Halftime Hype

Additionally, the returning players on each team have changed, whether they have a different role or ability to perform. In 2008, point guard Rajon Rondo was the worst player in Boston's starting lineup. Now, he's arguably the best. On the flip side, Lakers point guard Derek Fisher was never speedy Gonzalez, but these days he's had a great deal of difficulty keeping up with the numerous quick guards in the league. Ray Allen, who didn't have a very rigid role, is now declared the X-factor: If he has a good game - at least, scoring-wise - then the Celtics win. If not, the game is up for grabs. A couple years ago, Lamar Odom was a starter. However, with the Lakers' bench in a state of flux and the acquisition of Artest, Odom is currently the 6th man. At the power forward position, an aging Kevin Garnett is no longer as aggressive as he once was, while Pau Gasol has rapidly shed his "softy" tag (see: 2010 Western Conference semifinals, Lakers vs. Jazz) .

This series also has a different significance than it had two years ago. Back then, Kobe had just received the MVP award and was still trying to prove he could win a title without Shaq. Meanwhile, the Celtics were attempting to fulfill their championship prophecy, formulated the previous offseason after the acquisition of Garnett and Ray Allen. This season, Kobe & Co., who acquired championship experience, are motivated by revenge. On the other hand, the Celtics want to prove the naysayers wrong, specifically those who doubted them during the regular season.

For certain players, the Finals - or rather winning - hold a different significance. If the Celtics win it all, Rondo will be credited with leading his squad to a title. He's been a champion before, but never a leader. If the Celtics come up short, Rondo's performance in the playoffs won't be remembered outside of Beantown (and Orlando, Cleveland, and Milwaukee). Thinking about it from the other side, this may be Derek Fisher's last championship. Considering that he may retire after this season, the 2010 NBA Finals are pretty special.



Then there's the superstar, Kobe Bryant. What does this mean for him? Instead of Shaq, Kobe has Lebron in mind. The pundits and most fans have dismissed Kobe Bryant as the best player in favor of "King James." As Fanhouse's Bethlehem Shoals blogged, if Kobe wins, people will have to rethink their opinions. Is Lebron really the best? He still hasn't won a ring, and Kobe just led his squad to a championship. Imagine how Kobe, who performs at such a high rate without any motivation, will play with the "best player" debate secretly fueling him.

Analysis
Contrary to what some may say, this series - and thus, the NBA championship - could go either way. Boston boasts a unique physicality that has challenged L.A. and a productive bench, while the Lakers have Twin Towers and a former Defensive Player of the Year, as well as the best closer in the game.

The point guard match-up is definitely an advantage for the Celtics, since Rondo will always be several steps ahead of Fisher. It is imperative that Rondo use his quickness to create plays and drive, rather than utilizing his newfound jumpshot. Fisher can't keep up on a run to the basket, but he has no problem sliding his feet and contesting jumpers. The question is how often Doc Rivers will turn to Nate Robinson, who recently showcased his repertoire, and whether Phil Jackson will resort to Jordan Farmar or Sasha Vujacic as Fisher's backup. Both are quick, but neither Farmar or Vujacic have a high basketball IQ. Unfortunately for Lakers fans, Derek Fisher ought to be pretty fatigued by now. He's had to chase Russell Westbrook, Deron Williams, and Steve Nash. Phil Jackson must sub in Vujacic and Farmar for the well-being and stamina of Fisher. In spite of this disaster, Rondo should get the best of the Lakers' PGs.

Nevertheless, Kobe Bryant may end up guarding Rondo, too, with Fisher switching to Allen. In that case, Rondo will have to exploit his other options. Ultimately, if Rondo - the key to the Celtics offense - isn't effective, the Celtics don't stand a chance. Of course, that's easier said than done.

The game's greatest closer, L.A.'s Kobe, and the catalyst, Boston's Ray Allen, occupy the shooting guard positions. The only way Ray Allen can score while matched up against Kobe is with the assistance of screens. If Allen's teammates can provide a good pick, and Ray can run at the right angles, then he'll get his shots. But don't expect him to perform too well, which should really concern the Celtics. On the opposite end of the floor, Ray will have to guard Kobe, one of the most difficult defensive assignments ever. However, Ray doesn't get enough credit as a defensive player as he should. Even though Kobe sank the shot, you couldn't ask for better defense from Ray Allen on Kobe's game winner in Boston earlier this season. Kobe wins this match-up hands down.

At the 3, the Lakers' Ron Artest will defend the Celtics' Paul Pierce. Artest is undoubtedly the main difference between the unsuccessful '08 Lakers squad and this year's team. Sometimes, Ron Artest's defense can turn the game into a 5-on-4, simply by taking the opposing small forward out of the game. That said, Paul Pierce is a talented offensive player who shouldn't be underestimated (neither should his acting abilities). When he gets hot, his jumpshot is hard to stop. The disadvantage is that because of Artest's defense, Paul Pierce wouldn't be a reliable clutch player, causing the Celtics to look elsewhere during crunch time. Typically, I would say Pierce gets the advantage over Artest, because of his offense, but Artest has recently showed he can put up points too. This match-up is a tie.



What a great power forward match-up. Pau Gasol, and at times, Lamar Odom, against Kevin Garnett. Pau has beefed up and KG has aged, but is still effective. This is the time for Pau to prove people wrong. Two years ago, he heard it all. The Olympian was said to be "weak" and a "softy". In case you didn't catch him during the Lakers-Utah series, this is not the same Pau Gasol. Although Pau has gotten stronger, Kevin Garnett is still an intimidating and effective player. He, just like Pau, is capable of making mid-range jumpers. And at the heart of it, they're both excellent power forwards, which implies that they are good rebounders and have a dominant post presence. Two years ago, I would have given the edge to Boston. But a clash between Garnett and the new Pau Gasol is a tie, at least on paper.

The center position is really what won Boston the championship in '08. Pau was playing out of position and Perkins gave him hell. Everybody saw Perkins' excellent defense against Dwight Howard, and I wouldn't expect anything less of him against Bynum. The injury-plagued Bynum has only scored more than 13 points twice during the playoffs and that's against the likes of Nenad Kristic, Kyrlo Fesenko, and Jarron Collins. Perkins has come a long way, but still doesn't exactly stuff the stat sheet. What he does do is frustrate his opponent and hustle, which outdoes Bynum. But he also outdoes Bynum in technicals; one more T and Perkins is suspended. Regardless, Big Baby is also a good defender and is, in many ways, similar to Perkins. Nonetheless, I don't think Big Baby is as effective as Perkins. The only reason the Lakers can be optimistic is because of the height advantage. If Bynum can exploit that, expect some big games. I don't. The Celtics' centers have the advantage in this matchup.

Lastly, there's the bench. Almost any bench is better than the Lakers'. It's more than just a matter of talent. The Celtics' reserves are smart players. The Lakers' bench sometimes makes decisions that cause one to question their competence. Oh, and their defense needs a lot of work. If you're the Celtics, don't be discouraged if you're facing a double-digit defecit; the Lakers' reserves are very forgiving. In fact, they'll let you right back into a game - just to make things interesting, of course.

The Verdict
In 2008, the Celtics had home court advantage and an overwhelming advantage at the 1,3,4, and 5. Now, they barely have advantages, and slim ones at that (except for the bench). Home-court advantage is ultimately a deal breaker. According to John Schuhmann of NBA.com, "The team with the first two games at home has won 19 of the 25 Finals since the NBA switched to the 2-3-2 format in 1985. The Celtics have already won five road games in these playoffs, but the Lakers are 8-0 at home thus far at Staples Center." Plus, the Lakers have the best clutch player in the game, Kobe Bryant. My prediction: Lakers in 7.

New post about tonight's events, probably going to be about Lebron's shortcoming, will be up ASAP. Until then, relish this.

Clearly, this time, things are very different. Shaq has come and gone for the Suns, Steve Kerr has assembled a dangerous supporting cast, A'mare has been a force to be reckoned with, Nash at 35 (with one eye) is better than most point guards, nay players, in the NBA, and the Suns are arguably the hottest (pun intended) team in the NBA after the All-Star break. The Los Angeles Lakers are no longer the underdog but defending champions, with the game's best closer, a clutch point guard, a coach on the verge of retirement, and have replaced their Kwame Brown-Chris Mihm front court with Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol.

All that said, no rational person should believe that the Suns will beat the Lakers. Not. A. Chance. For every argument against the Lakers in this series, there is an even better counter favoring L.A. Kobe Bryant is battling multiple injuries and won't be 100%. Well, he just posted 30 points or more during the Lakers' sweep of the Jazz while connecting on 46 of 88 shots (about 52.68%). Plus, nobody on Phoenix is capable of remotely slowing him down. And he's going to be even more difficult to defend since he's well rested.

The Lakers are old, thus slow, and can't keep up with the Suns. Then how did L.A. win the season series 3-1, outscoring the Suns with an average of 11.67 in the Lakers' victories? Oh, I know, because the Lakers have a frontcourt of two talented seven-footers, one of them a starting center for the second best country in FIBA, and the Suns have...Robin Lopez and Jarron Collins. Not to discredit Lopez and Collins, they're good players that shouldn't be cast out because they aren't big names. After all, Serge Ibaka had his way with the Lakers and he's not considered a particularly elite big man. However, I'd take Gasol and Bynum over almost all other PF-C combos in the league.



Steve Nash will exploit his quickness against Derek Fisher. First of all, that's been the excuse opposing teams have used 82+ times this season. And, in many cases, opposing point guards have had the best of D-Fish, statistically anyway. In reality, though, Steve Nash and Derek Fisher are both 35. What will trouble the Lakers is Nash running off screens. Then again, the Lakers have young, quick guards in Shannon Brown and Jordan Farmar who have the quickness to match Nash. And if there's only one thing Vujacic is good at, and at the moment it seems like there's only one, its running around screens. Plus, Vujacic has been in L.A. for a few years now and has become a pretty skilled actor. His showmanship could easily result in moving pick and offensive fouls against Phoenix.

And those are just (baseless) arguments against the Lakers. There are plenty of arguments favoring the Lakers and against the Suns. Notably, Grant Hill matched up with Ron Artest? Grant Hill should expect to end his season very quietly...

One thing I'll give to the Suns is the presence of A'mare Stoudemire. After standing up to the Utah Bruisers, I mean, Jazz, Pau Gasol has definitely shed his "soft" tag. But neither Gasol nor Bynum are as strong as A'mare and if Phoenix racks up offensive rebounds, they should automatically result in second chance points. The only other thing I can credit the Suns with is their efficient reserves. These days, it seems like any bench is better than L.A.'s. Robin Lopez and Amunson provide a nice spark and hustle play, Jared Dudley is one of the top "stealers" with a well-rounded game, Goran Dragic just scored 25 points in a quarter and 26 points in 17:27 of play, making 5/5 from downtown, Channing Frye is a 6'9" forward with a shot, and Leandro Barbosa is a "Brazilian blur" when he's on the floor.

If you're on the Suns, you can't afford to lose home games. It's extremely difficult to beat the Lakers at Staples Center, but if the Suns can get momentum with home wins, the series can change dramatically. Potentially, a Game 7 is within reach. But I doubt it. With the defending champs having gotten their act together against Utah, I'm picking Los Angeles in 5.

If you were watching the Celtics-Cavs game yesterday, you know that one thing was missing: Danny Ainge the fan. The Celtics’ general manager was recently fined $25,000for waiving his towel in a futile attempt to distract the Cavs’ JJ Hickson when JJ was shooting a free throw. The question circulating around the league has been whether or not Ainge acted inappropriately, and the league offices believe he did cross one boundary or another. But is the Stern administration, with a particular emphasis on David Stern and Stu Jackson, taking it too far with the recent deluge of fines?

There’s no doubt David Stern is managing the league – as commissioner, he’s supposed to, right? What I’m debating, though, is if he’s starting to micromanage the NBA. Earlier in the 2000s, Stern enforced a dress code, with controversy over the rule specifically targeting the NBA’s well-populated demographic of African-Americans. However, after some analysis it seemed like Stern’s policy made sense. After all, it is the National Basketball Association and with so many people tuning in, do you want to be the leader of a thug league? As a testament to how many people followed the league, the rapper Nas referred to the commissioner as “David Stern with his fashion issues” in his song “Hip Hop Is Dead.” Regardless, not that I’m a psychologist – though I do try to read Malcolm Gladwell whenever I get a chance – it seems like people are primarily judged by three things: their appearance, their actions, and what they say.

Needless to say, it’s awfully difficult to control people’s actions and what they say. Yet, he’s come very close with his implementation of fines. His sarcastic “make my day” phrase makes me wonder how he feels whenever Phil Jackson opens his mouth and/or when Mark Cuban blogs. I could wrap my head around the fines when there were issued for misconduct on the court (thus, restricting actions) but I don’t know if it’s justified, or even constitutional, to fine personnel for comments or for just being an ordinary fan.

I argue the first amendment right, “freedom of speech”, overrides the current discipline policy, laws being something David Stern is well aware of. According to the book, Great Jews in Sports, “he began handling legal business for the National Basketball Association in 1967 as an attorney with the law firm of Proskaur Rose Goetz…Persuaded in 1978 by [NBA commissioner Larry] O’Brien, Stern left to become the league’s general counsel. Two years later, O’Brien created the position of ‘Executive Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs’ and gave Stern the job.”

But I guess currently the prevailing argument is for defamation. When the refs are criticized, the credibility of the league is criticized, which makes the criticism defamatory. If the players think the game was poorly officiated, so what? The next time they encounter the same ref(s), they’ll notice a grudge and keep quiet to avoid further bad calls. My opinion, like that of others, is very likely influenced by Tim Donaughy’s actions as an official, the existence of grudges proved when he documented that many officials held a grudge against Allen Iverson, thus resulting in unfair calls. By handing out fines, it’s almost like a settlement: trying to keep someone quiet because you know you’re guilty. In this sense, the fines are defaming the league’s credibility.

As for Danny Ainge and waving a towel, the league should appreciate the passion. Every GM should be spotted banging thunder sticks when the opponent is shooting free throws and love their team as much as the fans. If teams’ front offices show up to the arena and proved how much of a fan they are and just how much they support their team, the players and coaching staff would undoubtedly feel more appreciated. And when the players and coaches are, chances are the results will be better. So, David Stern, if you want to keep issuing your fines, you should bill the Utah Jazz’ Energy Solutions Arena for “Fisher sucks” chants, take action against the people who printed the “Fear the Deer” shirts, frown upon the Thunder’s fans for being fans, and from now on have the Golden State Warriors play in front of an empty crowd at home.

Happy Cinco de Mayo! Unless you've been living under a rock, haven't turned on the TV, or both, you are aware of the new, controversial Arizona law allowing police to check if you're "legal" at, pretty much, any given time. The Phoenix Suns, however, have decided to share their political views by wearing "Los Suns" jerseys tonight in Game 2 of the Western Conference Semifinals. That's a big forum to share opinions on. Is it the right one, though? Should there be seperation of sport and state?

At times, sports have been used for more than just entertainment (and betting). In some cases, they've been used by politicians to make a statement. During the Cold War, President Jimmy Carter ordered a boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics. As you can imagine, an Olympic games without the United States is like cereal without milk - decent, but could be much better. That was countered by a Soviet boycott of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics. In other cases, commonfolk have used sports to make their voices heard. Nearly two years ago, on the same stage, the Beijing Olympics was shadowed by the protests for more basic rights in Communist China.

Sports have also been used for genuinely good political purposes, too. The most notable demonstration of this is Nelson Mandela's unification of South Africa through rugby, as documented on the big screen in Invictus and on the small screen in the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary, The 16th Man.

The most similar and recent example that I can think of that corresponds with the "Los Suns" declaration, is members of the Iranian national soccer team wearing green wrist bands during a match in support of the revolutionary "Green Movement." In an attempt to show that they too were "Down with the dictator" Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, they also empathized with plenty of Iranian people. It seems like the same situation is going on here. The Suns represent the many American people who view the Arizona legislation as unconstitutional and/or going against American values.

But then there's the other side of the arguement. Should the Suns be wearing the "Los Suns" jerseys? Definitely. If not to protest the immigration law, then certainly it's more than appropriate to wear the jerseys on Cinco de Mayo. Then again, the Suns let it be known that the law was the major reason for wearing the jerseys. Is it ethical, or even more so, is it appropriate of a sports franchise to get involved in politics?

Each situation is different. With the Iranian soccer team, election-rigging warrants political rebellion. But Arizona lawmakers and representatives - the ones who devised the law - for the most part, are chosen by the people. However, the law targets illegal immigrants, who clearly didn't have a vote. Personally, I believe that in a country like the United States, the Suns have every right to exhibit their freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Plus, our nation's president meets with the champions of major sports, so there's really no issue in the political aspect.