There was quite a bit at stake on Tuesday night when the San Antonio Spurs came to Los Angeles. The Lakers, in jeopardy of dropping all the way to the four-slot over the remaining two games, needed a win badly against the Spurs. While seeding in the Western Conference is still up in the air, home court advantage in the NBA Finals is still changing on a nightly basis. The Spurs and Bulls have top overall position, but the Lakers are still wrestling for priority over the Heat and Celtics.
Gregg Popovich decided to rest his “Big 3” starters on Tuesday. And for those that believe in the Lakers’ Hollywood Ending, that scene played out again when the game was tied at halftime, and then tied again halfway through the 4th quarter. It wasn’t until the final minutes when the Lakers were able to squeak out a win against guys that probably all logged season-high minutes.
I don’t think Popovich was in a winning situation before the game even started. What would’ve happened had he started his starters? The Lakers are still the favorites to see them in the Western Conference Finals. He knows he’ll be seeing Los Angeles for six or seven games in a row in the next month or so. Even if his “Big 3” start, would he have shown his hand of cards this close to the playoffs when there was virtually nothing at stake for them? They would’ve run their usual offensive and defensive sets. Nothing fancy. And if he’s running his starters out there just to run a few plays, then what’s the overall point of that? One can understand that the best thing Popovich could last night was sit his main guys. And even then, the most time any Spur logged was 28 minutes.
Meanwhile, the Lakers in a much different situation because of their recent losing streak, went with business as usual, and four players logged over 30 minutes and Pau Gasol ended with 41. I have to admit, I thought the Lakers were going to have this game in control by the end of the 3rd quarter. But that wasn’t the case. They more had this game under control at the end of the 4th quarter. But a win is a win, right? Now just the 2nd and 3rd seeds are at stake and all they have to do is go up to Sacramento, for what will no doubt be an extremely emotional “last game in Sac-Town/let’s go out with a win against those pompous Lakers” game for the Kings, and tally one more win. Yes, a win is a win, but I would like to see the Lakers go up there and hammer a W by halftime with the message of “if we have to share a room with our little brother, the Clippers, then you’re our little sister down the hall in Orange County”. (I am from Orange County, so I say that respectfully to all Orange County natives.)
The Spurs and Lakers expect to see each other in the Western Conference Finals. But should they?
Next: Lakers or Spurs
[phpbay]Lakers Swingman, 3, “”, “”[/phpbay]
Since 1999, the Western Conference has been represented 11 times in the Finals by either the Lakers or the Spurs. Only in 2006 was it represented by Dallas. Of those 11 appearances, 9 NBA titles have gone to the West – five to the Lakers and four to the Spurs.
The Lakers have met the Spurs along the way in six of those past 11 conference championships, either in the semifinal or final round. And of those six meetings, four of the winners have gone on to be the NBA Champion. Not only does the East have to go through Los Angeles or San Antonio, but they typically have to go through each other first.
They say it’s not a rivalry until you’re able to take the same prize from each other. Until you both win. Was Lakers-Kings a rivalry in the early 2000’s? Nope. The Kings could never dethrone the Lakers. While many other teams fancy themselves as the Lakers’ new and upcoming rivalry, there has only been one – the San Antonio Spurs.
But what about Lakers-Celtics? They’ve won and lost against each other for the grand prize, right? I guess for media’s sake you could sell that as a rivalry, but it doesn’t even compare to that rivalry of the 80’s. The odds of these Lakers and Celtics squads meeting each other in the Finals gets slimmer and slimmer each year.
When it comes to the Lakers or the Spurs punching their ticket to the Finals, it typically happens at the expense of the other. It is the best rivalry the NBA has at the moment.
Next: 2011: Lakers vs. Spurs
[phpbay]Lakers Swingman, 3, “”, “”[/phpbay]
Despite anticipated runs by the Thunder and Mavericks, there is really no reason to doubt that the West will be won in either Los Angeles or San Antonio. The success of each franchise has been predicated on the same enduring principles. Each team has had the talent. Each team has had the experience. And each team has had the coaching.
Speaking of, it seems that playoff coaching is still one of the most underrated playoff variables. In the grind of a seven game series, few things make as much difference from game to game as the guy steering the ship. From lineup changes, to rotations, to wrinkles in the sets, to pace of game, to preparation, coaching can win and lose games. If a certain player on either team is the “X Factor” to their success, then coaching is the “Y Factor”.
Players and home court advantage aside, do you put your money on Phil Jackson or Eric Spoelstra? Do you put your money on Gregg Popovich or Scott Brooks? No respect to those guys, but rings talk.
The Spurs will be in the Western Conference Finals. So will the Lakers. The Spurs have stuck with the core nucleus of characters over the past several years. Duncan, Ginobili and Parker. They all play playoff basketball when the playoffs start. The Spurs’ role players have changed from year to year, but have remained competitive.
The Lakers have only won their championships when they have had a tried and tested nucleus of players as well. Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant in the early 2000’s, and Kobe and Pau as of late. Their role players have changed minimally, and many of Los Angeles’ role players already have rings.
Neither team has missed going to the Western Conference Finals, or the NBA Finals for that matter, when they’ve been top three in the conference. And primarily it’s been when either team has been a one or two conference seed. Either team has only made it to the league championship as a third seed once, but both times brought home gold.
The Spurs are the one seed. The Lakers will be the two or three seed. But both will face each other in the Conference Finals. And the winner of that series will be the NBA champion.
[phpbay]Lakers Swingman, 3, “”, “”[/phpbay]