The NBA playoff picture is starting to take shape in the final weeks of the regular season.

The play-in tournament will begin April 14, giving teams two weeks to secure a spot and jockey for the best possible seeding.

The Oklahoma City Thunder and San Antonio Spurs already clinched playoff spots in the Western Conference. The Detroit Pistons and Boston Celtics are the two Eastern Conference teams that have also clinched playoff spots.

The Celtics clinched a spot following a 114-99 victory over the Charlotte Hornets on Sunday.

The New York Knicks had an opportunity to clinch a spot, as well, but fell short in a 111-100 loss to the Thunder.

The Golden State Warriors and Portland Trail Blazers also secured a spot in the play-in tournament after the Houston Rockets' 134-102 win over the New Orleans Pelicans.

The Wizards got utterly blasted by the Portland Trail Blazers, trailing by as much as 39 before finally losing by 34. While the score was close into the second quarter, there was no point where the game felt truly competitive. Once again, it felt like when Portland started making the abundant open looks they were getting, the margin would expand. And it did. Like a mushroom cloud.

At one point in the second quarter, the Wizards were 1-9 from three-point range, and Portland was 0-10. Washington shot 4-13 (30.7%) the rest of the way. The Trail Blazers: 12-26 — 46.2%.

This kind of outcome was mostly to be expected. They started the “Tank Towers” of 6-9 JuJu Reese in the middle with Tristan Vukcevic alongside. Despite pairing two “centers,” the lineup was thoroughly incapable of contending with Portland’s size and athleticism.

That deficit was matched on the perimeter where the Wizards were unable to stay in front of opposing ball handlers or even direct penetration to a spot where they’d at least theoretically have help. Oh yeah, they also missed lots of rotations, over-helped, and ball-watched. All stuff they’re working on, of course, but there are serious talent deficits, even when the roster is at full strength. And they’re not at full strength.

It was one of those “almost no one played well” kind of butt-kickings. The closest guy to “good” was probably Will Riley, and I thought he was only okay.

Leaky Black had what was probably his best game as a pro (8 rebounds, 4 on each end) in 22 minutes, though I was once again appalled by his defense.

Bright side: the Wizards get the Los Angeles Lakers Monday night and then get to go home to take on the Philadelphia 76ers later in the week.

Brighter side: Only eight games left in the season.

Thoughts & Observations

• It was an absolute treat to watch the Portland broadcast. Kevin Calabro is excellent on play-by-play, and Lamar Hurd is one of the best analysts around. Tom Haberstroh is a fully integrated provider of meaningful and interesting stats and analysis. Brooke Olzendam is good in the courtside reporter role. They also do some fun things with graphics — putting up numbers and then having them “sticky” on the stands so that they pan to the side as the camera follows the action. The Wizards could do worse than copy the format with good people.
• Recurring entry in last night’s notebook: Clingan overpowers JuJu. It happened on the boards and inside. On several possessions in the third quarter, Reese sought to attack inside. Clingan erased the shots repeatedly while barely leaping. He was just that much bigger and stronger.
• Yes, that preceding bullet is something of a subtweet who thinks Reese is any kind of roster solution for next season. I like that he’s competitive and plays hard, but he’s not big enough, strong enough, athletic enough, or skilled enough to play in the middle.
• One more on Reese: I had some notes in the first half about Bilal Coulibaly having a brutal game. One of the big reasons — Portland bigs didn’t have to defend Reese away from the basket. They ignored him, let him set screens and then waited in the lane for Coulibaly (or whoever) to drive. I think Reese could be an interesting high-post passing hub, but he has to be able to shoot well enough to bring the big out from under the basket. Otherwise, the lane is clogged, and he’s just dishing to teammates for contested midrangers and worse.
• Any regular reader knows I’m not a fan of midrange field goal attempts, except when necessary. Bub Carrington is getting close to “exception” range. For the season, he’s inching closer to 50% on two-point attempts outside 10 feet, which is pretty dang good. He’s also around 40% from three this season. I have some issues with his game, but his shooting has become a strength.
• At the 6:20 mark of the first quarter, Deni Avdija just trucked Vukcevic on a drive. On the court, the refs called it an offensive foul, which was the correct call. Portland challenged and the officials reversed the call upon review. I think they more or less applied the rule properly, but the rule itself is bad. Vukcevic beat Avdija to the spot, Avdija veered into him and blasted him into the stanchion. Calling what Vukcevic was doing “still in motion” is an absurdity that gives way too much advantage to the offensive player.
• Riley was okay overall, but had a lot of trouble attacking when Toumani Camara was defending.
• The Wizards needed a three on the final possession to get to 15 points in the 1st quarter. According to Haberstroh, that was the fewest scored in a quarter against Portland this season.
• Another cool stat from Haberstroh — he reported on a Damian Lillard workout the previous day in which Lillard shot 1,000-1,090 from three-point range. That’s 91.7%. From three-point range.
• One more from Haberstroh — he said Camara leads the NBA in defensive miles covered. Camara is approaching 100 miles for the season, a feat he achieved last season, as well.
• The game ended weird. Yang Hansen and Reese got double technicals with 28 seconds remaining and Portland up by 34. The Portland big boxed out Reese, Reese apparently didn’t like it much. He put Hansen in a kind of half nelson, at which point Hansen went limp, at which point Reese dropped him to the floor.
• A few seconds later, Sharife Cooper decided he absolutely had to get a steal while Portland was trying to run out the clock and committed a foul instead. And then complained (a lot) to ref Bill Kennedy, whose body language said he just wanted the game to end.
• This was Washington’s worst offensive game of the season, by the way.

Four Factors

Below are the four factors that decide wins and losses in basketball — shooting (efg), rebounding (offensive rebounds), ball handling (turnovers), fouling (free throws made).

The four factors are measured by:

• eFG% (effective field goal percentage, which accounts for the three-point shot)
• OREB% (offensive rebound percentage)
• TOV% (turnover percentage — turnovers divided by possessions)
• FTM/FGA (free throws made divided by field goal attempts)

Stats & Metrics

PPA is my overall production metric, which credits players for things they do that help a team win (scoring, rebounding, playmaking, defending) and dings them for things that hurt (missed shots, turnovers, bad defense, fouls).

PPA is a per possession metric designed for larger data sets. In small sample sizes, the numbers can get weird. In PPA, 100 is average, higher is better and replacement level is 45. For a single game, replacement level isn’t much use, and I reiterate the caution about small samples sometimes producing weird results.

POSS is the number of possessions each player was on the floor in this game.

ORTG = offensive rating, which is points produced per individual possessions x 100. League average so far this season is listed in the Four Factors table above. Points produced is not the same as points scored. It includes the value of assists and offensive rebounds, as well as sharing credit when receiving an assist.

USG = offensive usage rate. Average is 20%. Median so far this season is 17.7%.

ORTG and USG are versions of stats created by former Wizards assistant coach Dean Oliver and modified by me. ORTG is an efficiency measure that accounts for the value of shooting, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers. USG includes shooting from the floor and free throw line, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers.

+PTS = “Plus Points” is a measure of the points gained or lost by each player based on their efficiency in this game compared to league average efficiency on the same number of possessions. A player with an offensive rating (points produced per possession x 100) of 100 who uses 20 possessions would produce 20 points. If the league average efficiency is 115, the league — on average — would produced 23.0 points in the same 20 possessions. So, the player in this hypothetical would have a +PTS score of -3.0.

Players are sorted by total production in the game.

Giannis Antetokounmpo.

It took some time to memorize the name. The N before the M will get you. Now, it’s muscle memory. Antetokounmpo. Ann-Tito-Kounmpo, or On-Tito-Kounmpo. Anti-Tokounmpo is less helpful.

He’s the best player who isn’t the best player in the NBA. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Nikola Jokic will both stay where they are – likely for their entire careers. The Thunder will win enough championships to secure Gilgeous-Alexander’s permanent fealty, and Jokic doesn’t seem interested in being anywhere but Denver or on a horse ranch.

Victor Wembanyama looms, but a healthy Antetokounmpo is still better right now (in my opinion). That could change as soon as next year, but even still, Antetokounmpo would be the fourth-best player in the league. You know where this leads:

Should the Houston Rockets acquire him?

Rockets linked to Antetokounmpo again

If you think the answer is obvious, you probably haven’t thought about it enough.

Let’s start with the pros. A common argument I’ve heard is “If you think these Rockets are an Antetokounmpo-for-Sengun swap away from title contention, you’re delusional”.

You sure about that?

There’s a tendency to overstate this team’s flaws. They’re aesthetically glaring. Yet, for as unpleasant as the Rockets are to watch, they’re a sixth seed in the West that’s one game behind the fourth seed. The Rockets have the NBA’s 11th-best Offensive Rating (116.3) and 7th-best Defensive Rating (112.3).

There’s no value in a statistical analysis on whether swapping Antetokounmpo for Sengun would improve the defense. It’s self-evident. The more pertinent question is whether the offensive improvement juice would be worth the trade asset squeeze. Before we get any further, let’s talk about the trade particulars.

Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., and as many picks as needed to have the best offer on the market should do it, right? Houston has a lot of tradeable, valuable unprotected firsts to offer. If they want to walk away without moving Amen Thompson or Reed Sheppard, it should be achievable. Sengun, Smith Jr., and five unprotected firsts ought to be as good as the Bucks will do.

So, I circle back – why wouldn’t this deal make Houston’s offense better? For argument’s sake, assume Rafael Stone approximates Smith Jr.’s value elsewhere. Maybe Bobby Portis is involved in the trade. Let’s not get hung up on particulars. For argument’s sake, assume that the total roster change is Sengun, Smith Jr. out, Antetokounmpo, a floor spacing big (more on this later) in.

OK. So, the Rockets would run the same stuff they run now, with Antetokounmpo in Sengun’s place. Why wouldn’t the offense climb from 11th to, even 7th or 8th, exactly?

They’re functionally similar in terms of being primarily interior scorers. In 2025-26, Antetokounmpo takes 61.0% of his field goals between zero and three feet, and 16.1% between three and 10. He hits 80.0% (not a typo) from zero to three, and 42.7% between three and ten.

Sengun, somehow, takes just 28.0% of his field goals between zero and three. A whopping 41.6% of his attempts come from three to ten. He hits 72.5% between zero and three, and and 42.5% between three and ten.  In the aggregate, Antetokounmpo’s 65.8 True Shooting % (TS%) towers over Sengun’s 56.4%.

Am I missing something?

Why wouldn’t that swap improve the team? Surely the argument isn’t that Sengun’s midrange proclivities open up some space for Amen Thompson. Antetokounmpo can post-up between three and ten to open up space for Thompson to cut. I hope the argument isn’t that the Rockets’ offensive environment makes it harder for Sengun to get in the paint. Antetokounmpo is getting in the paint, which is kind of the point: He’s better.

Someone, in the comments, tell me what I’m missing. If the Rockets have the 11th-best offense in the NBA, why would it be that swapping out a non-shooting big for, in terms of offensive functionality, another, much better non-shooting big not result in sufficient improvement?

By now, it feels close to consensus that Sengun is a talented-but-problematic piece. He doesn’t seem defensively viable alongside Reed Sheppard, or offensively functional next to Thompson. Antetokounmpo readily solves one of those issues. He should moderately improve the other, even if the functionality is still somewhat limited.

I just think the theory is flawed. “The Rockets are more than a Sengun-for-Antetokounmpo swap away from title contention”. Why? The team is already quite good. Why wouldn’t making it much better get them to title contention?

It is fair to say that Antetokounmpo isn’t precisely the first player you’d plug-and-play here. A shooter / ball-handler would more immediately fix the problems. Still, an Antetokounmpo for Sengun and Smith Jr. trade makes a good team better, provided that the Rockets can find at least a nominal starting stretch big.

No, they won’t be the best team in the NBA. That ship has sailed. The Thunder own that spot. Acquiring Antetokounmpo isn’t even likely to help Houston usurp San Antonio. There is nothing that can be done to accomplish either of those goals.

All Houston can hope to do is build a squad that has a chance in the event of injuries. Acquiring Antetokounmpo should do that. That’s not to say they should do it. There are good reasons not to:

They just have nothing to do with the team’s 2026-27 projection.

Rockets would sacrifice flexibility in Antetokounmpo deal

Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., and three-to-five first-round picks. Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., Reed Sheppard, or Amen Thompson, and two or three firsts.

No matter how you slice it, the price will be exorbitant.

It also probably won’t result in an NBA championship. It will give the Rockets a real share in championship equity – something they do not currently have, and likely will not without an (eventual) major change – but they probably still won’t win.

There are a couple of reasons for that. Firstly, Houston would need some type of stretch big. The simplest solution would be to bring Portis in with the same trade – Houston should not sneeze next to Myles Turner’s contract. They could scour the market for a low-cost, nominal starting big under the assumption that Antetokounmpo closes games at the 5.

Either way, you are still pairing two non-shooters in Antetokounmpo and Thompson. Again, I think the assertion that Antetokounmpo doesn’t “fix the Rockets’ problems” is overstated. They’re top-10 in offense or defense, so the path to title-caliber improvement isn’t so perilous. That said, it is fair to say that they’re not plugging Antetokounmpo into an optimal roster. It’s fair to argue that if you’re going all-in, you want to go all-in on an optimized hand.

He’s also injury-prone – although that’s a bit overstated as well. This is the first season in which he’ll play fewer than 60 games, ever. It’s not fair to assume that’s his new baseline, although it’s reasonable to worry at his age.

More than anything, the bar is just prohibitively high. The new-look Antetokounmpo Rockets likely won’t win next year because the Thunder or Spurs will. It’s as simple as that.

So, you’re gutting the future only to build something that likely still doesn’t accomplish the goal. From that perspective, it’s a pretty unattractive proposition.

This “cons” section is going to be shorter, but that’s not because it’s any less salient. It just requires less dissection. The Rockets currently have tremendous flexibility, and after an Antetokounmpo deal, they’d have little to none of it. They’d be truly all-in on a roster that has no case as the best in the NBA.

How could they even consider it?

Rockets’ Antetokounmpo answer is complicated

Ultimately, “build the best team in the NBA” is not a reasonable bar. It’s nearly impossible. The goal is to build a team that has a chance to win an NBA title if luck goes its way. The Rockets do not currently have that, and they would after an Antetokounmpo deal.

Time for the unsatisfying conclusion: It’s a toss-up. The impetus for this piece was, admittedly, to dispel the “It won’t even make us better because Antetokounmpo isn’t a shooter!” argument. The team is already plenty good (if disappointing) with Sengun. You can plug Antetokounmpo into his spot and get a lot better. Smith Jr. is, regrettably, imminently replaceable. It feels intellectually dishonest, unless, again, I’m missing something basketball-related.

Still, it may not be worth the flexibility. That’s the tough thing. What are you preserving this flexibility for? It’s to build a title contender, right?

Yes – but you want as wide a window as possible. Let’s be clear. Pulling the trigger on Antetokounmpo gives the Rockets two or three seasons in which they have significantly higher-than-average odds of winning an NBA title.

By contrast, drafting, say, Jan Cerdan (look into it if you like) with the 2029 first-round pick that they didn’t trade for Antetokounmpo and watching him develop into a superstar could give them a decade of contention.

Plus, his name is a lot easier to spell.

Ten months ago, the Boston Celtics faced a murky future. Jayson Tatum’s ruptured Achilles and looming payroll cuts cast doubt on how the team would weather the storm. In Sunday night’s 114-99 win over the Charlotte Hornets, the franchise officially returned to business as usual.

Boston secured its 50th win of the season and clinched a playoff berth, doing so with starters Jaylen Brown and Derrick White sidelined and replaced with Payton Pritchard and Jordan Walsh.

Tatum saluted everyone involved and expressed his gratitude afterward.

“It just speaks to the character of the organization, to the coaching staff, front office, to the players,” Tatum told NBC Sports Boston’s Abby Chin postgame. “The standard, the culture that we’ve built since I’ve been here, you don’t take it for granted. It’s just how we approach every single day, and winning is hard in this league. But we’ve had the right mindset — they’ve had the right mindset — for the whole season. I’ve just tried to help. So you don’t take that for granted.”

Tatum finished with a season-high 32 points, leading all scorers in an effort that set a few milestones for the Celtics, including their fifth straight 50-win season and 12th consecutive trip to the postseason — both NBA-leading active streaks. For Tatum, facing a Hornets team that had won seven of its last 10 games and leads the league in threes per game (16.3) and, without Brown, allowed him to take full control offensively.

Charlotte gave Tatum room to step back, settle in, and slowly get back in the driver’s seat. In the first quarter, he got going in transition by splitting past Brandon Miller, Moussa Diabaté, and Miles Bridges for a two-handed dunk to get Boston on the board. Three weeks ago, Tatum missed a wide-open tomahawk dunk in his season debut against the Dallas Mavericks, showing how far he’s come just 11 games into his return.

Pritchard, right by Tatum’s side, delivered in his 50th start of the season. He scored 28 points, grabbed six rebounds, and dished out six assists as the team’s second-leading scorer. On short notice, Pritchard and the Celtics once again demonstrated their defining trait: their mindset.

“I think of myself as a winner. I think of this organization as winners,” Pritchard told reporters, per NBC Sports Boston. “And I just don’t think we ever live in the mindset of a loser mentality. It’s just not something we come to work every day thinking that, ‘Oh, it’s a gap year,’ or anything. We’re coming to win, and that’s the only mindset we have.”

Apart from Brown’s MVP-caliber run, the Celtics have brought their mindset to life each night. Walsh hadn’t played more than 30 minutes since January, and despite shooting just 1-of-7, he impacted the game with seven rebounds, two assists, and a steal. Baylor Scheierman came off the bench to provide 14 points, knocking down three 3-pointers, while Ron Harper Jr., who logged only 11 minutes across Boston’s previous four games, shot a perfect 3-of-3 in 14 minutes, playing with a sprained ankle.

Boston improved to 8-1 in games without Brown, and Joe Mazzulla tied Bill Fitch and Doc Rivers for the most 50-win seasons by a Celtics coach — doing so in just four years.

“I think it’s a testament to the alignment of the organization and to the players,” Mazzulla told reporters, per NBC Sports Boston. “We’ve shifted players over the last five years a bunch of different ways, but winning still remains the most important thing.

“It’s a minor milestone. I wouldn’t say that it’s a true definition of success, but I think it’s a definition of consistency. And I think that starts with the players that put on the jersey and have an understanding that winning is the most important thing, and how serious they take it. So I think a lot of it has to do with them.”

The Celtics aren’t content with just avoiding the draft lottery or the play-in tournament. They’ve approached this season with as much urgency to win as in the previous three under Mazzulla. Tatum’s nearly 10-month absence forced some tactical readjustments, but it didn’t change their plans. Boston believes it has a legit shot at returning to the NBA Finals, and that confidence didn’t emerge on Sunday. It’s been a shared feeling throughout the organization — from players to coaches, front office members, and ownership — ever since the start of the season.

The expectation to compete each year inherently comes with being a Celtic.

“It’s a culture thing,” Pritchard told reporters.

“Everybody shows up. You’re not gonna have every guy play every game, so that means you’ll need a whole roster, and every guy shows up every game ready to compete and help winning. It’s definitely the culture we built here.”

MADRID (AP) — The final six World Cup places will be decided this week with the conclusion of two playoff tournaments that will complete the 48-team lineup.

Eight teams from Europe will compete for four spots, while the new intercontinental tournament that is being staged in Mexico will determine the other two places.

The biggest ever World Cup — up from 32 teams in Qatar in 2022 — is being co-hosted by three nations for the first time: The United States, Canada and Mexico.

Four-time champion Italy is the standout name in the European playoffs as it tries to avoid missing out on a World Cup for a third consecutive time.

“We all know what we’re playing for,” said 32-year-old Italy winger Matteo Politano, who has never played in a World Cup. “For me, and for a few of the other senior players, it’s probably our last chance.”

European playoffs

There will be more European teams than from any other continent at the World Cup: 16.

Eight teams made it through the last round of the playoffs and will seek the final four spots in winner-take-all matches: Bosnia-Herzegovina vs. Italy, Sweden vs. Poland, Kosovo vs. Turkey and Czech Republic vs. Denmark.

All four games will be played Tuesday.

The winner of the Turkey-Kosovo game will enter into Group D, which already has the United States, Paraguay and Australia.

Intercontinental playoffs

There is a different format for the intercontinental playoffs, which FIFA simply calls the Playoff Tournament.

Two teams will advance from a field of six.

The initial lineup was made up of two teams from CONCACAF (Jamaica, Suriname) and one each from Asia (Iraq), Africa (Congo), South America (Bolivia) and Oceania (New Caledonia).

Congo, Jamaica, Iraq and Bolivia made it through to the final two matches. Congo will face Jamaica and Bolivia will play Iraq.

The decisive games will be played in Guadalajara and Monterrey on Tuesday.

Who has qualified for the 2026 World Cup?

Co-hosts: Canada, Mexico and the United States.

Asia: Australia, Iran, Japan, Jordan, South Korea, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan

Africa: Algeria, Cape Verde, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Ghana, Morocco, Senegal, South Africa, Tunisia

North America, Central America and Caribbean: Curacao, Haiti, Panama

South America: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay

Oceania: New Zealand

Europe: Austria, Belgium, Croatia, England, France, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Scotland, Spain, Switzerland

When is the 2026 World Cup?

June and July. It kicks off at Azteca Stadium in Mexico City on June 11. The final is on July 19 at MetLife Stadium, which will be referred to as New York New Jersey Stadium during the tournament.

___

James Robson is at https://x.com/jamesalanrobson

___

AP soccer: https://apnews.com/hub/soccer

Dukethrew it away. Literally.

UConn’s Braylon Mullins hit one of the great shots in NCAA Tournament history.

Just before that, Cayden Boozer committed one of the most brutal turnovers in tournament history. Let us not mince words.

Add it up, and Duke blew it, UConn stole it, and the Huskies won 73-72 in the Elite Eight, a game Duke had no business losing, and UConn had little business winning after facing a 15-point halftime deficit, but nobody’s better in March these past few years than Dan Hurley’s Huskies.

Toppmeyer: Dusty May so good at Michigan, you almost forget Sherrone Moore's disgrace

Elite 8 winners, losers: UConn comeback, Duke chokes again, and much more

“It’s the UConn culture. It’s the UConn heart,” Hurley said on CBS, with his Huskies heading to the Final Four for the third time in the past four years.

“We just believe we’re supposed to win this time of year," Hurley added.

That says it all.