richboy wrote:Offense sells tickets, defense wins games but rebounding wins championships. That what Pat Summit says and its very true. Its the reason why the Cavs are such a tough out in the playoffs. Its the reason a improved Laker defense look so bad at times against the Celtics. It doesn't matter how good your defense is if you can't grab the rebound it goes for waste.
Yeah, if the "experts" did a close analysis they would've realized why the Celtics struggled against the Cavs and that they wouldn't have those problems against the Lakers. Cavs are a much better defensive team than the Lakers, and a much, much better rebounding team. They essentially started two centers at the same time -- Big Ben and Big Z -- while the Lakers had an SF playing as PF, and a soft PF playing as C. Yet experts completely ignored the fact that the Lakers would get abused on the boards. Or if they did realize it, they would simply use the flimsy argument of "well Kobe is Kobe and if Kobe is Kobe then Kobe will win it!"
Another reason why the Cavs played the Celtics tougher is because they had a big man that could hit automatic midrange jumpers (Big Z and Joe Smith). While the Celtics overloaded the strong side of the ball, their big man would be open on the weak side for an open jumper. Celtics had to focus on Lebron, and it was extremely beneficial that he could pass it to Big Z or Joe Smith for an open jumper. Odom, on the other hand, is very, very inconsistent with jumpers, and Gasol may be a good shooter, but that didn't matter because he was often too hesitant to shoot them. So the Cavs big men not only could hang with the Celtics' in terms of rebounding, but they were a threat for hitting jump shots, which would kill you when you focused the D on Lebron.