Let's not fool ourselves here, basketball fans: the finals are already over. The Cavs, bless their scrappy hearts, don't stand a chance against the Spurs. Tim Duncan is playing at too high a level, Daniel Gibson can't guard Tony Parker, and Poppovich is going to throw every defensive scheme his mind can conjur up at LeBron.
But that's okay. It doesn't mean this can't be entertaining. Think back to the 2001 Finals, when the Lakers streamrolled the 76ers in five games. That series was actually one of the more watchable finals of the new millenium. Why? Because it was pretty awe-inspiring to see Allen Iverson - all 160 pounds of him - try and take down the vaunted Lakers all by himself. He pulled it off, too, if only for one game. That's all we need to happen here to feel like we're watching something that matters.
What would make these finals passable, in terms of relevance, watchability, and - must-have for the NBA - ratings? One, LeBron and the Cavs could steal game one on the road, thereby creating a buzz around the series that would last until at least the middle of next week. Two, the Cavs head to Cleveland down 2-0, but with LeBron averaging 38 points, 13 rebounds, 10 assists and three mindfuck plays a game. Or three, the Spurs take two in San Antonio, the Cavs take two in Cleveland, and we go back and forth until a climatic game seven where LeBron dunks over Duncan in the lane in the final minutes and the Cavs take the title.
Scenario one, most likely, isn't happening. Scenario two, while fairly possible, is a reach with Poppovich coaching against Mike Brown. And scenario three is completely asanine, but just too fun not to list and hope. So, with all that in mind, we'll take the Spurs in six. But since we're not NBA experts, by any means, here's how everyone else sees it:
Simmons - Spurs in five
SI - Spurs in five (or six)
Sporting News - Spurs in six
Fox Sports - Spurs in six
Yahoo! Sports - Spurs in six
No comments:
Post a Comment