SportsBoner.com

Somewhere deep in the crevasses of the NBA headquarters in New York City, the bowels of the Disney Corporation the parent company of ABC/ESPN, old stinking rich white men in suits yearning for a dream NBA Finals match-up, have all collectively had a potential super-ratings orgasm.

Just like the picture above speaks volumes, this Finals will be a star-studded cast of a combined 4 All-Stars, two sure Hall of Famers, one Hall of Fame coach, and one coach who stumbled into an unbelievably fortuitous situation (not unlike the pimply 90 lb kid who stumbled into the girl’s locker room).  So instead of a potential yawn fest that might have culminated with broadcast executives taking murder/suicide pacts to offset the pain of low Finals ratings yet again brought upon by the San Antonio Spurs and/or the Detroit Pistons, you have the rejuvenated Los Angeles Lakers and the equally wide-eyed Boston Celtics.

The Western Conference Finals were eerily similar to the first round between the Spurs and the Suns only that the Spurs were on the opposite spectrum.  Some signs were two game 1s werein the visiting team lost a 20+ spread only to give the game away, losing another big lead to ultimately lose a close game, failing to win two games at home, and of course even though both teams were evenly heatedly matched, the series never went beyond 5 games.  If I sound a little bitter, that’s because I am.  No need to mince words, in a series where the Spurs could easily be up 4-1 (if you allow me to pretend they could have won games 1, 4 and 5) due to a variety of reasons like not blowing a  20 point lead in game 1,  getting the right call from the officials in game 4, and not blowing a 17 point lead in game 5 as well as contain Black Mamba in the 4th.  However thats just all what-ifs, and there is no excuse.  The Spurs in the past had to navigate through a tough Western Conference getting beat up along the way just to make it to the Finals, so past championships proved worth the trial whence they beat up on their opponents handily (with the exception of Detroit in 05 when it went 7 games).  If they were to make it this year, there would be little doubt they like the Lakers now would be the favorites to win even if they don’t have homecourt advantage.  Having to go through a buzzsaw through the likes of the Phoenix Suns, New Orleans Hornets, and the Lakers is only a testament to how difficult the road was.  The Lakers equally with the exception of Denver had to finish off contenders like the Utah Jazz and the Spurs for the right to meet the Celtics.

If the Celtics win the title, it means they definitely deserve it mainly due to the fact that they peaked at the right time, disposing of a very good Pistons and an even better Lakers team.  It also means even though they struggled to take out the Atlanta Hawks and the Cleveland Cavaliers, I personally think their quality of opponents pale in comparison to the Lakers.  Upon closer inspection it may bode well for the Celtics that they struggled with a below .500 playoff team, another that had only one true offensive threat in LeBron James because maybe that was enough for them to take themselves seriously and not think that their cakewalk through the regular season would be sufficient in the playoffs.  That remains to be seen.

LA will be a hard-pressed to lose this as it’s been suspected and now beyond doubt that Kobe Bryant is on a mission and his supporting cast is talented enough to take them to another title.  Against the Spurs I was able to see up close how deep the Lakers are as their entire 2nd unit has grown throughout these playoffs and their youth and energy could give the Celtics trouble against their starters even.

As for my favorite team, it is back to the drawing board.  With their head coach signed for an extension through 2012 the same year Tim Duncan’s expires, it is possible both will retire at the same time or simply leave the team.  Tony Parker and Manu Giniboli are here for at least another year, with Parker extended through 2010 while Ginobili’s might be up a bit sooner I am not sure.  The point is, the core will still be together with the team’s main concern to reload the bench and tap into all those stockpiled picks they keep in Europe and D-Leagues.  Nevertheless, Gregg Popavich had a good point in saying if the team had won it all this year, no one would expect them to change much but because they lost many are pointing to needed changes.  In my opinion, had the Spurs won it this year, they would have had made changes regardless due to seeing up close what areas they were exposed during the playoffs.

Objectively I see the Spurs being a viable contender for the next 2-4 years as long as the core stays healthy and the right pieces are surrounding them.  Unlike the Suns or the Dallas Mavericks, the Spurs will not have to overhaul their roster or mindset/philosophy completely.  Much like the pundits say, I believe an athletic wing and another athletic forward/center will do wonders for this squad.  Of course they have been winning for years without on overly athletic 2-guard or pivot, relying on good ol’ hard-nosed defense, experience and chemistry.  If anything truthfully the Spurs like any team with hopes of a title, just need luck.  Luck that there are no debilitating injuries, the right bounce of the ball, or even the right call.

Although the players and coach might not admit it, I believe that the Spurs are always out to prove themselves to everyone.  Even though they may always comment that they don’t care what anyone thinks, they do things the way they want to and that winning is the only thing on their minds, this organization respects the game and its fans and it only makes sense that they care how they are perceived in history.  When they won their first title in 1999, many including Phil Jackson claimed that title should have an asterick due to the shortened season because of the lock-out (though I guarantee if it were Jackson who had that title in ‘99 to give him 10 total rings, he wouldn’t say a word about astericks).  So the Spurs had a cloud hanging over them and whispers that they can’t win a title in a full NBA season up until the 2003 season when they finally won a 2nd title.  However soon after more excuses were made when the Spurs hoisted the O’Brien trophy last summer and more criticism flowed saying that San Antonio cannot win in even years, nor repeat/defend a title thus laying more claims that this is not a dynasty.

As I mentioned before, even if the organization does not publicly say it, I feel personally that this team has too much respect for the game thusly it only makes sense that they take such comments to drive them to excel even more and strive to put away criticism and entrench themselves in NBA lore.  However when you take a step back and look, many will see the difficulty of repeating a championship (only further strengthening the argument that a truly great team will overcome such obstacles and weakening the Spur’s position), and the aforementioned amount of fortune ultimately needed to gain this goal.

It also stands to say that when your critics are talking heads of journalists who don’t play all 82 regular season games and possibly 16-28 postseason games; or former players turned “analysts” who (unless their names are Bill Russell, Michael Jordan, or Shaquille O’Neal to name a few ) never won multiple titles much less one, San Antonio should be (and are I’m sure) proud of their accomplishments thus far and just ignore all those jealous over-the-hill/no talents.   But if it helps, such criticism should be one helluva rallying cry.

Seeya next season =)

Lakers in 4.