cavs vs magic redux

When I read this article after the Cavs lost game 1 to the Magic, I scoffed. I thought it was jumping to conclusions after one game. I thought this was LeBron's year. They swept their first two series. Simmons told me so. Even Fanhouse home of the post-game 1 insight had this prediction:

"Rust is overrated; Cavs in four. That said, the Magic tend to play better when everyone in the world has counted them out, so this could theoretically go five, maybe six. Either way, the Cavs will be representing the East in the Finals."

So I brushed off the Tim Potvak theory because it didn't support the conclusion I wanted. I didn't think that Lewis and Turkoglu were that much better than the Cavs bench. But what was the difference in the series? Not that Howard outplayed LeBron, but that the Magic was the better team. James couldn't do it all.

All that said, I would have been a lot more impressed if Potvak would have written that before game 1, instead of after the Cavs lost at home.

- - -

Of course, I only pay attention to the NBA in the playoffs. When the playoffs started, I was surprised that Cleveland had the league's best record. I assumed nothing had changed since I saw them in 2007: LeBron is awesome but can't beat a solid team like the 08 Celtics or the 07 Spurs. But I got sucked in because of their record and performance in the first two rounds and listening to the experts.

So I was wrong twice. Or in other words, I was right all along. Just glad I didn't put any money on the Cavs before the Magic series.