Every lifelong NBA fan has run into him at one time or another. The most casual of basketball watchers (typically age 35+), who watches 60 minutes of actual NBA basketball a season, mostly of the highlight variety. For reasons that only the most twisted version of karma can justify, you're stuck talking to this guy about sports. You mention that you like the NBA, and suddenly, you're listening to some flimsy subjective analysis of why the NBA is inherently bad. And you have to make a choice.
You can meekly agree, affirming every ridiculous thing they say for the sake of avoiding an awkward conversation. If you're having a drink, you can throw it on them (the modern-day face slap with a glove). Or, you can fight stupid with fact. If you're like me, then you're too much of a man to go option #1. But, if you're like me, you're not man enough for option #2. So, you're stuck with option #3. If that's the way you're gonna go, this is an attempt to provide the weapons against the various arguments that come up, one by one.
Stupid Argument: The League is Rigged
The idea is that some group of people (the league office, David Stern, ESPN) decides the script every year so that the right teams play, and the right team wins. Therefore, the NBA playoffs are the same as the WWE's Royal Rumble. The basis of this argument usually stems from some game in which a marquee team received preferential treatment relative to a less popular team. First off, trying to bring up the same accusations in other sports (Duke basketball) don't work, so don't bother. The better path? A few recent series that didn't go the way the NBA marketing department would have wanted. And, as luck would have it, it turns out there are a few such instances.
2000 Eastern Conference Finals: Knicks vs. Pacers
What the NBA wanted: Knicks.
What the NBA got: Pacers.
With the Lakers playing the Blazers in the Western Conference finals, a Knicks win would have put them in the NBA Finals for 2 straight years, and given us Lakers-Knicks matchup for the title. Shaq vs. Ewing, Kobe vs. Sprewell, and the #1 and #2 NBA markets in the league showcase.The Pacers were a nice story, but New York's TV market dwarfed Indiana's. Could have been some serious ratings, but somehow, the league let the Pacers shoot 23 more free throws in the series (20 more in Games 5 and 6). NO RIGGING.
2002 Western Conference Finals: Lakers vs.Kings
What the NBA wanted: Lakers.
What the NBA got: Lakers.
Lakers-Kings in the Western Conference finals - a dream matchup for the league and fans. Two time defending champs against the most fun team in the league (fun to watch, fun to play for). In Game 6, the Lakers had a 40-25 disparity in free throw attempts, and won to force Game 7. Strange result considering that through 5 games, the Kings had shot 39 more free throws. Plus, the image of Mike Bibby's face fouling Kobe Bryant's elbow in the last 30 seconds just doesn't help things. POSSIBLE RIGGING.
2002 Eastern Conference Finals: Nets vs. Celtics
What the NBA wanted: Celtics.
What the NBA got: Nets.
While Lakers-Kings was the more compelling conference finals matchup that year, the Pierce-Walker Celtics had the chance to go back to the Finals, setting up the first potential Celtics-Lakers matchup since 1987. There's no more compelling NBA matchup than Celtics-Lakers, and there's no question who the league office wanted to win. Unfortunately, The Nets ended up winning, and got swept by the Lakers amid terrible ratings that would have been enormously helped by some Celtics-Lakers marketing. NO RIGGING.
2005 NBA Eastern Conference Finals: Heat vs. Pistons
What the NBA wanted: Heat.
What the NBA got: Pistons.
The Pistons were the defending champions, but Shaquille O'Neal had transformed the Heat from playoff team to title contender in the most famous trade of the decade. Shaq may have been the biggest draw since MJ left the league, and his return to the Finals with a new team and a new sidekick (a young Dwyane Wade) would certainly be a boon for the league. The most significant swing in this series was probably Wade's Game 5 rib injury, and it's unlikely the league wanted that to happen, since Spurs-Pistons was a ratings disaster. NO RIGGING.
2006 Western Conference 1st Round: Lakers vs. Suns
What the NBA wanted: Lakers.
What the NBA got: Suns.
The Lakers were back in the playoffs on the strength of Kobe Bryant's scoring and little else. The 7 Seconds or Less Suns, sans Stoudemire and Joe Johnson, just weren't as exciting. So, when the Lakers went up 3-1 in Game 4, everyone knew what the league would do next. Have the Suns shoot 7 more free throws than the Lakers in the next 3 games, and win 3 straight to send Kobe and the Lakers home. NO RIGGING.
2007 Eastern Conference 1st Round: Heat vs. Bulls
What the NBA wanted: Heat.
What the NBA got: Bulls.
The Miami Heat were the defending champions, and boasted two NBA All-Star game starters (Shaq and Wade), who had the #12 and #2 selling jerseys that year, respectively. The Chicago Bulls had no All-Star players, and were led by Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, and Luol Deng. Waiting in the next round would likely be the Detroit Pistons, who had developed a nice two year rivalry with the Heat in the conference finals. So, naturally, the Bulls swept the champs out of the playoffs. NO RIGGING.
2009 Eastern Conference Finals: Cavs vs. Magic
What the NBA wanted: Cavs.
What the NBA got: Magic.
The Cleveland Cavaliers were the league's best regular season team. Lebron James had won his first MVP, and his team was 8-0 in the 1st 2 rounds of the playoffs. Most sports media were watching Lebron perform at a transcendent level, and bursting with praise about the league's torch being passed to the next Great One. With the Lakers hurtling towards another Finals berth, the league had the chance for Kobe's Lakers versus Lebron's Cavaliers. Of course, the Magic won the series 4-2. NO RIGGING.
2011 Western Conference Semis: Lakers vs. Mavs
What the NBA wanted: Lakers.
What the NBA got: Mavs.
The Lakers were the two-time defending champs. Kobe was going for his 6th title. Phil Jackson was going for his 12th as a coach. Phil was even writing a book to chronicle his team's quest for the title. The Dallas Mavericks' postseason resume was more noted for historic collapses (2006 finals, 2007 1st round) than successes. With the Thunder waiting to resume their L.A. rivalry from the 2010 playoffs, and a Celtics/Bulls/Heat combatant likely waiting in the Finals, the Lakers could have brought the league its most successful ratings by making it back to the Finals. Naturally, the Mavs swept the Lakers straight out of the playoffs. NO RIGGING.
So, over the last 11 years, 8 times the league had a clear preference in who won a playoff series, based on the potential benefit for ratings and revenues. 7 times, the other guy won. So, the argument that the NBA is rigged is based on the league getting its way 12.5% of the time? Right.
Unfortunately, this argument is mostly hopeless against your combatant. They have no memory of anything that doesn't serve their ridiculous point of view, and will probably counter any example you use as wrong or a lie, for reasons they can't explain. Don't worry - when it comes to making rational, factual arguments, you're right. But arguing this point is like arguing politics: they don't like your point of view, and there's nothing you can say that will change their mind.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
Heat Bulls Summary
Best Player in the Series: Chris Bosh. He's been listening to everyone's garbage all season. The world knew how good Lebron and Wade were, but Bosh had toiled in relative anonymity despite regular season success and some nice play for Team USA. Watching Toronto the last 3 years, and Miami this year, no one had to adjust their game more than Bosh on the Heat. He's really the 2011 remix of 2008 Pau Gasol: overburdened #1 guy turns into a great sidekick (other good bets to get the same result: Andre Iguodala, Danny Granger). Incidentally, he lapped the field and then some in this series. How good was he? His 1.10 points per shot in this series was better than Dirk's 1.08 PPS in the OKC series. That is not a misprint. I'm not trying to imply that the two feats are the same, because they're not, and Dirk was far more impressive scoring the ball. I'm simply saying that Dallas should remember to account for this guy... after they figure out how to slow down the two-time MVP. And the All-NBA 2nd Team, Finals MVP from '06. Man, I do not want to trade lives with Rick Carlisle for the next three weeks.
Worst Player in the Series: Joel Anthony. Just so you know, before Game 5, this was Dwyane Wade's spot. That's how bad Wade was in this series, despite the 4 point play and the comeback and all that. But, luckily for Wade, Joel had one more 29 minute stink bomb to throw onto the court. I actually like Joel Anthony; he's in the league because he does the dirty work things that most players claim they do, but rarely do consistently. But the fact that Coach Spo will trot out Anthony, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Jamal Magloire, or Juwan Howard as the starting center in the NBA Finals next week really speaks to how good the Big 3 are. Or, if that isn't convincing enough: Mike Bibby started at PG for the Miami Heat in Game 5 of the Eastern Conference finals. 3 months and a day earlier, he was playing against the Heat in his first game for the Wizards, the 23 win team that would pay him to go away less than one week later.
Jerome James Award: Derrick Rose. Derrick Rose is my favorite player in the NBA. Humble, hard-working, and never shies away from accountability. There's no doubt that he could have used some more help from his teammates against Miami, but there are other things to take from this series. For example, here's a look at Chicago's top 5 regular season scorers:
The thing that jumps out... Noah and Korver lost a lot of shots, and lost a lot of efficiency. People can say whatever they want about the Bulls' individual struggles, but the bottom line is this. The point guard's job is to get everybody in the right spot, at the right time, so they can do their job well. Both Noah and Korver aren't going to get their own shot in iso situations, and it's Derrick's job to get them their points. In the regular season, both these guys had struggled offensively against the Heat, and they were going to need Derrick's help to get theirs. And they just didn't get enough help. Regardless of who this team brings in at SG next season, Miami will be waiting in the playoffs. And as evenly matched as these teams were (11 point difference in 5 games, plus an overtime), those future matchups will likely tilt on guys like Haslem getting theirs, and guys like Korver not. And that responsibility will fall to the league's youngest MVP.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Mavericks Thunder Summary
Best Player in the Series: James Harden. The month of March was basically our first look at Harden freed from the constraints of Jeff Green getting shots. In that month, he averaged 13.6 ppg on 15 shots (0.90 PPS). That's not good, but not terrible. In this series? 14.4 ppg on 13.6 shots (1.06 PPS). That level of efficiency is as ridiculous as it is unsustainable over a full regular season. How unsustainable? Well, Dirk couldn't do it this year. I think his play-making abilities were not similarly overblown; he's been a natural and willing passer since his ASU days. But for Thunder fans expecting him to produce like this every night for 82 games as a scorer next year, please temper expectations. For his sake, and your own.
Worst Player in the Series: Russell Westbrook. I hate to pile on him, because he's taken too much criticism. But, there are a few things that should be pointed out. First, during the regular season, Westbrook was the 5th worst point per shot scorer among players taking 18 shots per game, at 0.82 points per shot on 24.6 shots per game; in this series, he shot it to the tune of 0.77 points per shot... on over 30 shots per game. Second, during the season, he averaged 8.2 assists versus 3.9 turnovers; in this series, 4.8 assists versus 4.8 turnovers. His teammates may say he was playing the same game he has all season, but it's just not true. He shot more (and with less efficiency), passed less, and turned the ball over more. This is by no means the player he will always be, but for 5 games, Russell and KD looked like what Bron and Wade were supposed to look like in the playoffs: two ball dominant scorers who tolerated sharing the ball instead of working effectively together.
Jerome James Award: Jose Juan Barea. Even for guys that come off the bench, there are two sides to an NBA court: offense and defense. And if you're completely useless on one end, a good opponent will likely offset everything you do on the other end. And that's what happened to everybody's favorite "oh, man, he's not bigger or more athletic than I am, I could play in the NBA" player (incidentally, he's stronger than you are, he's way more athletic, and you couldn't play in the NBA if they said you didn't have to dribble). Consider: in 4 of the 5 games he played in, OKC outscored the Mavs while he was on the floor (-2, -12, -7, -8). In the other game (Game 3), the two teams tied in his 14 minutes. This was not the Laker series for Mr. Barea. And against whichever stifling defense comes out of the back-alley brawl that is the Eastern Conference finals, I think he could fare even worse.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
A One-Step Plan for Titles in OKC
On the heels of that Game 4 debacle, I'm sure there are a lot of people wringing their hands over the future in OKC. In a 7 game series, the superior team wins most of the time, with only a few potential exceptions (2007 Warriors, but that's the only one that comes to mind). As OKC looks ahead to the future, and its potential to contend for championships, the question has to be asked: is the current roster capable?
The front office has done an incredible job of hitting on high draft picks, paying players reasonable money and maintaining cap flexibility (e.g. the Collison deal). But is this team good enough to get better, from within, and win it all? The NBA has proven time and time again that it takes 2 stars, with a reliable 3rd option, to consistently contend for a title. Now, in Durant, one piece is definitely in place. So, is the 2nd piece in place? If you don't think Russell Westbrook is the answer, then there might be a deal that fixes everything you think is wrong with the Thunder's situation - trade for Chris Paul.
Why New Orleans does this deal: Chris Paul is going to leave, and if the front office could choose how it plays out, they'd probably lean towards Utah handling Deron Williams more than Denver handling Carmelo. Despite what everyone has said, Russell Westbrook is still an All-Star, All-NBA talent who may not have reached 3/4 of his potential yet. Plus, James Harden is a nice, young, rookie contract piece that can play next to him. The most onerous long term contract the Hornets are saddled with (Okafor) is traded out for a much lower number being paid to Perk. And Nate Robinson is a nice expiring piece for next year. And, if both Westbrook and Harden implode quickly, in three years Perk and Sefolosha are all that's left. If there's a team that can make a better offer, I'd like to see it.
Why OKC does this deal: Upgrade the point guard position with arguably the best pure point guard in the league, in his prime. Realistically, Russell Westbrook's best case scenario can't include the floor general skills and shooting of CP3. Okafor is not considered an attractive piece to every NBA team, but he's capable of giving OKC exactly what Perkins was supposed to and then some (physical interior defense, without playing 4-on-5 on offense).
The most serious hurdle to clear is including James Harden. He's showed well in this postseason, and may be offering a glimpse of potential All-Star talent. It's certainly possible. Of course, it's also possible that he's showing us exactly what we saw from Boris Diaw in '06, Rodney Stuckey in '08, Hedo Turkoglu in '09, and Goran Dragic in '10. And that would be the perfect combination of opportunity, matchups, and confidence. The one common thread between all those breakout stars of the playoffs? Their stock has gone down, and 3 out of 4 were playing on different teams within two seasons.
Would this deal represent a radical departure from the OKC blueprint? Not really. The team traded Jeff Green, one of the first building blocks of the current roster, because they saw an opportunity to upgrade the roster and open the championship window now. If the key ingredients this team is lacking include leadership, methodical execution of the offense in crunch time, and a 2nd true alpha dog to pair with Durant as he enters the physical prime of his career, this is a deal that I think must be done. Let's pair two of the most likeable, marketable, skilled competitors in the league in a small market, with a nice roster and a great fanbase, and let them go to work.
I mean, you tell me how Dallas would like to try closing out 2 minutes of crunch time against Chris Paul, Kevin Durant, Serge Ibaka, Okafor, and a wing defender to be named later?
The front office has done an incredible job of hitting on high draft picks, paying players reasonable money and maintaining cap flexibility (e.g. the Collison deal). But is this team good enough to get better, from within, and win it all? The NBA has proven time and time again that it takes 2 stars, with a reliable 3rd option, to consistently contend for a title. Now, in Durant, one piece is definitely in place. So, is the 2nd piece in place? If you don't think Russell Westbrook is the answer, then there might be a deal that fixes everything you think is wrong with the Thunder's situation - trade for Chris Paul.
Why New Orleans does this deal: Chris Paul is going to leave, and if the front office could choose how it plays out, they'd probably lean towards Utah handling Deron Williams more than Denver handling Carmelo. Despite what everyone has said, Russell Westbrook is still an All-Star, All-NBA talent who may not have reached 3/4 of his potential yet. Plus, James Harden is a nice, young, rookie contract piece that can play next to him. The most onerous long term contract the Hornets are saddled with (Okafor) is traded out for a much lower number being paid to Perk. And Nate Robinson is a nice expiring piece for next year. And, if both Westbrook and Harden implode quickly, in three years Perk and Sefolosha are all that's left. If there's a team that can make a better offer, I'd like to see it.
Why OKC does this deal: Upgrade the point guard position with arguably the best pure point guard in the league, in his prime. Realistically, Russell Westbrook's best case scenario can't include the floor general skills and shooting of CP3. Okafor is not considered an attractive piece to every NBA team, but he's capable of giving OKC exactly what Perkins was supposed to and then some (physical interior defense, without playing 4-on-5 on offense).
The most serious hurdle to clear is including James Harden. He's showed well in this postseason, and may be offering a glimpse of potential All-Star talent. It's certainly possible. Of course, it's also possible that he's showing us exactly what we saw from Boris Diaw in '06, Rodney Stuckey in '08, Hedo Turkoglu in '09, and Goran Dragic in '10. And that would be the perfect combination of opportunity, matchups, and confidence. The one common thread between all those breakout stars of the playoffs? Their stock has gone down, and 3 out of 4 were playing on different teams within two seasons.
Would this deal represent a radical departure from the OKC blueprint? Not really. The team traded Jeff Green, one of the first building blocks of the current roster, because they saw an opportunity to upgrade the roster and open the championship window now. If the key ingredients this team is lacking include leadership, methodical execution of the offense in crunch time, and a 2nd true alpha dog to pair with Durant as he enters the physical prime of his career, this is a deal that I think must be done. Let's pair two of the most likeable, marketable, skilled competitors in the league in a small market, with a nice roster and a great fanbase, and let them go to work.
I mean, you tell me how Dallas would like to try closing out 2 minutes of crunch time against Chris Paul, Kevin Durant, Serge Ibaka, Okafor, and a wing defender to be named later?
Friday, May 20, 2011
Going Solo: A Cautionary Tale for Durant and Westbrook
A very disturbing storyline is developing for the Oklahoma City Thunder in this postseason. Whether deserved or not (overdone, in my opinion), the successes of the team are being laid at the feet of Kevin Durant, while the struggles are heaped onto the shoulders of Russell Westbrook. Given the incredible youth and inexperience of virtually every major piece of the Thunder in postseason play, from coach on down the line (Kendrick Perkins' plus-minus contributions makes him a minor piece here), this is almost certainly unfair. Example: In the triple-overtime Grizzlies game, Westbrook misses at the end of regulation and OT #2 are ridiculed. Kevin Durant is exempted from criticism despite getting no closer than a step back 28 footer at the end of OT #1, in addition to openly complaining about not getting the ball for all the cameras to see. From the outside looking in, it appears to be wearing on Westbrook, which is bad for everybody.
The toughest thing to do in the NBA is put two upper echelon players on the same team while both are in their prime. Most of the time, one is past their prime, or not at it yet. Durant and Westbrook, and the league for that matter, are lucky enough to be in that rare position. The worst thing possible, for everyone involved, is if oustide pressures (read: media) and ego drive a wedge between these two, and force one to leave. This has happened before, and the results are not good.
Kevin Garnett and Stephon Marbury (1999): despite two consecutive playoff berths, Stephon was unhappy with his role, and demanded his way out. After being traded, Starbury and Garnett would make it past the 1st round just once, combined, in the next 9 years, despite piling up All-Star berths and All-NBA praise individually.
Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant (2004): despite 3 titles and 5 NBA Finals appearances, Shaq and Kobe were always considered two alpha dogs that somehow coexisted despite hating each other. Management chose the younger guy, and both players won titles without the other. However, we haven't seen a pairing of two All-NBA 1st team talents since, and who knows how many titles they could have won had they just figured it out.
Steve Nash and Joe Johnson (2005): The 7 Seconds or Less Suns were an amazing phenomenon in '04-'05, and the combination of Nash, Stoudemire, Marion, and Joe Johnson lost in the conference finals to the Spurs. Most people forget that a Joe Johnson concussion in that series hampered the Suns, who may have already been the Spurs' match in their 1st year playing together. Joe Johnson wanted a team and venue to showcase his 6-8 point guard abilities, and management worked out a trade to Atlanta. Joe Johnson has never gotten back to the conference finals, and the Nash Suns didn't until 2010.
Hopefully, Russell and Kevin understand how rare their combination is, and from a team success standpoint, it's hard to imagine them being better positioned than they are now for the long term. Money is a separate issue, and I'll never pretend to tell someone how or why to leave $10mm+ in guaranteed money on the table. But I'll always believe that it's easier to teach skill/poise to talented players than to teach talent to skilled/poised players. And there are examples of guys sharing or even ceding the spotlight for team success (Ginobli with Duncan). Jordan had to learn to trust teammates, and never won it all until he did. But he figured it out. So I say to Durant, Westrbook, Scott Brooks: figure it out. It's the best thing for all of us.
Unless New Orleans would take Westbrook in a package for Chris Paul, in which case you can disregard all of this.
The toughest thing to do in the NBA is put two upper echelon players on the same team while both are in their prime. Most of the time, one is past their prime, or not at it yet. Durant and Westbrook, and the league for that matter, are lucky enough to be in that rare position. The worst thing possible, for everyone involved, is if oustide pressures (read: media) and ego drive a wedge between these two, and force one to leave. This has happened before, and the results are not good.
Kevin Garnett and Stephon Marbury (1999): despite two consecutive playoff berths, Stephon was unhappy with his role, and demanded his way out. After being traded, Starbury and Garnett would make it past the 1st round just once, combined, in the next 9 years, despite piling up All-Star berths and All-NBA praise individually.
Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant (2004): despite 3 titles and 5 NBA Finals appearances, Shaq and Kobe were always considered two alpha dogs that somehow coexisted despite hating each other. Management chose the younger guy, and both players won titles without the other. However, we haven't seen a pairing of two All-NBA 1st team talents since, and who knows how many titles they could have won had they just figured it out.
Steve Nash and Joe Johnson (2005): The 7 Seconds or Less Suns were an amazing phenomenon in '04-'05, and the combination of Nash, Stoudemire, Marion, and Joe Johnson lost in the conference finals to the Spurs. Most people forget that a Joe Johnson concussion in that series hampered the Suns, who may have already been the Spurs' match in their 1st year playing together. Joe Johnson wanted a team and venue to showcase his 6-8 point guard abilities, and management worked out a trade to Atlanta. Joe Johnson has never gotten back to the conference finals, and the Nash Suns didn't until 2010.
Hopefully, Russell and Kevin understand how rare their combination is, and from a team success standpoint, it's hard to imagine them being better positioned than they are now for the long term. Money is a separate issue, and I'll never pretend to tell someone how or why to leave $10mm+ in guaranteed money on the table. But I'll always believe that it's easier to teach skill/poise to talented players than to teach talent to skilled/poised players. And there are examples of guys sharing or even ceding the spotlight for team success (Ginobli with Duncan). Jordan had to learn to trust teammates, and never won it all until he did. But he figured it out. So I say to Durant, Westrbook, Scott Brooks: figure it out. It's the best thing for all of us.
Unless New Orleans would take Westbrook in a package for Chris Paul, in which case you can disregard all of this.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
One of a Kind: Remembering the Pistons/Celtics
(This is a two part blog entry. To read Part 1, a recap of the Billups/Hamilton/Prince/Wallace/Wallace Pistons, read the words highlighted in blue. To read Part 2, a recap of the Rondo/Allen/Pierce/Garnett/Perkins Celtics, read the words highlighted in green.)
The Pistons/Celtics of 2004-2007/2008-2011 were a collection of lesser stars who, while somewhat accomplished individually, had never been to an NBA Finals, much less won a championship. While together, they had a four year run of incredible success. Several pieces had been in place for some time, but the finishing touch on the team’s core came with the acquisition of Rasheed Wallace/Kevin Garnett. A multi-skilled and athletic big man, he changed games on both ends of the floor, but had never gone further than the Western conference finals, losing to the Lakers of Shaq and Kobe. For most of us who watched, we thought his struggles stemmed from not having the mentality necessary to carry a team in crunch time, a thought driven by his willingness to make the right pass, no matter how much time was left on the clock (and possibly by a few 4th quarter misses). Once he arrived, conventional wisdom said this team was an instant title contender from day one. As it turned out, conventional wisdom was right.
The Pistons/Celtics of 2004-2007/2008-2011 were a collection of lesser stars who, while somewhat accomplished individually, had never been to an NBA Finals, much less won a championship. While together, they had a four year run of incredible success. Several pieces had been in place for some time, but the finishing touch on the team’s core came with the acquisition of Rasheed Wallace/Kevin Garnett. A multi-skilled and athletic big man, he changed games on both ends of the floor, but had never gone further than the Western conference finals, losing to the Lakers of Shaq and Kobe. For most of us who watched, we thought his struggles stemmed from not having the mentality necessary to carry a team in crunch time, a thought driven by his willingness to make the right pass, no matter how much time was left on the clock (and possibly by a few 4th quarter misses). Once he arrived, conventional wisdom said this team was an instant title contender from day one. As it turned out, conventional wisdom was right.
The calling card of the Pistons/Celtics throughout their four year run would be defense. The tandem of Rasheed Wallace/Kevin Garnett with Ben Wallace/Kendrick Perkins proved to be an ideal fit. Rasheed/Garnett was the vocal leader of the defense, providing excellent defense in help situations, as well as effectively snuffing out pick-and-rolls and guarding every conceivable type of forward with his combination of length, energy, and athleticism. Meanwhile, the interior power and rebounding of Ben Wallace/Perkins let the team leave even dominant centers like Shaq/Dwight single covered in the post. The ability of those two bigs to affect a game, combined with the previously underrated defensive ability of Chauncey Billups/Rajon Rondo at the point guard spot (earning All-NBA Defense honors during the run, but not before), created an incredible defensive team. Even a shooting guard like Richard Hamilton/Ray Allen, who had never been considered a piece of a good defensive team, bought in and contributed to a unit that genuinely intimidated the rest of the league.
While the reputation of the team came from defense, on offense this team was pretty impressive. Despite basically playing 4-on-5 because of Ben Wallace/Perkins being on the court, the team remained tough to defend. Rasheed/Garnett, with both a low post and face-up game, was a difficult matchup for most post defenders. Add to that Hamilton/Allen tirelessly running through a million screens, Billups/Rondo perfectly playing the role of floor general, and Wallace/Perkins available to crash the offensive glass, and most teams had serious problems trying to defend their sets. The biggest problem the Pistons/Celtics were supposed to have was, "who takes the shot in crunch time?" As it turned out, there were usually a few mismatches to exploit. Despite previous struggles as his team’s main go-to scorer, Rasheed/Garnett became a good option due to his combination of scoring ability and willingness to trust and find the open man if doubled. Hamilton/Allen was always dangerous as a shooter, and had to be respected coming off screens, either getting himself open or keeping help defenders occupied. However, when the team just had to have a bucket, usually the ball went to Billups/Pierce, as his Finals MVP trophy would eventually attest.
In their 4 season run, the Pistons/Celtics accomplished a lot. In terms of regular season success, they averaged 56/59 wins per year, including a league-best 64/66 wins in 2006/2008. The Pistons/Celtics earned 8/12 All-Star berths in 4 years (including 4 in one year), and 5/3 berths on All-NBA teams. They won their only NBA title in their first year together. They would come tantalizing close to another: in a matchup of the past two NBA champs, the Pistons/Celtics were tied/up 4 against the Spurs/Lakers going into the 4th quarter of Game 7 of the 2005/2010 NBA Finals, but ultimately lost the game, the series, and bragging rights as top dog of those 4 years in NBA history.
Ultimately, their last year wasn’t really a fair chance at one last run, because management decided to let Ben Wallace/Kendrick Perkins go, unwilling to pay him the long term money he wanted, and probably misunderstanding his importance to the team. It turns out, letting him go meant unraveling the very core of the defense and mentality the Pistons/Celtics had hung their hat on the previous three years, and the 2007/2011 season marked the end of their run. In the playoffs that year, they would finally lose to Lebron James, who after years of tormenting playoff losses to the Pistons/Celtics, losses that made us question if he could ever win a title, finally beat them in a series.
When we look back on the Pistons/Celtics in 10-20 years, it will probably turn out that the for all their intensity, late game heroics, and larger-than-life swagger, they just don't stack up to the team that beat them in the 2005/2010 NBA Finals, the Spurs/Lakers. That's just the way it is... we don't say the Sixers were the equal of the Lakers in the '80s, and we don't say the '06 Heat were as good as the Tim Duncan Spurs. For better or worse, the world uses championships as the final measure of historical greatness. And, as time passes, these teams will likely be nice stories, but ultimately placeholders as we shifted between teams of real historical significance in the NBA.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Drafting for the Bobcats
The NBA Draft is a lot like hitting a baseball, something I know literally nothing about. There are different definitions of success, and different ways to go about getting it done.
- Sometimes you don't need to be a hero, and just advancing runners is a good enough win (low upside, low downside).
- Sometimes, you're situated to take a reasonable shot at an extra base hit, knowing that it's okay that it might not work out (the calculated risk).
- Sometimes, you flail so hard at the ball that the most likely outcome is you walking back to the dugout, after looking really stupid. But, for whatever reason, you wanted that home run so bad, you decided it was time to take a shot.
In my opinion, DraftExpress provides everything you'd want to know about a prospect and more, but here's my view of what the Bobcats are looking at in their draft slots, and what I think they should do.
#9 (Joakim Noah/Brook Lopez to Joe Alexander)
Laying Down the Bunt: Kawhi Leonard, Marcus Morris
The 2-0 Swing: Donatas Motiejunas, Alec Burks
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Bismack Biyombo
My Pick: Kawhi Leonard. I see shades of Gerald Wallace (great rebounder, energy and versatility on defense), with a little sprinkle of Andre Iguodala (underrated passer handling the ball, particularly in the open court, potential lockdown defender). Is he the best player on a title contending team? No. But the last 6 champions needed a glue guy wing defender like this on their team (Prince, Bowen, Posey, Bowen, Posey, Ariza, Artest). He's ready to play in the NBA tomorrow, and when I watched him play a few games at SDSU, I saw versatility, athleticism, two-way ability, and hustle. I want Kawhi Leonard on the Charlotte Bobcats. Don't argue. Just accept it.
#19 (Ty Lawson to Quincy Douby)
Laying Down the Bunt: Kenneth Faried, Chris Singleton
The 2-0 Swing: Jordan Hamilton, Tyler Honeycutt, Travis Leslie
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Lucas Noguiera, Josh Selby
My Pick: Lucas Noguiera. I can already hear the Alexis Ajinca comparisons. They're both 7 footers that make Kevin Durant look like Ron Artest. I can't say that I disagree, but... he's 18 years old, with ridiculous physical potential. Easy to compare him to Ajinca and laugh, but tell me how he's different from Serge Ibaka as a prospect in 2008? He's a longshot, but he may be stashed overseas for a year or two...or forever. I'd rather use the $1.2mm salary that pick is allotted as dry powder for a potential free agent offer (spoiler alert: he plays for the Kings).
#39 (Landry Fields to Stanko Barac)
Laying Down the Bunt: Nolan Smith, JaJuan Johnson, Trey Thompkins
The 2-0 Swing: Darius Morris, Jereme Richmond, Norris Cole, Charles Jenkins
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Scotty Hopson, Malcolm Lee, Jeremy Tyler
My Pick: Norris Cole. In the 2nd round, there aren't a lot of All-Star caliber players available. In fact, it's important to remember that most of these guys are out of the league in less than 2 years. With that in mind, this is where I pick the guy that has a spot on an NBA roster. That guy? Norris Cole. True point guard, with NBA size, demonstrated ability to run a team (esp. in pick-and-roll) and do what it takes to help his team win. Case in point? Over 20 ppg against Butler (3 games) as the focal point of his team's offense, and 20 rebounds in a game (in college, I believe a young Rajon Rondo was the last PG to do that). This was Cleveland's sleeper before they got the #1 pick and Kyrie. Now, hopefully, he'll be our sleeper.
- Sometimes you don't need to be a hero, and just advancing runners is a good enough win (low upside, low downside).
- Sometimes, you're situated to take a reasonable shot at an extra base hit, knowing that it's okay that it might not work out (the calculated risk).
- Sometimes, you flail so hard at the ball that the most likely outcome is you walking back to the dugout, after looking really stupid. But, for whatever reason, you wanted that home run so bad, you decided it was time to take a shot.
In my opinion, DraftExpress provides everything you'd want to know about a prospect and more, but here's my view of what the Bobcats are looking at in their draft slots, and what I think they should do.
#9 (Joakim Noah/Brook Lopez to Joe Alexander)
Laying Down the Bunt: Kawhi Leonard, Marcus Morris
The 2-0 Swing: Donatas Motiejunas, Alec Burks
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Bismack Biyombo
My Pick: Kawhi Leonard. I see shades of Gerald Wallace (great rebounder, energy and versatility on defense), with a little sprinkle of Andre Iguodala (underrated passer handling the ball, particularly in the open court, potential lockdown defender). Is he the best player on a title contending team? No. But the last 6 champions needed a glue guy wing defender like this on their team (Prince, Bowen, Posey, Bowen, Posey, Ariza, Artest). He's ready to play in the NBA tomorrow, and when I watched him play a few games at SDSU, I saw versatility, athleticism, two-way ability, and hustle. I want Kawhi Leonard on the Charlotte Bobcats. Don't argue. Just accept it.
#19 (Ty Lawson to Quincy Douby)
Laying Down the Bunt: Kenneth Faried, Chris Singleton
The 2-0 Swing: Jordan Hamilton, Tyler Honeycutt, Travis Leslie
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Lucas Noguiera, Josh Selby
My Pick: Lucas Noguiera. I can already hear the Alexis Ajinca comparisons. They're both 7 footers that make Kevin Durant look like Ron Artest. I can't say that I disagree, but... he's 18 years old, with ridiculous physical potential. Easy to compare him to Ajinca and laugh, but tell me how he's different from Serge Ibaka as a prospect in 2008? He's a longshot, but he may be stashed overseas for a year or two...or forever. I'd rather use the $1.2mm salary that pick is allotted as dry powder for a potential free agent offer (spoiler alert: he plays for the Kings).
#39 (Landry Fields to Stanko Barac)
Laying Down the Bunt: Nolan Smith, JaJuan Johnson, Trey Thompkins
The 2-0 Swing: Darius Morris, Jereme Richmond, Norris Cole, Charles Jenkins
Swinging Out of Your Shoes: Scotty Hopson, Malcolm Lee, Jeremy Tyler
My Pick: Norris Cole. In the 2nd round, there aren't a lot of All-Star caliber players available. In fact, it's important to remember that most of these guys are out of the league in less than 2 years. With that in mind, this is where I pick the guy that has a spot on an NBA roster. That guy? Norris Cole. True point guard, with NBA size, demonstrated ability to run a team (esp. in pick-and-roll) and do what it takes to help his team win. Case in point? Over 20 ppg against Butler (3 games) as the focal point of his team's offense, and 20 rebounds in a game (in college, I believe a young Rajon Rondo was the last PG to do that). This was Cleveland's sleeper before they got the #1 pick and Kyrie. Now, hopefully, he'll be our sleeper.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Thunder Grizzlies Summary
BEST PLAYER IN THE SERIES: MARC GASOL. If it hadn't happened in two consecutive series, the Jerome James Award may have been re-named. Because it's hard to imagine Pau's little brother living up to the hype of these 13 games going forward (don't worry, Marc, I'm calling it the Ben Gordon award before I do that). No one player can claim to benefit more from Memphis' run than Marc. Z-Bo got the headlines, Mike Conley and OJ (I'm not calling him "Juice") got the highlights, but watching the Grizzlies games, this guy made it all happen. From keeping double teams off Randolph by quietly torching single coverage, to providing shooting touch and passing from the mid-post, to gutting out unbelievable minutes for a player his size, the 2011 playoffs should be remembered in part for Marc downgrading the Pau trade from fleecing to fairly lopsided. (What's that, Celtics fans? Don't want to chime in about how Telfair is the only Celtic left on Minnesota's team from the Garnett trade? No interest in mentioning that Minnesota traded Al Jefferson, the centerpiece of the deal, for less than what the Bobcats got for Gerald Wallace? Hmmm, the silence is making me uncomfortable...)
WORST PLAYER IN THE SERIES: KENDRICK PERKINS. Honestly, what is there to say? Only Tony Allen and Sam Young were worse from a raw plus/minus standpoint in the whole series, and they were hindered by being on the team that lost 4 games in the series. He epitomizes everything some people started to dislike about the end of the Pistons and Celtics' recent runs: way more bark than bite, way more perception than production. There's no better way to make your rep as an interior defender when you can't guard either of the starting bigs for the other team.
REVERSE JEROME JAMES AWARD: RUDY GAY. Really feel for this guy. First, he gets what any basketball player would dream of by signing a max NBA contract. Then, he gets to read about how he wasn't worth the money, because he couldn't lead his team. After stepping his game up in ways pretty much all of us couldn't imagine, and helping to lead Memphis to a potential playoff berth, his shoulder injury forces him to the sidelines for the best run his franchise has ever had. Players tried to play lip service to his absence hurting the team, but given how far above their ceiling the Grizz performed, would any of us blame them for doubting that fact? Well, I do.
There's an argument that OJ's bench scoring wouldn't be possible if he was sharing shots and minutes with Gay, Randolph, and Gasol. Here's another argument: in this series, the Grizzlies struggled to space the floor effectively for Randolph and Gasol, due to a lack of proficient outside shooters. In this series, the Grizzlies struggled to generate crunch time offense, especially when Randolph was off. Guess who solves those problems? How about a 6-8 gazelle who can get his own shot, shoot 40% from 3 (this season), play some real on-ball and help defense when called upon, and hit a shot with the clock running down (note: all highlights from this season):
Rudy Gay Game Winner Against the Heat
Rudy Gay Ties Game Against Suns
Rudy Gay Game Winner Against the Raptors
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Heat Celtics Summary
BEST PLAYER IN THE SERIES: RAJON RONDO. Ever since the Perkins trade, it felt like everyone acknowledged that the team was different without him, and maybe not title-worthy. The truth for the last 2-3 years, even though his teammates seemed to try to deny it: Rondo was the key to the Celtics title runs. Their amazing playoff run last year was directly tied to his play. And as opposed to other guys on the team, he proved a level of toughness in this series that his teammates have not, and likely will not ever, match. I do have to say this, though... Rondo's a great player, but his jump shot wasn't that much worse than Derrick Rose's a few years ago. And look what changed. Heal up that elbow, and come back after the lockout with a jumper.
WORST PLAYER IN THE SERIES: LEBRON JAMES. I don't doubt that Lebron's personal 10-0 run to ice Game 5 was a big deal for him and his team. But compare his regular season numbers to his numbers in this series:
Regular Season: 26.7 ppg (0.98 PPS), 7.5 rpg, 7.0 apg vs. 3.4 topg
Against Boston: 28.0 ppg (0.93 PPS), 8.2 rpg, 3.6 apg vs. 3.4 topg
Watched a lot less of Lebron getting easy buckets for less talented teammates (everyone's generic measure of greatness), and a lot more of Lebron taking contested step back 2's and 3's (the goal of any defense against Lebron), which he hit less efficiently than he did in the regular season (Game 5 being a notable exception). Without the 16-0 run to close out game 5, Lebron would have had an overall negative plus/minus for both Game 5 and the overall series. If anything, this series confirmed to me that beating the Celtics, particularly for Lebron, was more about the help he got from his team than his individual efforts.
JEROME JAMES AWARD: PAUL PIERCE. Everything that Rondo was in this series, Pierce was not. Rondo played 2+ games with a dislocated elbow. Paul Pierce was once carried off the court and put in a wheelchair, only to jog back out 5 minutes later (does that have anything to with this series? No, but if I can't mention it in an NBA blog, why am I blogging at all). If he's the heart and soul of the team, why is it that in Games 3-5, the Celtics did better without him on the floor by the numbers? Plus, from flipping the ball back to a one-armed Rondo who needed help, to openly pouting at teammates for botching the last play of regulation in Game 4, he didn't seem to exude the spirit of a leader. Incidentally, wonder why no one pouted at him for giving up 2 threes and 2 turnovers in the last 2 minutes of Game 5, with the Celtics' season on the line? Hopefully, this is the last time I'm forced to pay attention to the diva antics of 2008's self-proclaimed (and confirmed by no one) best player in the world.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Mavericks Lakers Summary
Best Player in the Series: Pau Gasol. This is not an easy one to explain, but this is the same analysis that gave me Chris Paul and Manu Ginobli in previous series, so I'm not backing down from trying.
(Deep breath).
In this series, the Mavs used Dirk as a scorer/playmaker/decoy, and drove-and-kicked the Lakers to death from distance. How bad was it? During the season, the Mavs shot 21.6 threes a game, making 7.9 (36.5%). In 4 games, the Mavs shot 26.5 threes a game, making 12.3 (46.2%). Pau was matched up with Dirk, who took less than 3 three pointers a game. So somebody else was responsible for the other 24 a game that went up, and mostly went in. Yes, Dirk scored at will on Pau, but we already knew Dirk was the NBA's best scorer this season. And yes, we know that Pau was a far less efficient scorer in this series than in his regular season. But if you forget conventional box score stuff, and compare the two starting 7 footers for LA, you tell me who's getting their fair share of the blame for this series:
Gasol: 143 minutes, -22 in total plus/minus
Bynum: 134 minutes, -59 in total plus/minus
Now, is this a convincing argument, based on the games I watched? Not entirely, no. But most of us watch basketball games and see a few things while missing most things. Some people even see most things, and miss a few. But there's a lot that happens on the floor that we don't see, don't remember, or can't explain. This series probably had a lot of things we didn't see, and if the Lakers are upgrading their talent this summer, I'd rather swap centers with Orlando than power forwards with just about anyone at this point.
Worst Player in the Series: Shawn Marion. In three out of the four games, he played 30+ minutes, and Dallas was outscored while he was on the floor. Game 2 was his only positive plus/minus game (+3 versus the team's +12). Given that he hardly ever drew the Kobe assignment, not sure how to explain this performance. Just plain bad.
Jerome James Award Winner: Jason Kidd. Over the course of the series, there was a lot of talk about the veteran savvy and know how he brought to the team in this series, with the added bonus of checking Kobe Bryant to some degree of success (note: there's nothing savvy about grabbing someone's jersey when they're running around, it's just irritating). Well, Kobe scored 0.949 points per shot on 24 shots, better than his regular season 0.935 on 27 shots. And, as far as plus minus, the Mavericks were better with him off the floor in all 4 games (+6 points in Game 1, +2 points in Game 2, +2 points in Game 3, +23 points in Game 4). If anything, he should have been the weak link to exploit for the Laker defense: not sure why people weren't going under the screen and daring him to shoot off the dribble, where even the Mavs will say his percentages go way down.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
2011 Early Entry Analysis: Deadline Decisions
Since tonight is the official deadline for college basketball's early entrants to withdraw or stay in the draft, it's probably the right time to take a look at who should stay in school, and who should go. Obviously, if three major NBA mock draft sites have a player as a 1st rounder, I believe that means that player should go. Since Harrison Barnes, Jared Sullinger, and Perry Jones have already announced they're staying, let's look at who's staring down their decisions before the deadline. (For the record, all three guys were consensus lottery picks, and extremely likely top 5. Let's see how that plays out. My guess is that 2 of those guys are disappointed with their decision a year from now).
HAVE TO GO NOW (consensus 1st rounders): Alec Burks, Bismack Boyimbo, Brandon Knight, Chris Singleton, Derrick Williams, Donatas Motiejunas, Enes Kanter, Jan Vesely, Jordan Hamilton, Kawhi Leonard, Kemba Walker, Klay Thompson, Kyrie Irving, Marcus Morris, Markief Morris, Terrence Jones, Tobias Harris, Trey Thompkins, Tristan Thompson, Tyler Honeycutt
The easy lightning rods here will be less accomplished college players like Klay Thompson, Tobias Harris, and Tyler Honeycutt. But if mock drafts are in any way indicative of league consensus (I believe the three used are), their decisions to go are good. Terrence Jones, a player whose tweener label will likely grow next year, is definitely risking something by staying, especially considering he was viewed as a consensus lottery pick.
NEED TO THINK (2 out of 3 1st rounders): Darius Morris, Jeremy Tyler, Jordan Williams, Shelvin Mack
I'd guess that 3 out of 4 are taking calculated risks, given uncertainty around next year (team performance, coach, etc.). The apparent head-scratcher is Morris, but his progress and potential could make him a late 1st round steal.
TAKING A RISK (1 out of 3 1st rounders): Josh Selby, Lucas Nogueira, Reggie Jackson, Travis Leslie
Honestly, nothing that crazy here. Most people know Selby's story. The one thing I would note: he may prove people wrong, but Travis Leslie's an interesting case. Usually, a prospect with his athleticism is the kind of guy NBA GM's get excited about. If in 3 years of playing college basketball, there isn't that much buzz about his potential, he could have a very tough professional road.
BAD DECISION (not a 1st rounder): Everybody else
This is a group that's clearly determined to go pro, despite any other feedback they got. For guys like Scotty Hopson, who definitely has pro-level talent, an unsettled situation next year isn't the best place to raise his stock, especially as a rising senior. But for guys like Jereme Richmond, Cory Joseph, and Malcolm Lee, this is a very tough decision to understand solely based on draft stock.
Mock Draft Links Used:
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2011/
http://www.nbadraft.net/2011mock_draft
http://hoopshype.com/draft.htm
HAVE TO GO NOW (consensus 1st rounders): Alec Burks, Bismack Boyimbo, Brandon Knight, Chris Singleton, Derrick Williams, Donatas Motiejunas, Enes Kanter, Jan Vesely, Jordan Hamilton, Kawhi Leonard, Kemba Walker, Klay Thompson, Kyrie Irving, Marcus Morris, Markief Morris, Terrence Jones, Tobias Harris, Trey Thompkins, Tristan Thompson, Tyler Honeycutt
The easy lightning rods here will be less accomplished college players like Klay Thompson, Tobias Harris, and Tyler Honeycutt. But if mock drafts are in any way indicative of league consensus (I believe the three used are), their decisions to go are good. Terrence Jones, a player whose tweener label will likely grow next year, is definitely risking something by staying, especially considering he was viewed as a consensus lottery pick.
NEED TO THINK (2 out of 3 1st rounders): Darius Morris, Jeremy Tyler, Jordan Williams, Shelvin Mack
I'd guess that 3 out of 4 are taking calculated risks, given uncertainty around next year (team performance, coach, etc.). The apparent head-scratcher is Morris, but his progress and potential could make him a late 1st round steal.
TAKING A RISK (1 out of 3 1st rounders): Josh Selby, Lucas Nogueira, Reggie Jackson, Travis Leslie
Honestly, nothing that crazy here. Most people know Selby's story. The one thing I would note: he may prove people wrong, but Travis Leslie's an interesting case. Usually, a prospect with his athleticism is the kind of guy NBA GM's get excited about. If in 3 years of playing college basketball, there isn't that much buzz about his potential, he could have a very tough professional road.
BAD DECISION (not a 1st rounder): Everybody else
This is a group that's clearly determined to go pro, despite any other feedback they got. For guys like Scotty Hopson, who definitely has pro-level talent, an unsettled situation next year isn't the best place to raise his stock, especially as a rising senior. But for guys like Jereme Richmond, Cory Joseph, and Malcolm Lee, this is a very tough decision to understand solely based on draft stock.
Mock Draft Links Used:
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2011/
http://www.nbadraft.net/2011mock_draft
http://hoopshype.com/draft.htm
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
NBA Hater Response: The Game Isn't As Good
Every lifelong NBA fan has run into him at one time or another. The most casual of basketball watchers (typically age 35+), who watches 60 minutes of actual NBA basketball a season, mostly of the highlight variety. For reasons that only the most twisted version of karma can justify, you're stuck talking to this guy about sports. You mention that you like the NBA, and suddenly, you're listening to some flimsy subjective analysis of why the NBA is inherently bad. And you have to make a choice.
You can meekly agree, affirming every ridiculous thing they say for the sake of avoiding an awkward conversation. If you're having a drink, you can throw it on them (the modern-day face slap with a glove). Or, you can fight stupid with fact. If you're like me, then you're too much of a man to go option #1. But, if you're like me, you're not man enough for option #2. So, you're stuck with option #3. If that's the way you're gonna go, this is an attempt to provide the weapons against the various arguments that come up, one by one.
Stupid Argument: "The players / game just isn't as good as it was years ago."
The fundamental (-ly flawed) premise of this argument is that for whatever reason, NBA players have been getting progressively worse at every skill in the game. "Guys just can't shoot the way they used to... These guys don't pass at all anymore... the game today is so sloppy and one-on-one now." Shockingly, the data just does not back this up. At all.
As far as shooting, overall league shooting percentages shouldn't be looked at in isolation, because the addition of the 3 point shot, and its increasing use, has some effect on that metric. As a result, it makes more sense to look at the three types of shots available: free throws, 2 pointers, and 3 pointers.
FREE THROWS
The free throw hasn't changed in 40 years. 15 ft away from a 10 foot hoop, and no one is playing defense. Over the past 4 decades, NBA players shot free throws at the following percentages: 75.5% ('72-'81), 75.8% ('82-'91), 74.2% ('92-'01), and 75.6% ('02-'11). That conspicuous low point for any season? The '99 lockout shortened season. Nobody getting worse here.
2 POINTERS
Again, nothing unusual here. But an interesting question... has defense gotten worse in the last 10 years? I would say that it's no worse than the 80's, which most consider the golden age of NBA ball. Same shooting ability (proven by free throws), similar 2 point shooting results. Watch some old highlights closely when you get a chance... do the rotations and close-outs look as intense as today? I say no, but at the very least, they're equal. That's another point for the NBA fan.
3 POINTERS
This is too easy. Now, obviously, the 3 point shot only started in the NBA in the '79-80 season, so players had to get used to it, but anyone who argues that today's players aren't better at shooting it is looking at this backwards. Or upside down. Or both. Players in the league are shooting a higher proportion of 3's, at the same clip as any other time, if not better. One more for the NBA fan.
ASSISTS-TO-TURNOVERS
If the game is devolving into one-on-one plays that generally make the game sloppy and ugly, then it stands to reason that there should be fewer assists (because of the players that don't know how to pass), and more "i'm-gonna-score-at-any-cost" type turnovers (again, because of the players that don't know how to pass). Not so much. Quite the opposite, in fact. Don't say offenses might be more intricate now, though - you don't need a knockout when you're ahead on points.
If your opponent can even comprehend the beating he's just taken, he'll probably say that numbers don't matter, because he knows basketball. That's the arguing equivalent of him taking his ball and going home. When he does, feel free to break out the Dikembe wag, because nobody brings that weak stuff in your house. The Sam Cassell dance works too, but make sure the crowd is age appropriate - gotta stay classy when you win.
One last thing: there's an outside chance that someone throws random things like rules changes in your face. These aren't arguments based on numbers, so matching him with something equal should be a push. Things like, "Ever since the hand check rule, any guard can score at will." Easy to come back with something like, "Before the Mark Jackson rule, any low post player could score at will."
Hope this helps other NBA fans in the eternal fight against stupid.
You can meekly agree, affirming every ridiculous thing they say for the sake of avoiding an awkward conversation. If you're having a drink, you can throw it on them (the modern-day face slap with a glove). Or, you can fight stupid with fact. If you're like me, then you're too much of a man to go option #1. But, if you're like me, you're not man enough for option #2. So, you're stuck with option #3. If that's the way you're gonna go, this is an attempt to provide the weapons against the various arguments that come up, one by one.
Stupid Argument: "The players / game just isn't as good as it was years ago."
The fundamental (-ly flawed) premise of this argument is that for whatever reason, NBA players have been getting progressively worse at every skill in the game. "Guys just can't shoot the way they used to... These guys don't pass at all anymore... the game today is so sloppy and one-on-one now." Shockingly, the data just does not back this up. At all.
As far as shooting, overall league shooting percentages shouldn't be looked at in isolation, because the addition of the 3 point shot, and its increasing use, has some effect on that metric. As a result, it makes more sense to look at the three types of shots available: free throws, 2 pointers, and 3 pointers.
FREE THROWS
The free throw hasn't changed in 40 years. 15 ft away from a 10 foot hoop, and no one is playing defense. Over the past 4 decades, NBA players shot free throws at the following percentages: 75.5% ('72-'81), 75.8% ('82-'91), 74.2% ('92-'01), and 75.6% ('02-'11). That conspicuous low point for any season? The '99 lockout shortened season. Nobody getting worse here.
Again, nothing unusual here. But an interesting question... has defense gotten worse in the last 10 years? I would say that it's no worse than the 80's, which most consider the golden age of NBA ball. Same shooting ability (proven by free throws), similar 2 point shooting results. Watch some old highlights closely when you get a chance... do the rotations and close-outs look as intense as today? I say no, but at the very least, they're equal. That's another point for the NBA fan.
This is too easy. Now, obviously, the 3 point shot only started in the NBA in the '79-80 season, so players had to get used to it, but anyone who argues that today's players aren't better at shooting it is looking at this backwards. Or upside down. Or both. Players in the league are shooting a higher proportion of 3's, at the same clip as any other time, if not better. One more for the NBA fan.
If the game is devolving into one-on-one plays that generally make the game sloppy and ugly, then it stands to reason that there should be fewer assists (because of the players that don't know how to pass), and more "i'm-gonna-score-at-any-cost" type turnovers (again, because of the players that don't know how to pass). Not so much. Quite the opposite, in fact. Don't say offenses might be more intricate now, though - you don't need a knockout when you're ahead on points.
If your opponent can even comprehend the beating he's just taken, he'll probably say that numbers don't matter, because he knows basketball. That's the arguing equivalent of him taking his ball and going home. When he does, feel free to break out the Dikembe wag, because nobody brings that weak stuff in your house. The Sam Cassell dance works too, but make sure the crowd is age appropriate - gotta stay classy when you win.
One last thing: there's an outside chance that someone throws random things like rules changes in your face. These aren't arguments based on numbers, so matching him with something equal should be a push. Things like, "Ever since the hand check rule, any guard can score at will." Easy to come back with something like, "Before the Mark Jackson rule, any low post player could score at will."
Hope this helps other NBA fans in the eternal fight against stupid.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Taking the Money: Why and When A Player Enters the NBA Draft Early
Every year around this time, the NBA draft early entry list is finalized, and a small army of college basketball analysts wax poetic about the horrible decisions young athletes are making by trading 1-3 years of eligibility for their chance at an NBA career. The odds of being drafted in the 1st round are so low, they say. Staying in college to hone your craft gives you a better shot at making it, they say. While I can't begin to describe how hypocritical the 2nd sentiment is (how many times do college coaches dump on their power forwards and centers trying to face up because "they care too much about what scouts think?"), the first is pretty misleading too.
The NBA draft, like most drafts, are not about what players do at their current level of the sport, but what they could do at the highest level. And over the last 5 years (the one-and-done rule period), the drafting pattern is plain and simple. Most freshmen who are drafted are lottery picks or 1st rounders, and most seniors who get picked are 2nd rounders. Is this focus on potential over production valid? Well, based on NBA success, the list of under-drafted seniors is pretty short (Wes Matthews), but almost every year there's an under-drafted early entry (DeAndre Jordan, Rudy Gay, Rajon Rondo).
The composition of drafts is only half the story, though. What about all those early entry kids who messed up by listening to the wrong people, and shortchanged themselves? Well, looking at the official early entry candidates who stayed in the last 5 drafts, it looks like this...
Underclassmen making bad decisions? Please. In the last 5 years, 88% of freshmen early entries drafted, 76% in the 1st round, with guaranteed contracts. 76% of sophomore early entries drafted, 58% in the 1st round. Overall, 71% of early entries are getting drafted, and 49% in the 1st round.
So, what advice is there to kids weighing the early entry deadline? There's something important to be gained from looking at the underclassmen who declared early, and weren't drafted.
Undrafted Freshmen: Davon Jefferson, JaJuan Robinson, Nate Miles, Robert Earl Johnson, Tommy Mason-Griffin
Robinson and Johnson were definitively off the NBA radar when they declared. Jefferson, Mason-Griffin, and Nate Miles were all flagged for varying levels of issues after their freshman years (work ethic, chemistry, and recruiting violations, respectively).
Undrafted Sophomores: Courtney Fortson, Dar Tucker, Darius Washington Jr., David Johnson, Dee Bost, Derek Burditt, Donald Jeffes, Keith Brumbaugh, Kellen Lee, Samardo Samuels, Sylven Landesberg, Tedric Hill, Terrence Roderick
Of this group, Washington, Samuels, and Landesberg were truly being evaluated as NBA prospects ahead of the draft. In total, of the 18 undrafted underclassmen, you could argue that only 5 harbored legitimate hopes of being drafted at all, if not in the 1st round. Removing the truly irrational draft entrants, the data is striking: 95% of early entry freshmen were drafted (82% 1st rounders), and 93% of early entry sophomores were drafted (71% 1st rounders). That's 81% of those early entrants drafted, 66% in the 1st round. Doesn't seem like anybody mentions that Tristan Thompson has a 95% chance of being drafted, and an 80% chance of being a 1st rounder, does it?
For the prospect considering early entry, if they've consistently seen their names on the mock drafts of DraftExpress, NBADraft.net, and HoopsHype all season, they need to seriously consider leaving school to play in the NBA. And if most mocks have a player in the lottery, I'd advise against turning down the chance to earn more money in 3 years than most college graduates earn in a lifetime. College basketball analysts love to rail against a DeAndre Jordan or B.J. Mullens leaving early and falling in the draft. What they always fail to mention is the opportunity for life-changing money that guys like Willie Warren and Devin Ebanks gave up by going back to school for one more year, and having scouts fall out of love with their potential.
This decision, of course, has to be made with the perspective of a likely NBA lockout. No one really knows what a new collective bargaining agreement will bring for rookie salaries, guarantees, when players actually play, when players actually get paid, etc. Is that a reason to stay in college, or a reason that a record 56 underclassmen declared for this year's NFL draft with a similar lockout looming? I lean toward the latter.
The composition of drafts is only half the story, though. What about all those early entry kids who messed up by listening to the wrong people, and shortchanged themselves? Well, looking at the official early entry candidates who stayed in the last 5 drafts, it looks like this...
Underclassmen making bad decisions? Please. In the last 5 years, 88% of freshmen early entries drafted, 76% in the 1st round, with guaranteed contracts. 76% of sophomore early entries drafted, 58% in the 1st round. Overall, 71% of early entries are getting drafted, and 49% in the 1st round.
So, what advice is there to kids weighing the early entry deadline? There's something important to be gained from looking at the underclassmen who declared early, and weren't drafted.
Undrafted Freshmen: Davon Jefferson, JaJuan Robinson, Nate Miles, Robert Earl Johnson, Tommy Mason-Griffin
Robinson and Johnson were definitively off the NBA radar when they declared. Jefferson, Mason-Griffin, and Nate Miles were all flagged for varying levels of issues after their freshman years (work ethic, chemistry, and recruiting violations, respectively).
Undrafted Sophomores: Courtney Fortson, Dar Tucker, Darius Washington Jr., David Johnson, Dee Bost, Derek Burditt, Donald Jeffes, Keith Brumbaugh, Kellen Lee, Samardo Samuels, Sylven Landesberg, Tedric Hill, Terrence Roderick
Of this group, Washington, Samuels, and Landesberg were truly being evaluated as NBA prospects ahead of the draft. In total, of the 18 undrafted underclassmen, you could argue that only 5 harbored legitimate hopes of being drafted at all, if not in the 1st round. Removing the truly irrational draft entrants, the data is striking: 95% of early entry freshmen were drafted (82% 1st rounders), and 93% of early entry sophomores were drafted (71% 1st rounders). That's 81% of those early entrants drafted, 66% in the 1st round. Doesn't seem like anybody mentions that Tristan Thompson has a 95% chance of being drafted, and an 80% chance of being a 1st rounder, does it?
For the prospect considering early entry, if they've consistently seen their names on the mock drafts of DraftExpress, NBADraft.net, and HoopsHype all season, they need to seriously consider leaving school to play in the NBA. And if most mocks have a player in the lottery, I'd advise against turning down the chance to earn more money in 3 years than most college graduates earn in a lifetime. College basketball analysts love to rail against a DeAndre Jordan or B.J. Mullens leaving early and falling in the draft. What they always fail to mention is the opportunity for life-changing money that guys like Willie Warren and Devin Ebanks gave up by going back to school for one more year, and having scouts fall out of love with their potential.
This decision, of course, has to be made with the perspective of a likely NBA lockout. No one really knows what a new collective bargaining agreement will bring for rookie salaries, guarantees, when players actually play, when players actually get paid, etc. Is that a reason to stay in college, or a reason that a record 56 underclassmen declared for this year's NFL draft with a similar lockout looming? I lean toward the latter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)