Lakers-Celtics Nostalgia? Not quite...

Despite my lifelong allegiance to the Pistons and deserved respect for the Spurs, I have to admit that the NBA has found itself with a dream marketing matchup in the Finals with the Lakers and Celtics. But don't be mistaken - this historically-relevant matchup doesn't meant that we're completely harkening back to the glory days of Magic, Bird, Isiah, and Jordan. In fact, the way that this Finals developed is almost entirely counter to what made the Eighties in the NBA so great.

Rewind 11 months - the Spurs had just beaten the upstart Cavaliers and superstar LeBron James in the '07 Finals, and the league was hailing the San Antonio dynasty, awaiting the resurgence of the run-and-gun Suns for another playoff run, biding its time until the Cavs added a supporting cast for James, and knowing that the road to the Finals would have to also pass through Detroit (a conference finalist since '03), Dallas (a finalist the previous year), and perhaps even Denver or Houston. Meanwhile, Chris Paul was reflecting on a breakout sophomore campaign and preparing for an even better third year.

Notice that I didn't mention Los Angeles or Boston - Boston had just lost its ever-important draft lottery, squandering a host of ping-pong balls that it had earned for a woefully poor season, and the Lakers were headed for a summer of discontent, with Kobe Bryant publicly asking to be traded and GM Mitch Kupchak hamstrung by contracts and untradeable assets. A Lakers-Celtics final seemed among the least probable sporting events of '08.

Rewind 20 years: The 80s were great because of this - in June of 1988, the Lakers had just capped a first-in-decades repeat championship in seven games over the upstart Detroit Pistons (helped immensely by Isiah Thomas' ankle injury in his ever-heroic Game Six, but I digress...). To get there, the Pistons had to vanquish the Eastern Conference's perennial champion Celtics - in six hard-fought games, including Detroit's first-ever playoff win in the Boston Garden - to whom they had lost the previous two years. And before even getting there, the Pistons needed to outpace Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls, in a series that would mark the emergence of Jordan's playoff prowess.

The next year? The Pistons disposed of Boston in the first round, aided by nagging injuries to Larry Bird, and passed through the Knicks on a collision course with Jordan's Bulls in the conference finals. Jordan had hit his famed last-second jumper over Craig Ehlo to upset the Cavaliers, and fought admirably for six games before succumbing to the Pistons, who would unseat the defending champion Lakers in the Finals. The Lakers, to get there, passed through the up-and-coming Trailblazers, who would finally jump that hurdle the following year, as almost would Jordan's Bulls, this time lasting seven games before losing to the eventual champion Pistons.

Over the next few years, the Bulls, Pistons, Blazers, and Lakers would trade blows, with the Bulls besting the Western powers once each in the Finals. What does all this mean?

The 'good old days' featured young teams earning their ways to the top, needing to learn from losses to the incumbents in order to regroup and overcome those barriers the next year. Consider:

1982-87 - Lakers and Celtics alternate championships, with Houston and Philadelphia each getting a shot at opposing one of the two.
1987 Eastern Conference Finals: Celtics defeat Pistons in 7 games
1988 Eastern Conference Finals: Pistons avenge that loss and beat Celtics
1988 NBA Finals: Lakers beat Pistons in 7 games
1989 NBA Finals: Pistons avenge that loss and beat Lakers
1989-90 Eastern Conference Finals: Pistons beat Bulls in 6 and 7 games
1991 Eastern Conference Finals: Bulls avenge that loss and sweep Pistons
1989-90-91-92 Western Conference: Lakers and Blazers alternate trips to the Finals
1991 NBA Finals: Bulls defeat Lakers, beginning dynasty

That's basketball meritocracy - each team earned its way to the top, and each fanbase could feel the evolution of its team, as well as the sense of urgency when it neared the top as the newest upstart was always on the rise. Consider, also, the stars of these teams:

Lakers: Magic Johnson (original draft pick), James Worthy (original draft pick), Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (acquired in 1970s)
Celtics: Larry Bird (original draft pick), Kevin McHale (original draft pick), Robert Parish (acquired in trade of #1 pick down to #3, pick used to select McHale)
Pistons: Isiah Thomas (original draft pick), Joe Dumars (original draft pick)
Bulls: Michael Jordan (original draft pick), Scottie Pippen (original draft pick/draft-day acquisition)
Blazers: Clyde Drexler (original draft pick), Jerome Kersey (original draft pick), Buck Williams (traded for Sam Bowie)

For the most part, these teams were homegrown, and grew in to their roles as champions. Contrast that with this year's finalists, who as of a year ago were nowhere near the top, and each had blockbuster trades drop in to their lap:

Boston acquired Kevin Garnett, whose salary was holding Minnesota back, and Ray Allen, whom Seattle was willing to drop quickly as part of a rebuilding plan and salary dump.

LA acquired Pau Gasol as a desperation salary dump.

Regardless of whether you believe any conspiracy thoughts regarding the fact that former Celtic Kevin McHale traded Garnett to Boston and that former Laker Jerry West oversaw the Memphis team that traded Gasol to LA, these trades were entirely improbable, and the major reasons that these teams find themselves in the Finals.

Will this series be enjoyable? Hopefully. Will the history bring back feelings of yesteryear? Of course. But this series materialized out of nowhere, and doesn't begin to compare with the Epic Eighties and all of the drama that unfolded as teams scrapped to the top then. It's historically relevant, but far from history repeating itself, unfortunately.