The Orlando Magic Can't Help That They Have the NBA's Easiest Schedule

by Ben Q Rock on Dec 21, 2008 11:00 AM EST in Commentary Comment 14 comments

There's plenty of great information concerning the Orlando Magic in the Weekend Dime at ESPN, which was posted yesterday. Most interesting, though, is the discussion between ESPN.com writer Marc Stein and ESPN Radio host Marc Kestecher which was recorded a few hours before the Magic's 90-78 victory over the San Antonio Spurs; we'll discuss the other two items after the jump. Stein says he would include San Antonio in the discussion of the league's elite teams, but is much less certain about the Magic. As Kestecher notes, 16 of the Magic's 19 victories at that point were over teams with losing records. Stein says he's impressed with Orlando's ability to win on the road--it is 10-3--but still believes it would falter in a playoff series against either the Boston Celtics or the Cleveland Cavaliers. The second round of the playoffs is the Magic's ceiling, says Stein.

Since that conversation, the Magic have beaten the Spurs and the Los Angeles Lakers to run their record to 21-6. They have won 21 of their last 24 games while battling injuries to their three best guards and their franchise center. They have an All-Star center, two productive forwards in their primes, an emerging point guard, and a bench that's gotten deeper as the season has progressed. About the only thing working against them, in terms of public perception, is their early schedule.

And that's what bothers me.

It's so obvious that I almost hate to write it, but here it is: teams can only play who is on the schedule. They have no say which other teams they play, when, or where. The Magic have taken care of business in the early going, as have the Celtics, Cavaliers, and Lakers. Yes, every other team in the NBA has played a stronger schedule than the Magic. But if anything, that's more reason to pay attention to them, not less. The "Oh, the Magic aren't for real, they haven't beaten anyone" argument is simply absurd. The Magic are 5-5 against teams currently above .500, and 4-1 in their last 5 such games. It's clear that they're starting to pull it together. So when the schedule toughens up, as it will in January, when 9 of the 13 games are against teams currently over .500, the Magic should be tougher, too.

Bottom line: I understand if people need to see more of the Magic before lumping them in with the Cavaliers, Celtics, and Lakers among the league's elite teams. But to dismiss them outright is unwise, not to mention premature, and not only because it makes one look foolish: it also helps the Magic, who feed off the perception that they're not ready to contend. Magic forward Rashard Lewis explains:

"We keep feeding off of flying under the radar just so we can prove a point. It feeds our fire. Keep pouring gasoline on the fire, it's going to keep flaming up."

To which I respond, "Burn, baby. Burn."

Make the jump to get my take on the other two items of interest in that Dime.

First: the Oklahoma City Thunder are willing to part with power forward Chris Wilcox and Joe Smith as well as point guard Earl Watson, and are "simply looking for expiring contracts and/or future first-round picks in exchange." Marcin Gortat and Tony Battie have helped the Magic at the power positions a great deal, but the Magic should jump at the opportunity to acquire a vet of Smith's caliber if the price is right. Wilcox is no slouch, either, but he takes entire games off. Not so with Smith, who can play either power forward or center, rebound at a respectable rate, defend well, and make the 18-foot jumper at a solid rate.

Watson, too, is intriguing. He'd make a solid backup to Jameer Nelson in Orlando, but his contract is the least attractive of any of the available Thunder players; it pays him $12.8 million over the course of this season and the next (thanks, ShamSports), whereas the contracts of Wilcox and Smith expire after this season. Given how well Marcin and Tony have played, one could argue that depth at point guard is the Magic's biggest weakness. They could certainly find worse players than Watson to fill that need, though. It's something to keep in mind.

Second: Stein believes Kevin Garnett, not Dwight Howard, is deserving of the Defensive Player of the Year award. He admits it's a tough call, but...

Boston's start has been so historic -- and its defense remains so ferocious -- that I can't make this just about numbers. Sorry, Orlando. I simply can't turn in a trimester report with only one Celtics winner. KG's effectiveness and reach as a defensive anchor and chief of the intensity police, in conjunction with [Doc] Rivers and [Paul] Pierce, to keep these Celts so hungry has him just above Howard for now.

"Effectiveness." "Reach." "Hung[er]."

Draw your own conclusions.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Call me crazy, but I am still not sold on Cleveland, either. I have a feeling they’ll crumble in the playoffs, as usual.

"It's not how you enter your sport, it's how you exit." - Dr. J
http://myspace.com/eme0916

by dfjmed on Dec 21, 2008 11:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'd have thought the same, but man, Bron is for real

That blowout win over Denver pretty much has to cement them as the favorite to win it all.

What a year for the Magic. We are at our best, right up there or close to that 95 team, and we have Boston and Cleveland to go through just to get to the conference finals. I actually think we still win the conference though, call me crazy.

'Coach, Dwight is a nice guy. Dwight don't hit anybody. But Superman will knock the crap out of you.' - D12

by Eyriq the Red on Dec 21, 2008 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

*it seems I contradicted myself in the same post

lesson on the difference between homerism and objectivism, lol.

'Coach, Dwight is a nice guy. Dwight don't hit anybody. But Superman will knock the crap out of you.' - D12

by Eyriq the Red on Dec 21, 2008 11:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cleveland is more REAL than real can possibly be ...

1st in defensive efficiency
2nd in defensive efficiency

… and they’re clobbering everyone.

Plus, remember, most of the core lineup of the Cavs have been the Finals (Z, LBJ, Big Ben, etc.). They have the playoff experience. They know what it’s like to play at the highest level possible … now that they got a taste of it (Wallace won it), they’re more prepared this time. Needless, barring a catastrophe, I expect the Cavs to hoist that Title when it’s all said and done.

Senior Writer for DePaul's Scout.com website
Class of 2009 - DePaul University

by erivera7 on Dec 21, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Correction … I meant to say 1st in offensive efficiency, my bad.

Senior Writer for DePaul's Scout.com website
Class of 2009 - DePaul University

by erivera7 on Dec 21, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

marc stein is a fking nut

that is laughable man.

www.last.fm/user/mhetrick04

by mhetrick14 on Dec 21, 2008 3:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Will the real contenders please stand up?

I got a chuckle out of some of these comments. For example, this was an ultimate "fan boy" comment. "Barring a catastrophe, I expect the Cavs to hoist that Title when it’s all said and done."

Wow, just like that? I mean, don’t get me wrong, confidence is good, but the way you’re saying it is like Cleveland is going to cruise through Orlando, Boston, and LA.

So it got me thinking, because everyone loves to say who is a "legit contender", and who isn’t. Well, for me, I can only call 3 teams legit contenders.

1.– Boston
2.– LA (As of today, I think they’re still to soft on the interior to beat Boston.)
3.– San Antonio (If they are healthy, never count them out. They can score, and more importantly defend. If their history continues, this would be their year to win another title (03, 05, 07)).

For me, Cleveland, Orlando, New Orleans, Houston, and Denver come in next. I think they all have a shot, but if they want to be considered legit, they’re going to have to prove it in the playoffs. I want to mention Portland in with those teams, but I think they’re still too young. On the flipside, Phoenix and Dallas are too old.

Here is the thing that bothers me. I understand Boston and LA being mentioned at the top, pretty much in their own category. What I don’t understand, is how Cleveland is being put up there on the same level? It doesn’t make sense to me. Here are a few thoughts I have on the Cavs.

First off, I couldn’t help myself… Are you seriously going to mention Ben Wallace? That’d be like me making a case for Orlando and including Anthony Johnson’s name because he has played in the NBA Finals before. Wallace is an embarrassment. He stopped playing ever since he got his big payday. Once upon a time he was a dominant force, but Big Ben doesn’t exist anymore, and hasn’t since Detroit.

At least Ilgauskas puts up respectable numbers…

In my opinion, Cleveland has about three things going for them:
1. – Depth
2. – Defense
3. – James (The only reason they’re considered a contender.)

Like I said above, I don’t understand why they’re put on the Celtics or Lakers level, because in all actuality, they’re not. Typically when someone tries to make a case for the Cavs, they often mention two things. That they went to the Finals in 2007 and taking the Celtics to seven games last season. Here are my thoughts on both of those.

Cavs make it to the Finals:
The Cavs had one of the easiest trips to the NBA Finals possibly ever. They beat an injury destroyed Wizards squad in the 1st round that didn’t belong in the playoffs. Then they landed a sub .500 Nets team in the 2nd round. They didn’t face a legit playoff team until the Eastern Conference Finals in the Pistons, which they beat, congratulations! You beat a team famous for burning out late in the playoffs. Then you went onto the Finals, got stomped and swept out by a real championship quality team for one of the most boring and lowest rated NBA Finals in history.

Cavs take the C’s 7:
Sure the Cavs took the Celtics to game 7, and it even went down the wire. I admit it was a fun series to watch. Hell, I was cheering for the Cavs, as I would be this year (because I hate the "classless Celtics"). But at the same time, the Hawks took the Celtics to 7 before the Cavs did. In the end, it was the same result.

The bottom line is, the Cavs are a very good team, with the best player on the planet. But I don’t think it’s fair to say they’re in the same category as the Celtics, because they’re not. They lost in the 2nd round last postseason just like the Magic. All things considered, based on last season, the playoffs, off-season moves, and this ongoing season, I think Orlando should be put in the same category as Cleveland. And as much as I hate to say it, Boston is in a category of their own; at least until somebody beats them.

Last thought:
The Magic had a 3-1 record against the Cavs last season, which included winning both games in Cleveland. If you include the preseason, the Magic were 5-1 against the Cavs. So while James is a match-up nightmare for the Magic (and the entire league). The Magic will present Cleveland with match-up problems from top to bottom.

Needless to say, I’m looking forward to January 29th.

by OVERWADED on Dec 21, 2008 6:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Know who the commenter is before labeling them a “fanboy”.

I’m a Magic fan, not a Cavs fan, but with that said, I’ve watched them plenty this year to be completely impressed with that team and rightfully so. They have everything you want in a Title contender, and it doesn’t hurt having the best player in the world (LeBron). I have them as the favorite (at this moment, but things can certainly change very quickly) … me stating that I feel the Cavs will hoist the Title doesn’t mean I’m leaving absent the road they will have to take. It will be tough, sure, but they’re more than capable of handling the task at hand.

You can’t discredit the Cavs now because of what occurred in the 2007 Finals. They’re two completely different teams. You’ve already labeled the reasons why the Cavs made it to the Finals and you are correct with you’re assessment. However, this year’s team is VASTLY different and superior.

… this year’s Cavs team isn’t overmatched and inexperienced anymore. Plus, they’re not offensively inept as they were two years ago when they made the Finals, as well as last year. They’re a offensive juggernaut now and the stats don’t lie (1st in offensive efficiency). They were already a great defensive ballclub but now that the offense has caught up to speed, you’re now seeing the Cavaliers at their absolute best.

You also can’t dismiss the Cavs taking the Celtics to 7 games simply because the Hawks accomplished the same feat. That’s too much of a generalization … the Cavs COMPETED on the road against the Celtics. The Hawks? Not so much … they just did their job and held home-court. As the Cavs did, but Cleveland actually threatened the Celtics on the road every game (aside from Game 2). The Hawks did not.

Given what is occurring THIS YEAR, it’s more than fair to put the Cavs side-by-side with the Celtics. Just two years ago, the Celtics were awful and they quickly transformed into a juggernaut. The Cavs weren’t as bad, but they were clearly weren’t great either … now? They’re transformed as well. In the end, what’s occurring this year is all that matters when deciphering who should be among the Elite.

Senior Writer for DePaul's Scout.com website

by erivera7 on Dec 21, 2008 6:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

incredible post

…in that you defied all objective logic in determining an elite team.

www.last.fm/user/mhetrick04

by mhetrick14 on Dec 22, 2008 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The numbers don’t lie … not sure how I defied objective logic.

Senior Writer for DePaul's Scout.com website

by erivera7 on Dec 22, 2008 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, I’m an idiot. Are you “mhetrick14” referring to me or the other poster? My mistake! I just realized that right when I hit “submit” … hah, foolish me. My apologies.

Senior Writer for DePaul's Scout.com website

by erivera7 on Dec 22, 2008 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wait a minute!!!!

Wait BUT last year the Magic had one of the toughest schedules in the NBA and still went 52-30 and made it to the second round with a 1st year coach for the Magic. Listen what more do you need???? If you don’t think the Magic are contenders you need to get your head check.

by orltragic07 on Dec 21, 2008 7:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Maybe you need the Magic to beat someone in the playoffs who hasn’t lost as many games as they’ve won. Maybe you need the Magic to take out an elite, rested team away from home. Maybe you need the Magic to blow out one of the good teams, rather than just scraping by them.

Yeah, we’re contenders. We’ve won one playoff series in a decade, beaten the Lakers on the second night of a back to back and done absolutely nothing else apart from beat up on crap teams.

ZOMG BEST TEAM IN NBA HISTORY

Get a grip.

by eltharion_doa on Dec 22, 2008 1:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Back to the schedule...

The Magic are 3-1 off of back to back games. They beat Utah and Portland; 2 teams that are very good. The Magic have also beat: the Raptors and the 6ers twice. Not our fault that they can’t compete with us. They have expectations just as high as ours and could not stay with us.

Well said Ben. We’ve had starters, Dwight, and key bench players all out and figured out ways to win. But I like it better that we fly under the radar and really surprise teams and the public how good we really are. Christmas should be fun…

by L Magico on Dec 21, 2008 8:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs