NBA Playoff Thoughts

The NBA Playoffs are one of the most exciting times of the year for me because I am an absolute basketball junkie and the NBA playoffs pit the best basketball players in the world against each other in do-or-die situations.  Here are some of my thoughts as the Conference Finals progress.

How good are the Miami Heat?


This is not a question where I'm asking for an actual measurement of how good the Heat are, but instead an exclamation like, "WOW.  How good are the Miami Heat?!?"


When people asked me before the playoffs about who I thought would represent the Eastern Conference in the NBA Finals, I answered the Miami Heat.  It was hard for me to say this because there are still certainly questions regarding their team chemistry and playoff experience together, but I kept telling people that it was impossible for me to bet against Dwyane Wade and Lebron James.  Each of these players had already carried teams to the Finals singlehandedly.  If each of them can do it by themselves, it was difficult to grasp what they could do together.  Thus far, the results have been pretty impressive.  In their series against Boston, it simply seemed unfair at times.  During the series, it seemed like Wade and James had planned out the game like prize fighters.  Wade would come out with a point-scoring, play-making barrage in the first half to soften up the champs, while James would be pulling a rope-a-dope in the corner.  After halftime, the roles would reverse with James hitting jumper after jumper and driving to the rim delivering power punches to knock out the champs.

I'm not saying their path to the Finals is not going to be difficult because that would just be ignorant.  The Bulls are the best team in the league and have the best defense in the league that will test the Heat night in and night out.  With that being said though, it is still impossible for me to bet against two of the five best players in the league.

(Sidenote:  I was discussing this with one of my friends the other day.  Even though, I absolutely love seeing the Lakers lose, I really wish they hadn't.  With the Lakers and Spurs both being knocked out, the playoffs have been set up for doubters to create excuses for why the Heat were able to "sneak through the playoffs" and win a championship.  When doubters take a look at the Heat's postseason run, they will be able to make these claims.

Skeptical fan: "The Heat really didn't even win the championship.  In the first round, they beat the Sixers, who honestly didn't even belong in the playoffs.  Then they beat the Celtics, who were too old and past their prime.  In the Eastern Conference Finals, they beat the Bulls.  This was the first season that the Bulls made a deep postseason run and Derrick Rose is still learning how to take over playoff games.  In the Finals, they didn't even have to beat the Lakers.  Instead they faced Dirk, who doesn't have a clutch bone in his body.  He's never been able to lead the Mavs to victory in the playoffs.  **OR** The Thunder?  Their best player is barely old enough to buy beer.  Their two best players don't even get along.  Of course, the Heat beat them.  Their entire postseason run was easy.  They played very beatable teams in every single game."

If the Heat win the NBA Finals, I know a ton of people that will definitely make this argument.  If the Heat actually do end up winning, I will be unbelievably annoyed having to listen to these ignorant statements.)

Are there any valid complaints with Russell Westbrook's play?


Throughout the postseason, there have been questions regarding Westbrook's play.  In the first two rounds, many people questioned Westbrook's decision making and ability to facilitate to other players on the Thunder specifically Kevin Durant.  At times in their first two playoff series, the Thunder were unable to get Durant touches in the fourth quarter during end of the game situations.  Since Westbrook is the point guard of the team, much of the blame was placed on him for the Thunder's inability to get Durant shots.  Though there were certainly times Westbrook could have done better, it would be irresponsible to place all of the blame on him.  Getting Durant touches is dictated by the plays that are called and Durant's ability to move off of the ball.  Though Durant is certainly very good at this, the Grizzlies were able to throw two defenders (Battier and Allen) at him that could push him around and frustrate him while chasing him around screens.  Memphis's team defense did a great job of making it difficult on Durant while he attempted to get open.

Though there are others to blame, the criticism of Westbrook is not completely undeserved.  When taking a look at Westbrook's game, it is simple to see why he has received so much criticism.  Westbrook is a great scorer and attacks the rim like few other players in the league can, but when attacking Westbrook looks to score first and pass second.  I'm not going to say this is a bad thing because Westbrook's ability to score makes him one of the most dynamic guards in the league, but his preference to score can become a hindrance when it comes to creating for other teammates.  In my opinion, the Thunder's offense flows best when James Harden is facilitating the action.  With Harden as the creator, both Durant and Westbrook are able to work off of the ball, which puts even more pressure on the defense because help defenders have to be aware of where both of them are as well as the ballhandler.

Ultimately, when looking at Westbrook, I think it is necessary to understand that he is still a young player learning how to be a point guard and leader.  To be the explosive player he has become, he will likely have some turnovers and make some poor decisions.  For Westbrook, it could just be, as some have suggested, a matter of maturing and getting more experience as a point guard.  It could also be that he just may never be a great point guard.  He is already a great player and scorer, but being a great point guard is something that can be difficult to learn.  Great point guards are typically born, not made.  This is what I believe the case is with Westbrook.  It's impossible to teach someone how to get others involved and lead a team.  Playing the point guard position well is just an innate skill that can not be taught.  You either have it or you don't and I just don't think Westbrook has it.

Is Memphis better without Rudy Gay?


(Even though the Grizzlies have already said that they are going to bring him back, I still want to explore it.)

I know this seems like a silly question, but I really am curious if the Grizzlies are better without their leading scorer and supposed best player.  After spending the summer on Team USA at the 2010 FIBA World Championships, Gay developed into a much more complete player and was putting up great numbers until he got injured in the middle of February.  With their best player out, many assumed Memphis would fall out of contention for the last playoff spot in the West and settle for a lottery pick.  Much to everyone's surprise, they made a few savvy moves at the trade deadline (trading for Shane Battier and signing Leon Powe) and turned themselves to a playoff team.

With Gay out of the lineup, they took on a completely new persona and became a scrappy team centered around team defense and inside strength.  While many other teams in the league are going small, they went big with Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol.  With Gay no longer in the lineup taking 15-20 shots a night, Memphis was able to completely embrace this new identity and begin to rely on their post play.  This transformation led them to the playoffs and helped players like O.J. Mayo and Mike Conley develop into more than just role players.  Having to take on a heavier load led to these players taking bigger leadership roles on the team and a feeling of greater importance.  When Gay returns next year, it could be difficult for the Grizzlies to reinvent themselves again.  It might not be the worst idea to trade him this offseason, but a Gay-less Grizzlies team seems unlikely with the comments from their GM and owner.