Charlie Rosen is pretty much the man. I encourage you to read his stuff if you don't already.

-----------------------------------------------

LeBron rises, Celtics shrink in fourth quarterby Charley Rosen
Charley Rosen is FOXSports.com's NBA analyst and author of 14 books about hoops, the current one being No Blood, No Foul.

Updated: May 13, 2008, 12:03 AM EST 47 comments add this RSS blog email print Game Time: Cavaliers 88, Celtics 77

Another away-from-home gut check for the Celtics resulted in still another throw-up performance.

2008 NBA playoffs



The responsibility for Boston's fifth consecutive road loss was equally divided between the hometown heroes and the road wimps.

Here's the breakdown:


Cleveland

The Cavs effectively countered Boston's screen/rolls with a switch-and-swarm defense that held the Celts to 38.6 percent shooting.

Except for a couple of lapses by Ben Wallace early in the game, the baseline rotations of the Cavs' big men were right on time.

Indeed, the only defensive liability for Cleveland was Sasha Pavlovic, who was repeatedly abused by Paul Pierce.

On offense, LeBron continued his shooting woes — 2-13 from mid-range and beyond — but when the game was on the line late in the fourth quarter, he nailed an 18-footer, then bulled his way to a resounding dunker. Overall, LBJ was 7-20, 13 assists, three steals, two blocks, four turnovers, and 21 points. Not quite a super-human effort, but good enough to totally control the end-game.

Ben Wallace made a couple of hustling plays on defense, but was otherwise invisible.

Zydrunas Ilguaskas — 3-10, seven rebounds, two assists, nine points — was another non-factor.

Wally Szczerbiak was solid early — 6-11, 14 points — and managed to play adequate position defense.

Daniel Gibson — 5-9, six rebounds, four assists, 14 points — killed the Celtics by turning kick-back passes from LeBron into swishes.

Delonte West got poked in the eye and had a rather subdued game — 3-8, one assist, two turnovers, six points — but right out of the gate he repeatedly got into the middle against Rajon Rondo and made a couple of sensational buckets that helped the Cavs get off the mark.

Anderson Varejao — 6-8, six rebounds, 12 points — was a stand-up defender, and even hit a jump shot.

The Cavs shot 45.5 percent primarily because the Celtics' defense routinely overreacted when LeBron threatened to power his way into the paint. On several such sequences, the Celtics surrounded with him with all five defenders. No wonder Cleveland wound up with so many uncontested perimeter shots.

Here's an obscure stat to ponder: In the Cavs' half-court sets, LBJ received 40 passes when he was stationary and only seven passes when he was in motion. Subtracting the shots that he took (1-3), James wound up cashing in four of his dimes after he caught the ball on the move.
In any case, it was the Cavs' nasty defense coupled with the Celtics' powder-puff offense that won the game.


Paul Pierce and the Celtics are now 0-5 on the road in the playoffs. (Gregory Shamus / Getty Images)


Boston
Except for a couple of weaves that turned into either handoffs or reverse cuts that generated good looks for Ray Allen, Boston was never able to get into any kind of rhythm on offense.


With their S/Rs smothered, they frequently over-handled and had to resort to individual efforts. That's why the Celts managed only 16 assists on 27 baskets to the Cavs' 24 and 35.

Pierce was AWOL — 6-17, 13 points — forcing a number of shots and missing a couple of layups.

Ray Allen ran himself to daylight only on a limited basis — 4-10, three assists, 15 points — and did a poor job on defense, particularly when he was supposed to be tracking Wally World around weak-side screens.

Rajon Rondo was the most energetic of the Celts — 7-14, four assists, two steals, three turnovers, 15 points — and even made half of his eight jumpers. But Rondo also forced several shots and made at least a half-dozen poor decisions with the ball.

Sam Cassell — 0-5, 4 points — was a minus at both ends of the court.

Then there's Kevin Garnett — 6-13, 10 rebounds, four assists, 15 points. He posted up five times and attacked the basket only once — a hard drive that suddenly turned into a fadeaway, contact-avoiding flip shot that badly missed. In the fourth quarter, KG was 0-2. During the two losses in Cleveland, Garnett has exposed himself as being strictly a finesse player who leads the league in fakes-per-shot.
What must the Celtics do to protect their home-court advantage in Game 5?



Try Tony Allen behind Rondo at the point.

Set up screens on both boxes and run Ray Allen through snake routes a la Rip Hamilton.

Post Pierce against LBJ.

Get KG the ball at the foul line so that he can't be doubled, and where he can maximize his quickness. And encourage Garnett to attack the basket, take the resulting hits and get to the stripe.

Get more ball- and player-movement into the offense, and implement more alignments where the ball can be reversed.

Maintain more defensive balance when LeBron drives by sending only one helper and staying in touch with the likes of Gibson, Szczerbiak and West.
If the Celtics think that the Cavs will automatically go belly-up in Boston, then their season won't survive the weekend.


http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/8...fourth-quarter

I think this might be the postseason that shows Garnett would not have been the same as Tim Duncan had he been in SA instead of Minnesota (like many KG fan's have insinuated). KG is a nice player, hard worker and good teammate. But, none of that changes the fact he doesn't have it in his DNA to be "The Man" in crunch time like Kobe and Duncan.

For Boston to win, Pierce needs to carry them as he's the only guy who both wants to and is capable of doing so. Cassel and Ray Allen want to (but aren't capable) while KG is capable (but doesn't seem to want to).

KG's an overrated Baby. Always has been, always will be.

With all this negativity, anyone want to make a sig bet on the Celtics winning Game 5? I'm sorry, but they didn't look any worse losing Games 3 and 4 in Cleveland, particularly Game 4 which was practically tied until the last 3 minutes than they did losing Games 3, 4 and 6 in Atlanta. And we all saw them blowout the Hawks Games 5 and 7 at home, just like they did the Cavs in Game 2.

I doubt they'll put their money where their mouth is. I think the Celtics win game 5 and the series. It's up to the higher seed to win on the road and prove they can win the series, not the other way around. If Kobe is healthy, the Lakers will win game 5 and the series. Hornets-Spurs is a little more difficult to predict, but until the team with home court loses at home they're not in trouble.

Garnett is having a better series then Lebron. And yet Lebron is still getting all the praise. I definitely don't think Garnett is overrated.

From a shooting point-of-view Garnett's having a great series and LeBron a horrible one. From any other point of view LeBron is having a far superior series, and I think it's clear to anyone watching the games he's having a far greater impact. Cleveland's defense has not had to react much to KG, while Boston's is set to deny LeBron, opening up opportunities for others. And of course KG's disappearing act in the fourth quarter is a huge difference as compared to LeBron trying to be a closer(and succeeding in one of the two close games).

Take LeBron off Cleveland and KG off Boston, and it's not hard to see it wouldn't be 2-2 at this point.

Reading these comments you'd think the Celtics were down 3-1 at this point. Were they even favored in games 3 & 4? If so, it couldn't have been by much.

The real question is whether Cleveland can win in Boston, not the other way around.

The Celtics are in trouble once/if the Cavs steal a game in Boston, until then, they're still in control here.

Cavs are a shit team. Losing even two games to them is a failure. Never mind losing 3 to Atlanta.

At what point is just winning a playoff series enough? Is their season a failure if they won the championship but needed 7 games in every series?

I'll wait until either the Jazz or the Cavs win away before pressing the "oh shit, they're in trouble" button for either the Lakers or the Celtics.

The Spurs, on the other hand... might look like they're down and out, but they're resilient bastards.

of course not. you really think that's where the C's fortune is headed based on the basketball played in their two series so far?

detroit figures to wipe the floor with them at this point if they get out of the cavs series.

they couldn't win a single game in ATLANTA. that's embarrassing. Now Wally and Delonte West look like superstars. that's embarrassing.

Agreed, and Doc is a terrible coach, KG isn't assertive enough and Sam Cassell has been a huge negative. Doesn't change my main point that this "Cavs in 6" shit is ridiculous. Home teams are now 17-1 this round, and the one was a 1-pt victory at the buzzer. I don't know why, but it seems this year is even worse for home/road disparity - NO/SA for example are blowing each other out at home and losing by 20+ on the road. The Celtics are probably going to win tonight, and there's probably a 50/50 chance it will be by double digits.

It is definitely worse this year. Honestly it's puzzling to me. Home court advantage should be marginally lessened in the playoffs -- I think the grind of the regular season, the back-to-backs, the jetlag, etc are a big factor in HCA, but you don't have that stuff in the playoffs. You get to settle in a city, no back-to-backs... it seems like the crowd is the biggest factor left, and it's hard to understand how professional athletes can be that rattled by crowds. The Hornets-Spurs series is insane. You're talking about literally 40+ point swings depending on the location of the court they're playing on. It's like there's no point in trying to analyze these games this year. Just pick the home team and be done with it.

I'll give a pass to the west teams losing on the road. They are actually playing good teams in their buildings. Celtics have faced two junk teams and even those junk teams aren't playing particularly well. Look what happens when Detroit faces a lousy team. They win in 5 and don't even need their best player.

Unlike Detroit, the Celtics haven't lost a game at home or trailed in a series yet. Their playoff point differential is also better than the Pistons'.

The question is why they suck so much on the road right now after having the best road record in the NBA in the regular season. Maybe there's something to it, maybe it's just a small sample size. But they've barely been challenged at home. It's an issue, but hardly a fatal one until someone wins in Boston.

I'll be the first to say it...

Spurs in 7 (over NOH)

Please stop with the point differential nonsense.

Winning by blowout isn't more impressive than winning a close game?

Judging by the two C's series the answer is clearly NO.

Was it a failure for the Pistons then to lose two games to the marginally-better 76ers, including one in their own building?

I don't disagree that the Celtics are in trouble, it just seems strange to write off the team with home court advantage when they've dominated at home.

Yes but then they beat the Magic in five games.

Without the heart of their team.

I love that people have already forgotten that KG hit two clutch shots and LeBron missed a layup at the end of game one. Three games later and we've determiend that LeBron is clutch and KG is not because LeBron helped his team win two home games.

I just want to see a good, exciting, close finals. I thought Boston from the East or a crazy-powered LeBron would be the only way. Now that both the East and West have these home-court shenanigans and Boston isn't tearing through the East, it makes me less excited for the finals.

LeBron with a couple of early makes. Good sign for Cavs fans.

I like that LeBron is being aggressive to the hole. He has been to the line three times so far...

Good win the Lakers

Lakers baby! Whooooooo.

Lebron had 23 1st half, KG took 18-footers, Pierce's game is deteriorating faster than a speeding bullet, and, oh wait C's are up 3-2. See you guys late friday night once we lose again so we can talk about how bad the Celtics are before they win game 7.

Good grief. The point isn't that Boston is a horrible team. They aren't. Nobody left is. The point is that they are drastically underachieiving, and that they are not displaying championship characteristics. I.e., that they are playing like maybe the fifth or sixth best team in the league, not a dominant one. When their own coach says they need to be better under stress, that should lend some credibility to this, no?


Eh, actually it's more to the point that KG didn't want anything to do with the ball and did pretty much nothing of substance in Game Four(0-2, 1 reb in the 4th Q). Meanwhile in game 1 LeBron did miss a shot he should have made(a lot of them in fact). He was ready and willing to take those shots though. Garnett usually shrinks from them. Not hard to fathom the difference between the two.


This misses a few points. One, San Antonio has led all three games in NO at the half. The Hornets are winning because they have been physical with the Spurs and are as tough mentally as they are, which is not a combination SA sees often, to put it mildly. Game 3 was tight well into the fourth quarter. It's easy to look at the final score and say blowout, no contest for the home team but only Game 4 in the five games so far has been that way prior to halftime. Last time out, San Antonio just absolutely could not hit a shot in the third quarter, and that had a lot to do with it.

It's not so much the crowd this year as it is evenly matched teams and the familiarity with the environment, etc.

The C's should just forfeit game 6.

I don't know how people can watch the NBA. The last 1:05 of the Cavaliers-Celtics game took 14 minutes to elapse. I turned the game on with that 1:05 on the clock and I told my wife I'd be in bed in a few minutes. Sure, I expected it to take maybe 5 minutes or so, but it took 14 minutes to run 65 seconds off the clock.

By comparison, the final 2:30 of the Red Wings-Stars hockey game took less time, and that was with a timeout, two penalties, and the puck going out of play at least once.

I've seen college basketball games in which the final 1:05 took only 1:04 to complete. I've been to a 3 Doors Down concert that was over in less than 14 minutes. When I was in fifth grade, I made out with one of my teachers and got myself pregnant in only 12 minutes.

Screw the NBA.

My brother has long maintained that there is no point in watching the first 46 minutes of an NBA game, and for the most part I agree.

I wouldn't be surprised if, minus the halftime show, the first 46 minutes of an NBA game took less than 14 minutes to play.

You definitely don't have to sell me on the Hornets, as I am a Hornets fan, but for me it's basically all about defense. It's true that game 3 was not a one-sided game, but that was due to an abnormally good offensive game from the Hornets given that Bruce Bowen has essentially removed Peja from the roster -- and given that the Hornets usually create offense from their defense. The Hornets have not played a single minute of decent defense in San Antonio. Conversely, they are swarming all over the place (sorry) in New Orleans. I'm just sort of wondering why that is.

I don't expect anything different tonight. I don't think they'll get wiped out a la game 4, but their defensive rotations will again slow down (because of the crowd I suppose, I dunno) and we'll be headed back to New Orleans for game 7. My big concern there is the puzzling THREE full off days between games (what the hell, NBA?) so the Spurs will have three days to rest up and sit around thinking about their third quarters. Don't know if it will make a difference, but it's definitely a concern.

I guess I just don't agree with the premise here. Other than the initial burst of energy I haven't seen a whole lot of difference in the Hornets defensively(outside of the second half of Game Four). San Antonio made a lot of adjustments for Game Three offensively as well, and in Game 5 after the first few minutes NO's defense wasn't all that different than the games they played at SA. San Antonio just plain stopped making shots. They got a good amount of open shots in the third quarter of Game 5, pretty much the same ones they were making in Game 3. I really don't think it's any more complicated than that. A couple less layups maybe but not a major difference.

This is one of those things that gets thrown around a lot about basketball in general.

Not surprisingly, I completely disagree. Why not have the NFL just play a college style OT period as the entire game? Why not have baseball matches last 1 inning? Cut straight to th epenalty shoot outs in soccer and hockey?

This I do agree with. Basketball should not turn in to the NFL in the last minute, with coaches calling a time out to bring on a different lineup and draw up a different play each possession. I think teams get too many timeouts - should be 1 full TO and 1 20 sec TO per quarter in the NBA. Keep the TV timeouts that are unavoidable.

Well, I guess the good news for the Hornets is that the Spurs can't shoot 70% from the floor all game long...

Ouch

NBA bashing: It's what the cool kids are doing!

Lebron is absurd.

The two most hilarious criticisms of the NBA I've read in this thread so far are:

1. Home teams win too often.
2. real time isn't more evenly distributed throughout the game time.

This has been some pretty $h!tty basketball. I am all for a good defensive game once in a while but this series is something else.

KG actually looked nervous to take that shot

Doc Rivers...please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Looks like Cleveland is ready to give this game away.

And the Celtics are playing hot potato apparently.

So why did they wait so long to foul? Every second counts numb nutts.