Connect with us

Culture

NBA playoff predictions: Why I like Celtics and Nuggets, early West upsets and more

Published

on

NBA playoff predictions: Why I like Celtics and Nuggets, early West upsets and more

We, as a species, have trouble imagining something until it actually happens. The NBA playoffs are a perfect vessel from which to view this particular shortcoming.

The Boston Celtics just completed a regular season in which they won 64 games, winning their conference by a staggering 14 games and posting the fifth-best scoring margin of all time at plus-11.3 points per game. They won or split the season series with 28 of their 29 opponents (good job, Denver), had no losing streak longer than two games and now take no significant injuries into the postseason.

And yet, it seems hard to find people who would describe Boston as an overwhelming favorite, because they haven’t seen this group of Celtics win it all but have seen them fall short several times.

The Pulse Newsletter

Free, daily sports updates direct to your inbox. Sign up

Advertisement

Free, daily sports updates direct to your inbox. Sign up

BuyBuy The Pulse Newsletter

We’ve seen this movie before, of course. Nobody will admit it today, but a lot of people had a hard time imagining the Denver Nuggets winning the Western Conference, let alone the NBA Finals, last spring … even though they were the top seed in the conference, had a two-time MVP as their centerpiece and their starting five was dominant anytime it played together. Some folks even talked themselves into the Lakers–Warriors second-round series — between two teams that combined to go 87-77 in the regular season — as the “real” conference finals.

Yeah, not so much.

Flip to 2024, and we almost have the opposite problem. People speak of the Nuggets in hallowed terms, with the word “inevitable” being thrown around. Don’t get me wrong — they’re good — but that description may be a bit rich for a team that’s always one injury away from playing extremely makeshift lineups. Nitpickers also will point out that Denver glided through a cleaned-out bracket last year, facing two eighth seeds and a seventh seed on the way to glory. The Nuggets were worthy, asterisk-free 2023 champions, but 2024 is a different year.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Hollinger: Why Joker is MVP again, Wemby is Rookie of the Year and more honors

And the Celtics? Until the Jayson Tatum-Jaylen Brown core wins the big one in June, they’ll always have doubters. But that’s no different from several other eventual champions; people thought the same thing about the Shaq-Kobe Lakers (did too) and Kevin Garnett’s Celtics and Dirk Nowitzki’s Mavs and countless others, right up until last year’s Nuggets.

Advertisement

I must point out the odds are pretty heavily in Boston’s favor to get it done this time. Of the 15 teams to post a margin of plus-9.3 or greater in an 82-game NBA season — taking us two points below what the Celtics did — only the 2015-16 Warriors (who lost the NBA Finals in seven games) and the 2015-16 Spurs failed to win a title. The other 13 won, many in romps.

Even if you just look at basic wins and losses, teams that both win 60 games and have the league’s best record have ended up winning the title more than half the time: 16 times in 31 cases. The last one of those was Phoenix in 2022, which went out with a whimper in the second round against Dallas after winning the same 64 games these Celtics won, so that recency bias may be tilting us a little.

I’ll give you another reason to like Boston: The Celtics are one of only four teams in the “52-3-3” club, and the only one in the East. Of the NBA’s 44 champions since 1980, 43 of them won at least 52 games (pro-rated to 82 for shortened campaigns), had at least a plus-3.0 scoring margin and were one of the top three seeds in their conference. That winnows down your field of potential champions to the top three seeds in the West (Oklahoma City, Denver and Minnesota) and the Celtics.

To counter my point, some argue load management, not to mention general coasting by elite teams, has made the regular season less determinative than it used to be. Last spring, for instance, we had first-round upsets by teams seeded fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth, with a No. 7 seed making the West finals (Lakers) and a No. 8 seed (Miami) crashing the NBA Finals. Lower-seeded teams won seven of the 15 series overall. (From that perspective, reviewing my own performance, getting nine of the 15 bracket lines correct before the playoffs started feels pretty good.)

But even in recent history, a postseason like last year’s is rare. A typical NBA playoffs only sees four teams without home-court advantage advance out of the 15 series; we only had two in 2019, 2017 and 2015, and before last year, we hadn’t had more than five since 1995.

Advertisement

However, perhaps this season the playoffs are rife for more upsets because the standings are so jumbled (well, except for Boston). Every East playoff team besides the Celtics finished with between 46 and 50 wins; the striations in the West were a bit deeper, but every series still looks competitive up and down the board.

Projecting this postseason was maddening, especially in the East. But the bigger issue is adjusting for the unknown of who is actually playing. Late-season injuries to elite players could massively tilt the odds if they can’t play. Already we’ve seen that in the Play-In, with Zion Williamson and Jimmy Butler out and Alex Caruso questionable.

More questions loom for the first round. How much are we going to see of Giannis Antetokounmpo? Joel Embiid? Kawhi Leonard? And what of guys like Tyrese Haliburton and Donovan Mitchell, who are almost certainly playing but might not be at full strength?

So, we bravely go into this knowing the potential to look stupid is off the charts. Even the Celtics, as dominant as they were in the regular season, don’t necessarily get a free pass to the title. As good as they are up and down the roster, they won’t have the best player on the floor in several potential matchups, which is always worrisome. Additionally, injuries, slumps, hot streaks and general weirdness can always throw a wrench into a short series.

But we don’t aim for clairvoyance here. I am just trying to project what is likely. Inevitably, I won’t go 15-for-15 or anywhere close to it. However, after agonizing over several matchups — particularly in the 1-4-5 bracket in the West — here’s what I think is most likely to happen this postseason. Apologies if it’s chalkier than you’d prefer.

Advertisement

West first round

No. 1 Oklahoma City Thunder vs. No. 8 Sacramento Kings or New Orleans Pelicans

I’m not sure these will be totally comfortable series for the Thunder, even if they play the Pelicans without Williamson. New Orleans has waves of defenders to throw at Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, and Brandon Ingram has always played better when he’s not sharing the court with Williamson. Sacramento, meanwhile, has the ability to physically mash OKC with Domantas Sabonis and won two of the four regular-season meetings between the teams.

But there’s a big difference between being uncomfortable and being on the wrong side of the scoreboard four times in seven games. Sacramento is also short-handed because of late-season injuries to Malik Monk and Kevin Huerter, leaving it underpowered against a Thunder team that has too many offensive weapons of its own. I’ll give the Kings their respect and say they can extend the series a bit, while New Orleans probably only has enough left in the tank to grab one game. Pick: Thunder in six vs. Kings; Thunder in five vs. Pelicans


Chet Holmgren and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander celebrate after a play against the Timberwolves in March. (Alonzo Adams / USA Today)

No. 2 Denver Nuggets vs. No. 7 Los Angeles Lakers

My basic rule of thumb is that teams without home-court advantage in the first round are toast unless they at least split the season series. The Lakers lost to Denver 3-0.

Here’s the other, more compelling reason to pick against Los Angeles: Even when Anthony Davis and LeBron James were on the court together, the Lakers just weren’t that good. They finished the season with a plus-0.6 scoring margin, the worst of any of the 18 teams with a winning regular-season record. Even with their dynamic duo on the floor, they were only plus-3.4 points per 100 possessions. That’s the worst number on the board from a playoff team with its two best players, except for New Orleans.

Meanwhile, the Nuggets are ridiculous when their starters play. To the extent they struggled this season, it was almost entirely with bench-heavy whatever units soaking up minutes. Heck, even when they played Aaron Gordon as the backup five and not one of Zeke Nnaji or DeAndre Jordan, they still had a better scoring margin than the Lakers.

Advertisement

As a result, I don’t think this chapter in the series will go much better for Los Angeles than the previous ones. The Lakers have played a series of close games against Denver over the last two years and will eventually win at least one of them. But if Nikola Jokić finishes the series upright, it’s hard to see how Denver doesn’t advance. Pick: Nuggets in five

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Lakers-Nuggets factors: Who stops Nikola Jokić? Can D’Angelo Russell be impactful?

No. 3 Minnesota Timberwolves vs. No. 6 Phoenix Suns

One of my best preseason predictions — or so I thought — was that Minnesota would win a playoff series for the first time since 2004. And then this happens! The Wolves drew perhaps the worst possible opponent in Phoenix, a team that beat them soundly three times in the regular season.

Moreover, the reason the Suns beat them makes conceptual sense. The Wolves love drop coverage and excel at keeping opponents away from the rim; the Suns aren’t all that interested in getting there in the first place. Devin Booker, Bradley Beal and Kevin Durant are Team Pull-Up, devouring opponents by raining jumpers when they can get space coming around a screen. Additionally, the Suns afford no clear hiding spot for Karl-Anthony Towns, forcing him to check a perimeter scorer.

Obviously there are adjustments Minnesota can make to take this away, but this isn’t how the Wolves want to play or what they do best. The most radical adjustment would be to limit the minutes of Towns and Naz Reid and go massively smaller with Kyle Anderson at the four, but that may compromise Minnesota’s spacing too much. The other adjustment, of course, is to score so much that it doesn’t matter; the Suns are not an overwhelming defensive squad, and the Wolves might be able to mash them to pieces in the paint.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, the story here feels more about Phoenix. After a series of fits and starts, Phoenix closed the year on a 30-15 clip and finally projects as the team we thought it might be at the start of the season. The Suns aren’t deep, but their starting five had a plus-11.1 per 100 scoring margin, and several units with Eric Gordon or Royce O’Neale were nearly as good. Phoenix may not have the depth to make a deep run, especially up front, and health worries always hang over this team’s four best players. But in a single short series against a perfect matchup for them, where they come in healthy? Yeah, they’re a handful. Pick: Suns in six

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

‘It’s the Minnesota way’: After dream season, Timberwolves draw nightmare matchup vs. Suns

No. 4 LA Clippers vs. No. 5 Dallas Mavericks

This one is a great unknown on some levels, and not just because of Leonard’s uncertain status.

These teams haven’t played since Dec. 20, and even that game was missing both Paul George and Kyrie Irving. While the Clippers won two of three in the regular season, both teams have changed dramatically since opening day. The Clippers added James Harden, moved Russell Westbrook to the bench and upgraded Amir Coffey to a rotation spot; Dallas traded for Daniel Gafford and P.J. Washington and retooled around them.

Both teams also have had awesome stretches — a 16-2 run by Dallas before shutting its players down for the year, a 32-9 half-season eruption from the Clippers — and have impressive numbers with their stars on the court. Dallas outscores opponents by 10.5 points per 100 when Luka Dončić and Irving share the court, while the Clippers are plus-12.6 per 100 with George and Leonard.

Advertisement

These teams also met in the playoffs in 2020 and 2021, with the 2021 series in particular being a seven-game classic in which the road team won the first six games. The Clippers won both of those series and, on paper, would seem to have a slight edge in this one; first, because three stars are better than two; and second, because their second-line players are better than Dallas’, even with the trade deadline upgrades.

But Playoff Luka has been a cheat code, and I’m not sure Leonard can match him in his current state. Go back and look at the series from 2021: That Clippers team was much stronger than this one, with peak Leonard and an impressive bench; they screwed with load management all year and still ended up with a plus-6 scoring margin, and yet in the playoffs, they had their hands full with Luka. Dončić is going to attack Ivica Zubac again and again in pick-and-roll, just like he did in that series, and I’m not sure what the Clippers’ counters are.

Now that Dončić has Irving as his wingman, even if the second-line guys aren’t as good, I still like Dallas’ chances. That’s especially true when the alternative is betting on Leonard to stay healthy through a postseason series. I expect this series to be tremendous theater, and if Leonard is healthy, the Clippers are a real threat to make the conference finals. But if forced to choose, I trust Dallas a bit more. Pick: Mavs in seven

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Clippers vs. Mavericks is a familiar matchup, but these teams are anything but

East first round

No. 1 Boston Celtics vs. No. 8 Miami Heat or Chicago Bulls

Let’s see, the most dominant team in the league facing either the Heat without Butler or the Bulls potentially without Caruso. Yeah, this should be brief. Boston swept both teams 3-0 in the regular season; all three wins over Chicago were by double figures. Maybe the underdogs take a game while the Celtics play with their food; more likely, though, the end is merciful and quick. Pick: Celtics in four

Advertisement

No. 2 New York Knicks vs. No. 7 Philadelphia 76ers

Embiid showed in the Play-In against Miami that he still isn’t quite at full strength with his movement, and that hurt the Sixers at times. Even so, Philadelphia is now an impressive 30-7 this season when Embiid and Tyrese Maxey both play, with the Sixers outscoring opponents by 12.4 points per 100 possessions in the minutes they share the court together. That’s impressive, but two things worry me about Philly.

First, I just don’t think its supporting cast is good enough, especially if De’Anthony Melton can’t make it back into the mix. Second, the Knicks have some awesome numbers of their own. The small sample size of OG Anunoby minutes has seen them crush teams. More notably, even in the much larger sample of minutes with virtually any combination of Josh Hart, Jalen Brunson, Donte DiVincenzo and Isaiah Hartenstein, they’ve run teams off the floor. New York is plus-15.2 per 100 when those four play together, and thanks to Tom Thibodeau, we have a pretty large minutes sample to work with from that group.

Not having Julius Randle is a bit of a worry, but the Knicks on-off numbers with and without Randle this year aren’t all that different; where his absence hurts is if another injury hits and forces secondary players into prominent roles. In particular, if anything happens to Brunson, the Knicks have nobody who can dribble; their offense already craters when he’s off the floor.

It’s tempting to ride Embiid and pick Philly for the upset, but I think this series ends up underscoring that the Sixers need to get him and Maxey more help this summer. Pick: Knicks in six


Joel Embiid has only played a few games since returning from a meniscus injury. (Bill Streicher / USA Today)

No. 3 Milwaukee Bucks vs. No. 6 Indiana Pacers

You could tell me literally anything about how this series ends and it wouldn’t surprise me.

Advertisement

Immediately, it sets off my danger radar because Indiana beat the Bucks four times in the regular season, including the In-Season Tournament semifinal in Las Vegas, which is one of the conditions to look for when scouting potential first-round upsets. Additionally, Antetokounmpo is likely to miss some time at the start of the series. (While we’re here: Game 3 is at 5:30 p.m. Eastern on a Friday. What the hell, NBA?)

My numbers say the advantage tilts toward Indy in the non-Giannis games, exposing the rot in the Bucks’ second unit due to age and cap constraints. If the Pacers can keep pushing tempo, they can make their superior depth a factor as the series wears on.

However, note that all five meetings happened before the Bucks changed coaches; as our Seth Partnow and Kelly Iko noted, Milwaukee’s transition defense improved under Doc Rivers after the Pacers ran the Bucks off the floor in their early season wins over them.

Two things hold me back from picking the Indy upset. First, Haliburton still doesn’t quite seem all the way back to being the player he was in December. Second, the trade of Buddy Hield left an open sore at shooting guard, one the Pacers can only sort of fill with the T.J. McConnell Experience because of how he overlaps with Haliburton. If Giannis comes back and plays at some point, I think the Bucks hang on. Pick: Bucks in seven

No. 4 Cleveland Cavaliers vs. No. 5 Orlando Magic

This is another series in which the health of a star is a major factor, as Mitchell’s sore knee looms over this one. He wasn’t himself for most of the second half of the season but did come back and score 29 and 33 points in two games last week.

Advertisement

It’s a high-pressure series for the Cavs, given the questions hanging over Mitchell’s future and the roster in general. Cleveland leaned into a 3-point-heavy style built around Mitchell and floor spacers during Evan Mobley’s absence but flamed out late, going 12-17 after the All-Star break while dealing with Mitchell’s injury and trying to reintegrate Mobley.

Nonetheless, tanking their final game against Charlotte handed them the benefit of a first-round series against Orlando. The Magic are tough, physical and live in the paint, but that’s probably a thing the Cavs can handle given that they have two elite rim protectors in Mobley and Jarrett Allen. Orlando desperately needs some perimeter players to make shots and open up the paint; we’re looking at you, Jalen Suggs and Gary Harris.

Also: Don’t expect a lot of scoring. Mitchell will have his hands full with Suggs’ defense, while Paolo Banchero has to deal with the Cavs’ Mobley. Orlando will be searching for floor spacing all series; the Cavs likely will be, too, depending on who plays. Which coach goes for offense guys first?

Historically, these series go to the No. 5 seed about half the time, so on paper, Orlando has a chance. The teams tied the season series 2-2, but the last meeting was in February. This feels like one where the Cavs maybe don’t always look great but do enough to survive and advance. Pick: Cavs in six

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Are playoff lights too bright for Cavs? ‘Good for them to get their a– whooped’

Advertisement

West semifinals

No. 1 Oklahoma City Thunder vs. No. 5 Dallas Mavericks

Consider this the first installment in what could be a tremendous Red River rivalry over the next few years.

This is new territory for the Thunder’s youngsters, but that doesn’t mean they can’t hang at this level. Oklahoma City’s guard-heavy style translates well to the postseason, and look at how well the Thunder played with their best players on the court: Units with Gilgeous-Alexander and Chet Holmgren smoked opponents by 11.6 points per 100 possessions, a number that improved to 12.0 in units with those two and Jalen Williams. That’s even better than how Dallas fared in Dončić-Irving pairings.

Oklahoma City won two of the three regular-season meetings, but the last one was a gimme in which the Mavs sat all their players and the Thunder won by 49. Of more import, perhaps, is a game on Feb. 2 when the Mavs smoked them 146-111. That also was the only game Dončić played against Oklahoma City this season. Because of that, there’s a temptation to roll with Dallas, but a few things tilt me back to the Thunder.

First of all, Gilgeous-Alexander is Dončić’s equal as a scorer and shot creator, if not as a passer, and I’m not sure Dallas has anyone who can slow him down defensively. Along the same vein, Oklahoma City’s small lineups could run Dallas’ bigs off the floor and force the Mavs to dip even further into their bag of not-so-great forwards and wings. Tactically, Mark Daigneault has shown he has a lot more tricks in his bag than Jason Kidd, and that could also matter in a long, close series.

All of these tie into a bigger question: How, exactly, are the Mavs getting stops in this series? I’m not sure they are. Even when Gilgeous-Alexander is off the court or double-teamed, look at his supporting cast. The Thunder don’t have Irving, but they do have Holmgren, Williams and three or four random guys they can bring in and get a double-figure scoring lift from (Isaiah Joe, Cason Wallace, Aaron Wiggins, maybe even Gordon Hayward) without compromising themselves on defense. They may need at least one of them if Josh Giddey gets schemed off the court.

Advertisement

Finally, we can’t forecast injuries, but we can say the Thunder’s depth makes them more resilient to any non-SGA injury than the Mavs would be. Add it all up and I’ll pick the Thunder for another round. Pick: Thunder in seven

No. 2 Denver Nuggets vs. No. 6 Phoenix Suns

In a repeat of the second-round series from a year ago, I’m not sure this one goes any better for the Suns.

Last year, the Suns evened the series 2-2 behind a scorching hot Booker before Denver’s defense took control over the final two games. This time around, Beal replaces Chris Paul and Jusuf Nurkić supplants Deandre Ayton, and the Suns have better answers off the pine than the assorted T.J. Warrens and Terence Rosses they turned to last spring. Phoenix also won two of the three regular-season meetings.

Nonetheless, I can’t see the movie ending differently for the Suns this time, not when Durant is a year older and the Nuggets’ starting five still dominates games to such a massive extent. Even the elite numbers put up by Phoenix’s best lineups are no match for what the Nuggets have done in Jokić-Jamal Murray minutes (a staggering plus-15.2) or in several similar combinations with different starters; the starting group as a whole is plus-13.6 per 100.

A year ago, it felt like the Suns were overmatched once Booker’s scorching hot hand cooled off a little; this time around, the vibes feel similar. Phoenix can shoot its way to a couple wins, most likely, but not four times out of seven. Pick: Nuggets in six

Advertisement

Devin Booker, Bradley Beal and the Suns love to live in the midrange. Is that a winning strategy against Denver? (Joe Camporeale / USA Today)

East semifinals

No. 1 Boston Celtics vs. No. 4 Cleveland Cavaliers

Cleveland’s best game of the second half of the season came March 5, when the Cavs rallied from a 22-point fourth-quarter deficit with nine minutes left to defeat Boston 105-104 without Mitchell. However, they lost their other two meetings against Boston and, on paper, don’t seem to have the horses to hang with the Celtics. With Derrick White and Jrue Holiday, Boston can throw multiple elite perimeter defenders at Mitchell too. (Yeah, this bracket isn’t doing poor Donovan any favors.)

The Cavs might not have enough spacing against Boston unless they can play smaller, but they lost one of their best alternate options to an Allen-Mobley frontcourt with Dean Wade’s knee sprain. Wade, a stretch four who torched Boston in that comeback win, missed the final 19 regular-season games. It’s not clear when he’ll be back.

This one feels like another fairly comfortable series for Boston. With a full-bore Mitchell, the Cavs have enough talent to take a game or two, but in a best-of-seven series, Boston’s superior perimeter size, backcourt defense and shooting should win the day. Pick: Celtics in five

No. 2 New York Knicks vs.  No. 3 Milwaukee Bucks

This shapes up as a good series on paper; I’m not sure it will play out that way in reality.

The Bucks did win three of the five games between the teams in the regular season, but four of those happened before New Year’s Day. New York won the most recent meeting, with intact rosters on both sides.

Advertisement

The Bucks also don’t seem well-equipped to handle Brunson’s slippery pick-and-roll game, with Holiday gone and Damian Lillard in his place. They’ll try Patrick Beverley, surely, but he also tends to rack up fouls.

On the flip side, the addition of Anunoby gives the Knicks a go-to defender to use on Antetokounmpo, and they still have a couple of secondary options (Hartenstein, Precious Achiuwa) in reserve. One other factor to watch: The Knicks wrecked people on the offensive glass, leading the league in offensive rebound rate, but the Bucks were very good on the defensive boards, finishing fifth.

Bigger picture, this is a call on what the Knicks built during the second half of the season, a whole-greater-than-the-sum unit that stampeded the league when intact. The Bucks have the best player in Antetokounmpo, and the Knicks’ lack of perimeter size is a bit worrisome, but I still like New York. Pick: Knicks in six

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

OG Anunoby’s ‘sacrificial cuts’ have transformed Knicks’ identity

West finals

No. 1 Oklahoma City Thunder vs. No. 2 Denver Nuggets

The Thunder and Nuggets played three times this season, with the Nuggets completing outclassing them in the first meeting, the Thunder doing the same in the last and the middle game going down to the wire before Gilgeous-Alexander made a shot in the final seconds to give the Thunder a one-point win.

Advertisement

Sounds like a good formula for a great series, right? This wasn’t a case of the Thunder’s subs beating up on Denver’s subs, either. Jokić was a minus-7 over the three games, while Gilgeous-Alexander was a plus-2. That’s important because the starters are likely to play a much bigger chunk of the game in the playoffs than in the regular season, and Denver’s starters are awesome.

How awesome? Every Denver four-man combo with at least four of the starters had a double-figure per 100 scoring margin. The Nuggets were dramatically worse when they had to play multiple bench players at the same time, with virtually every two-man combo featuring two bench players having a negative margin, but that figures to happen much less in the playoffs.

The Thunder, meanwhile, had more distributed excellence; a lot of their second-unit groups were highly productive, especially ones with Joe in them. However, those groups tend to play a lot less in the playoffs, and if they are used more, they’re going against starters instead of backups.

This could be a classic between the likely top-two finishers in MVP voting; it also may be the first series in which the Thunder’s lack of playoff experience comes to bear. Between that and the Jokić cheat code, I still like the Nuggets to prevail in a tough series. Pick: Nuggets in six

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

NBA Power Rankings: Thunder move up as playoffs near; what’s next for each team?

Advertisement

East finals

No. 1 Boston Celtics vs. No. 2 New York Knicks

A Boston-New York conference finals will definitely break the league record for eff-youz between fans. Could it be competitive on the court too? I’m less sure of that.

New York won the final meeting between the teams after Boston had already clinched the East’s top seed, but the Celtics won the first four times they played, and three of them were by double figures.

Two things stand out here. First,  the Celtics can throw both White and Holiday at Brunson, forcing him to earn his points against two of the best guard defenders in basketball. Second, New York’s smallness on the wings could be more of a factor when the Knicks are trying to check Tatum and Brown; Anunoby can handle one of them, but they’re asking a 6-4 guy to take the other.

You can see other angles that might not favor New York either; Boston can bring better players off its bench, and if any injury attrition happens, that also favors the Celtics. It’s been a heck of a year for New York, but this is where I get off the bandwagon. Pick: Celtics in six


Jamal Murray drives against Jayson Tatum in Boston earlier this season. (David Butler II / USA Today)

NBA Finals

No. 1. Boston Celtics vs. No. 2 Denver Nuggets

You might have guessed my prediction from the intro. I had Boston over Phoenix before the season started, but the Suns haven’t quite looked strong enough, so I’ve pivoted.

Advertisement

The Nuggets have proven themselves in these situations, and their starting groups are lethal. But Boston’s excellence extends throughout the rotation, and the Celtics will have a massive advantage any time bench units are involved. Yes, that figures to happen less in an NBA Finals series than in a regular-season pairing, but those minutes still count.

Denver did win two close games against Boston in the regular season, and both were legit, asterisk-free matchups in which each team played its starters. Oddly, both teams shot horribly from 3, a trend that would favor the Nuggets if it held up in the Finals simply because they shoot so few of them.

In the end, you wonder if 3s will mater in a different way, in that math might be Boston’s difference-maker: The Celtics took 3s on a league-leading 47.1 percent of their field goal attempts, while the Nuggets were last at 35.2 percent.

Regardless, this shapes up as an awesome, get-your-popcorn series, featuring the league’s best player and defending champion against its most dominant regular-season team.

I know the Tatum-era Celtics have struggled in some of these moments before, but they’ve been the best team all year by a wide margin. This time, I think they finally get over the hump. Pick: Celtics in seven

Advertisement

(Top photo of Nikola Jokić and Kristaps Porzingis: Winslow Townson / Getty Images)

Culture

Poetry Challenge Day 4: What The Stars Can Teach Us About Love

Published

on

Poetry Challenge Day 4: What The Stars Can Teach Us About Love

Advertisement

Here we are on Day 4 of the Poetry Challenge, looking up, again, at the sky. (If you’ve just arrived, click here to catch up.)

We’ve considered “The More Loving One” as a witty, teasing love poem, and also peeked into the life of its author, W.H. Auden, to see what it might have meant to him. But maybe it’s time to take this poem at face value, as a meditation on our place in the universe.

You can read the whole poem here, but to recap: We start by admiring the stars even though they don’t feel the same way (or any way, really) about us. Then we wonder … do we care about them all that much? At last, we imagine them extinguished, leaving an emptiness that we tell ourselves would be just fine. Eventually.

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

Advertisement

And feel its total dark sublime, 

Though this might take me a little time. 

Tracy K. Smith, poet

Advertisement

The poem resolves with a sigh that seems to linger, as if the poem didn’t quite want to end. Unlike the concluding lines of the previous stanzas, all of which clocked in at precisely eight syllables, the last line of the last one extends to nine. That may sound trivial, but we know that Auden counted his syllables carefully.

And it isn’t hard to identify the extra particle, the one tweezed in among the others. Auden could just as well have written, “Though this might take a little time.”

That would have maintained the pattern without altering the meaning. The “me” is implied. Adding it might seem redundant. Which is exactly why Auden does it.

Advertisement

Though this might take me a little time. 

Advertisement

W.H. Auden, poet

That scant word makes the poem last a little longer. It also emphasizes the human presence of the speaker, a person whose perceptions and feelings are what this is finally all about. He is asking for patience, for grace, as he adjusts his eyes and heart to a stark new situation.

But how much time is “a little”? The split second it takes to utter that extra, unstressed “me”? However much is needed to heal all proverbial wounds? Or are we thinking in astronomical measures, as those stars invite us to suppose? In that case, it might take our poor stargazer more time than he has. Millions of years. Hundreds of millions!

Advertisement

What does it mean to exist as a solitary being in such a vast, incomprehensible cosmos? This may have been an especially timely question when this poem was written; early versions date from 1957, the year the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, marking the beginning of the space age. But poets have been looking at the sky for a very long time.

Some find comforting news of heaven, like William Wordsworth:

Advertisement

The stars are mansions built by Nature’s hand,

And, haply, there the spirits of the blest

Dwell, clothed in radiance, their immortal vest’

Advertisement

William Wordsworth, “The stars are mansions built by Nature’s hand

Others, like Ada Limón, see the projection of our own curiosity:

Advertisement

Arching under the night sky inky

with black expansiveness, we point

to the planets we know, we

pin quick wishes on stars.

Advertisement

Ada Limón, “In Praise of Mystery: A Poem for Europa

Occasionally a poet (Stephen Crane in this case) will hear an answer that makes Auden’s silent stars seem kind:

Advertisement

A man said to the universe:

“Sir, I exist!”

“However,” replied the universe,

“The fact has not created in me

A sense of obligation.”

Advertisement

Stephen Crane, “A Man Said to the Universe

Auden himself came back to the subject a dozen years after “The More Loving One,” in a poem called “Moon Landing,” which ambivalently hailed the Apollo II mission as a “phallic triumph,” “a grand gesture” of male self-regard. And while he acknowledges the spirit of adventure behind the mission, he doesn’t admire the moon enough to want to see it up close:

Advertisement

Worth going to see? I can well believe it.

Worth seeing? Mneh! I once rode through a desert

and was not charmed

Advertisement

W.H. Auden, “Moon Landing

He’d rather contemplate the moon above him — one who “still queens the Heavens” — than tread like Neil Armstrong on its dusty, lifeless surface. The feats of NASA and its astronauts belong to a world of science, politics and media spectacle; Auden prefers the realm of mythology and aesthetics.

Advertisement

W.H. Auden in 1972. Donal F. Holway/The New York Times

He’s in good poetic company. In “When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer,” Walt Whitman, at a lecture, finds himself “tired and sick” of charts and diagrams and scientific discourse.

Advertisement

Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,

In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,

Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.

Advertisement

Walt Whitman, “When I Heard the Learn’d Astronomer

He did not give a damn if they gave a damn.

For Auden, as for Whitman, demystifying the stars risks stripping them of their poetry. A sense of wonder flickers through “The More Loving One,” along with the wit and the romantic weariness. The poem concludes with an almost defiant commitment to awe, the search for sublimity in the heavens.

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

Advertisement

And feel its total dark sublime, 

Though this might take me a little time. 

Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet

Advertisement

Stars or no stars, what matters is the attitude of the person below: receptive, yearning, more in love than he may be willing to admit, even if — or indeed because — he doesn’t quite know what it is he’s worshiping.

As we approach the end of the poem, our own feelings might be in a bit of tangle: admiration, amusement and something else that’s harder to pin down in words or themes. A feeling that, having spent time with a poem largely about solitude, we are less alone.

Let’s nail down those tricky last lines, and come back tomorrow to talk about the whole thing.

Advertisement

Your task today: Learn the final stanza!

Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.

Question 1/6

Let’s start with the first couplet in this stanza. Fill in the rhyming words.

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.

Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.

Advertisement

Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.

Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.

Continue Reading

Culture

Book Review: ‘Israel: What Went Wrong?,’ by Omer Bartov

Published

on

Book Review: ‘Israel: What Went Wrong?,’ by Omer Bartov

The result has been a terrible irony for a country that was founded as a refuge from intolerance: “How is it that the appeal to humanitarianism, tolerance, the rule of law and protection of minorities that characterized the beginning of Jewish self-emancipation gradually acquired all the traits of the relentless, remorseless and increasingly racist ethnonationalisms from which Zionism sought to liberate European Jewry?”

To answer this painful question, Bartov uses all the tools at his disposal, weaving together history, personal anecdotes, even some literary criticism, including a close reading of a poem — by Hayim Nahman Bialik and known to “every Israeli schoolchild” — about the perils of vengeance that has been misinterpreted and warped for political ends. Bartov writes unsparingly about Hamas’s murderous attacks, in which about 1,200 Israelis were killed and about 250 others taken hostage, which he calls an unequivocal “war crime and a crime against humanity.” It was a “slaughter of innocents” that “evoked collective memories of massacres and the Holocaust.”

Indeed, in a May 2024 poll of Israelis that he cites, more than half of the respondents said Oct. 7 could be compared to the Holocaust, and the Israeli media repeatedly depicted the massacre as a pogrom. Bartov understands why — for traumatized people, new traumas will revive old ones — but he maintains that the label is a category mistake. Israel is a state; it has an army, laws and government. A pogrom “is a mob attack, condoned or supported by the state authorities, against a minority lacking any attributes of a state.” (“To be sure,” he adds, “pogroms have occurred within the territories controlled by Israel, but when they take place, they were and are being carried out, with increasing frequency and ferocity, by settlers in the West Bank.”)

Israel doesn’t have a constitution. After its founding, its government was supposed to codify the protection of religious freedom and minority rights, but efforts to adopt a constitution were waylaid and arguably thwarted by political figures like David Ben-Gurion, the country’s first prime minister. Bartov believes that a constitution could have made Zionism “superfluous” after it succeeded in establishing a state that could be a refuge for Jews. Citizens could have turned toward the task of building a “just society” that aimed at “peace, truth and reconciliation with the Palestinians.”

This sounds nice, if fanciful; constitutions don’t magically prevent authoritarianism. Not to mention that attacks by surrounding Arab states did nothing to alleviate Israelis’ sense that they were constantly embattled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Culture

Poetry Challenge Day 3: W.H. Auden, The Poet and His Technique

Published

on

Poetry Challenge Day 3: W.H. Auden, The Poet and His Technique

Advertisement

Now that we’ve memorized the first half of our poem, let’s learn a little more about the man who wrote it. (Haven’t memorized anything yet? Click here to start at the beginning.)

For most of his life, Wystan Hugh Auden (1907-73) was a star. He was widely read, quoted, argued over and gossiped about, achieving a level of fame that few writers now — and not many then — could contemplate. His New York Times obituary did not hesitate to call him “the foremost poet of his generation.”

Celebrity of that kind is ephemeral, but Auden’s words have continued to circulate in the half century since his death. Maybe you’ve heard some of them before. In the 1994 film “Four Weddings and a Funeral,” his poem “Funeral Blues” is recited by Matthew (John Hannah) over the casket of his lover, Gareth (Simon Callow).

Advertisement

In the Gen-X touchstone “Before Sunrise” (1995), Jesse (Ethan Hawke) regales Celine (Julie Delpy) with an impression of Dylan Thomas reading Auden’s “As I Walked Out One Evening.”

Advertisement

Castle Rock Entertainment

In both these scenes, the characters use Auden’s poetry to give voice to a longing for which they otherwise might not have words. Auden’s poetry is often useful in that way. It speaks to recognizable human occasions, and it isn’t always all about him.

Advertisement

“The More Loving One” might not be something you’d quote at a funeral or on a date, but it is almost effortlessly quotable — the perfect expression of a thought you never knew you had:

Admirer as I think I am 

Advertisement

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

I cannot, now I see them, say 

I missed one terribly all day. 

Advertisement

Ken Burns, filmmaker

The word “I” occurs five times in this stanza, but we don’t know much about the person speaking. His personality is camouflaged and revealed by craft.

Auden, born in the northern English cathedral city of York, began practicing that craft as a schoolboy, and honed it at Oxford. Not long after graduating in 1928, he was anointed by critics and readers as the great hope of modern English poetry. A charismatic, divisive figure, he gathered acolytes, imitators and haters.

Advertisement

He swam in the intellectual and ideological crosscurrents of the 1930s, drawing Marxism, psychoanalysis and mystical nationalism into his writing. Assimilating a daunting array of literary influences — Old English and Ancient Greek, French chansons and Icelandic sagas — he forged a poetic personality that was bold, confiding and seductive.

His love poems of that era were candid, discreet dispatches from a calendar of feverish entanglements, wrenching breakups and one-night stands, usually with other men. He also wrote about the feverish politics of the time — class conflict; the rise of fascism; the Spanish Civil War — in ringing rhetoric he later disavowed.

In 1939 Auden moved to America, acquiring U.S. citizenship after World War II. In New York he fell in love with Chester Kallman, a young American writer who became his life partner.

Advertisement

W.H. Auden (left) and Chester Kallman in Venice, in 1949. Stephen Spender, via Bridgeman Images

Advertisement

It was a complicated relationship, starting as a passionate affair and enduring through decades of domestic companionship and creative collaboration. Kallman’s refusal to be sexually exclusive wounded Auden, a dynamic that poignantly shades this poem’s most memorable couplet:

If equal affection cannot be, 

Advertisement

Let the more loving one be me. 

Yiyun Li, writer

In America, Auden distanced himself from the radical politics of his earlier career and embraced Anglican Christianity. His intellectual preoccupations shifted toward religion and existentialism — to the kinds of big questions we think about late at night, or when we look to the sky.

Advertisement

Making the leap from wunderkind to grand old man without seeming to stop in middle age, he became a mentor for several generations of younger poets. He was a prolific and punctual contributor of reviews and essays to various publications, including this one, for which he wrote a rave of J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Fellowship of the Ring” in 1954.

Through it all, Auden devoted fanatical attention to the finer points of poetic technique. His notebooks are full of numbers, word lists and markings that show just how deep this commitment went. He counted every syllable, measured every stress.

Advertisement

Scansion marks from one of Auden’s notebooks, dated 1955-65. Copyright by The Estate of W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. W.H. Auden papers, Berg Collection, The New York Public Library. Photograph by Angelina Katsanis for The New York Times.

He gathered rhymes and other words with a lexicographer’s zeal and a crossword puzzler’s precision.

Advertisement

Lists of rhyming words from another of Auden’s notebooks, dated 1957-59. Copyright by The Estate of W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. W.H. Auden papers, Berg Collection, The New York Public Library. Photograph by Angelina Katsanis for The New York Times.

Advertisement

The third stanza of “The More Loving One” is a miniature showcase of Auden’s skill. Of the four epigrams arrayed before us, it may be the most technically perfect.

Admirer as I think I am 

Advertisement

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

I cannot, now I see them, say 

I missed one terribly all day. 

Advertisement

W.H. Auden, poet

The rhythm is flawless, without an extra syllable or an accent out of place. The grammar is also fastidious. Here is a single sentence, springloaded with equivocation, beginning with one idea and sliding toward its opposite.

This quatrain is the poem’s ideal formal representation of itself, a kind of proof of concept: four lines of impeccable iambic tetrameter in an AABB rhyme scheme. The by-the-book regularity of this stanza should give you a leg up in memorizing it, and you can test yourself below!

Advertisement

But the rest of the poem is an argument against perfection, just as it is a celebration of uncertainty and humility — as we’ll see tomorrow.

Your first task: Learn the first two lines!

Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.

Question 1/6

Advertisement

Let’s start with the first couplet in this stanza. Fill in the rhyming words.

Admirer as I think I am 

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.

Advertisement

Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.

Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.

Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending