Archive for December, 2009


Is It A Basketball Game, Or A Circus?

Filed Under: Uncategorized by Tweener — Comments Off
12/30/2009

When I was vacationing over the last few days in Florida, I took a break from trying to tan my pale skin and went to see the Heat play the Pacers. The game was over about 4 minutes into the second quarter, but it was still fun to be there. A few notes / hoopservations:

1. Sam Perkins was there. He had on a suit, and occupied about three seats. From where I was sitting, he looked like he was sleeping. I love that guy.
2. The Pacers are barely an NBA team. At times, the lineup they had on the floor was just embarrassing. TJ Ford had a couple of nice drives to the hoop, and Troy Murphy looked like he belonged on an NBA court, but the rest of them had no business getting paid to do whatever it was that they were doing out there. Mike Dunleavy and Roy Hibbert were awful. Tyler Hansborough was trying hard, but really didn’t bring much to the table. It’s hard to see how the Nets, with Devin Harris and Brook Lopez, are significantly worse than those guys.
3. The Heat, on the other hand, looked pretty good. Of course, when you win a game by 34 points, you’re going to look pretty good in the process. But going beyond the score, I was impressed by the variety of options they had on offense. They dominated, and weren’t leaning on Wade all of the time. Whenever they can get 30 points and 15 boards between O’Neal and Beasley, and get 15 points and 10 assists between Arroyo and Chalmers, they’re going to be tough to beat — and those numbers are reasonable goals for those guys if they play up to their ability.
4. During every timeout, there was some type of skit going on: KissCam, the HeatDancers, the Junior HeatDancers, a Papa John’s pizza giveaway, shooting t-shirts into the crowd, etc., etc., etc. I have been to Sixers games where I felt like I was at the circus, but I thought it was something unique to the Sixers. When I saw the same type of nonsense at Knicks games, I didn’t make anything of it – I just figured that, if I ran the Knicks, I, too, would want to distract the fans from the product on the court. Now that I’ve seen it in Miami, also, I have to worry that every NBA game involves juggling acts, dancing kids, and various other skits to distract the fans from basketball. Why is this, and how do we make it stop? Does NBA stand for No Basketball Anymore?

Tags: , , ,
Comment

Week In Review

Filed Under: '09 - '10 Season, Week in Review by Tweener — Comments Off
12/23/2009

We’re approaching a great time of year for hoops. The NBA is approaching the halfway mark, and conference play is going to start to make college hoops quite exciting.

The major storylines, for those who haven’t been paying attention:

NBA

The Lakers and Celtics are scary good. The Nuggets, Mavs, Suns, Magic, Hawks, and Cavs, are very good.

The Nets might be the worst team ever. Yes, ever. Those dudes are 2-26.

The Spurs started badly, but, if the playoffs started today, they’d be in as the #7 seed. That’s one hell of a #7 seed.

Though the East sometimes seems to be catching up with the West, if the playoffs started today, three teams would make the playoffs in the East (Milwaukee, Toronto, Charlotte) with records below .500. Think about that. Three playoff teams with records below .500. An even stranger fact is that the Knicks are only a half-game out of the last playoff spot.

NCAA

John Wall is a star.

Kansas and Texas are on a collision course. I’ve seen both of them play, and am psyched for that matchup.

The top of the standings has not seen much change, except for a slight drop from Villanova. The top 6 teams seem to be establishing themselves as the top teams, and the bulk of the movement seems to be lower in the polls. I guess that’s how it often goes.

Speaking of the top 6 teams, Syracuse somehow lost Jonny Flynn, Paul Harris, and Eric Devendorf, and got much better.

And speaking of Big East teams, there are 5 in the top 15.

I’m psyched for some hoopserving during the holiday season. Please note, though, that I’ll be hoopserving while on vacation, and won’t be blogging for a few days. I hope you’ll check back next week. In the meantime, if you have hoopservations you want to share, please post them in the comments. Happy Holidays!

Tags: , , , ,
Comment

Why I Don’t Like Fantasy Hoops

Filed Under: Uncategorized by Tweener — Comments Off
12/20/2009

So, this week is the week of the semi-finals in both of my fantasy football leagues. No, my team did not make the semis in either league. Thanks for asking, though. I really appreciate it.

The point of this football reference is simply to say that I’m going to miss fantasy sports until September. I often think about scratching my itch for fantasy sports by joining a fantasy basketball league. But, I did that once, and didn’t like it.

The problem with fantasy hoops is that, due to the nature of the game, mediocre guys on sh**y teams put up great numbers. On paper, mediocre guys look a lot like stars, simply because by being on the court for extended minutes on a lousy team, they compile a bunch of stats. It’s because in basketball, losing teams generally put up 85 points, knock down a few 3‘s, and pull down about 35 rebounds. That means that a few of the scrubs that those teams dressed up in a uniform that night compiled some stats. In other words, players who don’t do anything that actually makes their team competitive wind up making their fantasy owners quite happy.

Other sports are different. In baseball, guys who just show up at the park and get some playing time don’t help their fantasy owners. But, a guy who goes 2-4 with a HR makes his real team – not just his fantasy team – more likely to win the game. In football, guys who just go through the motions don’t help their fantasy owners. But, a guy who runs for 80 yards and scores a TD makes his real team – not just his fantasy team – more likely to win the game.

An illustration of how basketball is different is the game Larry Hughes had on November 6th against Cleveland. As I already blogged about, the Knicks were never in the game. But, Hughes had a few rebounds fall into his lap, picked off a few errant passes when the Cavs were playing sloppy, and knocked down a 3 when the Cavs were too busy looking at all the celebrities in the stands. The Knicks were not competitive from the beginning of the game until the last 3 minutes, but guy I was sitting next to had Hughes on his fantasy team, and was loving what he was seeing. When the final buzzer sounded, Hughes had put up 18 points, hit a 3, pulled down 5 boards, had 4 assists, and 4 steals. On paper, those are good numbers. That’s not because Larry Hughes is good, though. It’s because he got lots of minutes on a bad team.

The other reason I don’t like fantasy hoops is that the thing which distinguishes basketball players from each other is not measured by stats. It’s an attitude. It’s the ability to come through in the fourth quarter. Other sports are generally different. Sure, football and baseball have “clutch” players, and also guys who tend to disappear in the clutch. But, if you’re comparing Larry Fitzgerald to Andre Johnson, you aren’t saying “Larry has ice running through his veins in the last two minutes of a tie game.” Yet, if you’re trying to explain what makes Kobe / Wade / LeBron extraordinary, it’s their ability to put their teams on their shoulders for the last 5 minutes of a tie game, and bring it home.

The only other comparison that comes even close is a football quarterback. Tom Brady ain’t Tom Brady because of stats. (Trust me, I had him on my fantasy team this year.) He’s Tom Brady because you want to be on his team in the fourth quarter of a close game.

This post is already quite long. Usually when I talk for this long, people have either fallen asleep or walked out of the room. So I’ll wrap up. I don’t like fantasy hoops, because too many mediocre players look like stars in fantasy hoops.

Tags: , , ,
Comment

There’s No Such Thing As A “Tweener”

Filed Under: Comparing Eras, Positions, Talking About Hoops by Tweener — Comments Off
12/20/2009

One of the most commonly made mistakes in pro basketball is that a guy gets underrated because he is a “tweener.” Lemme tell ya’, it should never happen.

According to Wikipedia: A tweener in basketball is a term, sometimes used derisively, for a player who is able to play two positions, but is not ideally suited to play either position exclusively, so he/she is said to be in between. A tweener has a set of skills that do not match the traditional position of his physical stature.

When teams decide to stay away from a guy because he’s a “tweener,” they could be making a huge mistake. A large part of the problem, as I blogged weeks ago, is that there is really not much of a difference between shooting guards and small forwards. (I’d go further and argue that the line between a 3 and a 4 or a 4 and a 5 is really not that clear anymore, either. A point guard is a point guard, but, as to the other positions, it’s not clear where one ends and one begins.)

Consider Antawn Jamison. He was an absolute star in college, but, because he was perceived as a tweener, was drafted after Michael Olawakandi and Raef LaFrentz. How’d that work out?

On a related point, if the word “tweener” means anything, isn’t Michael Jordan a tweener? I mean, I don’t see why you couldn’t play him at 3 if you had a star 2, or couldn’t play him at 2 if you had a star 3. But look at the trouble the Blazers got themselves into by thinking too rigidly about the five positions on a basketball team.

Bobby Knight has a classic quote about his advice to NBA GMs about Michael Jordan (full article here):
One day during at an Olympic practice before the June NBA draft, Knight remembered standing next to an NBA team executive, whom he refuses to identify.
“I was standing next to my friend as we watched us practice and I said, ‘You’re luckier than anybody could be in basketball, you have a chance to get Jordan,’ ” Knight said. “He said, ‘Yeah, Bob, he’s great, but we need a big man.’ And I told him, ‘Play Jordan at center and he’ll lead the league in scoring. He’s that good.’ ”

Speaking of classic basketball quotes, I must digress for a minute… Ron Artest has what might be the best quote of all time, when referring to a skirmish he had with Kobe Bryant. He says that he went over to Kobe and said “You’re hitting the wrong person. Don’t you know you’re hitting Ron Artest?” Video here (around 0:35).

When I want to make myself laugh, I envision a fight between Kobe Bryant and me. When Kobe makes an aggressive move towards me, I say to him “You’re hitting the wrong person. Don’t you know who you’re hitting?” The look of confusion on his face is hard to describe. His brow gets furrowed, and his eyes go crossed. In fact, his eyes get so crossed that his eyeballs actually switch eyes.

Anyway, back to the point I was making…

Nobody fails to succeed in the NBA simply because he’s a “tweener.” Lots of “tweeners” excel in the NBA (MJ, Vince, T-Mac, Dirk, Barkley, Antawn Jamison, Lamar Odom, etc., etc., etc.) For those guys, position doesn’t matter. The coach wants to put them on the floor, and let the other team worry about how to match up with him.

Bottom line: when a guy is good, his ability to play multiple positions leads to people calling him “versatile.” They only call someone a “tweener” if the guy isn’t good enough to play.

Tags: , ,
Comment

Who’s Better?

Filed Under: Comparing Players / Teams, Talking About Hoops by Tweener — 1 Comment
12/19/2009

Consider two stat lines for two players who were each in their sixth season at the time (each of them played 81 games):

MPG FG% 3p% FT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
37.7 .489 .344 .780 7.6 7.2 1.7 1.2 28.4

38.3 .514 .000 .745 11.2 3.0 .99 3.2 26.6

We’ll call the guy on top “F” because he’s a forward, and the guy on the bottom “C” because he’s a center. (The formatting might get screwed up in translation. F averages 37.7 minutes, shoots 48.9% from the field 34.4% from 3, 78% at the line, grabs 7.6 rebounds per game, dishes 7.2 assists per game, gets 1.7 steals per game, blocks 1.2 shots per game, and scores 28.4 points per game. C averages 38.3 minutes, shoots 51.4% from the field, didn’t make a 3, shoots 74.5% at the line, grabs 11.2 rebounds per game, dishes 3.0 assists per game, gets .99 steals per game, blocks 3.2 shots per game, and scores 26.6 points per game.)

If I asked who was better, you’d probably say it’s a close call, right? You might note that F brings more to the table, because he shoots 3’s, obviously passes well, is a thief on defense, and rebounds quite well. But, you’d also probably note that C is an extremely rare player: a center who obviously dominates the paint (11 rebounds, 3 blocks per game), and scores 26.6 points per game while shooting over 50%. On the numbers alone, it’s a very tough call. You couldn’t call me crazy if I said that I’d take C over F, if only because it’s harder to find a dominant center than it is to find anything else.

If I told you that F had already led his team to the NBA Finals by the end of his sixth year, and that the furthest C had led his team was to the Conference Semifinals, you’d say that F had probably proven himself to be a better player.

But, if I told you that C, by the end of his sixth year, had never had a teammate who made the All-Star team, and that F, by the end of his sixth year, already had two teammates who made the All-Star team, you might take that back. You couldn’t call me crazy if I said that I’d still take C over F, even knowing that F had already led his team to the NBA Finals.

If I then told you that Bill Simmons took the time to rank the 96 best players of all time, and ranked C number 39 and F number 20, you couldn’t call me crazy if I said that I disagree with Simmons. If I told you that Simmons said of C that his “career was either ‘frustrating’ (the glass-half-full take) or ‘phenomenally disappointing’ (the glass-half-empty take),” and said of F that “he’s a cross between ABA Doc (unstoppable in the open court, breathtaking in traffic, can galvanize teammates and crowds with one ‘wow’ play, handles himself gracefully on and off the court) and 1992 Scottie Pippen (the freaky athletic ability on both ends, especially when he’s cutting pass lines or flying in from the weak side for a block), with a little MJ (his overcompetitiveness and ‘there’s no way we’re losing this game’ gear), Magic (the unselfishness, which isn’t where I thought it would be back in 2003, but at least it’s there a little) and Bo (how he occasionally overpowers opponents in ways that doesn’t seem fully human) mixed in . . . only if that Molotove NBA superstar cocktail was mixed together in Karl Malone’s 275-pound body. This is crazy. This is insane. This is unlike anything we’ve ever seen,” you couldn’t call me crazy if I said that Bill Simmons got carried away. If I told you that I’d still take C over F in spite of Bill’s swooning, you still wouldn’t call me crazy.

But, if I told you that C was Patrick Ewing and F was LeBron James, you’d probably call me crazy if I said I’d take C over F.

Why?

Tags: ,
Comment

Week In Review

Filed Under: '09 - '10 Season, Week in Review by Tweener — Comments Off
12/08/2009

I just spent a few hours surfing the ‘net, and I think it’s safe to say that this is the only website on the entire internet that hasn’t mentioned Tiger Woods in the last few weeks. Welcome to the oasis.

Not too much time to put together a “week in review” today, so I’ll stick to the big picture. In the NCAA, Kentucky probably got the biggest win of the week, over North Carolina on Saturday. And it’s nice to see UNLV in the top 25, for no other reason other than that I love to be reminded that THERE IS A UNIVERSITY IN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE LAS VEGAS STRIP. It always throws me for a loop.

In the NBA, big stories include Greg Oden going down for the season, Iverson returning to the Sixers, the Knicks winning three straight games — yes, the Knicks — and the Lakers continuing their dominance. Other stories to keep an eye on are the return of Chris Paul, and the continuing inability of the Spurs to put together a winning streak. Here are Power Rankings from Sportsline.

Some highlights from the week:
Kobe hits a buzzer beater.
Kidd throws an alley-oop.
Crazy LeBron block.
Another great block.
Marcus Camby (?!) – great pass.

By the way, I’d love to post highlights from college games, but those don’t seem to be as easy to come by on YouTube. If anyone has any pointers, please share ‘em.

Tags: , , , , ,
Comment

A Few Words About DNA

Filed Under: Uncategorized by Tweener — Comments Off
12/07/2009

I was able to watch some of the North Carolina – Kentucky game on Saturday. At one point, Clark Kellogg was singing the praises of Larry Drew II, a guard on Carolina. Kellogg said that Drew II has “tremendous DNA.” He’s right; Drew’s father, Larry Drew, was an NBA player.

There is nothing controversial about this. Drew II is a good college player, and Kellogg was saying that he has lots of upside because it is in his genes. When a kid is good at the guitar, it doesn’t surprise people to learn that one of his parents was a musician. When a kid is smart, it doesn’t surprise people to learn that one or both of her parents was also smart. So, when a kid is good at hoops, it isn’t surprising to learn that his father played in the NBA.

It begs an interesting question, though: Why doesn’t this happen more often? The last time I remember the kids of pro basketball players playing for a good college team was when Doc Rivers’s son played with Patrick Ewing’s son for Georgetown a few years ago. That was an excellent team, but not necessarily because of Rivers and Ewing — the team was led by two guys whose surnames were Hibbert and Green.

On the pro level, there are a few guys who have a parent that was a professional athlete. Grant Hill’s dad played football for the Cowboys. Kobe Bryant’s dad played pro ball, overseas for a number of years. Joakim Noah’s dad played professional tennis. I’m sure there are a few other guys in the league who have a pro athlete for a parent, but I’m having trouble thinking of them.

In other sports, the list is longer, but it’s still not very long. The Manning brothers have a father who was an NFL QB. Ken Griffey, Jr. and Barry Bonds have fathers who played Major League Baseball. Again, I’m sure there are others, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

I, for one, have no idea why that is.

Comment

THE NETS WON!

Filed Under: '09 - '10 Season by Tweener — Comments Off
12/05/2009

So, the Nets finally won a game, “improving” their record to 1-18. They beat the Bobcats, Michael Jordan’s team.

You knew Jordan wouldn’t be happy about this, and he wasn’t. Hoopservations has obtained video of MJ’s reaction, while sitting in the Bobcats’ front office:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sq-HYGfnIo

Tags:
Comment

How Do College Teams Get Good?

Filed Under: NCAA by Tweener — Comments Off
12/04/2009

The college hoops season is starting to get rolling, and this weekend should be an exciting one to watch. Two of the headline teams are Kansas, who is #1 in the country, and Kentucky, who is playing in the biggest game of the weekend against North Carolina.

Whenever those two teams are among the nation’s best, it makes me wonder about the nature of college hoops. Specifically, I ask myself how college teams get good. It’s a stupid question, I guess, but I don’t know the answer.

The reason that Kansas and Kentucky make me ask the question is that they are two schools that I think of as drawing students from rural areas, yet they regularly recruit basketball players from urban areas.

I’m not knocking either school; I’ve never visited either one, and have met hardly anyone who attended either one. I’m just saying that I grew up outside of New York City, lived in three of the nation’s biggest cities (NY, LA, and Philly), and never met anyone who moved from one of these cities to Lawrence, Kansas, or Lexington, Kentucky. Maybe I’m ignorant, but I know of no group of people who consistently move from big cities to either of those places EXCEPT for 18 year olds who play basketball at the highest level.

According to the University of Kansas’s website, 74% of its students are from the state of Kansas. Yet, Paul Pierce wound up at Kansas from Inglewood, CA (called “IngleHOOD” by a rapper I listen to). Tayshaun Prince wound up at Kentucky from Compton. Yes, from Compton to Kentucky.

Who makes that move, other than talented basketball players? I’ve heard Snoop Dogg rap lots of things about Compton, I never heard him refer to a large segment of the population that typically picks up and moves to Kentucky. (Just think of the lyric… “With so much drama in the L-B-C, it’s kind of hard being Snoop D-O-double-G, so I picked up and moved out to Ken-tu-cky.”) Yet, the Kentucky basketball program recruits star players from Compton.
Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why this happens?

Whenever I talk to people about how these schools recruit guys from big cities, I inevitably get two answers: tradition and coaching. I don’t think either answer suffices.

Tradition, the first popular answer, is not all that it’s made out to be. Sure, Kansas can claim an excellent “tradition” that includes Wilt Chamberlain, but are 18-year-olds from Chicago in 2009 really trying to be like Wilt Chamberlain? Wilt has done lots of things that 18-year-olds from Chicago are not necessarily trying to copy. I mean, Wilt slept with 20,000 women. Are 18-year-old males really still trying to sleep with 20,000 women?

Ok, that was a bad example to prove my point. No doubt.

But the point remains: tradition ain’t what it’s cracked up to be. When you look at the college teams with the most wins in men’s Division 1, the top 10 includes Temple, St. John’s, and Penn. With all due respect to the Quakers, none of those schools has fielded a premiere team for a looong time.

Coaching, the second popular answer, ain’t all that it’s made out to be, either. It’s important, but it’s not like a good coach will necessarily bring success to his program. Bob Knight, the winningest coach of all time, couldn’t get Texas Tech off the ground. Tubby Smith won a championship at Kentucky and looked like a hero. A few years later, after some not-so-fantastic seasons, he was looking for a new coach. Just about every year, it seems like some hotshot coach leads a Cinderella team to a win or two in the tournament, and then gets a job at a “big-time” program. These hotshot coaches often don’t do much of anything. Remember Stan Heath, who was a hotshot leading Kent State? He went to Arkansas and did nothing.

Yes, “tradition” and “coaching” matter, but I don’t buy either as an explanation to what makes teams good.

Further complicating the question is the fact that sometimes programs come out of nowhere, and become powerhouses. Programs we now think of as powerhouses had almost no “tradition” to speak of only a few years ago. As of 1998, UCONN had never won a championship. It has now won 2. As of 2005, Florida had never won a championship. It has now won 2. When John Stockton went to Gonzaga, most people knew nothing about it. Now the Zags are consistently in the Sweet 16. I won’t even mention Butler.

So, in conclusion… I don’t have a conclusion. I’m just saying that college hoops fascinates me. There is much about it that I don’t get.

Tags: , , ,
Comment

Last Word About THE ANSWER

Filed Under: GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
12/03/2009

I’ve already had much to say about The Answer, and want to move onto other topics soon. After all, he is a 34-year-old who is unlikely to have an impact on the championship race.

But, now that he’s signed, it’s worth reflecting on what the process we just witnessed tells us about the NBA. As I see it, it illustrates two things that I believe to be true about the league: (1) that lots of players get overrated, and (2) too many teams are overly cautious about their personnel moves.

Regarding the first point, it was almost surreal to watch basketball commentators debate the merits of signing him. This discussion was particularly crazy. ESPN’s “panel of experts” debated six questions about the Iverson signing. One of those questions was whether Iverson should start, and, if he should start now, “what about when Lou Williams returns?”

Forgive my ignorance, but who the hell is Lou Williams? Apparently, he was a second round pick in 2005. Last year, his fourth season in the league, he averaged 12.8 points and 3 assists. That’s mediocre at best. Yet, at least some “experts” think that this guy is worth starting over AI. Most teams in the league thought that they had no spot in their starting lineups for AI, which leads to point number 2: Too many teams are overly cautious about their personnel moves.

At any moment, there are approximately 6 – 10 teams that have a legitimate chance to contend immediately. Right now, the list includes Boston, Cleveland, Orlando, Atlanta, the Lakers, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas, and San Antonio. For the sake of argument, let’s expand it to include Miami and Portland. That’s 11 teams.

And, at any moment, there are approximately 4-6 teams that have a legitimate reason to think that they’re going to become contenders within the next 2 or 3 years, either because they have great young talent or because they expect to have lots of salary cap space soon. Right now, the teams with multiple exciting young players include Chicago, Oklahoma City, and the Clippers. As I already blogged, I’m not sold on Brandon Jennings, but for now let’s assume that he’s the Second Coming, and include Milwaukee on the list. Even though I have trouble thinking of the Knicks or the Nets as teams that should be excited about their futures, let’s include them on the list because of the money they will have to spend on free agents. That’s 6 teams.

Between those two lists, 17 teams are covered. There are 30 teams in the league, meaning that 13 of them are not on either list. With the exception of Philly, those teams all chose to stay the course rather than role the dice on a guy like THE ANSWER.

Granted, there is reason to worry about the influence that Iverson has on a team, and reason to question whether he’ll “get with the program.” I get it. I think we can all agree that he has had a Hall of Fame caliber career, and that he can sometimes be a disruptive force on a team. I acknowledge this. But, I think we can also agree that there are plenty of guys in the league who can be a disruptive force on a team, and that teams are generally willing to sign them if the potential positives are likely to outweigh the potential negatives. Maybe it’s a close call, but to think that nearly all of the teams in the league decided they’re better off without him strikes me as ridiculous.

Tags: ,
Comment