For those of us in the "expert analysis" industry, the 2010 NBA Finals have been maddening.  We've seen six games now and we're devoid of one clear trend that will help us determine the Game 7 winner.

Instead, we've had six different games with six different storylines.

Game 1 - The refs called 54 fouls, which completely negated Boston's physical presence inside.  Instead, the Lakers were +11 on the glass and Pau Gasol was dominant.

Game 2 - Ray Allen made an NBA Finals record eight threes.  He has only made two threes in the other five games combined.

Game 3 - Derek Fisher breaks open a cagey battle with a clutch 4th quarter.  Fisher has not scored in double figures in any other game of the series.

Game 4 - The Celtics bench controlled the 4th period with a drooling and screaming exhibition led by Glen "Big Baby" Davis and Nate Robinson.

Game 5 - Paul Pierce seemed to solve Ron Artest with an efficient 12/21 performance and 27 points.  He's only been over 20 points twice in this series.

Game 6 - It was a college basketball game.  The Celtics must have gotten comfortable at home because they were nowhere near matching the energy of the Lakers at Staples.

Here are three possible storylines for each team if they are able to win Game 7:

Boston Celtics

1.) Rasheed Wallace is the X-factor.  Wallace is not dependable, but he can be explosive.  With Kendrick Perkins out, he'll need to play great post defense, which is his forte.  If he makes some shots too, he could be the key to a Celtics win.

2.) Rajon Rondo is the best point guard in the NBA.  He needs to prove that he's not a liability in the half court by making the occasional jump shot and hitting the 10+ assist mark, which he's done just once in the Finals.

3.) The "Big Three" make shots.  Allen led the C's to their lone road victory in the Finals and he's shot the ball much better at Staples.  Pierce can demoralize Artest if he makes his patented step back, which will hurt the Lakers on both ends given Ron-Ron's fragile psyche.  Garnett has been solid, but can he maintain his energy over increased minutes without Perkins?

Los Angeles Lakers

1.) Without Perkins, the Lakers can prove to be too long.  Glasswork has been the only overriding trend of the series.  The team that has won the rebounding battle has won the game.

2.) Kobe Bryant puts together the performance of his career.  In my series preview, I wrote, "If he can shoot between 45-50% against the Celtics, I'll say he's better than LeBron James."  He's at 43% through six games, which is the same number James posted in the Cavs six game series with Boston.  Bryant has the advantage of a 7th game and a chance to win a championship.  If he comes through with an epic buzzer-beater or an insurmountable triple-double, he'll end the conversation.  For this year at least...

3.) Home court is the difference.  The NBA regular season is painfully long and often useless in determining playoff success, which the Celtics have proven this season.  However, the Lakers get Game 7 at home because they finished seven games up on the Celtics after 82.  This game is big enough that the Lakers fans might even show up on time.

I could see any of the above coming to fruition.

I picked the Celtics in 6 for reasons that I don't even remember at this point.  I'll take the Lakers in 7 for reasons unbeknownst even to me.

Remember, Phil Jackson has never lost a series when he wins Game 1.