Mega 2010 NBA Finals Preview: L.A. Lakers vs. Boston Celtics
Posted by Neil Paine on May 31, 2010
2010 Playoffs Home ▪ 2010 Playoff Previews
West #1 Los Angeles Lakers (69-29)
Coach: Phil Jackson
SRS: 4.78 (5th of 30) ▪ Pace Factor: 92.8 (14th of 30)
Offensive Rating: 108.8 (11th of 30) ▪ Defensive Rating: 103.7 (4th of 30)
How They Got Here:
Won NBA Western Conference Finals (4-2) versus Phoenix Suns
Won NBA Western Conference Semifinals (4-0) versus Utah Jazz
Won NBA Western Conference First Round (4-2) versus OKC Thunder
Regular Season Four Factors:
| Team | eFG% | Rank | TOV% | Rank | ORB% | Rank | FT/FGA | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Los Angeles Lakers | 0.496 | 15 | 0.124 | 5 | 0.276 | 7 | 0.221 | 18 |
| Los Angeles Lakers - Opp | 0.484 | 6 | 0.132 | 18 | 0.256 | 9 | 0.195 | 2 |
Roster (w/ Combined 2010 Regular-Season + Playoff Stats) ▪ Glossary
| Player | Ag | Ht | Pos | ORtg | %Pos | DRtg | DPA | P36 | 2P% | 3P% | FT% | AsR | ToR | PpR | FTr | 3td | OR% | DR% | Bk% | St% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kobe Bryant | 31 | 78 | SG | 110.7 | 31.5 | 105.8 | 0.48 | 25.3 | 49.0 | 34.5 | 81.3 | 24.6 | 13.6 | 0.7 | 34.6 | 20.1 | 3.0 | 12.2 | 0.7 | 1.9 |
| Pau Gasol | 29 | 84 | PF | 121.7 | 22.1 | 103.2 | 2.31 | 18.0 | 54.5 | 0.0 | 78.9 | 14.8 | 13.5 | 0.3 | 43.3 | 0.6 | 11.2 | 22.4 | 3.6 | 0.7 |
| Ron Artest | 30 | 78 | SF | 106.4 | 16.2 | 106.3 | -0.16 | 11.6 | 46.8 | 33.6 | 68.1 | 12.6 | 13.6 | 1.5 | 22.1 | 41.3 | 4.3 | 9.4 | 0.7 | 2.1 |
| Derek Fisher | 35 | 73 | PG | 107.2 | 14.0 | 107.3 | -0.47 | 10.3 | 42.3 | 35.6 | 83.6 | 13.0 | 14.0 | 2.3 | 24.7 | 41.8 | 1.3 | 7.1 | 0.3 | 2.1 |
| Lamar Odom | 30 | 82 | PF | 110.1 | 18.0 | 101.6 | 2.23 | 12.4 | 51.0 | 31.5 | 68.0 | 15.0 | 15.8 | 1.1 | 27.2 | 24.0 | 8.7 | 26.2 | 1.9 | 1.5 |
| A. Bynum | 22 | 84 | C | 117.8 | 19.9 | 103.0 | 2.23 | 17.1 | 57.1 | 0.0 | 73.1 | 5.6 | 14.3 | -3.2 | 37.4 | 0.1 | 10.5 | 20.9 | 3.9 | 0.9 |
| S. Brown | 24 | 76 | SG | 104.3 | 18.1 | 106.3 | -0.54 | 14.1 | 46.6 | 32.6 | 79.5 | 9.9 | 11.8 | 0.2 | 21.5 | 32.1 | 2.2 | 9.7 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
| J. Farmar | 23 | 74 | PG | 106.5 | 18.1 | 107.1 | -1.34 | 14.4 | 47.8 | 38.7 | 67.7 | 14.0 | 14.3 | 1.1 | 16.5 | 46.3 | 0.9 | 9.0 | 0.5 | 1.9 |
| Luke Walton | 29 | 80 | SF | 95.7 | 17.0 | 107.1 | -2.23 | 9.1 | 34.6 | 34.6 | 50.0 | 21.9 | 12.7 | 5.9 | 7.7 | 25.0 | 4.0 | 10.6 | 0.2 | 1.7 |
| Josh Powell | 27 | 81 | PF | 90.1 | 18.5 | 107.7 | -2.09 | 10.5 | 36.4 | 43.8 | 65.7 | 8.7 | 15.6 | -1.6 | 17.5 | 8.0 | 8.5 | 13.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Sasha Vujacic | 25 | 79 | SG | 112.2 | 15.1 | 106.9 | -1.21 | 11.7 | 50.6 | 31.4 | 84.8 | 10.0 | 10.9 | 1.4 | 19.3 | 50.3 | 4.7 | 10.2 | 0.5 | 1.7 |
| A. Morrison | 25 | 80 | SF | 93.3 | 18.6 | 109.1 | -3.20 | 11.6 | 43.7 | 21.7 | 62.5 | 11.4 | 11.0 | 1.1 | 8.5 | 24.5 | 5.3 | 10.9 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| DJ Mbenga | 29 | 84 | C | 99.2 | 16.3 | 102.5 | 1.74 | 10.9 | 46.3 | 0.0 | 50.0 | 3.7 | 13.1 | -2.5 | 18.5 | 0.0 | 9.9 | 18.0 | 6.1 | 0.7 |
East #4 Boston Celtics (62-37)
Coach: Doc Rivers
SRS: 3.37 (10th of 30) ▪ Pace Factor: 91.6 (22nd of 30)
Offensive Rating: 107.7 (15th of 30) ▪ Defensive Rating: 103.8 (5th of 30)
How They Got Here:
Won NBA Eastern Conference Finals (4-2) versus Orlando Magic
Won NBA Eastern Conference Semifinals (4-2) versus Cleveland Cavaliers
Won NBA Eastern Conference First Round (4-1) versus Miami Heat
Regular Season Four Factors:
| Team | eFG% | Rank | TOV% | Rank | ORB% | Rank | FT/FGA | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boston Celtics | 0.522 | 5 | 0.145 | 27 | 0.228 | 28 | 0.248 | 6 |
| Boston Celtics - Opp | 0.487 | 9 | 0.149 | 2 | 0.262 | 12 | 0.251 | 24 |
Roster (w/ Combined 2010 Regular-Season + Playoff Stats) ▪ Glossary
| Player | Ag | Ht | Pos | ORtg | %Pos | DRtg | DPA | P36 | 2P% | 3P% | FT% | AsR | ToR | PpR | FTr | 3td | OR% | DR% | Bk% | St% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rajon Rondo | 23 | 73 | PG | 110.7 | 23.2 | 102.6 | 0.79 | 13.9 | 52.4 | 24.5 | 63.1 | 43.4 | 18.4 | 9.5 | 33.3 | 8.6 | 4.2 | 10.7 | 0.3 | 3.2 |
| Paul Pierce | 32 | 78 | SF | 112.7 | 23.1 | 104.2 | 1.11 | 19.3 | 48.9 | 40.9 | 84.4 | 15.4 | 15.7 | -0.9 | 48.7 | 31.2 | 2.3 | 14.1 | 1.0 | 1.8 |
| Ray Allen | 34 | 77 | SG | 114.8 | 19.0 | 107.1 | -0.54 | 16.7 | 54.5 | 37.6 | 89.6 | 12.6 | 12.2 | 0.6 | 25.9 | 42.4 | 1.9 | 9.0 | 0.7 | 1.2 |
| Kevin Garnett | 33 | 83 | PF | 111.0 | 21.4 | 100.7 | 2.32 | 17.2 | 51.6 | 16.7 | 83.3 | 15.1 | 11.4 | 1.0 | 26.2 | 0.6 | 5.0 | 24.5 | 2.1 | 1.7 |
| K. Perkins | 25 | 82 | C | 102.9 | 17.3 | 100.7 | 2.78 | 12.5 | 59.2 | 0.0 | 58.2 | 5.9 | 23.5 | -5.3 | 53.3 | 0.7 | 8.9 | 24.0 | 5.1 | 0.7 |
| Glen Davis | 24 | 81 | PF | 105.3 | 19.7 | 104.6 | 0.11 | 13.4 | 45.7 | 0.0 | 70.6 | 5.2 | 14.3 | -3.2 | 55.2 | 1.9 | 12.3 | 14.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| Tony Allen | 28 | 76 | SG | 101.5 | 19.3 | 100.4 | 1.56 | 13.3 | 52.8 | 0.0 | 63.5 | 11.8 | 19.4 | -2.3 | 45.3 | 2.8 | 6.7 | 11.9 | 1.9 | 3.4 |
| R. Wallace | 35 | 82 | PF | 101.2 | 18.6 | 100.2 | 2.66 | 14.6 | 50.5 | 29.6 | 77.6 | 6.6 | 9.5 | -0.7 | 20.7 | 44.1 | 2.7 | 18.7 | 3.1 | 2.2 |
| Michael Finley | 36 | 79 | SG | 103.1 | 12.6 | 107.7 | -2.18 | 9.7 | 45.9 | 38.0 | 58.8 | 8.7 | 10.8 | 1.3 | 8.4 | 45.3 | 1.0 | 10.9 | 0.6 | 0.9 |
| Nate Robinson | 25 | 69 | PG | 106.8 | 24.7 | 109.2 | -1.41 | 18.5 | 46.9 | 38.6 | 74.0 | 24.6 | 13.5 | 3.1 | 14.6 | 45.7 | 2.9 | 8.6 | 0.4 | 2.4 |
| S. Williams | 26 | 81 | PF | 117.8 | 15.7 | 102.5 | 1.51 | 12.3 | 52.8 | 0.0 | 76.9 | 5.0 | 16.8 | -2.9 | 81.3 | 0.8 | 9.7 | 19.9 | 2.7 | 1.2 |
| M. Daniels | 29 | 78 | SG | 101.5 | 15.9 | 106.6 | -1.55 | 11.3 | 52.8 | 20.7 | 63.3 | 11.0 | 15.0 | 0.1 | 23.1 | 11.2 | 4.0 | 9.0 | 0.5 | 1.5 |
2010 Season Series
5-Year Results: Regular-Season ▪ Playoffs
| Series schedule |
|---|
| Game 1 @ LAL - Thursday, June 3 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 2 @ LAL - Sunday, June 6 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 3 @ BOS - Tuesday, June 8 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 4 @ BOS - Thursday, June 10 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 5 @ BOS - Sunday, June 13 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 6 @ LAL - Tuesday, June 15 (TV: ABC) |
| Game 7 @ LAL - Thursday, June 17 (TV: ABC) |
| Picks | Most Likely | Second Opinion |
|---|---|---|
| SPM "True Skill" Projection says: | Lakers in 6 | Lakers in 7 |
| SRS says: | Lakers in 6 | Lakers in 7 |
| SRS (reg. season + playoffs) says: | Lakers in 6 | Lakers in 7 |
| I say: | Lakers in 7 | Lakers in 6 |
May 31st, 2010 at 4:40 am
I got the Lakers in 6 this time around. Believe I had them in 7 last time, so who knows. All I know is Boston really seemed to click into gear a round or so again.
May 31st, 2010 at 10:06 am
Am I still the only one who does series-by-series 'advanced' stats?
http://www.apbr.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3108
May 31st, 2010 at 10:33 am
You don't have to be... Do you want to be?
May 31st, 2010 at 10:45 am
No.
May 31st, 2010 at 10:55 am
If I had more than 3 clear hours to myself each day, I'd break out the 'ol Excel. Unfortunately, the time I spend online these days is mostly relegated to my off-time during work, in which I debate layman basketball at casual forums. With 16 year olds, mind you. Drunken bar arguments will never die. :(
May 31st, 2010 at 11:13 am
Actually, while not explicitly part of this blog post, these 2 links lead to the raw series totals for the Finalists:
2010 Celtics Playoff Stats
2010 Lakers Playoff Stats
Well, they don't come across as links, but they are in the opening post.
So the raw numbers are available for anyone's use. I find series stats fascinating, myself. They're like a microcosm of a 2-team league.
May 31st, 2010 at 5:07 pm
the celtics were a middling team in the category of DRB% during the regular season. In the playoffs, they are that the top of that category. How much of that can we attribute to Miami, Cleveland, and Orlando being below average performers in the ORB% percentage in the regular season?
Are the Celtics great defensive rebounders, or not?
June 1st, 2010 at 1:25 am
A huge part of the Celtics' disparity between regular season and playoff performance has to do with minutes.
During the regular season:
Rondo played 74.9% of available minutes
Allen played 71.3% of available minutes
Pierce played 60.9% of available minutes
Perkins played 54.4% of available minutes
Garnett played 52.1% of available minutes
During the postseason:
Rondo has played 82.1% of available minutes
Pierce has played 79.3% of available minutes
Allen has played 76.2% of available minutes
Garnett has played 63.9% of available minutes
Perkins has played 51.0% of available mintues.
That's a huge jump for the big four, at the expense of mediocrities like Scalabrine, Williams, and the horrifyingly inconsistent Tony Allen.
Doesn't hurt that Glen Davis and Rasheed Wallace have elevated their game during the playoffs.
June 1st, 2010 at 6:57 am
Joel, did you adjust those regular season minutes for games missed? I don't think you can really consider them available minutes if the player was injured; besides that is a better estimate to compare to the postseason where they have played every game. Then you get
Rajon Rondo 76%
Ray Allen 73%
Paul Pierce 71%
Kevin Garnett 62%
Kendrick Perkins 58%
Is what I get for the regular season, so you can see that Perkins burn has gone down almost as much as Pierce's has gone up, which is what I would expect after the Orlando Series.
I suspect that most of scalabrine's minutes were due to injury (to other players) in regular season, and Nate Robinson has probably impacted the guard positions...This is born out by the lineup data at BasketballValue.com where the Big 5 play 1150 minutes together (or 35% of the potential 69 games they played), the next most used lineup only played 190 minutes...
What is more impressive is if you look at the lineup data at Basketballvalue.com You will see that Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Big Baby has been played for 77 min in playoffs, for Ortg - Drtg of 10 (cf starting 5's MP of 360 and OR-DR ~ 4). This lineup only played 20 minutes in regular season! and had negative differential - so Doc seems to have gone with something he didn't really test out / or use successfully in regular season ...
Top 5 units with 'Sheed during the playoffs all have negative points differential ...
The Lakers seem to be limited by Bynum's Injury, particularly it seems they can't play an Odom / Bynum front court as much, nor is either lineup with Bynum as effective in the playoffs as in the regular season. They are harder to analyse as they have a clear best perimeter lineup of Fisher - Kobe - Artest; but use the three big men for the majority of the minutes - those 3 lineups played 1460 minutes for the lakers in the regular season, or 47% of possible minutes
June 1st, 2010 at 9:28 am
Neil--I'd love to see series-by-series advanced stats (seconding MikeG's request).
Also--could you include minutes played and games played in your tables above for the total season stats?
June 1st, 2010 at 9:38 am
I can probably data-dump series-by-series advanced stats at some point before the Finals.
The tables are sorted by minutes played, but I don't think there's any room to add G and MP to them w/o pushing something else off the edge. I had to abbreviate names just to make room the stats you see now.
June 1st, 2010 at 10:40 am
Here's the SPM Minutes-adjusted breakdown for this series:
LAL vs BOS
4 to 0 8.8%
4 to 1 20.8%
4 to 2 15.7%
4 to 3 20.9%
3 to 4 10.1%
2 to 4 14.1%
1 to 4 6.2%
0 to 4 3.3%
Margin
8.17 6.33
LAL BOS
66.2% 33.8%
I'm still using Neil's latest SPM here.
June 1st, 2010 at 7:20 pm
I opted to include games missed as part of the overall minute share, to explain why the Celtics were so mediocre in the regular season.
June 4th, 2010 at 6:01 am
Lakers are going to win this final! Game 1 has been won and Gasol has surely proven himself. Gooo Lakers!
D.
angry smiley
June 4th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
I made an error on my previous post--I forgot the 2-3-2 distribution. Corrected:
LAL vs BOS
4 to 0 8.8%
4 to 1 13.6%
4 to 2 22.9%
4 to 3 20.9%
3 to 4 10.1%
2 to 4 9.7%
1 to 4 10.7%
0 to 4 3.3%
Margin
8.17 6.33
LAL BOS
66.2% 33.8%
June 4th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
That's why I picked Boston in 5 for the TrueHoop contest -- because of the 2-3-2, they were most likely to win in 5 if they win at all. Although, after last night, Celts in 5 (or in anything) looks pretty unlikely.