East
Pacers 128-133 (OT) Celtic
Pacers 110-126 Celtics
Celtics 114-111 Pacers
Celtics 105-102 Pacers
Game Two was the big fave blowout game, Game Four was the team in control finishing the job. But the other two matches were nailbiters--and gotta say: the Pacers lost Game One and Game Three more than the Celtics won them. If the Pacers make the right plays late or at least bring some ruckus in the OT, they very easily could've been up early on the road. But....they didn't make the plays, the Celtics ripped them in OT and then ripped them some more in Game Two, went up 2-0, and looked like the dominant Eastern champs that they've been all season.
The Pacers, again, had their chance to steal Game Three--the gentleman's sweep game. But, again, the Pacers failed to capitalize and the Celtics handled their business. Game Four was good effort from the Pacers, the Celtics did well to squeeze the life out of this squad.
I was impressed with the Pacers. They faced a schizophrenic and battered Bucks squad, managed to outlast the Intensive Care Knicks, had some real toe-to-tie moments with the Eastern champs, they made the most of their run. They overachieved but this team can score. This team is good, if they run this back, they can expect to be better just on the normal maturation of Halliburton, Turner, Jackson and Benedict Mathurin (who didn't play at all in this series) and another year of Siakim getting acclimated to the rotation, so if the other East teams are gonna fart around, this Pacers team could be top 3 next season--it isn't that crazy.
Myles Turner gets buckets! I think they'd be crazy to trade him (though he's been one of the buzziest names in the league for years). Tyrese Halliburton had a tough season, started brilliantly--and that was after a fine performance in the FIBA World Cup last summer--but then ran into injury woes, which he was forced to play through to get his bonuses. I love Halliburton, but he's not yet a 4th quarter assassin, when he fully matures into his All-NBA self, he'll win the games that he let get away (like One and Three). Pascal Siakam, who I presume is re-signing with the Pacers (right?), is one that I have long thought of as a top flight 3rd banana, had some for-real moments of carrying this team (albeit without having to face Kristaps Prozingis). I liked Andrew Nembhard (made some cold blooded plays), Aaron Nesmith (seems like the prototypical 3-and-D guy), Ben Sheppard (nice minutes off the bench), they got nice defensive minutes from Isaiah Jackson, and I've loved TJ McConnell for years, these guys keep the speed high and they put points on the board. I'm guessing they'll wildly overpay Siakam, not sure what happens with Obi Toppin (who has tantalizing moments, but I'm not convinced he'll develop into a reliable baller). I think the Pacers are poised to be pretty good next season (and it'd probably be a mistake to trade away McConnell, but he is exactly what some other teams (Wolves, Nuggets, Lakers) are looking for, so if they could get back two rotation guys for him, it might be worth looking into).
West
Mavs 108-105 Wolves
Mavs 109-108 Wolves
Wolves 107-116 Mavs
Wolves 105-100 Mavs
Mavs 103-124 Wolves
The Mavs went on the road and won the first two games in Minnesota--double shocker! They made the plays to seal the victories and the Wolves did not. I think losing the first two games just right off doomed the Wolves. The games were all close (though Game Four was the least intensity the Mavs played since Game One against OKC), but the Mavs had the reliable buckets and the Wolves couldn't get there. Both teams played well on defense, the Mavs offense had more flavor, especially late.
Ultimately the banner headline of this series is that the Wolves are not a 4th quarter team. They've got a good mix of size, ball handling, youth/veterans to get through a game, but they don't yet have the zazz that it takes to finish out close games. They need to win big to be secure and I reckon the Wolves should be a good regular season team next year. The Mavs, on the other hand, have two relentless scorers and a bevy of a role players that know how to complement them. The Mavs fairly well cruised through Game Three, inexplicably rolled over in Game Four and then brought the hard wood in Game Five, a laugher (to go 3-0 in Minnesota) and finish the Series in five games.
The Wolves took a great leap forward this season, not unexpectedly--though I sure didn't think they'd win a Game Seven in Denver. They feature size all over the court and a swarming defense that (okay, I'll say it) reminded me of the Parcells-Lawrence Taylor NYG gang tackling attack. At their best, they were near the top of the West all season long, destroyed the Suns, flat out humbled the great Nikola Jokic (in Game 7 in Denver!) and looked to be the faves to finish off the Mavs. Then the troubles started...we learned that the platoon of Anthony Edwards and Mike Conley is a bit on the half-baked side. Edwards isn't yet a game winner and Conley, savvy vet that he is, just doesn't have the command on the court making their offensive attack too young and simultaneously too old. Throw in that Karl Anthony Towns is an unpredictable crazy man (wow, so many dumb fouls!) and Rudy Gobert goes through stretches of being incapable of scoring (dude, you're never more than two feet from the basket--how can you not score!?!??), and this squad just doesn't have the solidity to play a complete game just yet. I'm not sure Jaden McDaniels was effectively utilized in this series (I would've put him on Kyrie rather than Luka) and Naz Reid's minutes were haphazardly mixed and mingled with Towns. This is still a good team as constituted but (I sure ain't the first to say this) they ought to see what Towns can bring them in a trade package; not a bad player, but pretty expensive for his unpredictability.
Finals
Mavs @ Celtics
The Celtics dominated the East all season long. The Knicks were spunky but faced too many injuries, the Bucks were up-and-down and when Giannis got hurt, they were just down. I thought the Sixers were pretty overrated and with Embiid's injury woes, they never struck me as terribly dangerous. The Heat had one of their mail-in seasons (about every other year for them). The Cavs and the Magic are eerily similar in their "okay"-ness. And it was the Pacers that emerged in the playoffs--not a fluke, but not as good as the Celtics. So the rest of the East didn't really matter, as none of those squads were likely to compete with the Celtics anyway.
The Mavs missed the playoffs last season due to a team decision to tank for a top 10 pick, which netted them Derrick Lively (so organizationally they made the correct choice). They were a pretty good, top half of the table team in the West for the first half of the season, riding a top flight season by Luka. The real jump was picking up PJ Washington (Hornets) and Daniel Gafford (Wizards) at the trade deadline, which solidified their defense, allowed even more offensive focus for Lively thereby remaking the core into the toughest out this post-season. They rather easily dispatched the Clippers (for, like the 10th year in a row), took advantage of OKC not being ready to go deep in the playoffs (young and awesome....but young), and similarly found a Wolves team that had perhaps overachieved by beating Denver. The Mavs ended up with the best possible path by not having to play the Nuggets or (strangely) the Lakers, and matching up with two teams that just aren't ready yet instead.
So are the Mavs really the best in the West? No but the West is really tight and Dallas is deservedly among the best. Are the Mavs gonna be back next year? I wouldn't bet on it, way too much competition out there to just anoint them here and now. And seeing Anthony Davis, Giannis and Jokic turn into one-and-dones in rapid succession suggests that there are a lot of great players right now, the depth of even the worst franchise is still pretty amazing, and look how hard Tatum and Brown have worked to get to the pinnacle.
This should be a fun series. Whereas the Wolves and the Pacers couldn't close games, both of these squads are used to winning and I think a long series is in the cards. So far the Celtics have done it all without Porzingis because the East was, well, so winnable that they didn't even need the guy that has arguably been their offensive table-setter all season long. I would've liked to see him play a little against the Pacers, but hopefully he's practicing at a high level right now, and game shape will come easy to him. They can ease him into the lineup, I think I'd use him as a 6th man curveball to start, see if they can maximize him at both ends right away, then think about getting him back to the starting lineup (and putting Horford back in chaos-off-the-bench mode). The Tatum-Brown-White-Holiday core have been chugging along nicely and while I generally like the production they've been getting from their bench, I suspect Kornet and Brissett will be sharply curtailed to some end of quarter minutes, Hauser and Tillman are out of the rotation from here on out and even Pritchard will have a pretty short leash. So the Porzingis minutes are crucial and if he's not right, that's where it goes badly for the Celtics. They could still win with the bench they've been winning with, but the Mavs are cooking right now, not sure they can count on that.
The Mavs have Luka at the peak of his powers and Kyrie at his most snake-in-the-grass-ness and a supporting cast that is rounding out nicely. Washington got buckets against OKC (though not as much against anyone else), Gafford got stops, Lively is the perfect complement for Luka and Kyrie at both ends, Exum has had useful minutes keeping the pace off the bench, Josh Green and Jaden Hardy have had nice moments. This is a really good squad and that's with minimal (for various reasons) input from their veteran core of Tim Hardaway, Maxi Kleber and Dwight Powell, any of whom could suddenly appear and make plays. This team has everything they need to win. If they come full-on for 7 games, this series will go 7 games.
I think the Celtics are the better team, the Mavs are the deeper team. The Mavs have potentially more reliable offense and even more stifling defense. The Celtics are the big favorite in Vegas but it is not plainly obvious that they are wildly better than the Mavs. Throw in that the Celtics are good for at least one giveaway game per series and it doesn't seem at all crazy that this will go 7 games and anyone can win.
I fear, though, that the Mavs will either be Luka or Kyrie, whereas the Celtics have an array of scorers that can produce a flourish of buckets. So I expect the Mavs to win on nights when they're shooting with deadly accuracy, but the Celtics should have many nights of more shots, more buckets.
The real wild card is Porzingis. If he's awesome, the Celtics could wrap this up quick whereas if he's truly awful or unplayabale, the Celtics could fall into a rut of lazy shooting (that is the Celtics kryptonite) and get smoked. I think Porzingis will be good not great, he will be fine, which is really all the Celtics need to bolster everyone else's game. I reckon he'll have one good game, maybe 1-2 bad ones, but for the most part I think he's gonna give 7 good games of production.
I like the Celtics in 6 (2,3,5,6). I think the Mavs pull a shocker in Game One (fascinating to see Kyrie win it late), then the Celtics re-group, take Games Two and Three, the Mavs claw back Game Four (Luka goes for fitty), the Celtics cruise in Game Five and then seal it on the road.
I'll take Tatum as MVP and Man of the Match in Game Six. I think Brown has at least one balls out game, as does Porzingis and White, Holiday and Horford should all be solid. Looking back, the buzzy love for the Mavs supporting cast will start to fade and then we'll be off to debating whether this is one of the great Celtic champions of all time--and get some wildly conflicting responses. Dang, I just laid it all out, let's see what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment