Expect to find game-by-game statistical breakdown of the each game during NBA Finals 2008. Learn which team did a much better job in terms of 4 factors.
Abbreviations used:
OEFF: Points scored per 100 possessions | DEFF: Opponent’s points scored per 100 possessions
eFG%: Effective field goal percentage in which 3 pointers taken into account
OR%: Team’s offensive rebounds / (team’s offensive rebounds+opponent’s defensive rebounds)
DR%: Team’s defensive rebounds / (opponent’s offensive rebounds+team’s defensive rebounds)
(FTA / FGA)%: Free throws attempted per 100 field goals attempts
(TO/POSS)%: Turnovers per 100 possessions
{slide=06.05 | GAME 1 | LA at BOS | 88-98}
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| LA Lakers | 89.1 | 99.6 | 109.0 | 43.5 | 16.3 | 72.2 | 36.4 | 9.1 | ||
| Boston Celtics | 89.1 | 109.0 | 99.6 | 46.1 | 27.8 | 83.7 | 46.1 | 14.5 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.2 | 108.2 | 108.2 | 48.4 | 27.3 | 72.7 | 34.5 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
Was Paul Pierce trying to be Willis Reed? Why hasn’t he have an MRI after the game?
KEY FACTORS
LA Lakers couldn’t keep getting offensive boards as they did in playoffs games so far. Despite making more turnovers than the Lakers, Boston Celtics have stayed ahead at most of the second half thanks to the free throws they got frequently.
ADJUSTMENTS
The Boston Celtics should take care of turnovers. The Lakers have to attack more aggressively to the rim.
{/slide}
{slide=06.08 | GAME 2 | LA at BOS | 102-108 }
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| LA Lakers | 87.7 | 117.3 | 122.1 | 55.4 | 28.9 | 71.4 | 12.0 | 14.9 | ||
| Boston Celtics | 87.7 | 122.1 | 117.3 | 59.6 | 28.6 | 71.1 | 55.9 | 17.0 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.2 | 108.2 | 108.2 | 48.4 | 27.3 | 72.7 | 34.5 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
Leon Powe had 21 points on 6 of 7 shooting and was 9-13 at the foul line in just 14.39 minutes! Rajon Rondo had 16 assists which marked the third best record in Celtics’ finals history!
KEY FACTORS
Both teams have enjoyed a pretty good shooting night despite the game being played at a slower pace compared to Game 1. The La Lakers, once again, haven’t preferred to go to the foul line and that was the story of the game in my opinion.
ADJUSTMENTS
It seemed that Boston Celtics have found the comfort at the foul line. The C’s have to keep the confidence level and the momentum which they’ve gained in the first two games of the series. Gasol and Kobe must be more effective in the paint and should be taking some free throws in Game 3.
{/slide}
{slide=06.10 | GAME 3 | BOS at LA | 81-87 }
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| Boston Celtics | 86.8 | 91.7 | 102.1 | 39.8 | 28.6 | 77.5 | 26.5 | 14.7 | ||
| LA Lakers | 86.8 | 102.1 | 91.7 | 47.8 | 22.5 | 71.4 | 49.3 | 14.1 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.2 | 108.2 | 108.2 | 48.4 | 27.3 | 72.7 | 34.5 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
Do you remember the Game 3 of The Finals 2006? With Dallas Mavericks lead the series 2-0 heading to game 3, Gary Payton nailed a timely “go ahead” jumper so that Miami had barely avoided a possible championship loss. Dejavu for the Lakers, thanks to Vujacic’s and Kobe’s critical 3 pointers in the 4th quarter..
KEY FACTORS
Tempo of the game has hit its lowest level in the finals. Celtics seemed like they were benefiting a slow paced game but once again they couldn’t keep staying in game in 4th quarter. Despite an unusual low FT percentage, Kobe’s penetrations have really helped Lakers out as they’ve saved their backs.
ADJUSTMENTS
The Boston Celtics should attend a “how to play in 4th quarters” training program. Kobe’s starting lineup teammates have to contribute on both ends of the floor.
{/slide}
{slide=06.12 | GAME 4 | BOS at LA | 97-91}
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| Boston Celtics | 89.0 | 109.9 | 101.5 | 50.7 | 16.2 | 77.3 | 38.4 | 12.5 | ||
| LA Lakers | 89.0 | 101.5 | 109.9 | 45.5 | 22.7 | 83.8 | 37.7 | 13.4 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.2 | 108.2 | 108.2 | 48.4 | 27.3 | 72.7 | 34.5 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
First half score: 40-58
Second half score: 57-33
Ray Allen’s minutes: 48
KEY FACTORS
Once again shooting percentage determined the winner of Game 4. The other key stats were pretty equal for both teams as you see from the table above. Up-tempo style has helped the Lakers command first half but it was the Celtic’s defense which held Kobe & Co. to 33 second half points!
ADJUSTMENTS
The Lakers now in a must win situation heading to Game 5. In the huge loss, Kobe was limited to only 17 points on 6-of-19 shooting and should be using more balls in Game 5 like he did in the second half of Game 4. Great comeback for C’s and they need their defense one more time again to win it all. The previous 28 teams that have gone up 3-1 have never lost an NBA Finals series.
{/slide}
{slide=06.15 | GAME 5 | BOS at LA | 98-103}
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| Boston Celtics | 95.2 | 103.4 | 107.7 | 48.1 | 26.8 | 72.2 | 40.3 | 19.0 | ||
| LA Lakers | 95.2 | 107.7 | 103.4 | 50.6 | 27.8 | 73.2 | 39.2 | 17.8 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.2 | 108.2 | 108.2 | 48.4 | 27.3 | 72.7 | 34.5 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
Paul Pierce was very impressive and wanted to finish it in Father’s Days but Kobe’s steal from Pierce helped the Lakers pull out a win. Lamar Odom was helpful, Gasol had the best game in the series thanks to absence of Kendrick Perkins.
KEY FACTORS
Pace was way too high for a playoff game but it worked well for Lakers as I mentioned earlier. The other stats were again quite equal for both teams. The difference is that each team used almost 7 more possessions compared to first 4 games of the finals.
ADJUSTMENTS
Kudos to Boston Celtics as they patiently attacked and stayed in the game despite a 19 point differential at the end of first quarter. When playing against Boston, Lakers have never been in the comfort zone even they have had bigger leads in the Finals.
{/slide}
{slide=06.17 | GAME 6 | LA at BOS | 92-131}
| EFFICIENCY | SHOOTING | REBOUNDING | FREE THROWS | TURNOVERS | ||||||
| (PACE) | (OEFF) | (DEFF) | (eFG%) | (OR%) | (DR%) | (FTA/FGA)% | (TO/POSS)% | |||
| LA Lakers | 94.4 | 95.8 | 141.3 | 50.0 | 5.6 | 65.9 | 59.4 | 19.8 | ||
| Boston Celtics | 94.4 | 141.3 | 95.8 | 56.9 | 34.1 | 94.4 | 42.5 | 7.5 | ||
| Playoffs Average | 87.3 | 108.4 | 108.4 | 48.4 | 27.2 | 72.8 | 34.7 | 13.9 | ||
STORY OF THE GAME
No mental or physical resistance by the Lakers in the most critical game of the Finals. Rajon Rondo has punished the Lakers with 6 steals and made plenty of uncontested short range shots.
KEY FACTORS
The LA Lakers grabbed only two offensive rebounds. Along with the huge rebound differential, Boston stealed the ball 18 times which is an incredible stat for a NBA championship caliber team like LA Lakers.
ADJUSTMENTS
Congratulations to Boston Celtics as they’ve deserved to be the champions from all perspectives of basketball sport. LA Lakers desperately need some size in the frontcourt. It seems that Bynum will fill the hole very well.
{/slide}