I loved Steve Bulpett's article today. Here's a sample:
This is based not on the indisputable truth that the Celtics have a 2-1 series lead, although that certainly tends to help the argument, eh? This is more a qualitative judgment. You see what you see, and it has become clear that if both teams play to their full capabilities, the Celts will prevail.
They have a better defense and a stronger inside game and more than enough to counteract the best player in the series, Kobe Bryant. There may have been some serious doubts about the Celts coming into the Finals, and they were not unfounded. They had to sweat out a longer road against lesser foes to even get here, and their two regular-season wins over Los Angles were devalued because they came pre-Pau Gasol.
There was logic to the position that the Lakers would win, and the belief here was that a short series favored the Los Angelenos. A longer series was the Celtics’ amigo.
But now there appears to be no reason why the Bostonians shouldn’t take care of this thing in a less arduous fashion than needed to dispatch Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit.
That, of course doesn’t mean they will.
I fully believe all of the above. There are a lot of things that could go wrong. Pau and Odom could show up to play. Rondo could be hobbled to the point of ineffectiveness, causing the Lakers to trap us to death. Or perhaps most likely, Kobe could just take over and win it all by himself.
Still, with all things considered, the Celtics simply are the better team. The better team doesn't always win, but they certainly have a better chance at winning. If the Celtics take care of business, they'll be up 3 games to 1 by the end of the night. And that's about all you can hope for as a fan.