Lakers 83, Celtics 79

The Celtics had never lost a Game 7 to the Lakers, or in the NBA Finals until last night. But the series wasn't lost in Game 7 alone. It was lost in Games 1 and 6, when the Celtics put forth lackluster efforts, were inexcusably flat, and allowed the Lakers to walk all over them.

Let's get one thing straight: the Celtics didn't choke. The Lakers were the favored team in this series. And the fact that the C's advanced so deep into the playoffs is commendable. Despite the disappointing Games 1 and 6, the Celtics gave their maximum effort in Game 7. They simply didn't execute as well as the Lakers.

I'm going to rip Ray Allen for a bit. Defensively, he had an exemplary night. But offensively, he was a cancer. 3 for 14 from your biggest shooting threat is shameful. I know shooters can have off-nights, but he had 5 off-nights in this series. He was 33 for 90 (36.7%) from the field and 12 for 41 (29.3%) for three. Exclude Game 2's record-setting performance, and he was 22 for 70 (31.4%), and 4 for 30 (13.3%).

The Celtics couldn't find offense, and that's one of the big reasons they lost Game 7. And Ray Allen's offensive contribution was negligible. Certainly not worth $18.8 million.

The most glaring Celtic deficiency and Laker proficiency was rebounding, particularly LA's offensive rebounding. The Lakers hauled in 23 offensive boards. That's 23 times the Celtics could have triggered their breaking offense, 23 times that LA got an extra shot.

The Lakers didn't shoot well (32.5%), but were allowed to shoot often (81 field goal attempts).

The Celtics also put the Lakers to the line far too often. I've already heard grumblings from Celtics fans about the officiating, but it was a superbly refereed game. Very few mistakes. They let the players play. The Lakers actually struggled at the line, but they got there more often. 20 times more often.

The Celtics bench didn't do much, but neither did LA's. Then again, the C's bench was a matchup that favored the Celtics, so a draw serves as a win for LA.

The defense was excellent, especially the help-defense that clamped down on Kobe Bryant. Unfortunately, he got help from his friends. Ron Artest had the game of his life with 20 points, Gasol had 19 along with his 18 rebounds, Fisher's 10 points all seemed to come at key moments. Bryant finished with 23, but only 12 of those came from the floor. The other 11 came at the line. He did have 15 rebounds.

Maybe the Celtics missed Perkins in the paint, and perhaps that contributed to the Lakers' getting so many offensive rebounds. Then again, Perk was averaging only 5.8 rebounds per game this series, 3.5 of which were defensive. His replacements, Rasheed Wallace and Glen Davis, each had 9 and 8 rebounds, respectively. So excuse-mongers, look elsewhere.

The Lakers played better; in Game 7 and in the series as a whole. There's nothing to do right now but mourn and look ahead to 2010-11.

-The Commodore

Lakers 89, Celtics 67

I don't think the 89-67 pounding the Lakers gave the Celtics was as bad as the score suggests. But it was still pretty bad. The Lakers dominated the inside game, outrebounding the C's 40-28 (the ratio was much worse before garbage time). The Celtics missed 2 dunks and 3 lay-ups in the 1st half alone. LA's bench outshined Boston's, scoring 25 points, compared to 13 from the C's. The difference was 24-0 at one point in the 3rd.

Then again, Perkins only logged 7 minutes before leaving with a sprain. Then Sheed got himself into foul trouble. This allowed the Lakers to really pour it on. That being said, even a healthy Perkins and the Celtics still lose this game convincingly.

We've seen this kind of game before. The Celtics offense depends on defensive success in order to really get going, particularly Rondo. But the Lakers seemingly hit every shot. Hell, Ron Artest was 6 for 11, and 3 of 6 beyond the arc. When Ron Artest is making jumpshots, it's just not going to be your night.

But the rebounding also killed the Celtics. 5 of Gasol's 8 rebounds came off the offensive glass. Those kind of second chance opportunities kill both the Celtics defense, and slow down their offense.

The Celtics only attempted 10 free throws. The Lakers had 19. To me, that demonstrates the Celtics forfeiting that inside game. And without your starting center, you can't really blame them. But the Celtics need to get to the line, and need to get key Lakers in foul trouble to disrupt LA's defensive scheming.

The Lakers played about as good as they can. Although Kobe is capable of more than 26 points, as we well know. And the Celtics played almost as poorly as they can. 33.3% from the field, 21.7% for 3. No bench contributions, mediocre defense, no rebounding. All the ingredients of a blowout loss. But they can improve. And they must.

Ironically, the regular season comes into play here. All post-season, we've repeated the following mantra in Boston: "See, the regular season doesn't matter." Now it does, with Game 7 on LA's court, where they've won 10 of 11 playoff games.

Game 7 Thursday night. Will Perkins play? Will Bynum? Lots of questions to be answered, but that's what Game 7s invariably do.

-The Commodore

Lakers 91, Celtics 84

Paul Pierce said that the Celtics weren't going to go back to LA. Now, he'd better pray that they will. Because quite frankly, the Lakers took it to the Celtics last night. It wasn't a woodshed beatdown, but the Lakers took charge of this game in the 1st and never left the driver's seat, like a truck-driver on pep pills.

Ray Allen scored a measly 2 goddamned points. He was 0/13 from the field. Yet for some reason, he was trying to make 3-pointers late in the 4th quarter. I know full well that he had an historic outing in Game 2, and I know that he's not really an 0/13 shooter, but neither is he an 8/11 3-point shooter. Nobody is, at least not for longer than one night at a time.

Let's face facts, folks. The Lakers are a good T-E-A-M, team. And while Paul Pierce might have been confident in "Celtics in 5," I think it's quite clear that it will be much harder and much more difficult work than that. The Celtics are also going to have to function as a team. Instead of benefiting from freakishly good outings by Ray Allen, and then Rajon Rondo, all of the C's cogs will have to grind and gear properly, in order to manufacture wins in this series.

So what's the advice for Ray Allen? Make more shots. How about everyone else? Just play better. It's monstrously simple to say, yet exceedingly difficult to carry out.

Game 3 Thursday night, also at 9pm. Thanks, NBA.

-The Commodore

Lakers 102, Celtics 89

Well after beating Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, and Dwight Howard, it was hard to doubt the Celtics. They'd vanquished the 1st and 2nd best record teams in the Association, and did so with relative ease. But let's give LA some credit. The "teams" the Celtics had eliminated were centered around individuals. But the Lakers are a team, a pretty good team at that.

The Lakers won Game 1 in essentially every aspect of the contest. They outrebounded the C's 42-31. They were 4/10 for 3, the Celtics were 1/10. They shot 48.7% from the field, the Celtics shot 43.3%.

The one thing the Celtics did better was shoot free throws. That's it.

Now, I don't think LA will shoot this good for the rest of the series. Nor do I think the Celtics will continue shoot so poorly, especially from beyond the arc. Is Ray Allen a 3 for 8 shooter? No!

That being said, the Celtics do need to do something about the Lakers' 2nd chance points. LA got too many offensive rebounds, then were allowed to put the ball in the hole, far too easily.

Rasheed Wallace, sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.



The list of problems needing to be addressed isn't short. The Celtics have some issues to work out. But they have time. They'll improve for Game 2. And it'll be hard for LA to duplicate their Game 1 performance.

Game 2, Sunday night. Yeah, Sunday night. They could have had it at like 5 or 6 in the evening, but they scheduled it for 8pm Eastern.

And I hope Jack Nicholson chokes on a hot-dog. Does this guy seriously deserve his own camera? Yeah, he wears sunglasses at a basketball game. Wicked cool, guy.

-The Commodore

Ted Green... What a Loser

You've probably read, or at least heard of Ted Green's "Guide To Hating the Celtics." It was pulled by the LA Times for this now infamous line:

"By the way, [Paul] Pierce's idea of a fun night is going clubbing and getting stabbed."

But what you don't know is that Green's Guide was horribly written, tritely unoriginal, and flat-out unfunny without that offensive line. In fact, that sentence is perhaps the best part of the piece. Although I think the purpose of including that line was to get the column pulled, or at least draw some negative attention. Did you know who Ted Green was before he scribbled this article? Nope. Neither did I. So kudos to him for figuring out how to get ahead in the Mainstream Sports Media: be a dolt.

But the rest of the "column" is really bad. I don't mean tasteless or classless kind of bad. I mean written by a 7th grader that was held back twice bad. Some examples to illustrate how much of an insult Green's Guide is to writing and to sports:

"The Celtics cry. They cry more than Best Actress winners at the Oscars. They cry like every game is a wedding."

Wow, great metaphors. Really funny. I mean, those Best Actress winners, they really do cry. HAHAHA. And so do the Celtics? WOW! High-larious!!!

"The Celtics also foul... They foul as a strategy."

What basketball team doesn't? This is like criticizing a hockey team for checking as a strategy, or a football team that tackles as a strategy.

"They probably foul their own bus driver on the way to the arena."

Oh Ted Green, you slay me! They foul their own bus driver?!? That's INSANE! Insanely funny, that is.

Kevin Garnett is #5. He wore 21 with the T-Wolves. Ted Green lists him as #21 in his "Guide." Bill Sharman would be pissed. Either it's an incomprehensibly subtle joke from Green, or it's sheer stupidity.



"If you'll be seeing [Paul Pierce] for the first time, you'll hate him before the first quarter of Game 1 is even close to over..."

So right here Green admits that Lakers fans are frontrunners and band-wagoners. First time seeing Paul Pierce? Didn't these teams play in 2008? Maybe LA fans forget because they didn't win? But if you haven't seen Paul Pierce yet, even in LA, you're a bit late to the party.

"Kendrick Perkins: This guy looks meaner than Cerberus..."

I know who Cerberus is, but that's because I'm a nerd. It's also because I'm a Simpsons fan (Season 8, "The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show, a producer describes Poochie as "The original dog from hell." A writer then asks "You mean Cerberus?"). All that aside, knowing that Cerberus is a three headed dog that guards the gates of Hades is far from common knowledge. This is supposed to be a guide for frontrunning, stupid LA fans. If they don't know who Paul Pierce is, what are the odds they'll know who Cerberus is?



Californians are familiar with Greek and Roman mythology, everybody knows that, but maybe this one reference was a bit of a reach. And the whole point of allusion is to simplify something for the reader, give them something they can relate to. A better choice: Kendrick Perkins looks meaner than Chong-Li from Bloodsport.



"[Perkins] is prone to getting technical fouls, usually immediately after waking up in the morning."

Stick to stab jokes, Ted. Seriously, that Paul Pierce getting stabbed line gets funnier and funnier compared to the rest of this guy's routine. These are like the bad jokes that the immigrant dude on Family Guy laughs at.



"If [Rajon Rondo] were any more conceited, he'd dribble with his left hand and carry a hand-mirror with his right"

What's the matter, Ted? No reference to Hallgerda, the Viking goddess of vanity? Calling Rondo conceited seems to be pulled out of mid-air. Rajon is quiet, calm, and confident. I can't see anything conceited or cocky. Maybe I'm missing it. But even so, calling an NBA player conceited is like calling a porn star promiscuous, it sort of goes with the territory.

And the worst sentence Green wrote (which is saying something)...

"Just remember this kid is, like, 8 years old and already as arrogant as the rest of them."

Apparently, in Southern California, you actually write "like" in the middle of a sentence. And the punctuation rules are similar to direct address. Use a comma before and after. This is, like, a really good way to, like, you know, sound like a complete moron, or like, hella stupid, or like something like that. Y'know?

So while everyone gets up in arms about the Paul Pierce stab line, it was actually the best part of what is a horribly written piece, filled with unfunny jokes, distractingly confusing references, and an undercurrent of California stupidity.

-The Commodore

Artest's deal not done but will be joining LA Lakers

According to multiple sources including ESPN's Marc Stein, "The Los Angeles Lakers and Artest have struck an agreement in principal on a multiyear contract that, according to sources close to the process, will total roughly $18.7 million over three years or $33.5 million over five years, depending on which contract structure Artest ultimately prefers."

In my opinion, I think the LA Lakers are off their rocker for not trying harder to sign Ariza. Artest is an excellent defender and a good player with a badass attitude but Ariza has all the potential and signs that he could be the next Ron Artest. Disagree? I also wonder how the Artest signing will affect Odom. I do believe if the Lakers sign Artest and resign Odom they will be better next season. Over and out.

Fuck Darko Milicic

-Beerman Posts