Lakers-Celtics Game 4 Thoughts: The Comeback Game

Fortunately, there will be no game 4 analysis of the officiating. I've had just enough discussion about officiating, thank you very much Mr. Jackson (who will no doubt conjure up a ludicrous and illogical excuse for why they lost the game yesterday that doesn't have to do with basketball).

As shocking as the comeback was in game 4, Paul Pierce's incredible defensive effort on Kobe Bryant was no surprise. Pierce has improved his defense exponentially this year, and was deserving of being on the all-defensive team as one of the five best perimeter defenders in the league. He has been better in the post-season, guarding LeBron James for six games better than almost anyone in the last few years, and now helping to shut down Kobe Bryant in the second half. Marc Jackson, calling the game for ABC, even proclaimed that Pierce had surpassed Shane Battier and put forth the best defensive effort ever on Bryant.

Only today was I in a discussion about Pierce's place in history, in which all involved agreed he wasn't even one of the 15 greatest small forwards in NBA history (a deep position, by the way). But after tonight, Pierce's resume looks, well, utterly unbelievable.

It's difficult to believe that most of the great players in NBA history have never exploded for 40-plus points in a critical game 7 (or what used to be game 5). Pierce has. Twice.

In 2002 he torched Philadelphia in the decisive game 5 for 46 points on 8-10 3-point shooting, and easily could have eclipsed 50 if not for garbage time in what turned into a blowout. This year he dueled with LeBron James for 41 points in a memorable game 7.

Defensively, Pierce has now manned up against LeBron James and Kobe Bryant – the two best players in the NBA – and faired better than arguably any defender in the league. He has closed critical games better than both James and Bryant in that period.

Finally, he is now part of two of the greatest comebacks in NBA history, which speaks to his resiliency. Pierce was stabbed, and he didn't miss a beat. Pierce broke his front teeth, and returned in the same game. And when down 21 points against the Nets in 2002, he orchestrated the greatest 4^th quarter comeback in playoff history. Tonight, he scored 14 of his 20 in the second half to lead the greatest Finals comeback in history, from 24 points down.

I told you – utterly unbelievable.

****

Marc Stein also mentioned this is his postgame column on espn.com: “it looks now as though the assist they got from the schedule-makers -- with such a short turnaround between rounds for the Spurs and no more than one day off between games -- was bigger than we knew.”

I've been waiting a week and a half to write that sentence, but for irrational fears of jinxing, refrained from mentioning the glaringly obvious fact that San Antonio was completely rundown and that created an illusion that the Lakers were Showtime again.

On the day before the Finals started, I finally conceded to my father that San Antonio gave me incredible confidence that the Celtics would handle Los Angeles in shockingly impressive fashion. The Spurs, like the Pistons four years ago and Boston this year, present a particular difficult matchup for the Lakers, and Kobe Bryant teams. All those teams have excellent perimeter defenders, and play great team defensive with an interior defensive presence (Duncan, Wallace, Garnett). Bryant can't drive and finish at the rim at will against these teams and starts settling for deep shots. Then his team falls apart.

Against the Lakers, the Spurs lost a controversial game at the buzzer, won in a blowout, and had two huge leads in other games only to collapse. It was as if they were fatigued and injured...perhaps because they were fatigued and injured! Heck, they looked that good against LA while essentially playing without Manu Ginobili, who was so injured he had to provide his health status for the August Olympics after the series ended.

Finally, I watched the opening game of the playoffs that the Spurs played against Phoenix. Low and behold, the Spurs looked like they were moving in fast-forward. The Suns and Hornets series, as well as sleeping on an airplane, had worn them down so much that they were moving at half speed by the end of the Lakers series, exaggerating the Lakers performance.

How this went unnoticed by the media is beyond me. Why did almost every national pundit pick against Boston, despite the obvious aforementioned evidence coupled with two easy Celtics wins over LA in the regular season?

Is Hollywood that convincing?