My thoughts on the Cavs' exit.

This summer is going to be crazy. If you thought it was bad hearing about Brett Favre every second of the day, it's going to be a lot worse with LeBron James. It's already unbearable hearing about him as it is, but it's going to be taken to an entirely different level during the summer. The summer of 2010 has been mentioned ad nauseum for the past several years and now it's finally here. Not only that, the way LeBron and the Cavaliers ended their season in a 4-2 series loss to the Boston Celtics in the second round will only add to the hysteria. Because there's no doubt about it, the Cavaliers quit at the end of the game last night. They were down nine points with a minute left and chose not to foul. They just stood there and watched Boston dribble the clock out. When they did get the ball they didn't try to score quickly, opting instead to fritter away the last few seconds doing nothing.

So who's to blame? Is it head coach Mike Brown? The supporting cast? Or could it even be LeBron himself who's to blame? One thing I know is that no one is blaming the Celtics for the Cavs' loss. There have probably been hundreds of polls taken across the nation today asking who's to blame for this debacle on radio shows and websites and I guarantee you that none of the choices are the Boston Celtics. Boston showed up to play in this series, while Cleveland acted as if all they had to do was get off the bus to win. In fact, that's the general feeling I got from the media before the series began; no one expected this. Boston was being dismissed as an old, washed-up team that was beyond their usefulness. They may have gotten blown out in Game 3, but they played hard in the other five games. Watching them play defense during this series kind of reminded me of how they looked in 2008 on their way to the championship. There were times during the regular the season when they looked like they didn't have it in them to make this kind of postseason run, but they've really upped their intensity during the last month. They were also able to rely on 20 points, 12 rebounds, and 6 assists from Rajon Rondo, and another 18 points and 8 rebounds from Kevin Garnett. Ray Allen may have been inconsistent at times and Paul Pierce never really asserted himself, but Rondo and Garnett made for a steady presence in every game. And let's not forget about Rondo's monster triple-double of 28 points, 18 rebounds, and 13 assists in Game 4, which stands as one of the best playoff performances in Celtics history.

The lack of a second consistent player is something that helped contribute to the the Cavs' early exit. In fact, I believe you'll find that there are some similarities between last year's Eastern Conference Finals against the Orlando Magic and this year's conference semis against Boston. Against Orlando, LeBron was the only Cleveland player to play well the entire series. Maurice Williams, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, and the rest of the supporting cast were mostly no-shows. This time around it was the same deal. LeBron played well for the series, putting averages of 26 points, 9 rebounds, and 7 assists per game. Williams had 20 points in Game 1 and 22 in Game 6 (20 of which came in the first half), but was nowhere to be found in the games in between. Antawn Jamison, who was picked up mid-season to give LeBron even more help, scored 20 points only once and didn't break 10 in the final two games.

Also, just like last season against Orlando, the Cleveland bench got outplayed. To be fair, though, they did play well in the first three games, especially J.J. Hickson who averaged 10 points over that span. But in the last three games of the series, Boston's bench played its role much better. In Game 4 Tony Allen scored 15 points, beating the 11 points by Cleveland's bench; in Game 5, Glen Davis had 15; in Game 6, Rasheed Wallace had 13 and Allen had another 10. After looking at the stats for the series, I have to wonder: what happened with Hickson? He played for more than 10 minutes in each of the first three games of the series, but didn't even play 10 minutes in the last three games combined. What happened?

Unlike last season, however, the Cavs gave up. They lost Game 4 97-87 in Boston, but that wasn't really surprising. Boston is a tough team and they were playing at home. But to follow that up with a 120-88 home loss in Game 5 is terrible, and terrible is exactly how they played in that game. They couldn't do anything right. They were listless, and not even LeBron could be bothered to make any effort. And at the end of Game 6, as mentioned before, they tanked and didn't even want to start fouling to try to stay in the game. They had the mentality that they were beat and they wanted no part of the game being extended any longer.

So really, who is to blame? I say it's everyone. It's LeBron for not being a better leader, it's the rest of the team for not showing up, and it's Mike Brown for getting outcoached and not getting the team prepared to play in the postseason. It's everyone. I also think it's the media's fault for this being such a big deal. I'm not surprised that the Cavaliers didn't reach the Finals again. I think he was the wrong pick for the MVP and I don't think he's as great as everyone says he is. I think he's good, but he hasn't done enough to earn all of this talk. He's been to the Finals once and he got swept by the San Antonio Spurs, a fact that for some reason we NEVER hear about. It is ridiculous how people talk about him. It is so insane that we've even got New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and President Obama lobbying for him to sign with their respective teams, the New York Knicks and Chicago Bulls. If you want to know what I'm talking about, read this from ESPN Chicago; and no offense to the author, but that article reads like something off The Onion (when I say that, I mean that it's not poorly written but comes off as farcical, like this or this). If it were anyone else failing to win a championship despite having so much talent then they would be the laughingstock of the NBA; they'd be talked about like Peyton Manning, who has lots of talent but "only" one Super Bowl. Again, I think he's a really good player and I don't hate the guy, but talk to me about how great he is after his career is over instead of now when he can't win.

Can The Celtics Get Any Love? (Deadspin)
LeBron overload here (ESPN)


By the way, the Atlanta Hawks "dismissed" head coach Mike Woodson.

Chuck and Kenny Preview the Celtics-Cavs Series

I thought this was a great video to watch for a few reasons: Both Chuck and Kenny both bring up great reasons for their perspective on the series, it's an even argument, and it poses a lot of great questions about both teams coming into the series.

Chuck brings up a great point about the Celtics being able to defend the Cavs. The addition of Antawn Jamison gave Cleveland the one-up for multiple reasons; which is, a lot of their three-point shooters LBJ was kicking the ball out to before weren't and still aren't the best at penetrating the ball. However Jamison can fake a shot and drive by his defender, take a few dribbles in the situation when a help side defender is flying at him to block the shot and either take an elbow jumper or find a backdoor cutter camped on the baseline. He can also give the shot up and take his defender from the three-point line down to the post and throw a couple post moves in his face. This, along, with the tasks of being able to transition from Shaq-basketball and young Cavaliers-basketball and defending LeBron are Barkley's main points as to why Cleveland can trump Boston. His thoughts are, Pierce is going to get into foul trouble trying to guard LeBron single-handedly, hindering his offensive effectiveness (you can't score if you're not on the floor); on the other hand, if Garnett or Ray Allen or even Rondo tries to help out, those three-point specialists like Mo Williams or Anthony Parker, and weapons like Antawn Jamison could really hurt the Celts.

But since we're talking about depth, we come back to the Celtics' view of things. This year, Boston has Marquis Daniels and the best Tony Allen we've seen EVER (especially mentally), whereas the only answers they had aside from Pierce to guarding James in the semis two years ago was James Posey. That's TWO guys they can throw at LeBron not only defensively, but offensively as well. They might not be quite on '08 Posey's level, but in this case the only thing you need is a couple of capable basketball players who have the tools to stay with James while Pierce takes a breather or sits down with fouls. Additionally, shutting down crucial, hand-picked players is what this Celtics defense does best. They did it in '08 with Kobe. And they did it in the first round with Dwyane Wade. And here's why I believe they can do it even with a motivated LeBron James.

Dwyane Wade's mentality, throughout the series, left '08 Kobe's demeanor on an entirely different planet. Kobe is a guy that when you know he wants something, he's going to put everything out on the floor and destiny will take care of the rest. He has that on his side. But in the Finals, despite all the hoopla about Bryant being thirsty for blood and ready to finally win a championship without Shaq... Bryant was missing what he categorized as "bunnies." Two years later, a younger, better (don't get me wrong... I still think a juiced Bryant without the injuries is the second best player in the league, but he didn't seem to me that he was as potent as he could've been emotionally), driven Wade is knocking down deep, ridiculous threes with defenders in his face.

But it was the Boston Celtics' wisdom and acceptance that they couldn't waste their time trying to hold Wade to low-scoring nights and poor shooting percentages and let guys like Michael Beasley, Quentin Richardson, Jermaine O'Neal, and Mario Chalmers do a lot of the lifting. So what they did is what the Celts do best: They adjusted. They let Wade get his and for the majority of the series, but held players like Beasley, O'Neal, and Udonis Haslem to relatively quiet series'. Sure, in the clinching game Mario Chalmers chalked up 20. Dorell Wright chipped in in game 3, and Quentin Richardson had a good game in the one Heat victory. But it wasn't easy for the Miami Heat. Basketball is a game of breaks, and sooner or later, other Heat players were going to start contributing. Shooting streaks happen, and they happened in this series. But the Boston Celtics still won that series, and defensive tactics had a lot to do with it. So will LeBron go off on the Celtics? He might. If he doesn't, will his teammates light up Boston? It could happen. But the Boston Celtics will find a way to adapt to either road the series trails off to and play well.

Kenny also mentions Rasheed Wallace when Charles remarked that the Cavs can now handle defensive monsters and competent offensive players like Kendrick Perkins because of Shaq. Chuck counters with J.J. Hickson, whom he says can chase Rasheed around implies that he'll wear him out. I have different thoughts. We didn't really need Rasheed in the Miami series. We never did. When in that series did we need anybody but an intense Garnett and a rebounding Perkins against a big man crew of Jermaine O'Neal, Jamal Magloire, and Joel Anthony? In this series however, whether its by way of his own alertness or a teammates' mentioning, I believe Rasheed Wallace senses the need for his own effectiveness.

What, in my opinion, put Kenny's argument over the top? He never picked a winner, which was smart. In this series, despite what most think, there is no clear-cut edge. One-on-one, yes. But both teams have the luxury of turning to multiple options if one doesn't go well. Exactly what options will both teams utilize?

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Why Kevin Durant is my MVP.

The general consensus around the league is that LeBron James is the runaway winner of the NBA's MVP award, which would make it his second straight. LeBron is well deserving of the award but, in my opinion, Kevin Durant has done more for his team and is more deserving of the award. Statistically, the two are virtually interchangeable. LeBron has averages of 29.7 points, 7.3 rebounds, 8.6 assists, 1.6 steals, and 1 block per game. Similarly, Durant puts up 30.1 points, 7.6 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.4 steals, and 1 block per game. Durant is also the youngest player in NBA history to win the league's scoring title. LeBron does have the statistical advantage because he gets 6 more assists per game, but does that make him so much better than Durant? Am I to believe that Durant is less deserving of the award because he only averages 2 assists? I don't think so; the two are just different types of players and LeBron has the better team around him.

What speaks to me more than the stats, though, is how the teams have done this season compared to last season. Last season, LeBron led the Cavaliers to a 66-16 record and the Eastern Conference Finals; this season, the Cavs finished with a 61-21 record. The Thunder, on the other hand, finished last season with a paltry 23-59 record. They were young and had just moved from Seattle to Oklahoma City. The franchise didn't appear to be going anywhere. Then this season they go 50-32 with the same young team and are in the playoffs a lot sooner than anyone would have expected. For me, what it comes down to is that LeBron led his team and they did what they were supposed to do in the regular season. We all expected them to run the Eastern Conference after returning essentially the same team and adding the likes of Shaquille O'Neal, Anthony Parker, and Jamario Moon in the off-season and Antawn Jamison at the trade deadline. But with the Thunder, they rely on seven players each night with 3 or less years of experience, including Russell Westbrook, Jeff Green, James Harden, and their leader Durant. As such, they were supposed to be in the doldrums again this season continuing to rebuild and their coach, Scott Brooks, wasn't really expected to be around very long. Yet despite all this, they climbed as high as the 6th spot and won 50 games in the ultra-competitive West; they would be tied for 4th with the Boston Celtics if they were in the East. Kevin Durant is the main reason for the team's success and deserves the award more than LeBron James.

You can't go wrong with LeBron, but I'm just really impressed with how well Durant and the Thunder have done.

The Edge: March Madness Brings the Best Out of Athletes

There's a fun and competitive debate going on between SB Nation's Andrew Sharp and Hardwood Paroxysm's Matt Moore concerning how most NBA fans might not pay March Madness full respect, and even reasons why that time of college basketball might edge out the best NBA basketball. I thought I would give my own two cents... or three.

For a long time now, people have been debating which is the greatest fluke between the two leagues of the NCAA and the NBA: a horrific march to the Madness where the NCAA teams that eventually head to the tournament terminate boring, just-plain-bad teams, or the overwhelming egos of basketball; leading to ridiculous propositions like Paul Pierce blatantly and confidently remarking that he's the best player after his championship season or Mark Cuban losing his cool in front of Kenyon Martin's mom.

At the same time, there are discussions about what's more exciting at their respective vintage moments: an NCAA tournament where anything can happen at literally any time (HP's Moore: "Comebacks in the NBA inside a minute? Really f’ing hard. Why? Guys know how to get the ball inbounds, and can get it to guys who can hit free throws."), or two QUALITY teams (which is Moore's argument for the NBA) emaciated for an NBA ring, going back and forth the entire game, and in the end delivering a thrilling performance?

Those debates can NEVER, EVER be settled. They just can't. You develop an infatuation for one league and can't ever seem to honestly find flaws in it when you're defending your preferred league against another league or sport. Sure, there's lots of situations where you mature and your opinions begin to vary, and you might even switch over to the other league. But you mature. You change. With exception to technical tweaks, the game of professional basketball has maintained the same general look since it's inception. There was the white, slow era of the '40s, '50s, and part of the '60s, and there was the physical, bangin'/bruisin' era of the '70s and '80s. Even today, the league has become more athletic. But it's still a different species of basketball than the NCAA, and it always has.

Nonetheless, there are debates that, in my mind, that can be settled.

1) The NBA is flat-out a better brand of basketball, from a quality standpoint. It cannot be refuted or argued. It is professional basketball, and college basketball is a step below. That doesn't mean there aren't players in the NCAA that couldn't play (and be distinguished) in the NBA, but that's only the cream of the crop. That's an extremely small slice of players when in correspondence with the entire NCAA.

2) March Madness is a bigger event than the NBA playoffs. It doesn't mean that I personally enjoy it more, it means that from a general fan's perspective, I'm tuning into March Madness over an NBA playoff game (if the two schedules ever crossed paths). The NBA, on the other hand, comes from a much larger audience scale throughout the entire shebang, including preseason, regular season, playoffs, and offseason. But March Madness seems to surround people as a magical, Cinderella Story tournament, which is what people want to watch. Perhaps the only playoff series' that have caught the eye of the general fan over the past five years:

1.Golden State V. Dallas, 2007 playoffs
 2. The entire Boston Celtics campaign, 2008
3. Los Angeles Lakers V. Houston, 2009, and Los Angeles V. Orlando Finals
4. Boston V. Chicago, 2009
5. Cleveland V. Detroit, 2007
6. Miami Heat V. Dallas Mavericks, 2006

The NBA playoffs are great, and sure, that's only a five year span (and this is also considering that it would have to at least draw some attention from most of the non-basketball diehards), but if you count the number of mesmerizing March Madness games that captivated the nation over the last five years... you're going to end up using more than just your fingers.

So what keeps March Madness so exciting? Hell, what keeps March madness even alive? If the NBA is better basketball mechanically, and there isn't a clear edge (that we've mentioned yet), NCAA fans are basically telling themselves I'd rather watch a poorer standard of basketball. And that's fine... except that the ratings of the NCAA should come close to touching the NBA.

Most NBA and NCAA fans have heard that a lot general basketball fans can't deal with the arrogance of professional basketball. They'd rather watch more humble, more committed athletes. And that's cool that a lot of America chooses to believe it and have that as their logic as to why they have the NBA over the NCAA. But it's downright false in every aspect. There is no way for most of the superstars in the NBA to succeed without comforting themselves after beatings from the fans and opponents every single day for 10-15 years. They have to be overly-proud. It's basketball. Players develop that toughness on the way to their objective. That's not any player either. That's a great player. That's an NBA-ready player.

And putting arrogance aside, you cannot tell me that NBA athletes choose to relax when they hit the premier stage of basketball. The ones that we enjoy watching, the ones that thrive in this league put the same amount of work in if not more basketball-wise. It is their life. If you're playing in the Association, unless you're name is Rasheed Wallace, you're routinely in the gym for hours and shooting thousands of shots per day.

Watch Paul Pierce receive his ring after winning the 2008 championship, and you see he's WEEPING. He's overcome. How is that different from a college athlete being overcome? What separates LeBron's incredible and passionate 48-point massacre of the Detroit Pistons, which was derived from his sheer competitive edge and ravenous attitude towards winning, from Northern Iowa's recent defeat of Kansas? Both circumstances are, essentially, David versus Goliath. It was literally LeBron against a highly-regarded, heavily-favored Detroit Pistons team, and it was the number 9., unheard of Northern Iowa against the no.1 ranked Kansas. What puts distance between the constantly-discussed team chemistry of college athletes, how it shows on the court, and how it makes them better, and Leon Powe's inspiring 21-point performance during game 2 of the 2008 Finals? There isn't separation, there isn't distance, there isn't a difference.

Except that college athletes consistently show a spark when the competition narrows down to March Madness. Losing, or not leaving it all on the court, just simply isn't an option. You do not think twice about letting your team down. It is indubitable shame for all the NCAA athletes participating in the Madness to not play their best in that tournament. It just doesn't happen. March Madness brings the best out of athletes. Every. Single. Time. March Madness is magical.

And according to the nation, that's fact.

Celtics Are Shown First-Hand Who the Team to Beat Is

Yesterday, Celtics' fans were buzzing. Today, they're holed up inside their own minds trying to find out how perhaps we could have evaded the last straw of doom for our Boston team. So far, we've come up with answers that aren't going to help the Celtics. Essentially, because they are answers that have been said over and over again, and that the C's have probably already figured out themselves.

Yesterday, though, we caught a glimpse of what the '07-08 Celtics looked like. The Cleveland Cavaliers are on an aggressive mission. They concretely just aren't going to let loopholes, twisted karma, or unpleasant kismet tear them from their path. They absolutely positively control their destiny, and they know that.

The '09-10 Celtics though, aren't in that same mindset. They're frustrated with the fact that drive and initiative can't come with work, discussion, and craft. It's a snowball effect that usually begins with an unfortunate impetus. Whether it happens 10 years before or the day before, it's something that sticks in their head and haunts them until they turn that memory around. Until they resurrect and rectify that horrific mistake/uncalled for blunder/whatever. The Celtics can't get there, because they are satisfied. They content. Or at least, a good chunk of the team is.

(I just wanted to point out that when Jeff Van Gundy was gushing over Andy Varejao, talking about how he's so effective by merely not giving up plays, hustling, and having been a student of the game so long that he picks up things more quickly than others -- OK, I added that last part, even though I loathe Varejao -- ABC immediately shows a pretty much sarcastic close-up of Rasheed Wallace. And then in the next couple of plays, Rasheed simply hacks at the Cavaliers that slice through the lane instead of actually trying to put a body on them or block the shot. Classic. OK, back to the un-comedic pessimism.)

I will never, ever write off the Boston Celtics. Ever. Hell, I'm so optimistic that I thought they had well-constructed teams the year Gary Payton joined the team and the year we won 24 games. Go figure. But just because I won't write them off doesn't mean I can't accept reality, or that I can't take off my green goggles. There just isn't a way that a motivated team with their type of talent couldn't be in the same championship debates with teams like the Cavs, Lakers, Nuggs, and Mavs... or the Hawks and Magic. That doesn't mean they can't turn it around at any time. But right now, they just aren't there.

And I just want to quickly point out to the fans saying that Boston may be running out of time (translation: I'm contradicting the Celticsfanatic of a few days ago) that there is no such thing as time limits for the Celtics. If they get into the playoffs and somehow get hot or regain that drive (unlikely -- considering there have been so many things that usually at least get a team pumped up for a stretch of the season that the Celtics haven't shown affected them on the court -- but still), they can do anything they want in this league. And I mean that.

Look at Ray Allen motivated (torching the league for a substantial number of games to prove the post All-Star bonanza of scoring from him wasn't a fluke). Look at a Paul Pierce motivated (27 points in 26 minutes despite being defended by a tough Stephen Jackson and a proven-defender in Gerald Wallace). Look at Kevin Garnett, Rajon Rondo, and Kendrick Perkins motivated (Rondo and Perkins dominating in their respective areas, Kevin Garnett scavenging the boards like the glass is a treasure chest). Even our bench is extremely talented when they get going (Glen Davis, Rasheed, Nate Robinson, Marquis Daniels, and Tony Allen. Wow).

I wanted to point out three things from yesterday's game, and the first is Paul Pierce. I know Pierce was pretty juiced for yesterday's game, so it was a surprise to see that LeBron was flat-out blowing by him late in the game to boost the Cavs and abuse Boston down low. Pierce was one of the few yesterday who tried to single-handedly put away the Cavs with consistent effort but just couldn't do it, so it's no secret that he was trying (for at least most of the game -- and for all of the second half).

But LeBron was using simple crossovers and a quick first step that resembled Pierce in his physical prime to eat up the opposing team's interior D (which could be an over-/understatement depending on how well you remember Pierce's ferocious scoring spurts and ability to take over whenever necessary), and Pierce couldn't do anything about it. So I guess my point here is, yeah, a few of the guys on the team are a step and a half, maybe a step slower than one or two years before. But can they get the job done as a group? Certainly, and it'd be foolish to analyze them any different.

Glen Davis, on the other hand, was our kryptonite to the Cavs and Anderson Varejao, who was beating up the Celtics' paint in every which way by playing scrappy and utilizing all opportunities given to him. He's really just a taller, more offensively gifted Leon Powe, with a bit more athleticism vertically. And those type of players can really shut down the Celtics and set a tone for their team. Glen Davis? He was getting on the floor, playing competitive, and had the same effect. The numbers don't show it, but he was clearly the player on the floor who was bugging Cleveland with his sheer edge and determination.

And lastly, I'd also like to pay tribute to Nate Robinson yesterday. Nate didn't a great shooting day, which has been rare since his arrival in Boston, but he played good defense for about a large stretch of minutes, as one of the ABC broadcasters mentioned. Despite Boston's disappointing play, he's been a glaring bright spot during these past five-10 games or so.

Go Celts.

Ugh.

We're not even four minutes into the Cleveland Cavaliers-Boston Celtics game on ABC and Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson are already freestyling about what LeBron James is the best at. The current topic: passing. Jackson says LeBron is the best passing non-point guard in the history of the league while Van Gundy says he may be the best passer in history. If one didn't know better, you would think that these two had only recently started watching basketball. They sound like elementary school kids at recess talking about their favorite players rather than a former NBA coach (Van Gundy) and the league's third all-time assist leader in assists (Jackson).

A Few Spare Tidbits

On Friday night, the Celtics blew out the Indiana Pacers, avenging themselves after suffering an embarassing loss to the athletic and energetic Memphis Grizzles. Here's the talk from around the Celtics' blogosphere, and more thoughts revolving around the state of the Boston Celtics during this time of the season:

The Boston Herald reports:

Rivers said he’d consider holding his veterans, both of whom are on the mend from injuries, out of games so they’re able to log practice time down the stretch.
"We have to have them playing at their peak (when the playoffs start). Whatever we have to do that, we have to do it," Rivers said before the C’s 122-103 win against the Pacers last night. "If that means working them more in practices and maybe them missing games - whatever it takes, that’s what we have to do and that’s what we’re going to do."

Garnett and Pierce didn’t exactly welcome the idea with open arms.

That's a very interesting take by Doc. Rivers may feel that if they can just hang on to a top four seed and come into the playoffs fresh, competitive, edgy, and with a new look at their goal, Boston can be a much better team, which is an understandable theory.

I said yesterday that the Celtics were saying hello to goodbye (of the championship window) if they couldn't prove to us that they still had that fire that characterizes champions. We all know they have the talent, and even most of the intangibles. So it's not entirely implausible here to think that if we go in with a fourth seed that we can't make a run at the championship. ]In addition, third seed or fourth seed aside, I still think we have enough to get past the first round.

It's a matter of getting past Cleveland though, and if we do, either Orlando or Atlanta (two teams we're 1-7 against during the regular season), that Doc is planning around for. But again, maybe rest is what's in our way of a new life. But I can't help but saying that we need to drive this team into the ground mentally to get them in condition for the big games, the must-win quarters, and the excruciatingly critical play sequences. Sure, fans aren't always able to recognize that their teams may be dog-tired. But it sure seems to me that with the relaxed style of play we've been going about with every night, we should be well-rested.

On the other hand of that argument, you have to keep your players happy. And like the article mentions, I seriously doubt Pierce or Garnett is willing to cap off the regular season and show up to games in suits because it might give them some extra recovery time. They're vets. They know how to battle through injuries. They know the bangs and bruises of a regular season and they understand that the real contenders are those who lead by example. In this case, how are Pierce and Garnett going to show their team the true mold of a contender if the validity of their playoff position is still up in the air and they're voluntarily sitting out? Which leads us to this:

From the Celtics' Twitter:

Pierce and KG say the team had a "heart to heart" and open dialogue this morning. Say that loss to Memphis and boos at home stuck with team.

Via CelticsBlog

(Disclosure -- this was reported yesterday morning before last night's annihilation of the Pacers.) That's a great thing to hear. I don't care if I've been hearing reports of the team recognizing that they all need to sit down and really discuss their objectives all season -- it's about time that it's been taken care of (or at least begun) and that we have evidence that's it's started to work (once again, the annihilation of the Pacers last night). Keep it up, boys.

CelticsBlog has an interesting piece about Glen Davis, preaching something that has kept me a fan of "The Eleventh Hour" since the beginning:

Fortunately, ever since that incident in Detroit on January 20, the artist formerly knows as "Big Baby" has cut out the superfluous junk that has plagued both his game and his reputation, and has seemed to re-focus his everlasting energy strictly on the basketball court. And that energy has in fact highlighted his play of late. He certainly hasn't been a perfect player, but the various flaws that have hindered his game, have so far, for the most part, been overshadowed by the relentless effort he's putting forth these days.

Obviously "hustle" stats are not kept in NBA game logs, but if you've watched this team of late, you'd be hard pressed to argue that the energy isn't there from Davis, which must be a welcome relief for Doc Rivers, because in these troubled times, effort has sometimes been harder to find than Carmen San Diego.

Red's Army reflects on the brilliant performance put on by the blazing hot Nate Robinson during Friday night's Pacers' game. They argue, can this hot streak stay on track? And will Nate make the dire mistake of living and dying by the three from this point on?

Nate is 16-27 from long range in March... a blistering 59.3%. 

It's an impossible pace... and a dangerous one at that.  Nate has fallen in love with the 3. 

At some point, that long-range stroke is going to go cold... which is going to put a serious strain on the second unit.  And it was the second unit last night that made Gino possible. 

All I'm saying is we've got to be realistic about what Nate brings us in the future.  What we see now is not what we're going to get.  No one sustains 59% shooting from 3. 

So the question is... will Nate adjust and get back to attacking when he knows the 3 stroke has gone cold... or will he become a mini-Sheed who continues to shoot from deep without regard for reality?

Slithering in Darkness: Where the Celtics Are Disgracefully Saying Hello to Goodbye

A slightly different take of this fantastic article written by KneeJerkNBA.

By replacing gritty defensive guys like Posey, Brown and Powe with shooters like Lil' Nate and Mike Finley, Ainge further eroded the team's identity. 'Get stops' isn't an option anymore. This team isn't physically able to 'get stops.' And nobody's intimidated by them anymore, either.

Those were the words written by my fellow writer here on Celtics 17, KneeJerkNBA. And while harsh words they may be, Celtics nor any NBA fan can deny the truthfulness that lies beneath them.

As the Boston Celtics fell to the Memphis Grizzles Wednesday night, the depression that hung in the air was something that words couldn't quite describe. Yes, you could mention that the Boston Celtics were disgustingly outrebounded by 19 boards. You could point out that Memphis shot 55% from the field and 56%+ from behind the arc. But there is no way to nail the "The Celtics just didn't have it... again" aspect. There is no impact that rests in those words, or, at least not nearly an impact that measures up to the real thing.

A few years ago, we witnessed that team in the league, a team that emotionally connected with their fans as electricity in the relationship between the two sparked a run that led to a much-longed-for NBA championship. We not only had the pieces on paper, but we had the chemistry. We had the leadership. We had players that knew the right time to dish out an extra pass (the famous split-second swing for a three or open look that was stamped rightfully by the Celts' that season). We also had players that recognized that must-win games sometimes hung on the decision made by players to hoard the ball selfishly for themselves and get the job done (the 41-point Pierce V. the 45-point LeBron game).

But the attitude never changed, no matter what the game style of that night was. I was there at game 7 of the '07-08 Eastern Conference semis, and I can tell you one thing: Paul Pierce was there to score, to dominate, to bloody the Cavs in every way he was capable of doing from the start. But despite his demeanor that in times made him look self-centered with the ball, his teammates were with him from the getgo. And not only was that support playing out just because that player happened to be Paul Pierce, but because it was one of their teammates. Paul Pierce was a Celtic, and so were the rest of those who emerged victorious last night. And that never changed whether it ended up being an evenly spread boxscore or a Paul Pierce/insert any other Celtic here-takeover.

Fast forward to last year. We had a few different players, but the destination, the drive, and the purpose was still there. We scorched the league from the start, racing out to an incredible 27-2 start. That clear sovereignty continued until our precious Kevin Garnett went down immediately after the All-Star break (by the way; although this is obviously easy to say in my position, I can't help but point out that it's ridiculous for Boston to allow the NBA to use our players elected to play in the All-Star game in any way they please with no restrictions. If I'm the Cs, I'm giving the coaches that are handed the reigns of the team limits concerning how much they can toy with our guys on the court during a game that's completely meaningless to every contender in the Association).

But regardless of the hammering injury, we played with a chip on our shoulder, and as always, fighting and eventually prevailing in what is now considered one of the most thrilling playoff series' of all-time (the Boston Chicago series, which involved numerous memorable OTs). We also almost slipped past the eventual Eastern Conference champs, armed with a 3-2 lead after five games but sadly falling in the last two. And this is all without Kevin Garnett.

At last, we arrive to 2009-10. With an improved Rondo and Perkins, a healthy Garnett, and at least a little bit more rested Ray Allen and Paul Pierce, we're a better team automatically than the squad last year that advanced to the second round of the playoffs and seemed to be well on their way to the EC Finals before a heartbreaking final two games. However, that's not all. We added a woefully underrated Marquis Daniels (who has been compared to the likes of Josh Howard and also plays a game style similar to that of Stephen Jackson), a dominant post player (who can cause trouble, but should have been set straight by our vets from the beginning nonetheless) in Rasheed Wallace, and another backup big man in Shelden Williams.

Three quarters of the way through the season, we've now also added Nate Robinson and Michael Finley. Where do we stand? Well let's just say that the team we're looking at on paper doesn't resemble the team we see on the court, nor does our record hint at us having such a great team (stats-/skills-wise at least).

The differences between this team and the past two of the Big Three era? Well, there's many. For one, Boston is a much less docile group than the crews the Celts had on their side in the past. Docile in the sense of all of the players having one goal, whether it's a wild goal or a conservative objective. We were all on the same page, which made it easier to strike points and basically just coach. This team? We're all over the place, I guess, is the best way to put it.

Two years ago and even last year, I remember a team that was fired up for even the most piddling of games. Now? Maybe we just don't have the energy for that anymore, whether we'd like to our not. Maybe we're resting for strategical reasons. But while that theory is understandable in these circumstances, it's been proven to be foolproof when you, well, don't win the ones that you save energy for in the first place.

And the conclusion is evident now: Even if we do manage to find that passion, that fire, it is, in many senses, much too late. Sure, we've saved energy all year long. But to become formidable once again, to gain position against other teams or at least be at the same level they are, we're going to have to rampage the league on a ferocious tear in these next few months. And at the level of stamina this team has shown it has, I'm not sure we can do that and still get up for the playoffs. Or at least, stay up for the duration of the playoffs, which we would need to do if we wanted to attain another ring. December is long gone. Sitting tight waiting for a run in January isn't possible now. Even February has evaded us. We're in March, nervously sweating it out until April.

Hey, miracles can happen. We don't know what's being said in the locker room. We have no clue what's going on in the closed, whispered huddles during practice. But from what I've been seeing lately, I just don't see it happening. It's too bad, going through so much for so little (maybe I'm under-appreciating the glory of one mere ring, but I was hoping to at least be in contention for two). It's even more disappointing that the Celtics essentially just let this happen. They let it slip away. They watched a likely banner slowly (don't think this happened in a flash; we had all the time in the world to turn it around and we couldn't get it done) drive by them, and sooner or later, a Cinderella Story as well (if the C's can't beat out the Hawks for the third seed, then this season, this goal, really ought to be packed away).

Of course, we can't doubt the potentials of a sensational offseason, as this would be the perfect time to do it (although we always have to keep money in mind). Danny might sense that the team as a whole (which includes the ENTIRE organization) didn't feel that the fans got their full due after 16 years of atrocious misfortune after Bird hung up the laces. But these are all possibilities that are battling the odds. And since we've seen that we can't complete the likelihoods that were graciously given to us at the beginning of this season (a refueled, recharged, revamped team that could easily have been included in the top five, maybe even top three teams in the league right now, and close to the end chunk of the season where contenders rest and teams battling for position continue to fight tirelessly), what leads us to believe that we have the proof to doubt the odds?

For one, there's hope. Basketball is a game of breaks. Sometimes, there's opportunities you ride out for much too long than destiny should have allowed you too. And in others (particularly this one), you fall way short of expectations and in all honesty, are stripped of what should have been.

So yeah, there will always be that next year, those next few years, those next 10 years. But the only thing at this point that I can say with all the certainty in my mind, with no counter-arguments available to mention is: Ubuntu might want to get a head start on getting comfort with the dark, dingy cellars of the NBA.

Rerun: LeBron changing number.

If one didn't know better, Stuart Scott just announced on SportsCenter that LeBron James will be playing in Cleveland next year. Here's why: LeBron has filed the paperwork to change his number from 23 to 6, something that he wouldn't have to do if he were signing with another team. So there you go. You can just stop thinking about LeBron signing with the Knicks/Clippers/Bulls/Heat/Nets this summer.

Ugh. This is the second time this season we've heard about this. In November, LeBron told everyone to stop asking him about who he would be playing with after the summer because he was tired of hearing about next year. Then what does he do? Later that week he announced that he was thinking about changing his number for next year, the same "next year" that he was tired of hearing about. He also wanted the league to retire the #23 for all teams in honor of Michael Jordan. And now, three months later, I'm sure the fact that you only have to fill out paperwork to change a number if you're not changing teams will be sure to quell all the free-agency questions. In fact, we'll probably forget the whole thing and need every other article written about the NBA to include a reminder. Like in this "report" from ESPN:

James will be part of the vaunted 2010 free-agent class that includes Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh. While Bulls fans would like to see him try to make No. 6 as legendary as No. 23 in Chicago, New York has also maneuvered to have enough cap space to sign James.

Cleveland can sign James to a longer, more lucrative deal, however.

I really like how they sneak that in, as if they're telling us something we haven't heard before, or more like a thousand times.

But here's a question: didn't he pick #23 to honor Michael Jordan to begin with? Isn't that what everyone who wears that number does? It doesn't make sense, unless he's doing it to gain more attention and jersey sales.

And this is what happens when I blog at one in the morning (CST).

Report: LeBron wants No. 6 (ESPN)

Risin' Up: Celtics-Cavs Throw Down Tonight

I'm just going to quickly run down the list for you of stuff that I'd like to see tonight:

• First and foremost, let's show some more consistent defensive effort like we showed in the first game of the season. Let's put forth that same effort, play with the same adrenaline. Fending off the Cavs and pushing them to the bottom part of the 90-point-hill is all I can ask for. 
• KG, keep it going. Come out with the same bounce that you've showed the past couple of games. I don't care if you score 10 points and get five rebounds -- I want you to tear up the glass even if you DON'T get the board so we can keep Shaq, LeBron, and Antawn Jamison from ripping us apart on the offensive boards, and I want to see you rotating like you never have this season. I want to see you and Perk completely shutting down the Cavs interior offensive effort. I want blood. Ray, you too. Play like you've been playing since the break.
• Paul, 'Quis, I don't know if you're playing tonight, but I want to see you guys suffocating LBJ. We've been giving up too many easy baskets in our half-court sets, and it's time to show by example how the Celtics of old played defense. If Cleveland's perimeter does manage to find their way into the paint, well then they've earned it. But I want to make sure that they indeed earned it. No free lanes tonight, please.  Give them a dose of their own medicine, "just so they under-STAND."
• Rondo, keep dishing, keep driving, keep playing confident. You've been playing great when you take an offensive stand, committing to aggressive offensive moves and giving yourself a chance to score on your own. Look for your shot, and if it's not there, do your thing with distribution.
• Perkins -- you've been slumping a bit lately. No matter the shots you take, let's try to keep a high percentage, so just in case Shaq does happen to go off (which is a slim possibility because I know that you understand we're all expecting you to play top-notch D tonight) for a big offensive night, we can fire right back at 'em.
• Hey Nate, let's run their bench into the ground alright? Don't be selfish, but do what you have to do.
• Rasheed, don't be an ass tonight. Thanks.

Prediction: As always, it depends on a few things. Obviously, those are all key, but these are the real crucial ones: Bullets number two, four, and five. If we can get the rest of the team going with our play right from the start, we have a great chance of winning this thing, Pierce and 'Quis or no Pierce and 'Quis.

If all crucial bullets are executed: Boston: 95, Cleveland: 87

If 2/3 are executed: Boston 92, Cleveland: 88

If 1/3 are executed: Cleveland: 93, Boston 89

If none are executed: Fahgetta 'bout it.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas to Boston? Well, Now That You Mention it...

Warning: This is not a rumor. just an idea. Hopefully you haven't already crapped yourself before reading this.

NESN's Evan Brunell brings up this possibility:

If or when new Wizards big man Zydrunas Ilgauskas gets bought out by Washington, should Boston try to bring him to town?

Ilgauskas, who previously spent his entire 12-year career with the Cavaliers before being traded in the Antawn Jamison blockbuster, is widely expected to be bought out and return to Cleveland.

Currently, NBA rules prevent Ilgauskas from returning to Cleveland for a 30-day period, but many players and teams have taken advantage of this rule -- including Boston. In 2005, the Celtics traded Gary Payton to the Atlanta Hawks for Antoine Walker, and then welcomed Payton back into the fold 30 days later.
Such is the reality of life in the NBA, where expiring contracts are more valuable than the players themselves. (Ilgauskas is making $11.5 million this year and will become a free agent after the season.)

I'm sure Doc wouldn't mind. He's already sounded off about the disgraceful rule that once again has allowed teams to go hit-and-run on lowly teams looking to rebuild or dump cash with the other team all for the deal. Red's Army has a post including Doc Rivers' and Phil Jackson's thoughts on the deal, as well as some insight of their own:

One of the main points in my rant against the Antawn Jamison trade is the fact that the Cavs could pretty much get the main player traded on their end back after a buyout.  So they could essentially get Jamison... a 20 and 9 guy... for a couple of draft picks.

A lot of people are upset at the rule that allows players to return to their former teams 30 days after a buyout.  Doc Rivers and Phil Jackson expressed their displeasure last night.

"They're going to get Ilgauskas back and it's going to be one of those scenarios that we see in the NBA where you ship a player out, you get another player, then your player retires or they pay him off and then he comes back in 30 days," Jackson said. "I don't know what that does for the league. I think that's kind of a weird situation."


Rivers agreed with Jackson, even though the loophole has helped his team in the past.

"I have a problem with that," Rivers said before Thursday's Lakers-Celtics game at Staples Center. "I loved it three years ago when we did it with Gary Payton if you remember, but now I think it sucks. I think it's a terrible deal."

Forgetting the fact that it would be a rather shocking blow to the Cavs (not necessarily significant, as they have a solid front court -- but certainly surprising), and that Rivers and the other teams won't have to stand back and watch as another Pau Gasol-esque deal goes down in the books, but Ilgauskas is a pretty good player too. It's just the fact that Ilgauskas would probably demand more money than we could handle because Cleveland is his number one destination (at least from what we've heard), so he would be asking for a lot to deter him from going to Cleveland. And in the end, the reward might just not be matching up with the price. Still, it's an interesting option we can mull over while we're waiting for him to be bought out.

We have two extra roster spots, so we wouldn't need to waive/buy anybody out (and if we did, Shelden's one year/< 1 mil. dollar contract wouldn't be too costly). Just a thought.

It doesn't sound like a very attractive deal at first glance (the money demand, mainly), but in terms of a playoff run, he could help in more ways than one.

Executives Firing on All Cylinders: More Deals, More Rumors

Disclosure: The Nate Robinson to Boston deal has multiple sources confirming that the deal is indeed in serious talks, and possibly even done, with some even reporting that the deal is set but not finalized, and likely will not be until tomorrow. Long story short, it's very unlikely the deal doesn't go through by the deadline tomorrow.

Adrian Wojnarowski, Y! Sports: Cavs Strike Deal for Antawn Jamison:

The Cleveland Cavaliers have reached agreement on a six-player, three-team trade that lands them former All-Star forward Antawn Jamison(notes), league sources with knowledge of the talks told Yahoo! Sports. The Cavaliers are sending center Zydrunas Ilgauskas(notes) and a first-round pick to the Wizards.

The Wizards also will receive Brian Skinner(notes) and Al Thornton(notes) from the Los Angeles Clippers. The Cavaliers will get point guard Sebastian Telfair(notes) from the Clippers. The Wizards will send Drew Gooden(notes) to the Clippers.

The Washington Post first reported the Wizards had agreed to send Jamison to the Cavaliers.

AP, ESPN: Agent thinks Stoudemire is on the move:

Happy Walters told The Associated Press that it would make no sense for the Phoenix Suns not to trade Stoudemire only to see him walk away as a free agent at the end of the season.
Walters said Stoudemire believes Phoenix's game Wednesday night at Dallas will be his last for the Suns.

"It's going to be emotional," Walters said. "... He really does love the team and he knows he's playing with one of the best point guards ever."

Both of these reports have me near self-convinced that the Celtics will trade Ray Allen, Nate Robinson or no Nate Robinson. We simply can't rely on the belief that maybe Ray Allen will catch fire, or maybe the team will regain that championship drive. We need to go out and get a star/starter/veteran player who can provide energy and motivation for the leaders to set this squad straight.

Don't think I'm panicking either. I'm just not being a homer and being rational here. When the best team in the league, arguably, as well as the best player in the league, gets armed with a veteran star like Jamison, it's improbable that you're going to get past them without an extra push. Especially since they've been doing this good with Mo Williams, who is scheduled to return soon. Now even with Nate Robinson, who I think is a fine addition barring, as I've said, any continuation of his uncooperative behavior and bad attitude in New York, we need someone to instill fear in Cleveland's hearts. In Orlando's hearts. As good a team as we are, do you think Cleveland is really intimidated of anybody at this point? Orlando? After overcoming double-digit leads against us twice? LA? Atlanta? Denver? Hell, Dallas?

And if Miami gets Stoudemire? It might not be true but... get someone. Please. Dwyane Wade might finally have someone that can draw some guys off of him and get open shots. LeBron now has a star-studded cast with committed role players and a determined coach. LA, Orlando, Dallas, and Atlanta have all proven they can beat us. And we know what Denver can do with the leadership of Billups and bullish, reckless play of Carmelo Anthony.

On a less frightening note, ESPN has sources telling them that Chicago is looking to deal John Salmons. It's not the most intriguing option for Boston, but it doesn't really seem like much of a desperate move either. Maybe Danny should investigate?

Make sure to stop by tomorrow from 12 p.m.-4 p.m. EST for Celtics 17's league-wide live chat, providing the best coverage of all the news swirling around the NBA!

Rumors, Thoughts, and Kindling the Trade Deadline Fire

After another memorable All-Star weekend (besides the Dunk Contest) in the books, it's time to start preparing for this year's NBA trade deadline. As reporters have heavily alluded to, we're in for an exciting couple days heading into Thursday's deadline this year. And as TNT analysts pointed out last night, the dominoes will start to fall after the blockbuster Dallas-Washington deal.

Let's start with Cleveland/Amar'e Stoudemire. At this point, the Cavs proposed offer for Amar'e has become the back pocket deal for Phoenix, as they appear to be one of many teams that are extremely interested in Andre Iguodala. The Cleveland deal, as much as Phoenix wants to dump cash and as intriguing as a J.J. Hickson pickup while he's still cheap is, will be the absolute rock bottom point in this sell for the Suns if it goes through, given Amar'e ability. The Suns don't want to be the team to trade a top five big man without getting a superstar, or at least a star, in return. And with the Heat heavily pursuing Stoudemire and there still being potential for a Suns-Sixers deal, I can't see Amar'e going to Cleveland unless a third team comes into the picture, Phoenix gets desperate at the last minute, or Cleveland throws someone else in the deal.

But, all is not lost for Cleveland. Troy Murphy, Andre Iguodala, Antawn Jamison, and more all still remain on the market. And there's no doubting that Cleveland's front office will do most anything it takes to raise the team to a higher level and sweeten the case for LeBron to stay in the 2010 offseason.

And that brings us to Cleveland's inner-conference rivals, the Celtics. Boston is still looking at Antawn Jamison, and appears to have interest in Kevin Martin, Andre Iguodala, and Monta Ellis. D.J. Augustin and Gerald Wallace are also possibilities for the Celtics. However, despite the availability of those players and the involvement Boston has in the market, time is ticking and with just three days left, the Celtics don't seem to be anywhere close to any of those players without offering somebody or something up they've been holding close all along. Boston is all over phone throughout the league, but talks haven't gone any further than a day or two before imploding. With Caron Butler being shipped to Dallas, Boston's best option and most discussed player is now out of reach.

CelticsBlog has suggested Boston gets involved with Phoenix for somebody like Leandro Barbosa, and mentions that a third team would be needed.

On a more panicky note for Boston fans, one NBA GM "gets the feeling that Boston is getting desperate." But if Danny Ainge ever needs an idea, here's one for him: Ray Allen for Ben Gordon (10 mil., 4 years) and Tayshaun Prince (10.34 mil. plus change, 2 years). Gordon would fit perfectly into Boston's system, we'd immediately have our starting shooting guard, and our depth would instantly become a whole lot better. We could go big with Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen, Tayshaun Prince, Glen Davis, and Rasheed, or we could go small with Eddie House, Tony Allen, Marquis Daniels, Tayshaun Prince/Glen Davis, and Rasheed/Shelden. It makes sense for both teams, as Detroit saves roughly 20 million for the offseason and Boston gets an experienced player and a starter for their playoff run (and possibly other playoff runs in the years to come).

Lastly, the Los Angeles Lakers are supposedly looking for a backup point guard (sorry for those of you that don't have ESPN Outsider), according to Chad Ford. Ford reports that both Bulls' guard Kirk Hinrich and Pacers' guard Earl Watson could be on L.A.'s radar:

First, there aren't a lot of great point guards available right now. The Bulls' Kirk Hinrich has been the name most associated with the Lakers, and the team has explored smaller deals, such as one for the Pacers' Earl Watson.

Second, a deal could be very costly. The Lakers already have the highest payroll in the league and would prefer to avoid adding more long-term commitments.

Here's one potential solution: The word out of the All-Star Game late Sunday had the Lakers recruiting the Portland Trail Blazers as a third team in trade talks with the Bulls. According to one source familiar with the discussions, the Lakers would get Hinrich, the Bulls would get Adam Morrison, Steve Blake, Travis Outlaw and Juwan Howard, and the Blazers would land Tyrus Thomas and Sasha Vujacic. Such a deal would lessen the amount of money the Lakers would be adding to their payroll next season.

Make sure to check out Celtics 17's NBA trade deadline live blog on Feb. 18th, Thursday, from 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. EST!

The Task of Appreciating LeBron James

For a nice weekend read, I put together a controversial piece about LeBron James. Here's a teaser for y'all:

Now a successful olympian and a proven NBA player striving to win on the most hyped stage, LeBron is one who suffers much criticism. Hunted down by ravaged fans and pestered by merciless media, everything James says is blown up and twisted, played into something that will either positively or negatively excite and intrigue the mud-slingers aimed at dousing LeBron with his own words. In a sense, haters.

It’s unfortunate though...

Go check it out by clicking the link provided above!