The Grizzlies and the Celtics are currently surging in the standings. Memphis is backed by rising superstar Ja Morant, who put up 52 points in his last game, while Boston has suddenly become a favorite to win the Eastern Conference. With the two title contenders facing off tonight, the Crossover staff answers a few questions.
Where do you currently rank the Celtics among title contenders in the East?
Howard Beck: I don’t (rank them among title contenders, that is). The clear contenders in the East are the Bucks, Heat and Sixers, in no particular order. If the Nets ever get whole, they join the pack. I’d put the Celtics in the next tier, with a chance to win the East if the others falter or are derailed by injury. They just don’t have the firepower to match the Bucks, Sixers and Nets, or the consistency and depth of the Heat.
Chris Herring: Not that high just yet. They’ve been fantastic since the turn of the year—with a better net rating and defensive rating than any other team—and have a pair of scorers who can go toe to toe with just about anyone. It could mean plenty, but for now I’d still take the Bucks, Heat and Sixers over them. And if Kevin Durant is healthy, Kyrie Irving can play in his home arena and Ben Simmons is conditioned properly, I’d likely take Brooklyn, too.
Chris Mannix: I've already written on how wrong I was about Boston. The defense is elite, Tatum and Jaylen Brown are top-level scorers and Ime Udoka, after a rocky start, is in the mix for Coach of the Year. The Celtics, though, have shown a vulnerability against physical teams (recent games against Detroit are a good example). And the top of the East is loaded with physical teams. I can see Boston getting out of the first round in matchups with Chicago or Cleveland. But if it bumps up against Philadelphia, Miami or Milwaukee, I think it has problems.
Michael Pina: If they catch a few breaks, the Celtics can absolutely reach the Finals. They have the best defense in the NBA, two All-Star wings, depth, experience and lineups that generate matchup concerns for some of their conference rivals. At the same time, it's hard to bet against any team that has Giannis Antetokounmpo, Kevin Durant or the version of Joel Embiid we’ve seen all year.
Rohan Nadkarni: I have the Celtics fifth behind—in no particular order—Milwaukee, Miami, Philly and Brooklyn. I still think the Nets are going to be fine once Durant starts playing. The Bucks’ defense is shaky, but they are still winning when their Big Three plays together. Harden and Embiid are a matchup issue, to say the least. And the Heat have simply been really good for the balance of the season (and could have home court for the first three rounds).
Robin Lundberg: I’d probably have the Celtics fifth. They are a wild card and it isn’t out of the realm of possibility they run to the NBA Finals, but the East is so stacked this season. The Celtics are behind the Sixers, Bucks, Heat and Nets for me and right with the Bulls (probably above Chicago) when it comes to teams I think can advance. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t a tough opponent for anyone.
Where do you currently rank the Grizzlies among title contenders in the West?
Beck: I don’t (rank them among title contenders, that is). It’s just too soon. I know it sounds simplistic and reductive, but youth generally doesn’t win in this league, no matter how talented. (Ask the 2011–12 Thunder, who had three future MVPs.) The Grizz are genuinely great and supremely entertaining; their future is bright. But they need some time, and a clear No. 2 scorer/playmaker to complement Ja Morant. They’re not ready to take down the Suns and Warriors.
Herring: I’m solidly taking Phoenix over everyone else out West. It deserves that belief after last season, and being just as good, if not better, this season. I’d put the Grizzlies and the Warriors as 2A and 2B. Memphis showed last year that it wasn’t afraid of anyone when it knocked Golden State out in the play-in round, and has gotten only better this season, logging more wins against teams .500 or better (23) than any other club in the NBA. Still, it’s asking a lot of a group to go from never having won a playoff series to winning the conference. The Grizz will likely need a bit more time and firepower.
Mannix: Maybe there's a recency bias here—the Grizz led the NBA in scoring average (123.5), rebounds (49.3), rebound differential (+6.6), points in the paint (61.0) and second-chance points (20.5) during February—but I think Memphis can win the West. They have the required top-10 offense and defense. They win on the road and they thrive in clutch situations. And Ja Morant is special. The Warriors have looked vulnerable of late, and the Suns might be a lingering Chris Paul injury from being the same. Youth, as it often has, could derail this team in the postseason. But the Grizzlies are good.
Pina: This young core has championship aspirations, but it's hard to envision them going from a first-round elimination to the Finals in one year. The Suns and Warriors, if healthy, should prevail in a seven-game series. And regular-season standings aside, it's unclear whether the Grizzlies should be considered dramatic favorites in a series against the Jazz, Mavericks or Nuggets.
Nadkarni: I have the Grizzlies third behind the Suns and Warriors. Memphis still lacks some playoff experience as a group. And I know Golden State has been backsliding; I just refuse to believe they won’t be able to pick it back up once Draymond returns to the lineup. As great as the Grizz have been this season—I wouldn’t be shocked if they made the conference finals—they’re probably still one more deep playoff run away from being true title contenders.
Lundberg: I still lean toward the Suns with CP3 as the favorites with a hat tip to the Warriors if Draymond Green is healthy. And the Clippers might actually have the best team out of everyone if they get Kawhi Leonard and Paul George back. The Grizzlies are in the mix with the rest of the teams. But given they are ahead of schedule and not proven in the postseason, I can’t say I'd pick them confidently over the likes of Utah, Dallas and Denver.
Ja Morant (Brad Penner/USA TODAY Sports) and Jayson Tatum (Winslow Townson/USA TODAY Sports)
Who would you rather build a team around: Ja Morant or Jayson Tatum?
Beck: Is it rude to tell my editors I hate this question? I hate this question. (Sorry, editors.) But if you’re forcing me to pick, I’m going with the bigger, taller guy. Multifaceted forwards have generally dominated the last decade-plus in the postseason. (See James, LeBron; Durant, Kevin; Leonard, Kawhi; and Antetokounmpo, Giannis.) Morant is obviously the better playmaker, but Tatum can score from more places and defend multiple positions. Then again, if Morant ever becomes an ace three-point shooter, watch out.
Herring: If I could turn injuries off? Morant. He’s the most fun, up-tempo, high-flying player in the league, and you get the impression his teammates adore him. He can create something out of nothing, and he’s a very good passer. But players with Morant’s sort of physical and athletic profile—Derrick Rose, John Wall, Dwyane Wade—often end up on the shelf. So Tatum, who is much taller and far more versatile defensively, might be the safer pick.
Mannix: As good as Tatum is—and I've long maintained he can be a 30-point per game scorer—I'd take Morant. Beyond his absurd skill set and early Russell Westbrook/Derrick Rose–level athleticism, Morant plays the NBA’s most important position, and he does it at an MVP level. He's fully embraced a leadership role, something Tatum, while growing into one, has not fully leaned into. Can’t go wrong with either, but Morant, for me, has the edge.
Pina: Jayson Tatum could be described as the “safer” pick. A down shooting season aside, he’s an elite three-level scorer and blossoming shot creator with All-Defensive team potential. Positional versatility makes it easier to plug Tatum into whatever environment or style without any disruption. Whether it’s as a building block or cog, this archetype is in greater demand and harder to find. On the other hand, at 22 years old, Ja Morant is this unprecedented, messianic figure who may someday be debated as one of the greatest point guards in NBA history. By a hair, I’ll go with that.
Nadkarni: I hate this question. Both guys are great! Tatum is probably the right answer. I’ll pick Morant, though, because I want the best player on my team to also be the most exciting guy in the league. Every single night Ja is providing theatrics seemingly nobody else can come close to matching. Morant ultimately will have to prove himself in the playoffs in a way Tatum already has. But there is no denying how fun the Ja experience has been so far.
Lundberg: At this very moment, Ja Morant. He is so exciting and can manipulate the game. But if I’m thinking more conservatively based on size, durability and how their games might age, I’d probably lean Tatum.
