Los Angeles Lakers 103, Boston Celtics 98 

Game 5, more than any other contest thus far, served as the most orthodox bit of typical postseason pattern'in that we've seen in these Finals.

The outcome was pretty expected, with the home team as the group with its back against the wall, playing its final game at home regardless of the outcome of the series, and the visitors just unable to keep up the execution level (partially) and effort level (mostly) for the full 48 minute term.

This isn't to say that the Boston Celtics have much more to worry about, but they shouldn't be excused from a little bout of teeth gnashing. They didn't blow the series or their cover and the Laker win was completely in line with how these things usually work; still, you never want to give a Finals-worthy opponent another chance in life. And if the C's would have come through with a tighter, smarter, and more efficient game, the title would have been theirs in five.

Didn't happen, though, and credit the Lakers for a strong brand of intense, if not overwhelmingly proficient, basketball.

You see, that Laker offense still hasn't risen from the depths. Sure, they put up 103 points overall (and 39 in the first quarter) against the best defense in basketball, but the Triangle as we knew it still hasn't returned. Kobe Bryant "set the tone early on" (come on) with 15 first quarter points including 12 off of three-pointers (4-5 mark), but those were crummy shots.

Kobe can nail long range bombs with the best of them, but pulling up off the dribble for fallaway 25-footers? Hardly setting a foundation to work off of. And people act surprised when he misses all four of his three-point attempts to finish the game. And his 3-13 shooting mark over the final three quarters, yeah, that was a result of having to work through an offense that Bryant (the game's most knowledgeable on-court Triangle offense practitioner) failed to set up in the opening minutes.

That offense has long been a "give a man a fish/teach a man to fish" issue for guys like Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. Of course a man of Kobe's talents can come out and single-handedly put together a massive points advantage against a stellar defense if the lucky shots are falling, but at what price?

This offense demands that you work from the inside-out early on, and even if that means you take a 24-18 first quarter deficit to the huddle after the first 12 minutes, it also means you have a batch of teammates with warm hands who are used to making cuts and will now aid in helping you get your shot off without much hesitation or reflex.

Not so much because they appreciate you moving the ball and working in the offense in that first quarter (though I don't doubt that helps), but because you know how to work your way toward easy looks in the Triangle, and your teammates (now making smart cuts and passes) can't help but set you up.

So it was absolutely no shock when the Lakers put up 16 points in the second quarter, with Kobe going scoreless in nine minutes. All he'd done in the first quarter is given the Laker offense a fish, and things predictably fell apart after that.

Then the Celtics, after getting their act together defensively and making the expected comeback, did a little falling apart on their own. Six turnovers in the third quarter for Boston, after coughing it up just three times in the final 18 minutes of the first half. Throw in 7-21 shooting and an inability to stop Pau Gasol (eight points in the quarter, a third of Los Angeles' output), and the Lakers jumped right back into control after the Celtics actually took a lead for a short spell. 

Gasol's ability to play well on the interior would seem to indicate that the Celtics were hurting without Kendrick Perkins on the inside, and SI's Chris Mannix did his job in getting that idea out there by asking every single Celtic or Laker who trudged into the press area post-game if Perkins' absence was felt.

The problem with that is that Perkins was playing lousy, lousy basketball on the road when he went down with a strained shoulder in Game 4. We talked about it last week, Perkins' absence actually helped the Celtics take the win in that comeback, because he was getting caught too far from the hoop to be of much service to the Boston interior defense (or rebounding corps), and Perkins was way too far out to do much from limiting a savvy player like Bryant working in the confines of an exacting offense.

The real problem was Kevin Garnett, cold and ineffective after playing just 12 seconds out of the final 13 minutes of the first half (plus the halftime break), then having to work with four fouls in the third quarter. KG wasn't anywhere near his typical self defensively, and though he helped on the rebounding end (14 caroms, seven offensively, seven in the third quarter alone), his defensively night off killed Boston's chances.

And don't make excuses for the big man, he certainly wouldn't, because those two reach fouls in the first half swiping for steals on the entry pass sealed KG's own fate.

Garnett will swing back into form, you can count on it; though Paul Pierce might be a little gassed having to play a Game 6 just 36 hours after this post goes up, on the exact other side of the country. The Truth sat for just two seconds of Game 5, scoring 38 points on just 22 shots with six rebounds, eight assists, a killer five turnovers, and a 16-19 mark from the line.

Sam Cassell had a nice nine points with two assists in 18 minutes, but I wouldn't bank on that again. Not saying it won't happen again, just saying Boston needs better bench production at home.

In the end, it did come down to effort, and though I wish I wasn't relaying this much on easy answers, the Lakers just stuck with this game for longer stretches. Even when they weren't playing the smartest offensive basketball, the effort level was there.

Phil Jackson mentioned post-game that the Lakers merely worked harder than the Eastern champs, and that was pretty obvious just watching the game, because "harder" also means taking the time to subscribe to a patient, exacting line of thinking that stops you from making silly passes or reaching for steals.

But I'm not going to kill Boston for Game 5. They had so many chances to roll over in this one, but kept coming back, even if little brain cramps here and there denied them the win. Anything can happen in a playoff series, anything can go wrong, and you never like the tenuous option of being expected to handily win the whole thing in Game 6 just to avoid a nervy Game 7 against a loose Laker club, but that's how it goes.

You just can't help but relax a bit in games like this, especially when you have three contests to win one championship. Doesn't mean we excuse the performance, and it doesn't mean there aren't things to worry about (Perkins always plays better at home, but he might not play; Rondo's a mess these days; and will Pierce's legs hold up?), but the Celtics are still the better team mainly because they're more comfortable playing with each other, and have developed a sense of on-court chemistry and economy of movement that the Lakers have yet to discover whilst L.A. plays against the great defensive teams.

Then again, if the Lakers finally find that in Game 6, and discover what they've been missing? Look out.

Related: Behind the boxscore