I despise the Celtics. Just can’t stand them. Putting the 2008 NBA Finals aside, I hate that stupid “Beat L.A.” chant more than anything else in basketball, except for maybe Raja Bell. Born and raised in Los Angeles, I was educated to dislike the Celtics, and I’m completely content with my contempt for Boston athletics.

That’s why it kills me to say this: Thank you, Boston.

There, I said it. I’ve gone against everything I stand for because I just watched the best basketball series I’ve seen since the Lakers played the Sacramento Kings in 2003.

Seriously, seven overtimes in seven games? You’ve got to be kidding me.

OK, well that’s great and all, but there’s no way I can sacrifice my L.A.-hood because I saw some good basketball, right? Well, not exactly. I’m all for good basketball, but in this case, it took a lot more than that to make me root for the Celtics.

Boston, you shut up those relentless Chicago fans, speaking not with words, but with examples set by Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce.

I know, I know. Last week I wrote about how the Celtics aren’t the same team without Kevin Garnett. Clearly, that showed over the past seven games. I think Bulls fans can also say that the Joakim Noah-Kendrick Perkins match-up helped them a lot more than if Garnett were clogging the middle.

But the Celtics made up for their inside struggles with superb perimeter play. Rondo was almost unstoppable, Allen shot like the best jump shooter in the NBA and Pierce came up clutch, again.

For the Bulls, Rookie of the Year Derrick Rose proved he absolutely deserved the award, and that he will be the catalyst of the Bulls for the next several years. John Salmons impressed, Ben Gordon got hot, and well, Chicago made it a series.

But that’s it, and don’t get any ideas.

Look, the Bulls made it fun, and they made clutch shots in almost every game. But really, Gordon is not one of the most underrated players in the NBA, Tyrus Thomas has no business shooting mid-range jump shots, and Noah still needs to learn how to shoot with one hand. And Vinny Del Negro? He’s not exactly helping the Bulls much either.

So I’m not thanking the Celtics simply for winning but for winning a series they had to win to make a point. They are still better than the Bulls, and they wanted to make sure the Bulls knew a team that won 41 games all season had no business trying to beat a team that won 62, even though they didn’t have arguably their best player.

Now I’m not saying the Celtics are going to beat Orlando in the second round. Aside from not having Garnett, Boston is missing another key component to their inside game: Leon Powe. The trio of Perkins, Glen Davis and Brian Scalabrine might not be enough to stop Dwight Howard down low, but we’ll see.

The point is that everybody is talking about how the Bulls made it a great series, when at the same time, the Celtics played better basketball than Chicago did. Boston was missing its best player, and the Bulls had everybody. I wouldn’t exactly call that fair, but the Celtics didn’t complain, and it showed.

In the end, I’m not thanking Boston for winning. I’m thanking them for climbing out of a hole and beating a team that they should have beaten. Looking back on this series, some might think the Bulls blew their chance, but really, even if they won, would you really be that impressed? They competed with a severely short-handed team, and that’s something to be dazzled by? Not me, and not the Celtics.

So, as much as I hate to say it, thank you Boston. But you’re still going down.

Jonah is a sophomore majoring in journalism and Hebrew and Semitic Studies. How big was the Boston win over Chicago? Send your thoughts to [email protected].