Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
At this point, who’s your favorite to win the West — the Spurs or the Thunder?
Steve Aschburner: San Antonio. I had picked OKC when the season began, but Gregg Popovich‘s deft management of the schedule and his guys’ minutes — and the play and indoctrination of their young guys — switched me over.
Fran Blinebury: The Spurs have been strong, steady and improving all season and their back-to-back sweeps in the first two rounds have only reinforced that opinion. They have the deepest roster and the best mental makeup of any of the remaining teams. I’ll go one step further right now and declare San Antonio winning in The Finals, too.
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
Give us three words (and some explanations for your choices) to describe the Indiana Pacers at this point of the postseason.
Steve Aschburner: Deep. Talented. And now soft. S-O-F-T. If that’s what Larry Bird sees, it’s good enough for me. The Pacers didn’t need to brawl vs. Miami but they needed to push their inside agenda. In the most bruising way necessary.
Fran Blinebury: 1 - Disorganized: Sloppy passing, nonexistent defense and no answer to the Heat dunking exhibition. 2- Delicate: When Danny Granger went down with his ankle injury, they surrendered. ”I can’t believe my team went soft,” Larry Bird told the Indianapolis Star. ”S-O-F-T. I’m disappointed. I never thought it would happen.” 3 – Done.
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
Play Lakers GM: What do you do in the wake of another West semifinal defeat?
Steve Aschburner: I start by abolishing World Peace. Sounds nihilistic, I know. But given the rebuild/retool ahead, they don’t need Metta’s shenanigans. Then I trade Pau Gasol, maybe to Minnesota for Derrick Williams in a package. I rebuild around Andrew Bynum because Jimmy Buss will fire me if I don’t. And I ride out Kobe’s angst or swing a deal for him that makes him happy. If that’s possible in every sense.
Fran Blinebury: I get on the phone to Orlando and find out if there’s any way to re-start the conversation for Dwight Howard. Does it take Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol together? Done. Gasol is fading into the twilight of his career and for all there is to like about Bynum on the nights he plays, that happens too infrequently. Howard has his own flaws, but combining with Kobe Bryant puts him back into the championship picture immediately, restores his damaged reputation and transitions the Lakers for the post-Kobe Era. I also do not sign Ramon Sessions to a long-term contract at significant cost. Not nearly enough bang for the buck.
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
We’ve seen a game and a half in the second round of Miami without Chris Bosh: How far can the Heat go without the bottom third of the Big Three?
Steve Aschburner: The Heat might get past Indiana, they might get through the Eastern Conference finals without Chris Bosh. And that would be a testament to LeBron James‘ and Dwyane Wade’s skills, resolve and, let’s face it, reputations for getting fouled. But there’s no way they get past the best of the West – San Antonio or Oklahoma City – to win a ring without their All-Star power forward. So Bosh might end up solidifying his spot with the club, because he’ll be missed sooner or later. And I actually think sooner.
Fran Blinebury: You’re already dissing him as the “bottom third” of the Big Three? Would Bosh have missed two free throws like LeBron? Would Bosh have missed the layup like Wade? We won’t bother comparing him to Mario Chalmers. Already a thin team, now Miami is a two-legged stool without Bosh in the middle. The Heat can still get to the Finals because Derrick Rose and Chicago no longer stand in their way. But it’s unlikely they can raise a banner against the Spurs or Thunder without Bosh.
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
Blake Griffin has been a little banged up, but we’re going there anyway: He can dunk, sure, but is he ready for the postseason spotlight?
Steve Aschburner: I don’t see the full range of skills, moves, wiles and whatever else goes into postseason success. Blake Griffin at this stage is still a regular-season highlight reel and accident — or brouhaha — waiting to happen with his collisions above the hardwood. Both he and the Clippers are building toward something, but they haven’t arrived.
Fran Blinebury: When you jump over cars and become a national spokesman for a product, you are inviting the spotlight. That said, eight games into his playoff career, Griffin is a work in progress who needs to expand his game and his skill for the Clippers to become real contenders.
Scott Howard-Cooper: Of course. It’s all relative, though. Is he is the best power forward in the game? No. Is Griffin as good as he will be next season or the season after? No. But is he good enough to beat an opponent as good as the Spurs? Yes. He can step into the moment just fine. (more…)
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
Oh, prescient ones: How many games is this Lakers-Thunder series going? Why do you see it that way? And who wins?
Steve Aschburner: It’s a five-gamer. Lakers eke one out at home. They needed Game 2 badly and didn’t get it. Kobe isn’t Kobe anymore, not like we think of him. And it’s all OK, TV ratings be darned. A Spurs-Thunder West showdown would be Tombstone at high noon.
Fran Blinebury: Thunder in five. They’re younger, better deeper. Best case is Kobe will explode in one home game to get a win. Another end-of-the-road sweep for the Lakers isn’t out of the question after gagging up Game 2 so ignominiously.
Scott Howard-Cooper: The Thunder will beat the Lakers in six games. I would have liked to see this series include a Laker team playing with urgency, but no sign of that. The Thunder are better, but the Lakers are still good enough to make it interesting. Said the man who said Dallas would never sweep L.A. in the second round a year ago.
Shaun Powell: OKC in four, and I mean a convincing four. The Lakers can’t keep up with these young boys. Besides, Bynum doesn’t want to play, Gasol is headed down the other side of the hill and Kobe is ready to blow a fuse. At least this is the evidence we’ve seen so far in the postseason. There’ll be some soul-searching going on in Lakerland in the offseason, which begins in five minutes.
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
The regular season is just about done. What’s your favorite story – whether it had a big headline or not – of 2011-12?
Steve Aschburner: For feel-good moments, it was hard to top the night Kaleb Canales took over as interim coach of the Portland Trail Blazers. Plopped into the job unexpectedly to replace fired Nate McMillan, about 24 hours before a road game against the mighty Chicago Bulls, Canales on the sideline looked like a young fan who’d won a “Coach-for-a-Day” contest. But he helped Portland to an improbable 100-89 upset. His players – most of whom had “come up” with the newly promoted video coordinator – demonstrated their affection for him (and vice versa) with their performances and their embraces afterward. It was a happy highlight in a very down year for the Blazers.
Fran Blinebury: Zombies. The Walking Dead. The San Antonio Spurs. Every time we bury them, they come back to bite us and now they’re growling and hungry going into the playoffs.
Scott Howard-Cooper:Jeremy Lin is a good one. But there is something about the Spurs of 2011-12 that hooks me. The way Popovich has merged youth with the big-name veterans, the way Tony Parker has advanced his game, the way management made a series of in-season moves, the way the roster overcame the lengthy absence of Manu Ginobili and still finished with the best record in the West. Never saw this coming. (more…)
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
It’s awards season, so let’s make up a couple. Who’s your stud of the year, the player who most impressed you? And your dud?
Steve Aschburner: Another way to phrase the first part of this would be, “¿Quién es más macho?” based on my choice: Ricky Rubio. The pressure was on this kid, built up over the two years between his draft selection in 2009 and his arrival from Barcelona, finally, this season. Yet he proved to be far more NBA-ready than many people expected. His innate ability to deliver the ball transformed Minnesota offensively and his long arms and instincts kept him surprised those of us who thought he’d be overwhelmed defensively. He was “Linsanity” in flyover country, though for longer and more legitimately. Minnesota was 18-13 in the games Rubio started, 8-26 (with one game left) when he did not. Dud of the year? Ladies and gentlemen, may we present Mr. Dwight! David! Howard!
Fran Blinebury: He doesn’t have the classic, muscular stud physique, but Tony Parker put the Spurs on his back and carried them to the best record in the West, setting up for a realistic run at San Antonio’s fifth championship. And he does it all with that sly, knowing grin on his face. As for a dud, it’s hardly a race. I do believe Dwight Howard is Secretariat at the Belmont, running 31 lengths away from the field.
Scott Howard-Cooper: Most impressed? Probably LeBron James, because he played at an MVP level (again) while improving his image (for a change), even if he can partly thank Dwight Howard for setting a new high for player-movement lows. Speaking of my dud, Howard doesn’t win this prestigious award. At least he produced in a big way. But no one could have imagined Lamar Odom’s 2011-12. A letdown after leaving the Lakers, maybe. But to be told to stay away from the Mavs would have been unimaginable to consider in December. (more…)
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
We know who the superstars are this postseason. Who’s your pick to become a breakout star in the next couple months?
Steve Aschburner: The key here is identifying the guy whose team is going to last two, three or four rounds but who isn’t already a known quantity. By definition, anyone who already has been an All-Star is eliminated, so that wipes out Chicago’s Luol Deng even if he opens eyes globally with his full array of offensive and defensive skills in a Finals run. So I’m going with Indiana’s Paul George, young enough and tucked-away enough in Indianapolis to still sneak up on people, but explosive enough and versatile enough to cause some real headaches for the Pacers’ postseason foes, especially if they line up in the East as New York, Miami and Chicago. George has the length and quickness to pester some of the big scorers on those or any other teams, with serious open-court chops.
Fran Blinebury: If they can make the bells inside his head stop ringing by the time the playoffs begin, James Hardenand his beard could become the hottest thing in June this side of brides in bikinis.
Scott Howard-Cooper:Serge He-Blocks-Ya. Though hardly an unknown around the league as the Thunder’s interior presence on defense, Ibaka is not well known among fans. That all changes now. He gets first-place votes as Defensive Player of the Year, Oklahoma City has a long playoff run, and Ibaka routinely swats four shots on national television. (more…)
Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes to weigh in on the three most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.
OKC is 5-5 in its last 10 games, with two losses to the Clippers. A pre-playoff blip, or is something bothering you about the Thunder?
Steve Aschburner: When I saw the Thunder in Milwaukee recently, I was awed by their firepower, chemistry and aggressiveness. But I didn’t fully factor in the opposition – the Bucks offered no resistance in the paint or at the rim, and Russwell Westbrook was matchup hell for both Brandon Jennings and Monta Ellis. Serge Ibaka blocked five shots in a quarter … but five Bucks’ shots. My concern is that against bigger teams – up front and in the backcourt – OKC is the club that plays smaller, relying on jump shots, without much in the low post and without enough defensive tenacity. There are no perfect teams this season, these guys included.
Fran Blinebury: Despite their little 5-5 walkabout, the Thunder are winning at a .721 clip. Projected over the course of a full 82-game schedule, that would be a 59-win season and it’s hard to see that as any kind of flop. I consider this to a be pre-playoff hiccup, where OKC has clinched the division title and has maybe eased up off the mental gas pedal. Having said all that, I’ll repeat what I’ve always said about the Thunder. They need to work on attacking the basket late in games and stop relying on jump shots to solve every problem.
Scott Howard-Cooper: The concern now is the same concern as before: The Thunder do not take care of the ball, and that could obviously cost them in a tight playoffs. The slump? The postseason is often different than the regular season, depending on the matchup. Win the first round 4-0 or 4-1 and the questions will be about their invincibility. (more…)
Fran Blinebury: The Spurs have been strong, steady and improving all season and their back-to-back sweeps in the first two rounds have only reinforced that opinion. They have the deepest roster and the best mental makeup of any of the remaining teams. I’ll go one step further right now and declare San Antonio winning in The Finals, too.
Fran Blinebury: You’re already dissing him as the “bottom third” of the Big Three? Would Bosh have missed two free throws like LeBron? Would Bosh have missed the layup like Wade? We won’t bother comparing him to Mario Chalmers. Already a thin team, now Miami is a two-legged stool without Bosh in the middle. The Heat can still get to the Finals because Derrick Rose and Chicago no longer stand in their way. But it’s unlikely they can raise a banner against the Spurs or Thunder without Bosh.
Fran Blinebury: Zombies. The Walking Dead. The San Antonio Spurs. Every time we bury them, they come back to bite us and now they’re growling and hungry going into the playoffs.
Fran Blinebury: Despite their little 5-5 walkabout, the Thunder are winning at a .721 clip. Projected over the course of a full 82-game schedule, that would be a 59-win season and it’s hard to see that as any kind of flop. I consider this to a be pre-playoff hiccup, where OKC has clinched the division title and has maybe eased up off the mental gas pedal. Having said all that, I’ll repeat what I’ve always said about the Thunder. They need to work on attacking the basket late in games and stop relying on jump shots to solve every problem.
