Wednesday, June 18, 2008

So is Kobe still considered better than LeBron?

Cause I have a feeling that if LeBron had A) Pau Gasol B) Lamar Odom C) veteran PG Derek Fisher and D) Phil freaking Jackson that the Cavs probably take Boston.

Hell, you could argue that they should've beaten the Celtics anyway. But if James is surrounded by the type of talent that the "Best Player in the NBA" has, I'm pretty sure they go more than six games. At least when the Cavs got a big lead at home they didn't blow it.

(also, the Cavs are close. Really close. They need a piece or two and they're champions. With LeBron and the stellar team defense, all the Cavs need is someone who can put up 15-20 points on a night-in, night-out basis and they're unbeatable).

Congrats to the Celtics by the way. I did not believe in them the entire season and I really thought that the Cavs would knock 'em out. I also thought that the Lakers would win the series, but I underestimated the crappiness of the Laker defense. Ray Allen should not be getting to the hole. Ever.

The one bright spot here is that this was probably Boston's best chance at a title. They're an aging team and their window will only be open for another season or two. If the Cavs can add that number two guy (be it Michael Redd, Elton Brand or whoever) then I think they'll be playing into mid-June for quite awhile.

4 comments:

geoff said...

I am a little bit of a sucker when it comes to great players finally winning a title.

I am happy for Garnett. I am happy for Pierce, who is a lot better than I ever thought. He shut down Kobe. Hell I am happy for P.J. Brown.

I'd just feel better about it if they were playing for some other city other than Boston.

Ben said...

I just kinda wish they made the trade, lost in the playoffs and then won next year.

This Celtics team never actually lost. There was no toiling, no near misses. They went from doormat to champion *like that*.

Pierce impressed me the most out of any of the Celtics. Garnett, despite his big numbers in the final game, never really did it for me. Sure, Simmons points out that he had a big night in the final game, but they were killing the Lakers. Getting 26 and 14 in a 30 pt blow out isn't the same as 26 and 14 in a 1 point win, you know? (KG always seemed to talk trash when they're up 20, but he never showed up in close games. Meh. I'm still bitter).

But that's nitpicking. They went through the best teams in the East and they took care of the best team in the West. Do I still think they're flawed? Ya. But they're the best, there can't be any doubt.

Erik said...

The Cavs are indeed close to being title-worthy. The Celtics are now the class of the league, and the Cavs were the team that posed the biggest threat to eliminating them.

Defensively, there is no question that Boston and Cleveland were the best two teams in this year's playoffs. And despite what anyone thinks about Mike Brown and whether he should be canned for his lack of offensive gameplanning, the C's proved yet again that defense always wins championships, and Brown rightly emphasizes that.

Give LeBron one or two other star players, let Brown coach them in the ways of defense, and we can be partying on Public Square this time next year.

On that subject, I'm beginning to think Ron Artest might be the best fit for the Cavs this offseason. He's still a nut, but he hasn't had any truly idiotic moments in over two years. Brown coached him, Brown wants perimeter defense to be a priority this offseason, and he'd also satisfy Ferry's desire to add scoring.

I think LBJ could keep a guy like Artest in check. If we didn't have LeBron, I'd be wary. But maybe Ron-Ron is the missing spice in the recipe.

Ben said...

Artest is an interesting choice and I'm not sure how I feel about it. He's not the most selfless offensive player but he is talented. I think if the Cavs go after Ron-Ron, they need to add one more person.

Artest as the third option would be killer but I'd be very worried if we were counting on him being the No. 2.