NBA Playoffs 2007

[Eazy E]

What a brutal game last night... I hope home court sparks SOMETHING for the Cavs.

[Mal Brossard]

In the playoffs this year, the Cavs are 5-5 on the road, and 7-1 at home.

Additionally, the Cavs were down 2-0 after two on the road against Detroit.

Last year, Dallas won games 1 and 2 at home, but Miami took the series.

No matter what my brain keeps telling me about The Shot, The Fumble, The Drive, Red Right 88, The Catch, and every other Cleveland sports mishap since 1950, I keep thinking something will change eventually.  Why not now?

[Eazy E]

Additionally, the Cavs were down 2-0 after two on the road against Detroit.

Yeah, but they could've easily been up 2-0 after the first two games against Detroit... San Antonio has been spanking them.  I just want the Cavs to come out at least looking respectable.

[Mal Brossard]

Tuesday, June 12, 2007
NBA Finals: Game 3 in Review

I'm a tad cheesed.

Just a tad, really. I promise.

Oh hell, forget it. This was the most excruciating game I've ever watched for multiple reasons. And this is saying something, considering I can't usually sit through an entire televised basketball game that doesn't involved the Cleveland Cavaliers or Ohio State Buckeyes. So I've seen some excruciating games.

First off, once again, the Cavs' shooting is abysmal. Daniel Gibson's hot hand has cooled significantly, to the tune of two points (granted, he had defensive whiz Jacque Vaughn stifling him most of the night). LeBron James still can't find his stroke from anywhere but the charity stripe (somehow leads all scorers despite going 9 of 23 from the floor, missed all five from the arc, but hey, 7 of 8 from the line!). As a whole, the Cavs shot 37% from the field and a pathetic 16% from three-point range. The only players with a shooting percentage of 50% or better for Cleveland was Anderson Varejao. And he was only 2 for 4.

Secondly, is the entire sports world against Cleveland? All night, all I heard were ABC announcers siding with the Spurs all over the place (Manu Ginobli's charge for one-- Varejao had his feet set, so quit whining). The officials repeatedly missed fouls on the Cavs from outside the arc (one obvious one against Gibson, one against LeBron, and of course LeBron's would-be game tying shot with about two ticks on the clock). While the calls in the paint were much better tonight, that doesn't excuse the blind eye turned toward the outside shots. Give us those fouls and this is a two to six point Cavs victory rather than a three point loss. I don't want to blame the refs too much here, but let's be serious. They influenced this game, and a lot.

Thirdly, the third quarter continues to be the Cavs' major sticking point. Tonight they managed to hold the Spurs to only 15 points, the second fewest they've scored in any quarter in this series (fewest: 14 points in the fourth quarter of Game 2). The bad news? They scored only 12, fewest scored by either team in any quarter of this series. The Cavs' defense provided them with a golden opportunity, and they choked it away.

Last, turnovers. While the Spurs made more, 45% of the Cavs' turnovers were made by one player-- number 23 himself, LeBron James. This will go down in history as a series LeBron would rather forget.

Granted, not everything was bad. The defense was great. The Cavs finally controlled the boards (48 rebounds, 15 of which were offensive; compare to the Spurs' 41 with 7 offensive). They limited Duncan at both ends of the court (14 points, 9 rebounds, 2 blocks) but should have taken advantage of his foul trouble more than they did. They effectively shut down Ginobli, limiting him to 3 points and an oh-fer from the field.

And I'll be the one to say LeBron did the right thing in passing up the shot to Anderson Varejao. All night, the shots weren't falling. Varejao was the only Cavalier shooting even 50% from the field. If he's open and you aren't and his shot is falling while yours isn't, you HAVE to let him take it. Taking bad shots and missing them only makes you look selfish, and that's not LeBron's game. This may be his team, but a true leader knows when to shoot and when to pass it up.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas showed once again why he may be the most underrated big guy in the game (at least in this Cleveland homer's eyes). Not only did he put up 12 points, but he controlled the glass when he was in the ballgame: 18 boards, 10 on the offensive side (granted, with the number of shots the Cavs were missing, they had plenty of opportunities for offensive boards). He added in a block and a steal while staying out of foul trouble. While no one will confuse him for Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal anytime soon, that doesn't matter. When was the last time anyone gave Ilgauskas credit? He's flown under the radar for some time now, thanks to injuries early in his career, a poor team in the middle of his career, and now, the massive shadow of LeBron James.

Looking ahead to Game 4, this series is over for the Cavs. Four little letters, O-V-E-R. If you have faith left after this, you must not have experienced The Catch, The Rocky Colavito Trade, Red Right 88, The Shot, The Fumble, The Drive, The Mesa, or The Great Playoff Choke of January 2003 first-hand. The Cavs are simply playing for pride now, playing not to get swept. All 9 teams with a 3-0 lead and home-court advantage in the NBA Finals have won the series. 5 of those teams pulled off the sweep. What do the Cavs do? Just go out and play their game. Tonight was the only night I feel the Spurs really looked like a truly superior team. The Cavs did a reasonable job of containing the Big Three of Duncan, Ginobli, and Tony Parker (limiting them to a combined 34 points), and someone else stepped up, namely Bruce Bowen (by the way, did anyone notice every shot he hit was from three?). But once again, change those foul calls and cut the crap with the ill-advised three-pointers that AREN'T FALLING, and this is a pretty even game, maybe even a good advantage to the Cavs.

Leave with some degree of honor, prove you belong here, or make history, it all requires one thing: a win at home on Thursday.

[sandman]

cavs are one of the worst teams to ever make the finals.

[Mal Brossard]

They aren't one of the worst, they're just playing like it.  Get a couple shots here and there to fall instead of rimming out and this is a 2-1 series (and could be 2-1 either way), rather than 3-0.  Their defense has been great, but you can't do much if the shots don't go.

[sandman]

They aren't one of the worst, they're just playing like it.? Get a couple shots here and there to fall instead of rimming out and this is a 2-1 series (and could be 2-1 either way), rather than 3-0.? Their defense has been great, but you can't do much if the shots don't go.

try naming one team that is worse. maybe the NJ nets, but i don't think so.

this is the only time i can remember a team making it to the finals and everyone clearly understanding that they are not good enough and need to add a few pieces to help the star player.

they were heading to the finals and there was basically no disagreement that they are not really that close to being a championship team. and that lebron needed signifiantly more help than his current support.

[Mal Brossard]

Who did the Sixers have other than Iverson in 2001?  As far as I know, that was the only team to make it to the NBA Finals with their leading scorer having more than two and a half times more points than their second-leading scorer.

Or the 1999 Knicks who really had nothing besides Patrick Ewing and an on-the-decline Larry Johnson?

I'm not saying the Cavs don't need more help, I just don't think they're anywhere near the worst to play in the Finals.

[sandman]

the sixers team in 2001 would have destroyed this cavs team. they were great defensively, and had players that would make lebron work hard for his points. specifically, who did they have? larry brown. he would have out-coached this bum and the sixers would take them in 5 or 6.

they faced arguably the greatest team ever in the finals. and went to LA and took game 1. games 2 and 3 were very close as well.

in fact, there were probably three teams in the east that year better than this cavs team - toronto and the bucks as well.

[Mal Brossard]

in fact, there were probably three teams in the east that year better than this cavs team - toronto and the bucks as well.

The Bucks?  Seriously?  The 25 games behind Detroit Milwaukee Bucks?  The Milwaukee Bucks who went 1-15 against teams in their division?  Really?  Are the Celtics and Grizzlies better too?

As for Toronto, well, they couldn't get past New Jersey, and Cleveland had little trouble with the Nets.  Next!

As for Philly having great defense, this Cavs team is right there with them-- a team built on defense that can't shoot worth a damn in the Finals.  And is that Larry Brown the same one who could only manage one NBA Title in 23 seasons as a head coach and can't stick with a team for more than six seasons?  The one who couldn't take the best basketball players in the world to any more than a bronze in 2004?

As for Mike Brown being a "bum," he's in his second season as an NBA head coach.  He won a title as an assistant in San Antonio (that team's defensive expert, I might add), and has led the Cavs to the Finals.  How many other coaches out there took over a team that missed the playoffs and made them Conference Champs in just two years?

[sandman]

re-read my post. i was talking about teams from 2001.

the cavs are an average team. i don't know why its so hard for you to accept.

if they get swept, they will go down as the worst team to have ever made it to the finals.

their coach is an idiot. lebron still has alot to learn - he disappears for long stretches of games. they have no one else even worth mentioning.

[Mal Brossard]

There's still no way they'll be listed as the worst.  Top 10 worst maybe.  But not the worst.

For the record, here's the 10 best and 10 worst NBA Finals teams since the NBA-ABA merger according to ESPN's John Hollinger.

BEST
1. 1996 Chicago Bulls
2. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers
3. 1986 Boston Celtics
4. 1991 Chicago Bulls
5. 1997 Chicago Bulls
6. 1985 Los Angeles Lakers
7. 1992 Chicago Bulls
8. 1999 San Antonio Spurs
9. 1980 Philadelphia 76'ers
10. 1989 Detroit Pistons

WORST
1. 1981 Houston Rockets (only team with a losing record to make the finals)
2. 1999 New York Knicks (as I mentioned)
3. 1978 Seattle Supersonics (don't forget they had to turn around from a 5-17 start)
4. 1979 Washington Bullets (only team to have a losing record in the postseason and make the Finals)
5. 2002 New Jersey Nets (as you mentioned)
6. 1977 Philadelphia 76'ers
7. 2001 Philadelphia 76'ers (as I said)
8. 1990 Portland Trailblazers (outscored badly in the playoffs)
9. 2004 Los Angeles Lakers (the dynasty dies)
10. 1978 Washington Bullets (most regular season losses of any NBA Champion)

I applied the same standards used to compile this list to what the Cavs have done (obviously not counting any unplayed playoff games).  Using this, the Cavs would rate better than the 2001 Sixers, and worse than the 1990 Trailblazers, therefore the 8th worst all-time.

Like I said: not the worst, maybe Top 10 worst.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10

Cavs are sitting at 149.3 points on this scale.  The number would only slightly change for the worse if the Cavs lose Game 4 by more than 3 points, or for the better should they win a game before bowing out.  In calculating the Cavs, I used a loss in Game 4 by 3 points in their score.

[Mal Brossard]

This explains a little.  Looks like LeBron's been a bit distracted from things off the court.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Ar18p1YPJTEm.SZC4EWvXY.8vLYF?slug=ap-nbafinals-lebronsbaby&prov=ap&type=lgns

Congrats to him and his girlfriend!

[D]

NBA need to reseed.


This is horrible every other year getting a bad NBA finals.

[sandman]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2007/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Finalists1-10

Cavs are sitting at 149.3 points on this scale.? The number would only slightly change for the worse if the Cavs lose Game 4 by more than 3 points, or for the better should they win a game before bowing out.? In calculating the Cavs, I used a loss in Game 4 by 3 points in their score.

this is an idiotic formula that makes no sense. comparing wins and losses in the regular season and playoffs is practically useless.

is gives teams credit for playing in WEAK conferences. the balance of talent has never been this lopsided.

comparing teams in the 70's and 80's to teams in the current, diluted, over-expanded league just doesn't make any sense. you're essentially penalizing teams for going beating other GREAT teams by small margins in 7 games.

[Mal Brossard]

Idiotic or not in terms of older teams, there are still three post-1990 teams that are ranked worse than the Cavs.

And if you can come up with a better formula, then let's see it.

[sandman]

Idiotic or not in terms of older teams, there are still three post-1990 teams that are ranked worse than the Cavs.

And if you can come up with a better formula, then let's see it.

you can't use a formula. that's my point! anyone that understands sports knows that margin of victory is an absolute meaningless stat. does history care that tom brady won 3 SBs by 3 points each, while aikman won 3 SB in blowouts??? No! brady is clearly the better QB and the NE team is clearly the better team.

it's a judgement call with many factors that need to be considered. and in the end, it is an opinion.

but i think many b-ball fans would agree that the cavs are one of the worst teams to ever make the finals - easily top 5. AND the eastern conference was the weakest its ever been this year.

LeBROOM, baby!!!!

[Mal Brossard]

you can't use a formula. that's my point! anyone that understands sports knows that margin of victory is an absolute meaningless stat. does history care that tom brady won 3 SBs by 3 points each, while aikman won 3 SB in blowouts??? No! brady is clearly the better QB and the NE team is clearly the better team.

Those New England Super Bowls were with teams built on defense first, while those Dallas teams were offensive powerhouses.  BIG difference between those two teams.  That argument comes down to which is more important: strong D and an average offense, or vice versa?  As those Super Bowls proved, either one can win.  You can't really compare Brady to Aikman as Brady has nowhere near the offensive weapons Aikman had (until maybe this year), while Aikman lacked the team defense Brady had.

it's a judgement call with many factors that need to be considered. and in the end, it is an opinion.

And yet you insist on trying to find some way to claim my OPINION (as you just said) is wrong.  Opinions aren't right, they aren't wrong.  They just are.  At least I'm trying to find some quantitative analysis rather than going fully on the qualitative.

but i think many b-ball fans would agree that the cavs are one of the worst teams to ever make the finals - easily top 5.

I'm still insisting it's top 10.

AND the eastern conference was the weakest its ever been this year.

It's been in just as bad of shape (if not worse) in the past.  The late 1970's come to mind.

Give it a year or two.  Shaq, Elvin Hayes, Earl Monroe, Elgin Baylor, Wes Unseld, and James Worthy all got swept in their first NBA Finals.  Even Magic Johnson was swept in the Finals twice in his career.

[estebanf]

Congratulations San Antonio Spurs for capturing the fourth title in nine seasons!

I love how the word ''sweep'' sounds!!!

Vote ''C'' for the MVP!! Manu Ginobili and his 27 points say it all!!! 

[D]

Robert HOrry should've won MVP cause if it wasnt for his Bullshit pussy ass cheap foul on Steve Nash, phoenix would be sitting here as champs.