That was the team that won three games and forced a winner-take-all game seven?
It’s amazing how hard it is to win when the officials don’t put you on the line 40 times.
After going to the line 47 times in game six and winning the game from the charity stripe, the Hawks ran into a group of officials who weren’t willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, weren’t willing to let their own whistles decide the outcome of the game, and didn’t feel the need to keep the Hawks in the game.
Not to harp on the officiating, but 36 points were scored at the free-throw line in game six by the Hawks.
The Hawks only scored eleven in game seven.
This Hawks were scrappy, but they weren’t nearly as good as Doc Rivers and the officiating crews made them look in Atlanta.
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.
In the deciding game seven, the Hawks were outclassed.
The Celtics were the stronger, more aggressive team (it’s much easier when the officials aren’t taking away your aggressiveness). The Hawks were the slower, tired team.
The Hawks’ youth showed time and time again, as Josh Smith was a non-factor and Game 6 hero Marvin Williams was ejected for throwing Rondo on his head during an attempted layup.
Kendrick Perkins was able to stay out of foul trouble, and was a dominant force underneath the basket. Both offensively and defensively, he was a game-changer. There were no easy layups, and even mid-range jumpers were contested.
He was a beast.
He set the tone (especially defensively) early, and the rest of the team followed.
Pierce, Garnett, and Allen were good all night. On the defensive end, they were active and in position. On the offensive end, they were moving the ball, going to the hoop, and getting open looks.
This Celtics team has its issues, and I’m still worried about the rest of the playoffs, but for one day they were the dominant team we expected them to be going into the playoffs.
They embarrassed the Hawks.
They humiliated the Hawks.
And more importantly, they sent a message to the rest of the Eastern Conference that they’re not the team that showed up in Atlanta.
They’re the Boston Celtics.
The team that led the NBA in wins in the regular season, not the team that couldn’t win a game in Atlanta.
The team that led the league in defense, not the team that couldn’t stop Joe Johnson and Josh Smith in Atlanta.
They’re the team most of the “experts” picked to represent the East in the finals, not the team some of the “experts” were worried about going into Sunday’s game.
The Cleveland Cavaliers are up next, and might be at an advantage given the time they’ve had to prepare while the Celtics were wasting time with the Hawks.
The Cavs will come into Boston on Tuesday rested and ready to go, while the Celtics will come into the game after having to lay it all out in a game seven.
If it weren’t a home game, I’d chalk it up as an automatic loss. But if there’s one thing the Celtics have proven in the playoffs this year, it’s they don’t lose at home.
They don’t even play close games at home.
Quick Hits
The Celtics’ bench played the entire fourth quarter. Hopefully Doc will have to rest them and limit their minutes for the rest of the playoffs.
Wouldn’t want the bench to get tired.
Ray Allen did a nice job early getting to the basket, showing the Hawks that this wasn’t going to be the same team that settled for jump-shot after jump-shot in game six.
Paul Pierce’s defense is underrated. Johnson hit a few contested threes, but for the most part he was a non-factor.
Smith had a nightmarish game where his nerves clearly got the best of him. He wasn’t even able to dribble the ball at times. Awful. The type that could be hard to get over.
Rondo was hit hard by Williams, in a play that resulted in Williams’ ejection, but bounced back to play his best game of the series. He was aggressive and ran the offense perfectly. Had he been hurt, the Celtics were in trouble, because Sam Cassell isn’t a full-time point guard.
I’m SeanMC.
SeanMC is a Senior Writer at Bleacher Report. His archive can be found here. You can find everything he writes, including articles for other publications, here.
Comments (8) Add a comment »
from 12 days ago
Well, you harp on the officiating way too much. As has been discussed elsewhere, the disparity is due to styles of play, not favoring by officials (yes, some bad calls and momentum calls were made in Atlanta, but the majority were 100% legit). The officiating was not the reason the Celtics lost any of those games, it was lack of execution down the stretch.
That said, the Celtics did do everything they could do to attempt to erase any doubt about their legitimacy as a title contender. Certainly questions remain, but KG stepped it up and dominated when he needed to and the defense was stifiling and quickly threw the Hawks off their game.
Game 1 vs Cleveland will be crucial. If the Celtics come out flat because of the the emotional swing they will be in trouble. However, if they can win Game 1 comfortably it bodes well for them to finish of the Cavs in 6 games or so.
from 12 days ago
You cant blame the offcials everytime the Celtics lose a game. I want to hear your excuses for when the lose the finals to the Lakers.
from 11 days ago
I don't expect them to make the finals, so you won't hear any excuses from me if they do.
That said, I blamed Doc Rivers as well.
from 12 days ago
the hawks "won" only ne game in this series. that was game 3. games 4 and 6 were gifts from stern and the officials. anyone who watches those games knew that. the first 6 games, even the games the C's won, were all to help out the Hawks. Today, reality slapped them in the face. you saw the hawks come unglued and I do not blame them. for 6 games, they were allowed to do what they want, were put on the line all game long, go over the back (i am looking at you zaza, childress, horford, and smith), hold off while dribbling (JJ and bibby). today you saw the result in marvin williams who shoul dmiss the first 5 games of next season for his cross body block on rondo. this is what happens when refs allow one team to get away with whatever they want for 6 games.
sadly, there are sports fans out there who feel refs or umpires do not affect games. i would love to live in that world, but I actually watch the games.
from 11 days ago
"the hawks "won" only ne game in this series. that was game 3. games 4 and 6 were gifts from stern and the officials. anyone who watches those games knew that....sadly, there are sports fans out there who feel refs or umpires do not affect games. i would love to live in that world, but I actually watch the games."
Yes, it's true that games in all major sports have been fixed in the past. However, to say that Stern (or anyone else not associated with ATL) was giving a 'gift' to the Hawks kinda makes you lose all credibility. Can you give us ONE reason why Stern would want the Hawks to do well at all? Make no mistake, Stern would sacrifice one of his limbs for a Lakers-Celtics finals. Why would he want to stretch out the Celtics series, possibly damage their confidence, extend the possibility of one of the big three gettting hurt...it just makes no sense. Most of the bad calls made in Atlanta were momentum calls when the refs get caught up in the moment of the underdog. It had nothing to do with anyone wanting the Celtics to lose...again, it just makes no sense, bro! You know why Stern was at the game today? So that if at halftime it was close, he would have gone to the refs and said "you better make the Celtics win this effing game if you want to work ever again." He didn't need to. Listen, there is no bigger Celtics fan than me, but the facts just can't be twisted in the direction of anyone wanting the Hawks to win any of these games.
from 11 days ago
Perhaps he wanted the Hawks to do well in Atlanta because Atlanta is a major market where the NBA has been failing recently?
You don't put Violet Palmer on a game if you want the home team to lose....
Not saying he would have wanted the Hawks to win, but there was certainly something in it for the NBA if they were competitive.
I don't believe this theory (I don't think) but it would make sense.
I firmly believe the NBA officiating is so bad that they couldn't throw a series if they wanted to. But a 70 free throw discrepancy? Against a team that made an effort to beat them up? That's insanely bad luck and even worse one-sided officiating.
from 11 days ago
let's see - why would Stern want the Hawks to win games? Could it have anything to do with money? Not that the league would ever use money as the key factor for a decision. It is simple - the more games that are played, the more money the league makes. the league needed a game seven - the first six games were broadcasted locally as well as nationally, but the game seven was available only to a national audience. how much extra money do you think the NBA from having one game seven? or how much money does the league make if atlanta wins a few games, and the city gets back into basketball? how much money did atlanta make already in season tickets for next season just by winning a few games. so don't tell me stern and the nba have no interest in seeing the hawks win a few games.
from 11 days ago
one more point about stern, and would the nba do all it could (short of actually fixing a game, which i am not saying they would do) to maximize profits, including knowing what officials to assign to push an outcome one way or the other - why is the first round of the playoffs now best of seven instead of best of five? because in the middle of the 2003 season, it appeared that marquee playoff matchup of lakers-kings might happen in the first round. ratings were down all over the nba, except for kings-lakers. stern couldn't risk not getting every cent out of that series, so he changed the ruled mid season. and we all remember the officiating from the 2002 lakers-kings series. but all of that is a coincidence.
Write a new comment