardless, it’s going to be fun to watch LeBron and Co. take on the biggest of challenges. I won’t know for sure until Game 1 starts, but despite my dislike for the Spurs, I think I’m actually going to root for San Antonio, because I don’t want to see such a flawed Cavs team win the title. Not yet, anyway.

Spurs in 6.