Los Angeles Lakers at Orlando, Game 4 (Los Angeles leads series, 2-1)

One thing to point out straightaway - I don't know how much we should read into Los Angeles' solid playoff record of bouncing back with a win after a loss and one day's rest.

The Lakers have won five times in five tries in this scenario this postseason, but outside of Game 3 of the Denver series, they should have been favored to win each of these games. One was in Utah, a night after the Jazz barely eked out a two-point win over Los Angeles. No way the Jazz were good enough to take two in Utah over the Lakers.

The next two were home games against the depleted Rockets. You're supposed to win those games. Then there's Game 3 against Denver, a legitimate Saturday surprise; but nobody should have been surprised with the way the Lakers took care of the Nuggets in Game 5 of that series, at home, even after a one-sided Denver win in Game 4.

The Lakers could win tonight. Some say the Lakers should win tonight. But it won't be because of some pattern that's been established while traipsing through inferior teams in April and May. I concede that the team's offense is best while in rhythm, as opposed to rested, but we shouldn't take this happenstance too far. 

On the flip side of that, don't read too much into Los Angeles' poor road record over the last three Finals. They've played but one road game in this year's series, losing by four, and were ably handled by better to much-better teams (due to injury, in 2004; and "much-betterness" in 2008) over Los Angeles' last two Finals appearances. Devean George(notes) and Leon Powe(notes) have nothing to do with what's going on in Orlando tonight.

The prevailing wisdom heading into Game 4 has to do with all the things that had to go wrong for the Lakers for Orlando to pull out Game 3 by four points, and that's entirely fair. The counter to that is to pull up all the things that went wrong for the Magic in Game 2, a contest they nearly won in regulation, falling just short in overtime.

Put those two together, and I think the question you're left with is, "which losing team was closer to their average self in those losses?" The Magic turned the ball over a ton in Game 2, a few shots spun out in overtime, and the team's guard rotation was absolutely ice cold.

The Lakers shot poorly from the free throw line in Game 3, did not hit three-pointers at its usual clip, made some bad play calling mistakes with regards to Pau Gasol(notes), and were torn up on the perimeter by the Magic.

Putting the two together, I can't help but think that the Magic are usually closer to what they showed us in Game 2, than the Lakers are typically closer than what they showed us in Game 3.

Think about it. The Magic's guards, since Jameer Nelson(notes) left the rotation, have always been inconsistent shooters. For years, the Magic have been turnover-prone, and as close to going down as Rashard Lewis(notes) and Hedo Turkoglu's(notes) overtime jumpers were, they were still jumpers that spun out. Happens 45 percent of the time, at best.

The Lakers, meanwhile, don't often watch as Kobe Bryant(notes) misses five of 10 free throws. His status as "the NBA's best closer" has been debunked, year after year, but he's still amongst one of the best fourth quarter players this league has, and certainly the best one of the two teams still playing. Tuesday's performance, though not as shocking as some made it out to be, was still wholly atypical.

Moving beyond that, the Lakers have shown that poor use of Pau Gasol in one game often leads to better (if not exemplary) use of Gasol in the next.

And getting into the other side? We won't know what to expect when it comes to Orlando's jump shooting ability in Game 4, despite scads of data, because jump shots are jump shots. You could toss up a half-dozen airballs in one game, accidentally bank in a few, and finish with a 60 percent clip. Or you could see open looks spin out all night, and make only 30 percent.

Worse for Orlando, you get the feeling that the Lakers were just fine with their defensive game plan in Game 3, despite allowing Orlando to shoot a ridiculous percentage from the floor, and giving up about 125 points per 100 possessions (114 per 100 will lead the league). The attitude after Game 3 seemed to move along the line of, "go ahead, Mickael Pietrus(notes). Nail another fadeaway. Keep shooting." It's a sense of bemusement that starts from Phil Jackson, and moves on down.

The Magic won that game, and earned that win. The squad's quick ball movement and penetration made it so those jumpers came easy and often after several passes. But the Lakers also, while hedging and showing somewhat, made a point to ease the Magic into jumpers, as opposed to looks around the rim.

Again, this isn't to dismiss Orlando's accomplishments in Game 3, or to tell you to expect a Laker win. I'm completely discounting the human aspect of the game, which can change everything. The energy might not be there, for various important contributors on either side. Calls could go the wrong way. One team could luck into winning all the loose ball scrambles. Someone who usually doesn't pick up three fouls in a half could pick up three fouls in a half. Anything can happen.

And after chasing away the "anything can happen" qualifier, this is what we're left with: Orlando and Los Angeles are two championship-worthy teams that are just about playing each other to a hilt (despite Los Angeles' blowout win in Game 1; who would be surprised if the Magic did the same thing in Game 5?), with the Lakers likely coming out a little better overall.

That makes the game, the series, worth watching.

BDL live blog around 9 p.m. EDT tonight, featuring TV's J.E. Skeets, Trey Kerby, Matt Moore, Matt Sussman, and yours truly tap-tap-tapping away from Amway Arena in lovely downtown Orlando, Florida.