Sportz' 2013-2014 NBA Preview

Can LeBron and the Heat steamroll their way
to a 3rd title?

The NBA starts up next week and I'm sort of excited.  I am admittedly a Lakers fan and I don't see us having a good season.  Lots of questions and not the talent of past years.  Still, I love basketball and love the NBA so there is a ton to watch along the way.

ATLANTIC DIVISION

1-NETS (4th seed in Eastern Conference)
2-KNICKS (5)
3-RAPTORS (9)
4-CELTICS (12)
5-SIXERS (15)

The Nets and Knicks should be playoff bound with the Nets possibly in the championship contender category.  Brooklyn has a load of talent that must be molded but I think they have a great shot to beat Miami in a 7-game series.  I'm not as high on New York.  Sure, they'll win their share of games but I don't see them going far in the postseason.  Toronto could be the team to sneak into a #7 or #8 seed.  We all know that the Celtics sold off their parts (aside from Rondo) to build for the future.  However, Philly will most likely be the worst team in the league this year and could beat them in the Andrew Wiggins chase.

SOUTHEAST DIVISION

1-HEAT (1)
2-HAWKS (6)
3-WIZARDS (7)
4-MAGIC (11)
5-BOBCATS (13)

Miami's sole focus is winning their 3rd straight title.  So don't get caught up into anything that happens during the season.  It's all about May and June.  Atlanta is stuck in the friend zone where they're not competing for a title at all but aren't bad enough to miss the playoffs.  Washington is the trendy pick to make the playoffs and I can see it.  They played well down the stretch last season and if John Wall can show the leadership they need from him, they have a great shot at a playoff spot.  Orlando is in a bit of a rebuilding mode though they have some exciting parts already.  Charlotte can't score but I'm interested to see if they will be that tough defensive squad they'll need to be to be competitive. Aside from that, they're looking forward to the return of the Hornets.

CENTRAL DIVISION

1-BULLS (2)
2-PACERS (3)
3-PISTONS (8)
4-CAVALIERS (10)
5-BUCKS (14)

Chicago and Indiana have the best chance to knock off Miami in the Eastern Conference.  The Bulls played them tough last year and now has a healed Derrick Rose to provide the star power.  They are defensively solid and aren't afraid of anything.  Neither is Indiana who took Miami to the brink last year.  They've rounded the edges to their team and get Danny Granger back to bring more offensive punch.  After that, not much.  Detroit should see a nice rebirth with some talent infusion ... but does Josh Smith really fit?  I'm interested to see how Chauncey Billups (yep, he's back) mentors Brandon Jennings.  Cleveland has all the young talent to build a playoff team and are hoping a solid season could possibly bring LeBron James back next summer.  Milwaukee was that #8 seed last year and watched all their offense bolt via free agency.  They'll be strong players in the Wiggins sweepstakes.

SOUTHWEST DIVISION

1-ROCKETS (2nd seed in Western Conference)
2-SPURS (4)
3-GRIZZLIES (6)
4-MAVERICKS (10)
5-PELICANS (12)

The Southwest will be tough.  I think the Spurs will ultimately be the better team but the Rockets are built for the regular season.  I see them really blasting off (no pun intended) while the Spurs will pace themselves to get strong come playoff time.  I like Memphis but I don't see them being that strong team without Lionel Hollins.  Dallas has talent but nothing cohesive to make a big difference.  I can see them stealing a playoff bid though.  New Orleans has a young exciting team but not good enough to contend for anything yet.

NORTHWEST DIVISION

1-THUNDER (1)
2-NUGGETS (7)
3-TIMBERWOLVES (8)
4-TRAIL BLAZERS (9)
5-JAZZ (14)

Oklahoma City is still the class in the West and I think both Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook desperately want to get back to the Finals.  I see Durant as possibly knocking LeBron from the MVP perch.  After them is a downer.  I think Denver will really suffer from their offseason moves ... especially letting go George Karl.  Minnesota is ready to ascend, but I just can't hook my cart onto them until I see them fully healthy and believe that they'll stay that way.  Portland, to me, isn't much different than last season so I see them in the same light.  Like Denver, too much has left Utah to have me believe in them.

PACIFIC DIVISION

1-CLIPPERS (3)
2-WARRIORS (5)
3-LAKERS (11)
4-KINGS (13)
5-SUNS (15)

A new beginning, eh?  The Clippers could end up with the top seed when all is said and done.  They have talent, continuity and are deeper than anyone in the league.  Golden State is exciting and now have Andre Iguodala who can defend those tough wings.  Injuries always haunt them, though, but they can make a run.  Everyone wants to talk about the Lakers.  Again, I'm a Lakers fan and maybe I'm a bit down on them.  I don't think Kobe will be back to form until late in the season, Pau Gasol and Steve Nash are just too old and banged up and the talent surrounding them is suspect.  Plus, there are too many teams that are too good in the West to allow the Lakers to sneak into the playoffs.  The Kings and Suns are still building, though it seems that Phoenix has decided to go the Philly way and bottom out.

POSTSEASON

FIRST ROUND
Heat over Pistons, Bulls over Wizards, Pacers over Hawks, Nets over Knicks
Thunder over Wolves, Rockets over Nuggets, Clippers over Grizzlies, Warriors over Spurs

CONFERENCE SEMIS
Heat over Nets, Pacers over Bulls
Thunder over Warriors, Clippers over Rockets

CONFERENCE FINALS
Heat over Pacers
Thunder over Clippers

NBA FINALS
Heat over Thunder

Does the NBA's Finals Format (2-3-2) Really Matter?

Would a 2-2-1-1-1 format have changed last year's Finals?

The NBA has unanimously voted to change the Finals format from the 2-3-2 setup to a typical 2-2-1-1-1 style.

So what does it mean?

Well, it should matter competitively.  In the playoff, 14 of the 15 series used the 2-2-1-1-1 format with only the Finals using the 2-3-2 (for the uninitiated, the 2-3-2 means the team with the better record plays the first two games of the series at home, the next three on the road and the final two at home.  A 2-2-1-1-1 format means the team with the better record plays Games 1, 2, 5 and 7 at home).  The 2-3-2 mainly came about in the 1980s when the Lakers and Celtics or Sixers met up in the Finals nearly every season and players, coaches, media and the like had to keep flying cross country four times to do the Finals.

This is 2013 and teams fly on private planes.  Reporters have laptops, internet and smart phones to do their jobs covering the Finals.  Media outlets have access to each Finals city (ESPN won't have a problem moving their coverage back and forth).  We can have a Clippers-Grizzlies playoff series with hardly any issues with travel for a 2-2-1-1-1 format so what's a little more flying?  The need for having just two "site changes" isn't really there anymore.  The logistics have changed.

So let's look where it would really matter: on the court.

True, there would be more travel for the players.  I don't see this as that big of a deal anymore.  Again, each team would've played a 2-2-1-1-1 series three times before getting to the Finals.  And again, the travel plan isn't the same as it was 30 years ago.  Comfy flights with a lot of ways to coach in the air.

What will change is the feeling of the Finals.  The underdog entering the Finals had that feeling that if they stole Game 1 or 2 in the favorite's building, they'd have three straight games at home to wrap it up.  That doesn't seem fair to the team with the home court advantage.  At the same time, that underdog better win all three games at home (effectively beating a better team three times in a row in the same building ... even if it is yours) or they risk going back to the big dog's place and having to win both games.

The NBA did have a bit of storyline due to this as there were times where the underdog held a 3-2 Finals series lead heading into those final two games.  It appears that the underdog is pulling off an upset when in reality, the team with the home court advantage hasn't even lost that advantage yet.  Heck, it happened last year.  The Spurs held a 3-2 Finals lead over the Heat after the three game stretch in San Antonio.  Miami went back to South Beach and pulled off wins in the final two games and won the series.  Partly because of that, we regarded it as a thrilling series.  It worked!

But not often.  That has only happened four times in the 2-3-2 era (1988 Lakers, 1994 Rockets, 2010 Lakers and 2013 Heat).  Aside from those instances, only the 2005 Finals (Spurs-Pistons) went to a Game 7 during the 2-3-2 format.

In the 30 years prior to that change, we saw TEN Game 7s ... obviously twice as many as the 30 years since.  Note that the 1971 series between Milwaukee and Baltimore had a 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 format, the 1975 (Warriors-Bullets) and 1978 (Sonics-Bullets) Finals in a 1-2-2-1-1 format -- with the '78 series going to a Game 7.  So the thrill isn't really there in the 2-3-2 format.

I didn't really care either way.  I'm 38 years old so it has basically been the way it is my entire life.  However, I do see the need to change it back to the old way.  Here's hoping we see a lot more great Finals.

NFL Coaches On The Hottest Seats

We are nearly halfway through the season so it is fair to see which head coaches are sitting squarely on the hot seat.

1-GREG SCHIANO, BUCCANEERS:  Tampa hasn't won a game yet this year and everything is falling apart.  The whole Josh Freeman saga made the Bucs look bad.  Losing makes them look worse.  It seems as if his deal is wearing thin at T-Bay and a change could be coming.

2-TOM COUGHLIN, GIANTS:  Coughlin, it seems, is always on the hot seat.  Throughout his entire tenure in New York, he has always got a lot of heat for his team's shortcomings.  Then, of course, he's won two Super Bowl championships as well.  So which is it?  Do you keep riding with him because he has proven he's able to get it done or is it finally time to cut bait and start with a new voice in the locker room?

3-RON RIVERA, PANTHERS:  He's always on this list.  Some say it is amazing he kept his job last offseason.  However, he does have his team sitting at 3-3 so it may not be a slam dunk this year either.

4-LESLIE FRAZIER, VIKINGS:  Minnesota made the playoffs last year but 2013 has been a bust.  Their remaining schedule is bonkers so it seems slim that they'll dig out of it.  Maybe Josh Freeman shows enough to keep Frazier around.  To me, this may be it.

5-REX RYAN, JETS:  Funny.  When you have high expectations and you start 4-3, everyone wants you gone.  When no one expects anything from you and you are 4-3, suddenly your job is a bit safer.  While his coaching may not be any better, the lack of antics and circus has cleared the head of these Jets.

6-DENNIS ALLEN, RAIDERS:  This is an interesting one.  Allen has done next to nothing in Oakland.  However, Allen is the GM's guy and this roster wasn't comprised to win now.  The franchise will have a ton of cap room coming to make a big free agent splash.  The question is if Allen is believed to be the guy to handle the squad when it is overhauled.  I think he gets a least a one season crack at it.

7-MIKE MUNCHAK, TITANS:  I think that he's done a decent job in Tennessee.  However, Bud Adams isn't getting any younger and may want to bring in a guy he think can take a mediocre team further along.

8-JIM SCHWARTZ, LIONS:  To me, the Lions are a team that has all the talent in the world but is held back by something.  Schwartz could be that something.

9-JASON GARRETT, COWBOYS:  Look, the NFC East isn't very good right now.  The Giants have been putrid, the Redskins are still fighting their way through RG3's knee injury and the Eagles don't really know who their quarterback will be.  This is Dallas' division to lose.  They are the most talented team and have every opportunity to win it.  If they don't, could Jerry Jones look somewhere else?

10-GARY KUBIAK, TEXANS:  His Houston teams have underachieved a bit and this year's team has been in full melt down.  It could be time to make a change.

11-MIKE TOMLIN, STEELERS:  I know Pittsburgh fans are angry, but this isn't all Tomlin's fault.  The team is old and they've been dealt a lot of injuries (then again, most teams are).  The Steelers don't make drastic changes for change sake ... especially at the head coaching position.

12-GUS BRADLEY, JAGUARS:  Even if the Jags have a historically bad season, Jags ownership cannot hold that against Bradley.  However, this is Jags ownership we are talking about ... so who knows.

Is LeBron Right About the Celtics Double Standard?

Recently, LeBron James opened up about a possible double standard by former Boston Celtics Doc Rivers, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.  A quick recap:

-After Ray Allen stunned the Celtics by signing with rival Miami during the 2012 offseason (he was a free agent), Garnett, Pierce and Rivers (who were currently Celtics) slammed Allen in different ways about his loyalty to them and/or his destination.

-Ray Allen hit a monumental three point shot in Game 6 of the NBA Finals to save the season for Miami.  The Heat would go on to win Game 7 and the NBA Championship.

-After rumblings of a possible retirement, Doc Rivers ... however it went down ... was traded out of Boston to the up and coming LA Clippers.

-Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce were traded to the up and coming Brooklyn Nets.

Now LeBron is asking why it was wrong for Allen to leave via free agency to Miami, but it was fine for Rivers to, outsiders looking in, weasel his way to the Clippers while KG and Pierce get run out to pasture in nearby BK.  It is a valid question, though I'm not really sure which side I'm on.

To be honest, I don't agree with that whole Celtics whining last year.  Ray Allen was a free agent and was free to sign anywhere he wanted.  I get that it's tough to see him leave for Miami, who beat the C's in the 2012 Eastern Conference Finals (remember that Boston had Miami on the brink of elimination in that series).  I get that it could be viewed as a slap in the face that he took less money and a smaller role in Miami.  However, Allen was chasing a title and felt he had a better shot in Miami.  All things being equal, wouldn't you view it the same way?

KG, Doc and The Truth can be pissed all they want.  But Allen wasn't wrong.  I can't agree with that logic.

On the other side, what about what LeBron said?  Technically, those three Celtics (among others) were traded by Boston to their new destinations.  Sure, this wasn't one of those instances where those guys were upset where they were sent.  All three basically helped facilitate their trades by open discussions.  I'm sure that those three would've been cool to take one last shot together with the Celtics, but Boston was ready to blow it all up and start their rebuilding process.

While I will agree with LeBron that it does look a bit hypocritical ... and it certainly makes their comments look childish ... I cannot put their leaving Boston in the same terms.  The organization wanted that "Big Three Era" over so they could bottom out, get some draft picks and get a high selection in a should-be loaded 2014 NBA Draft class.  Garnett and Pierce were teetering on retirement but took that opening to latch on with a talented team that is a contender.  Rivers, instead, was a bit slimier by being under contract with the Celtics and then working his way out to the Clippers.

All I know is that next time any professional athlete opens his mouth about loyalty, they realize what time they live in and how loyalty often works.  Today, Peyton Manning will be going into Indianapolis to face the Colts for the first time ever.  If anyone today could say they were merged with a franchise, Manning and Indy would be it.  Instead, business happens.

Business as usual.

What Should Josh Freeman Do?

It is very rare that a quarterback that is very capable of starting is out there as a free agent during the season.  Josh Freeman went from franchise quarterback in Tampa Bay to benched, to inactive, to released in a matter of weeks.  Now he has a ton of options to resurrect his career.

Don't get me wrong: being a QB in this league is tough and I don't think you could just plug in any QB in any situation and it is a perfect marriage.  Still, it is an opportunity for some down trodden teams to quickly upgrade a tough position to fill.

So where could Freeman go?  It could all go down on Monday and here are just some (uneducated) options:


MINNESOTA VIKINGS:  Makes a lot of sense.  Christian Ponder doesn't have that franchise hold on the job like he may have had a year ago.  Matt Cassel played well against the Steelers last week but isn't much more than a journeyman at this point.  You have a decent defense and Adrian Peterson running behind you.  Domed stadium and a chance (at least in later seasons) to be a playoff team?  Could be a perfect fit.

OAKLAND RAIDERS:  The Raiders are always in the mix on situations like this.  A guy with an unceremonious exit?  Fine.  A guy allegedly in the league's drug program?  Fine.  Throwing out your future plans of Terrell Pryor as your franchise guy?  Fine.  It's the Raider thing to do so you can bet your bippy that it may happen. 

BUFFALO BILLS:  The Bills need help right now.  E.J. Manuel is banged up and Kevin Kolb is done for the season.  Freeman could come in right now and start.  The problem is that Manuel is the Bills' future and he's shown some nice things already.  So if Freeman wants to be the no-doubt starter then Buffalo isn't for him.

CLEVELAND BROWNS:  The Browns' quarterback situation is either good or bad.  Hard to say.  Both Hoyer and Weeden have been banged up but both have played well enough to have the Browns in first place in the AFC North.  Cleveland could decide that they could cash this in and go for it by adding Freeman (a la the Raiders adding Carson Palmer a few years back).  I know they like what Hoyer has done, but don't think they couldn't be tempted. 

ARIZONA CARDINALS:  I know that Carson Palmer is the starter ... right now.  Palmer is basically a journeyman now who is leading a bad offense.  Freeman could allow Arizona to start fresh with a QB of the future who can win now.  He'd have Larry Fitzgerald to throw to and ... well.  Still, not a bad job to have even though you'd be staring at the Seahawks and Niners for a while.

NEW YORK JETS:  The Jets are in sort of the same boat as the Bills.  They drafted Geno Smith to be their future.  Mark Sanchez is serviceable if Smith needs to sit a bit.  But would Freeman go into an already toxic situation where the coach, in this case Rex Ryan, could be dumped at the end of the season?  Probably not. 

HOUSTON TEXANS:  I know there is a lot of anti-Matt Schaub feelings in Houston, but I doubt that the team changes horses mid stream.  They may decide to look in a different direction next season via the draft (Johnny Football, anyone?) but not right now.  However, Freeman could decide that he could be that next man in Houston and if there is a feeling that he could sort of sit a bit this season and then take over the job next year, he may bite.  Not likely, but not crazy either.

ST LOUIS RAMS:  Tough one, but Sam Bradford hasn't taken this team very far since he was the top overall pick.  Could Jeff Fisher decide it is time to get a Steve McNair type of quarterback to helm his team?  Maybe. 

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES:  This is a similar situation to the Texans as well.  Michael Vick is only in a one-year deal so Freeman knows that they have no future invested in him.  Freeman could work in Chip Kelly's fast break offense and would be an intriguing option.  Yes, the Eagles have floundered to 1-3, but the NFC East is so bad right now that they could fire into a division title and a playoff spot. 

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS:  If this was a quarterback who just desperately needed to start and had little option, then Jacksonville makes sense.  But why in the heck would Freeman leave that mess in Tampa to go across state to deal with the worse mess in J-ville?  There are tons of better jobs out there that he doesn't have to take on this one.

Now, the Bears, Chiefs, Chargers, Bengals, Titans and Panthers could be spots if those teams decide that they need to go into a new direction.  Of those teams, only the Titans (who's franchise QB Jake Locker is injured) may do so without much hesitation.  Still, Locker is their guy so it would be difficult for Freeman to know he'd have a fair shot at the gig long-term.  There is grumbling in Cincinnati among fans over Andy Dalton, but all he has done is lead his team to the playoffs in both his seasons (and is a win away from tying for the AFC North lead). 

Meanwhile, he would only go to the Broncos, Patriots, Packers, Lions, Ravens, 49ers, Colts, Falcons, Saints, Giants, Steelers, Redskins, Cowboys, Dolphins or Seahawks if he was fine being the backup.  For a loooooong time.  Unless he decided to sit for a few weeks and see if an injury occurs to any of these starting quarterbacks (it isn't that far-fetched), I don't see him signing with these teams.

Hey, MLB ... Chill With The Champagne!

Another day in October ... another night of champagne. 

Yes, baseball loves to celebrate and it usually is popping corks like it is popping foul balls.  In this day of one-game wildcard playoffs and the 163rd game of the season, it seems as the sparkling wine and plastic sheeting industries are rolling in dough.

Stop it.

It used to be that this wasn't a big deal.  In the pre-expansion era days, the winner of each league during the regular season was heading to the World Series.  Those teams would pop champagne when they clinched and a tradition was born.  No biggie, since the season is a grind and winning your league was and still is a big deal.  Obviously winning the Series is a huge deal and worthy of an enormous celebration.  All good.

When the division format began in the early 1960s, celebrating when clinching a playoff spot during the season continued to be the norm ... as did winning the title.  But with a playoff round, winning the League Championship Series also became cause for celebration.  Okay ... a third champagne blast.  A little annoying, but I get it.  So ... clinch playoff spot, win pennant and win Series.  Not to shabby.

Then 1995 came along.  Three divisions plus a wild card team in each league meant we add yet another round of playoffs.  While it riled up purists, I was fine with it and it has been wildly successful.  However, along with another round of playoffs came another champagne shower.  Really?  Seriously?  I mean, jump up and down, get excited and hugs all around ... but champagne???  Do we see that happen when the Miami Heat knock out the Milwaukee Bucks in the first round of the NBA playoffs? 

It has been annoying and I'm usually only reminded it when it happens.  Again, I look at it as if the Heat ousted the Bucks. 

Now with this one-game wildcard playoff, there is yet ANOTHER opportunity for champagne to pop.  Unreal.  It has gotten ridiculous.

The Tampa Bay Rays clinched a spot in a one-game playoff with the Texas Rangers on Sunday.  They beat the Rangers on Monday to clinch a wild card spot.  Champagne.  They then beat the Cleveland Indians in the one-game wildcard game.  Champagne.  Say they beat the Boston Red Sox in their five-game divisional series.  Yes, more champagne.  Then the Rays hypothetically beat the Detroit Tigers or Oakland Athletics in the ALCS.  Champagne.  Deserved, but more of it.  Now, if the Rays complete the deal and win the World Series?  The big daddy champagne!

Soooooo the Rays could have five champagne showers in about a three week span.  Unreal.

To me, here is the ranking of when champagne should be popped for baseball games:
No. 1 - WINNING THE WORLD SERIES

Of course.  You are champs, you deserve the spoils.

No. 2 - CLINCHING A PLAYOFF SPOT

I normally would put this below getting to the championship series in every other sport, but in baseball it has been tradition to celebrate getting to the postseason.  It isn't an easy thing to do.  Only 10 of the 30 teams get in (compared to 12 of 32 NFL teams and 16 or 30 NBA/NHL teams).  It is a big deal that deserves a celebration after a long, grueling 162 (or 163) game season.  This isn't the NBA or NHL were mediocrity makes the postseason.  Also, once you qualify for the MLB playoffs you have just as great a shot of winning the whole thing as anyone (ask the Cardinals of a few years ago). 

No. 3 - WINNING THE PENNANT

Over 50 years ago, clinching a playoff spot and winning the pennant were the same thing.  Now they are rounds apart.  Still, winning your league and representing it in the World Series is a big deal. 

After that, I don't see any other reason to pop champagne ... outside of personal acheivements like a perfect game or a record being broken or something.  No wild card wins.  No division round wins.  I don't need to see the St. Louis Cardinals spraying 'pagne jumping around like fools wearing t-shirts and goggles because they won a divisional series.  You won a World Series a couple years ago and went to the NLCS last year. 

................................

In other sports, I'm even more harsh.  In the NFL?  Champagne after you win the NFC/AFC Championship game and after winning the Super Bowl.  NBA and NHL should only pop the cork when they win their respective championships. 

Are We In For A New NFC Dominance? Or Maybe Not

I am 38 years old, so I distinctly remember the time from the 1984 season through the 1996 season when the NFC won all 13 Super Bowls.  Not only did the NFC teams win, but they usually won in dominant fashion.  The NFC had Super Bowl wins by 45, 36, 35, 32, 23, 22, 19 and 17 during that time frame and only Super Bowls XXIII and XXV were decided by less than 10 points. 

You had some dominant NFC teams in the 49ers, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants and Bears.  Yet, starting with Super Bowl XXXII, the AFC would then go on to win 8 of the next 10 Super Bowls.

When I look at the league right now, I can see that this kind of trend could be coming back.  No, I certainly don't think that the NFC is going to reel off that kind of impressive streak.  But the NFC looks strong.  Young and strong.

First, let's look at the AFC.  In the AFC, the Denver Broncos are one of the favorites to win the conference.  After that, it is ... New England?  Cincinnati?  Baltimore?  It's hard to say.  Not only is there not the quality of teams there usually is in the conference, most of the elite teams aren't built for the long run.  Denver is in a win-now mode with Peyton Manning.  As is the New England Patriots with Tom Brady.  To me, that makes a team like Cincinnati a team that could be in the mix for the long term.

Below those three teams, you have Pittsburgh and Baltimore ... teams who have had guys leave for various reasons and aren't as strong (though both have great front offices).  The Houston Texans have been in that "right there" spot for a few years and the Indianapolis Colts certainly have a bright future with Andrew Luck.

I'm not saying the AFC sucks by any means.  Remember in those 13 years the NFC won in the mid-80s to mid-90s there were some great AFC teams.  Those Buffalo Bills teams were great.  Denver went to five Super Bowls from 1986-1998 seasons.  There were solid teams in Cincinnati, Houston, Kansas City and Cleveland. 

Over in the NFC, there is a lot of youth that could rise the conference to the next level.  All the buzz is around RGIII (Redskins), Colin Kaepernick (49ers), Russell Wilson (Seahawks) and Cam Newton (Panthers).  The first three led their teams to the playoffs last year with Kaepernick nearly pulling off a Super Bowl championship.  You also have great young-ish QBs in Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford and Drew Brees.  And some guy named Eli Manning has already cashed in a couple of Super Bowls already.

Of course, I can point to those 13 dominant NFC seasons again for some perspective.  The AFC had guys like Dan Marino, John Elway, Jim Kelly, Boomer Esiason, Bernie Kosar and Warren Moon.  Besides Hall Of Famers Brett Favre, Joe Montana, Steve Young and Troy Aikman, these NFC quarterbacks won Super Bowls during that stretch: Jim McMahon, Phil Simms, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler and Mark Rypien. 

Plus, who knows what happens long term anymore.  In those days, free agency and salary caps certainly aren't the same as it is today.  It would be extremely hard for those stacked teams to be able to stay stacked in today's climate.  And with the mobility of the QBs in the NFC, they are one big hit away from having their star gone (just ask the Redskins on that). 

The NFC has won 3 of the last 4 Super Bowls and 4 of the last 6.  In the last 16 Super Bowls (the games after the NFC's streak), 12 different franchises have represented the NFC (only the Redskins, Cowboys, Vikings and Lions didn't make a Super Bowl in that span).  Conversely, the AFC has had only 7 teams represent the AFC (Broncos, Titans, Ravens, Patriots, Raiders, Steelers and Colts).. 

During the 13-championship streak, only six (49ers, Redskins, Giants, Cowboys, Bears and Packers) repped the NFC.  And, again, only 7 different teams represented the AFC (Dolphins, Patriots, Broncos, Bengals, Bills, Chargers and Steelers).

Who knows what this season will hold.  Well, except in Jacksonville where the season has pretty much been written.

Sportz' Week 2 NFL Picks

LAST WEEK:  12-4
SEASON:  12-4

Not a bad week last week, but there weren't that many head scratchers so I'm not going to break my arm patting my back.  Good start, but let's keep it going.

PATRIOTS over JETS:  New England didn't look great last week, but they still looked much better than the Jets did.

FALCONS over RAMS:  Atlanta can't go 0-2 ... especially at home against the Rams.

BILLS over PANTHERS:  It isn't so much that I'm sold on Buffalo as that I'm just not sold on the Panthers offense. 

BEARS over VIKINGS:  Peterson will get his, but no one else will for the Vikes.

PACKERS over REDSKINS:  Neither team can afford to go 0-2.  One will, and it will be Washington with that suspect defense.

COLTS over DOLPHINS:  Miami looked nice against Cleveland last week.  This isn't Cleveland.

COWBOYS over CHIEFS:  Andy Reid knows the Cowboys.  But with a banged up Jamal Charles, I'm going Dallas here.

RAVENS over BROWNS:  Um, Baltimore.

TEXANS over TITANS:  New Oilers over Old Oilers. 

CHARGERS over EAGLES:  I don't know why, but I'm going upset here.  Probably a dumb pick.

CARDINALS over LIONS:  This is a game Detroit seems to lose.  It continues here.

SAINTS over BUCCANEERS:  I wouldn't say New Orleans is back, but there aren't going to lose to this Tampa team.

RAIDERS over JAGUARS:  Who cares.

BRONCOS over GIANTS:  Manning Bowl goes to Peyton.

NINERS over SEAHAWKS:  I think Seattle is a bit over-rated and that people are underestimating the Niners ability to beat them.  I'm going San Fran.

BENGALS over STEELERS:  Pittsburgh can't block anyone.  Cincinnati will bring the heat.

Sportz' Week 1 NFL Picks

It's time.  I came to get mine.  Okay, the NFL season is on us so here is my Week 1 picks:

BRONCOS over RAVENS:  Sold on Denver being the best team in the AFC.  Not sold on B-more's drastic post championship changes.

PATRIOTS over BILLS:  Buffalo is starting a rookie QB who is coming off an injury?  Yeah, I'm taking the Pats.

BEARS over BENGALS:  This is a good one, but Chicago is at home so I'm going with Da Bears.

BROWNS over DOLPHINS:  Two teams who are looking to turn around their fortunes.  I'm going to give Cleveland the edge in this one due to the Dawg Pound.

SAINTS over FALCONS:  I have the Falcons in the Super Bowl, but N'Awlins will have their Sean Payton back and that place is always live.

JETS over BUCCANEERS:  Neither team wows me at all.  I know that Jets offense could be brutal, but I think people are underestimating the defense. 

STEELERS over TITANS:  Pittsburgh is tough to beat in the Ketchup Bottle

LIONS over VIKINGS:  I'm bullish on Detroit this year ... and I could be dead wrong.  I just think that Stafford and Calvin Johnson will be big, big, big time this year.

COLTS over RAIDERS:  Oakland is bad.  Really bad.

SEAHAWKS over PANTHERS:  Cam Newton is moody and Seattle will put him in a bad mood.

CHIEFS over JAGUARS:  Kansas City wasn't your typical "worst team in the NFL" last year.  They have some players and Andy Reid can coach.  Jacksonville, however, has that look of the "worst team in the NFL" this year.

RAMS over CARDINALS:  Tough to read either team.  I just trust Jeff Fisher a bit more.

NINERS over PACKERS:  Could we see Kaepernick run all over Green Bay again?  I'm betting on it.

GIANTS over COWBOYS:  The G-men own the Cowboys in Jerrah World.  They also show up big time in big time games.  Usually.

REDSKINS over EAGLES:  A rusty RG3 can still find a way to manuver around that Eagles defense.

TEXANS over CHARGERS:  Who does Philip Rivers throw it to?

Sportz Assassin's 2013 NFL Predictions

It's that time of year where I bust out my preseason NFL predictions.  And, in about 5 months, I'll go back and celebrate the two ones I hit on perfectly and mock the many others I was way off on.  So, let's get to it.

NFC EAST
1-GIANTS
2-COWBOYS
3-REDSKINS
4-EAGLES

Overview:  Full disclosure -- I'm a diehard Redskins fan.  Despite that, I feel the Skins may take a small step back this season.  This is a division where anything could happen.  I have the Giants at the top even though they have some injury issues.  It just feels like a season they'll get it together and win the division and not much else.  I feel Dez Bryant will go off and the Cowboys will slip into that 2nd spot and maybe a playoff berth.  The Redskins?  I still see them as an 8 or 9 win team.  RG3 is great, but he may struggle early on after seeing no preseason action.  The defense isn't that much improved in the passing game.  The Eagles will be improved, but I'm not sold on that offense clicking enough this season to make a run past the rest of the division. 

NFC SOUTH
1-FALCONS
2-SAINTS
3-PANTHERS
4-BUCCANEERS

Overview:  Atlanta is in the typical Atlanta sports fashion: stuck in the same spot.  That's a good thing, though, since the Dirty Birds are one the NFL's best teams.  The addition of Steven Jackson may be what gets them to the Super Bowl.  The Saints will be right on them.  They were strong late in the season after a string of bad luck early on last year.  With Sean Payton back and a chip on their shoulder, New Orleans could surge.  Carolina and Tampa Bay are easily at the bottom of the division.  Cam Newton and the Panthers has a bit more momentum on their side, though the Bucs had the better offseason. 

NFC NORTH
1-PACKERS
2-BEARS
3-LIONS
4-VIKINGS

Overview:  Green Bay is the best team in the division, though they need those rookie running backs to perform if they want to make a serious run in the NFC.  I still believe in that Chicago defense and special teams to help that Cutler-to-Marshall connection.  Matt Forte may be the biggest key in the entire division.  I believe in the Lions and think they could get back to their 2011 ways.  This elite offense that saw a lot of bad luck in 2012, will be even more potent with Reggie Bush back there.  Two things scare me into putting the Vikings in last.  One is Adrian Peterson.  He is great, but backs who threaten the all-time single season rushing record take a step back the following year.  Two, is Christian Ponder.  Nothing against him other than the fact that he isn't the other three signal callers in the division.

NFC WEST
1-49ERS
2-SEAHAWKS
3-RAMS
4-CARDINALS

Overview:  The defending NFC Champions will be back to make a big run.  They'll have an entire offseason, preseason and early season with Kaepernick as their QB.  Still a great team overall.  Seattle has suffered some injuries that will keep them from toppling the Niners.  The Rams just aren't on par with the two elite teams in the division and lost some key offensive players in Jackson and Amendola.  The Cardinals have pieced together an offense with Palmer and Mendenhall that won't fly too high.

NFC PLAYOFF TEAMS:  1-49ers, 2-Falcons, 3-Packers, 4-Giants, 5-Saints, 6-Seahawks.

NFC CHAMPIONSHIP:  Falcons over 49ers.

AFC EAST
1-PATRIOTS
2-DOLPHINS
3-JETS
4-BILLS

Overview:  I think this is the worst division in the NFL.  New England is the easy favorite, though they won't be as potent as in past seasons.  Among the rest of the division ... I guess Miami is the next best team.  They've made a ton of moves this offseason and look much better than the rest.  The Jets have a lot of veterans, but no real quarterback.  I just think they are too broken at this point to make any real dent.  The Bills are in rebuild mode with EJ Manuel as the new QB.

AFC SOUTH
1-TEXANS
2-COLTS
3-TITANS
4-JAGUARS

Overview:  Despite everyone being down on Houston, I'm in their corner.  No, they aren't the same juggernaut they've been in recent seasons, but this is a darn good team.   I think Indianapolis takes a small step back but will be in the playoff hunt.  Tennessee and Jacksonville just aren't in the same class as the Colts or Texans, though I do think Chris Johnson turns his career back around. 

AFC NORTH
1-BENGALS
2-RAVENS
3-STEELERS
4-BROWNS

Overview:  I am high on Cincinnati this season.  I think they have everything needed to make a Super Bowl run.  All they need is a better than average season from Andy Dalton.  The Ravens took too many hits from defections to be the same strong team from a season ago.  They are still a playoff team, but losing Ed Reed and Ray Lewis brings a huge leadership hole in the locker room.  Pittsburgh will still be in the mix, but Big Ben will have to be an MVP type player to make that happen.  Cleveland will be improved as well, but not enough to challenge getting out of the basement. 

AFC WEST
1-BRONCOS
2-CHARGERS
3-CHIEFS
4-RAIDERS

Overview:  Denver is easily the top team in the west.  They have everything ... but Von Miller for six games ... to win it all.  After that?  Well, the Chargers have a lot of talent that is underperforming.  Maybe the coaching change will bring out more of that promise.  I like the Chiefs even though they had the worst record a year ago.  They did have five Pro Bowlers, Andy Reid as their coach and Alex Smith as the new QB.  Jamal Charles will become known to more non-fantasy NFL fans this season.  Oakland just isn't going anywhere to me. 

AFC PLAYOFF TEAMS:  1-Broncos, 2-Patriots, 3-Bengals, 4-Texans, 5-Colts, 6-Ravens.

AFC CHAMPIONSHIP:  Broncos over Bengals

SUPER BOWL

 

Denver Broncos

over

Atlanta Falcons

34-27

Celtics Aren't Bad Enough ... And That's Bad!

As wild as surprisingly entertaining as Thursday's NBA Draft was, the story of the night was the trade between the Celtics and Nets.  The headline was Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Jason Terry heading to Brooklyn ... but the real story was the Celtics blowing it up and starting from the ground up. 

That skims over what really happened.

The Celtics are starting over.  This happens to be the year that everyone decided it was time.  Ray Allen left last summer, Doc Rivers didn't want to helm a rebuilding project and KG and Pierce hobbled to a #7 seed while Rajon Rondo missed the end of the season and postseason.  This was a franchise that nearly beat the Heat in 2012 and made the NBA Finals.  Now it is headed for the lottery.  And the projected 2014 NBA Draft lottery will be stacked.

Whatever you feel about it, it was bound to happen.  The key for Boston is this: did they get bad enough?  I mean, what's the point of blowing up your team if you aren't getting nice young pieces in the deal (they didn't), future draft picks (they did) and a bad enough team that you can net yourself one of the top prizes in the draft (they didn't).

After all, Rondo is still there.  So is Jeff Green.  Avery Bradley, Brandon Bass, Courtney Lee and Jordan Crawford are there as well.  So are rising sophomores Jared Sullinger and Fab Melo.  The cupboard isn't that bare.

Now take into account what the Celtics got back in the deal.  Kris Humphries is a nice rebounder, though rumors swirl that he'll never get to wear a Celtics uniform.  Gerald Wallace is a former All-Star, a nice defender and a decent forward.  MarShon Brooks has a nice rookie season in 2012.  Kris Joseph and Keith Bogans won't make a huge difference.  They also added Kelly Olynyk in the draft. 

Is this a roster that is really that bad?  To become one of the worst teams in the NBA, they really have some work to do.  Are they worse than the Charlotte Bobcats/Hornets?  Nope.  Are they worse than the Orlando Magic?  Probably not.  Not to mention that the hapless Sixers just sent their lone All-Star (Jrue Holiday) to New Orleans via trade to get two rookies, one of which is coming off a blown knee (Nerlens Noel) and the Toronto Raptors are rumored to be sending Andres Bargnani to the Knicks.  The Milwaukee Bucks, who finished as an 8th seed last season, could lose their top two players in Monta Ellis and Brandon Jennings.  The Celtics look like at worse the 12th seed in the East.  That's not even looking out West where the Suns and Kings are bottom feeders.

With everyone knowing the draft class of 2014 is stacked, who knows if there are any other teams that will tank their seasons.

It is certain that Boston will make more moves, but which ones?  Unless something major happens, I don't see them dealing Rondo.  Green could be dealt, but what would he net you? 

If Boston really wants to be bad -- ugly bad -- they may need to put in a little more work.

2013 NBA Draft Could Look Like 2002 or 2000 Draft

Charlotte made Melvin Ely a lottery pick in 2002

I'm an NBA Draft nut, but even I am not excited about this Thursday's draft.  It lacks the sizzle that most drafts have (including last year's) and is a bad prequel to what should be an amazing draft in 2014.  That draft will most likely feature the star power of Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker and Julius Randle among others.

Thursday's draft has none of that.  The most likely top pick is Nerlens Noel, a guy who blew out his knee and may not be ready for the beginning of the season.  I only wish the Portland Trail Blazers had the top pick so it would get me excited.  If Noel doesn't go No. 1, it could be Maryland's Alex Len ... a guy who couldn't even crack the All-ACC team this past year.  It could be Kansas' Ben McLemore, a guy who just isn't impressing scouts.  Honestly, it could be anyone and no one will be in awe of that individual.

This will be a draft of role players ... and that isn't a bad thing.  I've always been big on seeing the NBA Draft as that: you have a few future superstars, a couple of All-Star guys and several guys who could either have a long career or one that they shine for a bit and then fade out.  We just watched a Finals where guys like Udonis Haslem, Shane Battier, Danny Green and Kawhi Leonard played key roles for their teams.  They can't all be LeBrons.

However, who really knows who those guys will be.  It could be a Reggie Bullock who finds a long career as a sharpshooter (maybe a Danny Green?), or Otto Porter as a two-way player (Kawhi Leonard?), or a Trey Burke in a Gary Neal type role. 

It reminds me of the 2002 Draft.  In that draft, there was one true super star in Yao Ming.  There's nothing like that here for a variety of reasons.  Only three players other than Yao made an All-Star team: Amare Stoudemire, Caron Butler and Carlos Boozer.  Boozer was a 2nd round pick.

That draft was filled with guys who have made decent careers.  Guys like Nene, Tayshaun Prince, Drew Gooden, Mike Dunleavy, Matt Barnes and Luis Scola.  Udonis Haslem went undrafted that year.  It was also filled with guys like Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Dajuan Wagner, Melvin Ely, Marcus Haislip and Fred Jones.  P.S., those guys were all lottery picks.

The 2000 Draft was nearly as bad.  Only Kenyon Martin, Jamaal Magloire and Michael Redd made an All-Star appearance during their careers from that draft.  There were guys like Mike Miller, Jamal Crawford, Hedo Turkoglu, DeShawn Stevenson, Eddie House and even Eduardo Najera that forged a career. 

Or this could be as bad a draft as the one waaaaaaaay back in 2011.  That was the draft that scared away the top prospects due to an impending NBA labor battle.  Because of that, these guys were picked in the top 10:  Enes Kanter, Jonas Valanciunas, Jan Vesely, Bismack Biyombo and Jimmer Fredette.  There have been diamonds in the rough like Kawhi Leonard, Nikola Vucevic, Iman Shumpert, Kenneth Faried, MarShon Brooks, Jimmy Butler, Norris Cole and Chandler Parsons.  Kyrie Irving, the top overall pick, is a stud.  Klay Thompson is turning into one.  Kemba Walker is progressing nicely.  Outside of that, there's no one to be ecstatic about.

So as your favorite team drafts on Thursday, don't get caught up in any hype.  Just hope this guy can at least help your team down the road when the guys you drafted last year and next year are able to be the stars.

Ranking the NBA Finals Game 7s

I was born in 1975, so there have been seven Game 7s in my NBA lifetime.  Although the Sonics-Bullets series was a bit before my understanding, I will rate how well these Game 7s were played.

One of the themes in Game 7s is sloppy play and bad shooting.  It is a combination of good defense and tight offensive play. 

#7      1984-CELTICS vs LAKERS:  While the Lakers-Celtics rivalry of the 1980s was great as a whole, this lone Game 7 they were in was a bit dud-ish.  Cedric Maxwell was the man for the C's and not Hall Of Famers Bird, Parish, McHale or Dennis Johnson (those four combined for 68 points, but did so on 19-for-53 shooting).  For the Lakers, Kareem was huge with 29 points, but Magic Johnson had a bad shooting night and 7 turnovers.  While not a blowout, this one didn't have that close feeling. 

#6      2010-LAKERS vs CELTICS:  This game was close with two of the NBA's glamor franchises going at it.  But it wasn't a very well played game.  Boston held a 13-pt lead at one point, but poor shooting allowed the Lakers to come back.  Kobe Bryant, the Finals MVP, shot just 6-for-24 for the night, but was huge in the 4th quarter.  Still, not the greatest capper to a really good series. 

#5      1978-BULLETS vs SONICS: I obviously don't remember this series. But, reading the recap, it seems as this one was a pretty good one. This was the only time in my life that a road team won a Game 7 in the Finals. Neither team was great during the season (Seattle was a 4-seed; Washington was a 3-seed). This series followed the same format as the one you just watched: Seattle won games 1, 3 and 5 like the Spurs did with Washington winning game 2, 4, 6 and 7 like the Heat. Okay, on to the actual Game 7.

Game 7 took play 18 days after Game 1 as the NBA stretched the series out (it is the longest postseason series in actual time of the major sports). Dennis Johnson, like he did for the Celtics in 1984, had a bad game. He was 0-for-14 from the field.  The Bullets came into the 4th with a 13-point lead, but nearly coughed it up.  Big plays down the stretch by Mitch Kupchak and Wes Unseld clinched the win.

#4      2005-SPURS vs PISTONS:  This is what you want: a tie game going into the 4th quarter.  The Spurs would win by 7, but it was the run they went on that did it.  The Pistons held a 9-pt lead in the 3rd before Tim Duncan led San Antonio out of the fire.  He was big with 25 points and 12 boards.  As the theme goes, the Pistons were bad in this one.  Rip Hamilton led them in scoring with just 15 points on 6-of-18 shooting (Tayshawn Prince went 4-of-13).  Detroit shot just 41.9% for the game.  The Spurs weren't much better, shooting 42.6% (Duncan's big night came on 10-of-27 shooting).

#3      1994-ROCKETS vs KNICKS:  When we talk about bad shooting Game 7s, John Starks tops the list.  His horrid 2-of-18 shooting night against the Rockets is largely blamed by fans as the reason New York lost this series.  But everyone seemed to shoot poorly (NY went 39% in this one).  However, this game was close all the way through and featured the last great big man Finals battle in Olajawon and Ewing so that ranks it pretty high. 

#2      2013-HEAT vs SPURS:  A very, very good game.  It was close throughout with with Tim Duncan missing a hook shot and tip in late to tie the game.  LeBron James was dominant with 37 points and 12 boards.  Neither team really got out to a huge lead and there were huge plays down the stretch by James and Shane Battier. 

#1      1988-LAKERS vs PISTONS:  What a game and what a series.  Unlike most of the games on this list, bad shooting wasn't a factor.  The Pistons shot 46% while the Lakers shot an amazing 55.8%.  This was a game of runs.  Detroit got off early with Isiah Thomas and led at the half by five.  The Lakers then went off with Michael Cooper raining threes and led 90-75 late.  Then, the Pistons caught fire and made a huge comeback (25-12 run) to get within a bucket.  The Lakers gave them opportunites but Detroit just couldn't get over.  Big Game James Worthy had 36 pts, 16 rbs and 10 ast. 

Stop Calling The 2013 NBA Finals "Classic"!

The 2013 NBA Finals were really good ... just not classic.  Game 6 was a classic and Games 1 and 7 were very competitive, but there were four big-time blowouts in this series and that makes me hesitant to call this one of the great Finals.

Two main reasons why I cannot call this a classic series:

BLOWOUTS:  The middle four games were blowouts with two of the games just embarrassingly bad.  The Miami Heat had a 27-point lead at one point in Game 2 before winning by 19.  In Game 3, the San Antonio Spurs beat Miami by 36 points ... one of the worst Finals beatdowns in history.  In Game 4, Miami took control of the game in the second half and won by 16.  Game 5 saw a reversal, with the Spurs taking the game over with a huge lead before winning by 'only' ten.

Sure, Game 6 was a classic and Game 7 was close.  Those two games ... plus the fact that the series didn't see one team win consecutive games until those final two games ... make people believe the series was great.  The series was close, but the games weren't. 

REALLY, REALLY BAD PLAY:  Look, guys have bad series and games within series.  It has happened in every Finals.  But this one was very odd in how bad these superstars had looked. 

Just look at Game 7 for example.  Chris Bosh finished with ZERO points. Miami starters Bosh and Mike Miller, along with super sub Ray Allen combined for 0 points on 0-14 shooting in Game 7.  Tony Parker, who was the leading candidate for Finals MVP if the Spurs won, shot 3-for-12 in this one.  Danny Green went 1-for-12.

Manu Ginobili was horrible in nearly every game (Game 5 was the obvious exception).  Dwyane Wade had some very subpar games.  Aside from Parker early, Duncan late and LeBron James' performance, the star power had a lot of blackouts. 

Ranking The Last 25 NBA Finals

#25 - LAKERS VS NETS (2002):  To me, this was the worst Finals.  It wasn't just that this was a sweep (though it factors), it is just that this series felt like a formality while you were watching it.  Sure, three of the games were close, but it just didn't feel like the Lakers even took this series seriously. 

#24 - PISTONS VS LAKERS (1989):  This should have been epic.  The Lakers surged into the Finals after sweeping their first three series.  The Pistons had the best record in the league and we were staring at a rematch of one of the greatest Finals in history.  Well, that crashed when Byron Scott missed the entire series with a hamstring injury, then Magic Johnson getting hurt early in Game 2 and missed the rest of the series.  The Lakers were game, but with just Michael Cooper as their backcourt veteran, they were no match for that Isiah Thomas-Joe Dumars-Vinny Johnson backcourt.

#23 - SPURS VS CAVALIERS (2007):   Neither team was great (Spurs finished 3rd in the West; Cavs won just 50 games) but this was a three-time champion Spurs against soon-to-be-legend LeBron James and his Cavaliers.  The Spurs handled the Cavs in the first two games, then eeked out the final two games in Cleveland. This was a ratings nightmare.  Despite having King James in it, nobody watched. 

#22 - PISTONS VS LAKERS (2004):  This felt like a "5-game sweep" as the Pistons dominated the heavily favored Lakers and let Game 2 get away on a Kobe Bryant three-pointer with two seconds left.  The Pistons were a bland, hardworking bunch with no superstars.  The Lakers, however, were a complete spectacle all season long (the addition of Karl Malone and Gary Payton, Kobe's rape trial, Shaq's threats to leave) and it all crumbled during and following this series.  That's what people remember. 

#21 - SPURS VS KNICKS (1999):  The Asterisk Championship for the Spurs.  The NBA's lockout meant the season was only 50 games long.  It was the year after Michael Jordan retired.  And the Spurs played the Knicks in the Finals ... the only #8 seed to make it to the Finals.  The Knicks were bad, not scoring more than 89 points during the series and scoring 77 points or fewer in three of the games.  San Antonio wasn't much better, scoring over 89 just once.  Other than the closeout game, none of these games were particularly close. 

#20 - LAKERS VS MAGIC:  This was a close series of sorts, though the Lakers won it in five.  Game 4 was the classic.  The Lakers made a huge comeback which included a huge Derek Fisher three-pointer to send the game into OT.  There, the Lakers dominated and took a commanding 3-1 series lead.  The Lakers cruised to a title three days later. 

#19 - SPURS VS NETS (2003):  This was kind of like the Spurs-Knicks series four years earlier, except that the Nets gave a good fight.  Hard to believe, but Game 4 in New Jersey wasn't even a sellout.  Unreal.  Just like fans in the Garden State, fans at home didn't feel like watching this either.  It was the lowest rated Finals until the Spurs/Cavaliers series in 2007. 

#18 - LAKERS VS SIXERS (2001):  The Lakers went 15-1 in this postseason, though their only loss was in Game 1 to Philadelphia.  That Game 1 was epic, as Allen Iverson scored 48 pts and Shaq scoring 44.  Both Shaq and Iverson had big series, but the Lakers pretty much skated to their second straight championship. 

#17 - BULLS VS SUPERSONICS (1996):  This was the 72-win Bulls with the new Jordan dynasty.  I thought this would've been a great series, but the Bulls blew out to a 3-0 series lead.  Seattle did salvage the next two at home before the Bulls finally put the Sonics out of their misery. 

#16 - ROCKETS VS MAGIC (1995):  Shaq vs Hakeem in the Finals.  Wow.  Nick Anderson's missed free throws kept open a window for Hakeem to tip in the game winner of Game 1.  Anderson was mud after that.  This series was a sweep, but three of the games were very close.  Hakeem's tip in, Horry's three to win Game 3 and a huge fourth quarter run to close out the series. 

#15 - HEAT VS THUNDER (2012):  What was billed as the future of the Finals, LeBron James and Kevin Durant met on the biggest stage with a title on the line.  After an impressive Game 1 win, the Thunder would go on to lose every game the rest of the way.  The Big Three got their championship together ... so haters would have to hate harder and LeBron fans felt validated.

#14 - SPURS VS PISTONS (2005):  This, along with the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010, is the only matchup of teams on this list that had won a championship recently.  This did go 7 games, though this was filled with bad games.  There was a 31-pt win, a 21-pt win, a 17-pt win, a 15-pt win and a 9-pt win.  There was that great Game 5 -- a swing game with the series tied 2-2 -- when Robert Horry willed an overtime win and the series lead.  Game 7 was close, with the game tied heading into the 4th quarter. 

#13 -  LAKERS VS PACERS (2000):  This was the Lakers first championship in the post-Magic Johnson era.  Of their three-peat, this was the best series, though uneven.  Games 1, 3 and 5 were blowouts (the Lakers lost Game 5, where they could've won the title, by 33 points).  The memorable game was pivotal Game 4.  The game went into overtime with 21-year old Kobe Bryant hitting clutch shots (Shaq had fouled out) to give the Lakers a big 3-1 series lead.  The Pacers nearly sent it to a 7th game, but the Lakers made a late run to clinch the title. 

#12 - BULLS VS LAKERS (1991):  The changing of the guard.  After Sam Perkins stunned the Bulls in Game 1 at Chicago Stadium, Michael Jordan (and that "impossible move") took over from there.  In Game 3 at the Forum, Jordan and the Bulls dominated in overtime to win Game 3 and would coast to their first NBA title.

#11 - MAVERICKS VS HEAT (2011):  This series will be best remembered as the one where LeBron James just didn't show up for the Heat late in games.  It was a 2-2 series before Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Terry carried the Mavs the rest of the way. 

#10 - PISTONS VS BLAZERS (1990):  While only a five-game series, four of them were nail biters.  After a Pistons win in Game 1, Portland stole an overtime game to even the series.  After blowing out Portland in Game 3, the Pistons eeked out a 3 and 2 point win the capture their second title.  This was also sad as this was the last game with the NBA of CBS, which I personally grew up on. 

#9 - CELTICS VS LAKERS (2008):  This was a both a surprise and pleasant matchup of the two NBA glamor franchises.  The Celtics were back from the dead after getting their Big 3 together.  The Lakers made a steal of a trade for Pau Gasol to get back.  But the Celtics were ready.  A hard fought series that saw Paul Pierce wheelchaired off the court only to come back two minutes later and hit a couple of threes.  And then the Celtics clincher happened: a 39 point beatdown of the Lakers. 

#8 - HEAT VS MAVERICKS (2006):  This was the first non-Lakers/Spurs Finals since 1998 and the first to see new blood in the Finals since 1971.  A weird series.  The Maverics owned the first two games in Dallas.  Miami ... namely Dwyane Wade ... owned the rest of the series.  Games 3, 5 and 6 were nail biters that featured phantom fouls, an illegal timeout and a parade of Wade free throws.  Oh, and Dirk Nowitzki kicking the ball into the stands.  It was great theater and Miami's first NBA Championship. 
#7 - BULLS VS JAZZ (1998):  This series is always remembered for Jordan's final shot.  It was also a series filled with close games.  Game 1 went into overtime, Game 2 was won by the Bulls by 5 and Games 4 through 6 were won by 4, 2 and 1, respectively.  But this also had the dud of Chicago's 96-54 blowout of Game 3.  That was one of the ugliest Finals game I had ever witnessed.  The Jazz set a record for lowest point total for any NBA game since the shot clock (the record has since been broken).  The Bulls also held a 3-1 series lead before Utah saved face in Chicago.  Then Jordan's shot in Game 6. 

#6 - BULLS VS BLAZERS (1992):  People remember Jordan shrugging off those six first half three-pointers.  But this was a good series.  It was tied 2-2 when Jordan erupted for 46 points in Game 5 to take control of the series. 

#5 - BULLS VS JAZZ (1997):  I am actually ranking this series higher than the 1998 edition.  The teams had better regular season records, both teams cruised into the Finals and the series was closer.  In this one, the Bulls won the first two games in Chicago while the Jazz won the next two in Utah.  With the series tied 2-2, Chicago won Game 5 ... aka the Jordan Flu Game ... to take the series lead back to Chicago.  The Jazz had a big lead late in Game 6 before Steve Kerr hit the go ahead shot late and Scottie Pippen made a key defensive play to seal the deal.

#4 - ROCKETS VS KNICKS (1994):  This was a very defensive Finals that may be best remembered for a weird Game 5 that saw NBC cut to coverage of O.J. Simpson in his white Ford Bronco.  This was billed as the Hakeem vs Ewing series (these two met in the 1984 NCAA Tournament Final), but Olajawon totally outplayed his counterpart.  It all ended with a wild Game 7 that saw John Starks go 2-of-18 from the field.  As an aside, this series had a weird feel.  It was the first NBA Finals that didn't have the Lakers, Celtics, Pistons or Bulls in it since 1979.

#3 - LAKERS VS CELTICS (2010):   This, along with the 2005 Spurs/Pistons series, is the only on this list to feature the last two champions facing off.  This one was wild.  Though no game outside of Game 7 to be a nail-biter, this was a physical, chippy series.  We saw Ray Allen hit an NBA Finals record 8 three-pointers in Game 2 ... and then couldn't drop it in the ocean over the next few games.  Boston actually held a 3-2 lead before losing the series in 7. 

#2 - BULLS VS SUNS (1993):  Jordan vs Barkley.  That epic triple-OT Game 3.  Jordan going for 55 in one game.  John Paxson's game winner.  Epic series.  By the way, Michael Jordan averaged 41 points per game for this series.  Unreal.

#1 - LAKERS VS PISTONS (1988):  The oldest series on this list was also the best.  It went the full 7 games.  The Lakers would get the NBA's first repeat since the Celtics of the 1960s.  Game 5 at the Pontiac Silverdome had over 40,000 fans there.  And the classic Game 6 where Thomas scored 25 points in the 3rd quarter, Magic had 19 assists and about 100 scuffles.  A classic series ended with a tough as nails closeout Game 7 with the Lakers holding on for the title.