Welcome to the modern NBA, where you can make a case for no more than three teams to be hoisting the Larry O'Brien Trophy next June.
Interestingly enough, the two "Super Teams" went down by identical 29-point margins: the Cavs took down the Knicks, 117-88, while the Spurs embarrassed the Warriors, 129-100.
Yes the Knicks are a complete and utter joke but show me someone who says a team other than Cleveland, San Antonio or Golden State will win it all, and I'll show you the most forced contrarian taek of all-time.
POLL: Has Kevin Durant made the Warriors worse?— First Take (@FirstTake) October 26, 2016
Close to it, anyways.
The Celtics just might be the fourth-best team in the NBA, and the second-best in the Eastern Conference. If we were living in a world where science could confirm LeBron still lacks the clutch gene, I might be able to talk myself into Celtics in 7 over the Cavs.
But the C's are nothing more than a plucky mid-major type of team, much like the kind Brad Stevens used to coach at Butler. They'll be entertaining as hell, sound defensively and garner more trade rumors for Boogie Cousins than Taylor Swift or a Kardashian romance rumor combined.
Even if they land the mercurial Boogie, there's no shot. The gap between the Celtics and the top three isn't that much smaller than the gap between the Celtics and the Nets or 76ers.
It's shaping up a lot like the 2015 NCAA Men's Basketball tournament. The Warriors are constructed like that John Calipari one-and-done juggernaut at Kentucky, whereas the Spurs are built like that Wisconsin powerhouse with Frank Kaminsky, Sam Dekker and Nigel Hayes.
On the other side of the aisle is LeBron and the Cavs, similar to the Duke team which won it all that season.
You remember those three teams from the Final Four, but you have to go back and look it up to realize that Michigan State was the fourth team.
Those are the Celtics. Better than the gap, not elite. And it's just hard for me to get too excited about a group that will win 50-55 games but have zero shot at winning 16 more after that.
It's not their fault necessarily, it's an NBA issue more than anything.
Danny Ainge deserves all kinds of credit for making the C's quasi-relevant so soon after the Pierce/Garnett/Allen exodus, requiring only one truly awful season (2013-14, when they finished 25-57) to get to where they are today. Going from awful to average was pretty seamless (25 wins to 40 wins in '15) and going from average to above-average wasn't all that bad either (40 to 48 wins in '16).
Leaping from above-average to a bona fide title contender is the hardest part, and Boston is somewhere in between those stages right now.
It's not an awful place to be in because at least you'll get to watch some competitive games, watch them put a scare into the great teams and beat up on the dregs of society.
But like the Cleveland Browns, who just may go 0-16, the end result is predetermined: no championship for you. If you're hoping for one, you're bound for a bigger disappointment than @DanaB_Number3's career at the Tavern.
No comments:
Post a Comment