I, David Larkins, am completely superstitious, to a point that some of the things I do in the name of cheering for my teams can’t even be called superstitions.

Here’s the thing: I don’t turn my cap a certain way during a game because the last time it was tilted slightly to the right Kobe Bryant hit a deep three and started a 10-0 run. I don’t order a special kind of blue cheese when watching the Winnipeg Blue Bombers. And I don’t have any particular routine or method of coaxing wins out of the Nebraska Cornhuskers, Pittsburgh Steelers or San Diego Padres, either (although I’m expecting a letter from Pads GM Kevin Towers any day now asking me to devise one).

But I wear Husker red every Saturday game day, I have a porcelain Blue Bombers doll on my work desk that I will NOT let any non-Bomber fans even touch and I’ve gone six weeks without washing a Jerome Bettis jersey just because the Steelers were on an improbable run to a Super Bowl title in 2005-06.

But the thing I do the most — and this is one of those “non-superstitious superstitions” that I’ve gravitated towards — is I refuse to talk about big games that my teams are playing in. In February of ‘06 you’d have been hard-pressed to get any opinion out of me on what was going to happen between Pittsburgh and Seattle. Same too with the Winnipeg-Saskatchewan Grey Cup, which — as we all know — was only won by the Roughriders because we had to field our No. 2 unit.

And as the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers get prepared to launch a throwback NBA Final, I’m staying pretty mum with any predictions. That would ruin everything. I know it’s not something that works well when you’re in the business of writing about sports but c’est la vie.

I will, however, read as much as I can on the big games and saturate myself with as much coverage as I can. And (cue the next superstition), I’m very worried about the Lakers. Why? Because everyone and their pet monkey is picking the Lakers to win this series. And, even more than potentially jinxing a series myself by talking about it, that’s the thing I hate most: When everyone in the world is siding with your guys. It’s a sure sign you’re going down in flames.

On a “let’s actually put some thought into this and not rely on non-existent basketball gods” note, I don’t fully understand the runaway love for the Lake Show. At least not as it has manifested itself this week with all experts whole-heartedly scribbling their predictions down in royal purple and gold.

Everyone seems motivated more by the fact that the Celtics needed two Game 7s to get to the Eastern Conference final and that they had been 0-6 on the road during that time, against a team that barely deserved to be in the playoffs and then against a team that was one star and a bunch of other guys you won’t be able to name in 10 years. (For fun, 10 years from now try to remember who the starting lineup for the Cleveland Cavaliers was. Heck, try it in 10 minutes and you likely can’t get more than three names right).

Yet here were the Lakers blitzing through a shellshocked Denver team, rallying against a darn good Utah team and then whacking the defending NBA champions. Both Boston and L.A. are in the same place right now, just one team looked better in getting there.

And that appears to be the biggest criteria for everyone. That and the fact the Lakers have the biggest X-factor player in the NBA right now in Bryant. Obviously any game he’s playing in you have to give the Lakers more than a fighting chance.

Let’s also not forget that Boston blitzed L.A. in two regular-season meetings, even though one of those came before the Lakers had acquired Pau Gasol from Memphis, which is a far-from-insignificant fact.

So if you believe that the playoffs are about momentum, then you’d likely be feeling Los Angeles right about now. If you feel it’s about adjustments and depth and personnel and Xs and Os, then you maybe don’t believe it’s as clear cut.

All I’m saying is I don’t fully understand the love affair much of the media is having with the Lakers, insofar as their predictions. I mean, I get it. But I don’t get it.

This is not going to be any kind of cakewalk for either team. It also won’t be like 1987 or 1984 — classic series for both cities — and it’s not Showtime vs. Celtics Fundamentals, like it was when Magic was running the point and Larry was dropping threes.

What will it come down to? Here’s four things:

• Los Angeles’ so-called depth: The Lakers have been lauded this year for being able to go deep into their bench and that’s true. Where that is questionable, however, is just how much can they get out the deepest stretches of their reserves? You can talk about the Lakers being able to go 11-deep in their rotation of players, but what is more important than just being able to send a lot of players out is what those key athletes — the sixth through ninth men — are giving you. Luke Walton, who was outstanding against Denver, has been close to a liability in the last two rounds. Sasha Vujacic has been able to throw daggers at times but his consistency is a question. Ronny Turiaf is muscle, Vladimir Radmanovic is a bench player dressed up as a starter and is completely unpredictable and Trevor Ariza and Jordan Farmer — while bringing totally different styles to the table — are young and barely battle-tested. So, on one hand, you’ve just named another five guys that will get regular burn, and that’s a nice luxury. But on the other hand whether you can really rely on it is a different matter.

• Who has the bigger big-gamers?: A lot of talk about the Celtics Big Three of Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen but each of them has done some disappearing acts at some point, most famously Allen whose struggles from the field have been well-documented throughout the playoffs. The Lakers’ big three would be Bryant, Gasol and Lamar Odom, one of the most significant swing players in the series. Odom creates difficulties for any team because of his ability to play inside-out. He can draw a bigger defender away from the basket, he can post up smaller types and his versatility at 6-foot-10 with some small-guard skills makes him a tough match-up for any team. Garnett has the same type of game, of course, but how dominating will he choose to be? When he’s determined and wanting it, he’s a beast. When he defers to other players, he’s just another guy on the floor.

• Who can win on the road?: The unique 2-3-2 format for the Final changes things slightly in terms of what games are most pivotal and what I’m going to suggest might seem completely absurd. First, there are veterans on this Lakers team who have played in big games before — Derek Fisher’s leadership has to be an intangible — and somewhere along the line the Lakers have to win in Boston if they want to be meeting Larry O’Brien in a few weeks. Playoffs are all about moxy and determination, and so too is winning road games, which makes any “I’ve been here before” edge you can find such a big deal. Now here’s where I go loony: The Celtics don’t have to win a game on the road to win the title, which makes Game 1 arguably one of the most pivotal, given the C’s penchant for laying a turd away from the Garden. If the Lakers win Game 1, home court is theirs. If Boston wins it, there’s a HEAP of pressure on L.A. to get Game 2 because, even with Games 3-5 in Los Angeles, winning back-to-backs or two out of three against Boston would be a formidable task and the last thing L.A. would want is to have to try to stay alive in what would be an absolute madhouse in Boston.

• Which team’s “other guy” steps up?: We all know what the guy wearing 24 for L.A. can do, but who else makes plays for the Lakers? If the Celts are physical with Gasol and if they don’t let Odom get near the rim and get stuff going towards the basket, then now you’ve turned the Lakers into a jump-shooting team and they’re one leg up by defending the paint. That would make players like Radmanovic, Vujacic, Farmar and even Walton crucial because you need your supporting players to carry you at times. Conversely, if the Celtics would be well-served if they can get good, physical, productive minutes from Kendrick Perkins. So while the Lakers bigs need to match-up and play with some good Boston bigs, the Celtics guards are ones who have to prove themselves against L.A.’s smalls. Fisher is a good one-up defender and can potentially make Rajon Rondo’s life difficult, and the Celtics won’t have Tony Allen healthy to defend on Bryant, which he did well during the regular season. James Posey perhaps slides into that role temporarily. Boston has to find someone outside of the Allen, Garnett, Pierce triumvirate and still get what it expects out of those three.

Game 1 is Thursday and please forget I talked about any of this.