« The Transformed Man | Main | Oil: Price and Depedence »
Ill-Informed Predictions
Well, the playing roster is set for the NBA, so why not offer some ill-informed opinions? I say Washington beats Chicago before losing to Miami. Miami, in turn, loses to Detroit which loses to San Antonio in the finals. In the West, no upsets in the first round, but Dallas beats Phoenix in round two. So says I. Probably none of this will happen. I think this is a much more wide-open wide open playoff season than we've had in years. The East has two legitimate championship contenders, and a lot of the top teams are essentially brand new and might be subject to unexpected playoff collapse. Plus Denver is hot, hot, hot, which could throw a wrench in the works, and on paper, at least, the 76ers are a very good basketball team.
April 21, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d83464895169e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ill-Informed Predictions:
Comments
After the last two games' performances, I'm not sure my Celtics are making to the next round.
Posted by: Adrock | Apr 21, 2005 9:54:31 AM
Oh man, how awesome was the Nets game last night? I know, I know, Walker and Pierce didn't play the 4th Q. But still, what kind of drama was that? VC gets hurt in the first quarter and the Nets go down by 19 (!) midway through the 2nd. Then they storm back, outscoring the Celts 32-8 in the 3rd (most of which PP and AW played, BTW) and hold on for the win to eliminate LeBron.
Meanwhile, Shaq is hurt and may not even play in the first round! As next years' Nets announcer might say: YES!
(Am I predicting a Nets upset of Miami? Ummmm, errrr, *cough* ... what's Shaq's condition again?)
Posted by: Al | Apr 21, 2005 10:09:27 AM
Keep dreaming, Al. I'd pick Seattle to lose in the first round, but they're playing Sacramento, which is even more beat up.
Posted by: Haggai | Apr 21, 2005 10:12:17 AM
After the first 4 years of this decade I never thought that I would see either the Bulls or the Wizards actually win a playoff series ever again, and now it's guaranteed to happen. Stunning.
Also, wake me when it's Miami v. Detroit and Seattle v. Phoenix.
Posted by: diddy | Apr 21, 2005 10:45:53 AM
Not having watched any NBA since Detroit humiliated Shaq last year, isn't the fact that Pierce and Walker didn't play the 4th very important when taking any lessons from the Nets game?
Posted by: theCoach | Apr 21, 2005 11:04:24 AM
No, Coach, given that everything important in the game happened in the first 3 quarters. The 4th was just a matter of the Nets holding on to their lead.
Posted by: Al | Apr 21, 2005 11:27:25 AM
The sixers suck.
Posted by: MP | Apr 21, 2005 11:48:06 AM
Its not an apples to apples comparison as the Celts obviously hung it up the last two games.
The thing I'm mostly worried about is the poor shot selection and lazy rebounding they've had ALL season. This team is clearly better than they are performing. Ricky Davis takes some of the worst shots I've ever seen, yet you KNOW he's better than that. And on the O boards, 5 guys are running back once the shot is put up, with the exception of Delonte West and Tony Allen (when they play.)
It always amazes me when you see these guys go out night after night and do the same bad things. Ultimatey, if they don't improve, its really on the coach's head.
Posted by: Adrock | Apr 21, 2005 11:58:37 AM
I agree with Haggai, if the Sonics were playing anyone else in the first round, they'd be knocked out. But since they play injury-riddled Sacramento, they're knocked out in the semis.
I think the Pacers knock off the Celtics and set up that oh-so nice Pistons-Pacers 7 game series.
The Spurs knock off the Mavs/Suns in the Western Conference Finals, while the Heat prove too much for the Pistons. Or maybe the Pistons shut down Wade, and Shaq can't carry the team. Who knows.
Alls I knows is that San Antonio won enough games to get home-court advantage against the Heat and Pistons- the only other real contenders in my mind.
Posted by: Cincinnatus | Apr 21, 2005 12:22:56 PM
Dallas-Phoenix round 2 would have some extra drama given Nash's history with the Mavs. A Dallas win would be a major, major vindication of Cuban's decision not to re-sign him.
Posted by: Foo Bar | Apr 21, 2005 12:37:06 PM
Everyone laughs when I tell them this, but I like Phoenix to win it all, or at least make the Finals.
Part of this is the basketball version of the Pundit's Fallacy: I really like Phoenix, I think they play the game the way it should be played, and I'd love to see them win. But I have some real reasons, too:
1 -- Phoenix is an above-average defensive team. Other than Nash, all their starters are pretty decent defenders, and Marion is quite good. As a team, they hold opponents to 44%, which is remarkable, considering how many fast breaks their opponents get. Yes, they allow lots of points, but that's not a very good measure of team defense.
2 -- From what I've seen, Tim Duncan isn't 100% healthy. Maybe he's been saving it for the playoffs, and he'll start kicking ass this weekend. If not, it really opens up the West for the Suns.
3 -- I don't think they'll slow things down and try to play "playoff basketball." This will be a shock to the grind-it-out teams and their crusty old coaches, and the Suns just might blow teams like San Antontio out of the water.
Posted by: Steve | Apr 21, 2005 1:02:45 PM
Phoenix has a serious problem: if anything happens to Steve Nash they become about 50% of a good team. And, in the playoffs injury is always right around the next corner. Other teams seem to be much less dependent upon a single player, other than Miami, of course. But, my prediction is Phoenix will win it all.
Posted by: Vaughn Hopkins | Apr 21, 2005 1:51:16 PM
on paper, at least, the 76ers are a very good basketball team.
Although MY's use of it here is not so bad, can I just bloviate about how much I detest the insertion of the word "basketball" into situations where everyone already knows that it's being discussed? Like the ever-increasing number of analysts who extend "scoring" into "scoring the basketball." Dear lord, make it stop. It's so amazingly prevalent in football that I barely even notice it anymore, but everyone who talks about basketball really needs to cut it out.
Actually, I think the first time I really noticed this sort of thing was when I heard golf highlights/analysts (I never watch or follow golf, but watching Sportscenter obviously makes some exposure to it unavoidable) referring to this or that shot as "a great golf shot." Uh, what the hell other kind of shot could it be?
Posted by: Haggai | Apr 21, 2005 2:45:46 PM
Vaughn,
You're right about the Suns' dependence on Nash. They lose him, they're fucked.
But you could say the same about every team in the playoffs, regarding its best player. Except maybe Detroit. I'm not even sure who their best player is, but you take away any of their starting 5, and they're still a kick-ass team.
Phoenix's problem in relying on Nash is that he's fairly injury-prone. They've been resting him a lot to prepare for the playoffs, so that should help.
Anyway, my prediction is Phoenix and Detroit in the finals. That series could go either way, but my guess is, Phoenix in seven.
Posted by: Steve | Apr 21, 2005 3:39:16 PM
Steve,
You make some very good points about Phoenix. I don't know if you were able to watch any of the three Phoenix-San Antonio games this year(I watched all three), but the Spurs were able to run against the Suns. They scored 114 in the first one, 120 in the second game (in OT) and 101 in the third game (without Duncan or Ginobili). I don't think the question should be, can the Spurs run with the Suns. I think it needs to be, can the Suns run a half-court offense against the Spurs D for seven games if need be?
There's a big misconception about San Antonio out there that hasn't been true for the past couple of years. This isn't a carbon copy of the '99-'02 teams. They don't just drop it in to Tim and have everyone wait outside the 3-point line with only one true slasher out there (Sean Elliott, Derek Anderson, etc). This team is better than the '03 champ. team, and better than the '04 team that lost on a insane shot.
Before the injury bug hit them, they actually had one of the largest average margins of victory in the history of the NBA- only a few tenths of a point off from the '96 Bulls margin. You don't do this by sheer defense alone.
Tim is as close to healthy as he's gonna get this year, the biggest problem is rust right now. But they've got enough pieces to get through Denver and Seattle/Sac. And Tim will have 10-12 games to shake off the rust before the Western Conference finals.
I think the biggest problem that Phoenix has is not whether or not Nash stays healthy, but if Amare can run with Tim, at Tim's level, for seven straight games. Not saying he can't- he's a man-child- but that'll be the X-factor in my book.
The core of this team has been through all of the ups and downs of the past two seaons. This is their third year together (save for Rasho). With the exception of Nash, how many playoff games have the Suns played? There's a difference between regular-season ball and playoff ball. As Shane Battier said recently (paraphrasing), "We thought we had a reasonably good chance against San Antonio last year, but they just brought an entirely different gear in the playoffs, and the next thing you know we were done."
The Spurs are gamers/winners. The team has gone through it all the past two years and this season. Duncan and Pop, arguably the two most important pieces, have gone through it all and then some over the past 8 years.
I just don't see it happening. But then again, this is coming from the guy who was checking his bank account to see if he could swing some Western Conference Finals tickets with .4 of a second left on the clock in game 5 of the Western Conference semifinals.
Posted by: Cincinnatus | Apr 21, 2005 4:52:00 PM
I think everyone is going to be surprised by who wins in the West. Except for home court advantage, regular season records are meaningless. As Detroit showed last year, what matters is who is hot going into the playoffs.
I think Denver, Dallas, and even Houston all have a chance of being that hot team this year.
Also, check out the head-to-head matchups for these teams during the regular season. I think the results will be unpredictable.
Posted by: blah | Apr 21, 2005 5:10:35 PM
Dallas has won nine of their last ten. They are the best in the league at defending against the 3-pt field goal, and 7th at opponents overall field-goal defense.
I think Nash might tempt them into a running game,and I worry about Phoenix. But they can, believe it or not, play a half-court game with the best this year and would give them even odds against San Antonio. They won one less game during the season than SA, are peaking, are younger and deeper, and without Nowitzki are still a very good team. Less vulnerable to injuries.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Apr 21, 2005 5:42:21 PM
Haggai:
I'm definitely with you on that point. I can't stand how analysts say things like "I think the Packers are going to be a very good football team next year" as if, had he not inserted the term "football", people might have thought he was saying they'll be a great field hockey team. I think the commentators think it makes them sound more authoritative, when in fact it's just redundant.
A related pet peeve of mine is when commentators spell out names of leagues unnecessarily, e.g., in the middle of an NFL game the color guy will say "there's no question Peyton Manning has become the best quarterback in the National Football League". Surely "league" or "NFL" would suffice.
Posted by: Foo Bar | Apr 21, 2005 5:48:03 PM
Here's one of my own pet peeves, motivated entirely by my bias and upbringing:
Whenever someone compliments Allen Iverson, someone else always has to be clever and point out what a ball hog he is. There's the missed shots, the turnovers, they howl.
This, I think, is sour grapes. Any player who is the sole scoring threat on his team year after year is going to have more missed shots and turnovers. On individual games this can be a problem, but for the most part the opposite is true. Does anyone reasonably think that the 76ers limited success would be possible without an explosive scoring talent like AI?
Furthermore, the sloppy schtick is mostly myth. Few people noticed it, but AI's efficiency rating was 7th in the NBA this year. He managed this while leading the league in scoring and steals, and coming in 5th in assists. His transition froom shooting guard to point guard resulted in an extra two assists per game, as his scoring actually went up!
In exchange for an average of one extra turnover per game (compared to efficiency master steve nash) he gives you a spectacular additional 15 ppg.
The defense rests. The playoffs are the verdict.
Posted by: Jonathan Dworkin | Apr 21, 2005 7:03:20 PM
Jonathan,
You're right about AI's turnover. But I can't accept that a guy with his talent can't shoot better than 42 percent. That's fucking awful, much worse than other high-scoring perimeter players. Yeah, it's harder to get clean shots when you're 4-foot-11 or whatever. So pass the damn ball.
Posted by: Steve | Apr 21, 2005 7:17:38 PM
Pistons/Heat is the series I'm most looking forward to. Who wins? Who knows.
In the west, I'd be very nervous if I were a Spurs fan. The west is tough enough to beat with a healthy Timmy. If he's limping, they're gonna get beat for sure. Dallas is obviously the intriguing team out west, but who knows if Jason Terry and Josh Howard can hit big shots down the stretch.
The Bulls are missing a couple of key guys, but the Wizards are looking weak. They never seemed to get it back together after Hughes went down. Good series, but I'd put my money on the Bulls.
It'll be interesting to see if the Nets can do any damage against the Heat. They'd better steal the first game if they want to make the series truly interesting.
The Sonics/Kings series should be fun. Lots of good guards. Lots of running and gunning. No pressure to win titles. And the games will last until 3am. (The fact that Mike Bibby has never made the all-star squad is a crime.)
As Matt says, this year does seem more wide open than normal. But if you put a gun to my head, I say the Heat beat the Mavs in the finals.
-----
"on paper, at least, the 76ers are a very good basketball team."
What kind of paper is that? Rolling paper?
After you get past Bubba Chuck, you've got a Chris Webber who limps around like he's 60 years old and a bunch of kids.
If Korver and Iguodala grow up quick... If Sammy Dalembert manages to stay out of foul trouble... If their bigs knock down their open outside shots... If Webber figures out how to play on the low post with this team... If they execute perfectly down the stretch of games... If they manage to defend the 3pt line for the first time all year...
Then they might be able to make the series interesting.
If I'm Larry Brown, I play Carlos Arroyo a lot on Iverson, double constantly with the quick 'n' long Tayshaun (the kind of defender who gives Iverson fits), double team Iverson in the backcourt to get the ball out of his hands, triple team him in the frontcourt, and dare the other Sixers to beat me.
It's too bad the Pacers didn't lose their last game of the year. The Sixers could've taken down the Celtics.
Posted by: Petey | Apr 21, 2005 8:07:55 PM
I like Miami to go all the way, on account of the fact that they have the best player in the league (no, not the big fella).
Posted by: P. B. Almeida | Apr 21, 2005 8:57:43 PM
"I like Miami to go all the way, on account of the fact that they have the best player in the league (no, not the big fella)."
I like Udonis Haslem too, but I hardly think he's the best player in the league.
Posted by: Petey | Apr 21, 2005 9:41:15 PM
I'm definitely with you on that point. I can't stand how analysts say things like "I think the Packers are going to be a very good football team next year" as if, had he not inserted the term "football", people might have thought he was saying they'll be a great field hockey team.
Only a matter of time before it pervades all sports.
"When he's healthy, Mark Prior sure is effective at pitching the baseball."
"Roger Federer is the favorite at Wimbledon once again. After all, nobody serves the tennis ball on grass courts better than him."
Posted by: Haggai | Apr 22, 2005 12:05:38 AM
I'm not sure who will win it all, but I'm sure the West Coast will dominate in good style.
Posted by: Sean | Apr 22, 2005 9:32:58 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
