Tag Archive: Kevin Durant


Putting a Bow on the LeBron Discussion

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, Comparing Players / Teams, NBA by Tweener — 10 Comments
06/16/2011

Alas, my friends.  The time has come to put a bow on Season 2 of hoopservations.com .  Hope you’ve enjoyed it as much as I have.

In closing, I think it’s appropriate to wrap up the LeBron conversation.  Assuming we have a basketball season to talk about in October, people’s opinions and perspectives on what we just WITNESSED are likely to change.  Now that the discussion is fresh, let’s do some year-end hoopserving about it.

My five-part rant generated a few comments about King James, disagreeing with my conclusions.  I’ll take them in turn:

COMMENT:  Did Magic play with Kareem and Worthy? Didn’t Clyde Drexler and some others team up with Hakeem to win? Also didn’t Malone and Payton team up with Shaq and Kobe to win a championship? Shaq played with Kobe (arguably both could be considered in the top 5 to ever play the game). Jordan and Pippen were nominated in the 50 best players ever and Jordan is arguably the best to ever play. For all the hate that everyone has against Lebron for choosing who he works with, it sums up to jealousy. Last night Van Gundy stated this and he made a great point.

RESPONSE:  We’ll start with Magic.  I’ve already blogged about this.  He won his first championship when Kareem was injured.  By the time he won the last one, Kareem was washed up.  Magic had won two before Worthy even joined the team.  In any event, it’s not like he spent 7 years failing to win with his own team and then ran to join a team with Kareem and Worthy.

Re Drexler, it’s true that he didn’t win until he joined Hakeem.  It’s also true that nobody talks about him as a top-15 player.  If you want to agree not to rank LeBron ahead of Drexler, I’ll agree that the situations are comparable.  The problem is that LeBron gets much more credit than Drexler, without credentials to warrant it.

Re Malone and Payton, yes they both joined the Lakers when they were old, after having spent their careers failing to reach the promised land.  It was lame of them.  And it didn’t work.  They still failed to win.  And nobody puts them in the top 15.  (Simmons ranked Malone #18, and Payton #40.  I’m assuming that Simmons would have to acknowledge that Wade and Dirk have both moved ahead of Malone since he published his book.)

Re Shaq and Kobe, now you’re just being silly.  The year before Shaq joined the Lakers was 95-96.  (Shaq’s stats here.)  Kobe wasn’t even in the league that year.  (Kobe’s stats here.)  So Shaq leaving Orlando for LA is not at all comparable to LeBron leaving Cleveland for Miami: one guy quit on his team to join a team that already had an established superstar, and one guy did not.

Re Jordan and Pippen… ah, I’m not gonna go there.  Already done that.

Re “it sums up to jealousy,” now you’re not even making sense.  I’m fat, slow, and can’t jump.  As a result, I’m jealous of all the guys in the NBA.  Even Brian Cardinal.  Hell, I’m jealous of some dude named Tim whom I met at the park, because he was able to complete a reverse lay-up without twisting his ankle.  There’s a reason why LeBron is the source of my anger, and it has nothing to do with jealousy.

COMMENT:  Lebron should be applauded and emulated. Lets look at some of the positives he has done verse others in our beloved sport – he actively sought out Warren Buffet. He took the power of making his professional life more fulfilling. Don’t we all do this when we search for a new job or career?

RESPONSE:  I don’t follow the Warren Buffet thing.  Regarding the idea of “we all do this,” it’s true that we all try to make our lives as fulfilling as possible.  It’s also true that we aren’t all in the discussion for being one of the top 15 basketball players of all time.  Thus, if I go to work for an established organization, it’s probably because I want to make a few more bucks or have a bit more job security — not because I’ve taken the easy way out on the quest for greatness.

COMMENT:  He has two kids with the same woman and has never been accused of negative or illegal activities. So far he has embraced being a role model. He plays team first basketball – what he loves passing – the horror. He loves playing defense – don’t follow that habit.

RESPONSE:  I have one kid with the same woman, and have embraced being a role model.  I’m still not in the conversation for top 15 basketball players of all time.  Bruce Bowen loved playing defense.  He isn’t, either.

COMMENT:  I hope Lebron wins, dances, and then Miami throws a party even more out there then their intro party. When this happens you will see me in the middle of it. Don’t hate because our game is captivating and beautiful to watch.

RESPONSE:  I hope you enjoyed the party.

COMMENT:  That is definitely the most credit you’ve given LeBron that I’ve read. Almost, for a second, sounded as if you liked him- but then I kept reading. Although I always enjoy your posts, I’m going to disagree with something you wrote (surprise)- I do not think Lebrons decision to go to Miami was cowardly- at all. He did what anyone would do to get ahead in his job, further his career and achieve the ultimate goal. He has taken ridiculous amounts of abuse from every city around and has held his head high through it all. He is a leader and has not tried to steal the spotlight at all. He has his eyes on the prize as does the rest of the Miami Heat players.  If he was wearing a USA jersey for the Olympics the country would be cheering for him.

RESPONSE: When LeBron decides to play for Team USA, it’s not like he’s looking at 30 different options and choosing the one that represents the easiest path to a title.  Team USA happens to represent the easiest path to a gold medal, but it’s not like LeBron chooses to be on Team USA instead of other teams.  He’s on Team USA because he’s an American citizen.

Now, before closing out the season, let’s summarize why LeBron is so disliked:

* He came into the league with more hype than any other player.  This isn’t necessarily his fault, but he certainly added fuel to the fire.  He tattooed “Chosen 1″ on his body.  He wore the number 23.  His nickname is King James.  His ad campaign says “We Are All Witnesses.” Clearly, he was trying to be something other than just an ordinary superstar.  (For some perspective, remember that other dudes near his level have nicknames like “Durantula,” and ad campaigns about falling down 7 times and getting up 8, or something like that.)  With so much hype and such an oversized personality, things were destined to come crashing down eventually if he failed to win a title.

*  For years, he fought sports gravity.  The general rule in sports is that people root for their own teams.  They sometimes become fans of guys on other teams, but rarely in mass numbers.  For the first few years of his career, LeBron was a phenom, and people generally rooted for him.  Then, about the time he stopped getting the benefit of the doubt as a result of being a phenom, his free agency was approaching. Fans of multiple teams thought they were getting him, so, instead of rooting against him like they ordinarily would, they rooted for him, almost as if he was one of their own players.  This, too, was destined to lead to a backlash, for reasons that are not necessarily LeBron’s fault.

*  ”The Decision,” and the following celebration, were both obnoxious.  If these were the only reasons people had to dislike LeBron, people would have gotten over them eventually.  But they weren’t the only reasons.

*  Even if he hadn’t done the stupid tv show or celebration, the decision (lower-case letters) to go to Miami was infuriating.  At the end of the day, ignoring everything else, he had to decide where to continue his career, and he made the unprecedented choice of trying to pursue greatness while taking a backseat to a superstar who had already established himself.  Millions of people (including me) see it as an act of cowardice, and don’t want him to be rewarded for it.

All of that said, it’s true that he hasn’t committed a crime and that, by all accounts, he’s a good family man off-the-court.  So, nothing he has done is irreversible.  Reversing the negative feelings about him, though, will be very difficult, because now he’s stuck on Wade’s team.  Now that people have woken up to what he did, there might be a ceiling on the amount of credit he’ll get, even if he does everything right and the team wins.  It will be hard for him to reverse things very quickly because the team would be excellent without him.  Decisions, though, have consequences, and that is the consequence of The Decision.

As far as human dramas go, it’s really quite fascinating.  I know that I’ll be watching next year, to see how he responds (assuming there’s a season!!).

Until then, enjoy the off-season, hoopservers!!!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

What’s The Best Model?

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — 5 Comments
04/17/2011

Here we are.  The 2011 Playoffs.

Of course, there are lots of interesting storylines to talk about as the playoffs begin.  What interests me the most is the clash of styles amongst the teams still standing.

To set the table for that discussion, I think it’s worthwhile to identify who I think the 20 best players in the league are (otherwise, discussions about which teams truly have “star” power get complicated, as it’s easy to call lots of players “stars” but much harder to identify the ones who truly are).  In no particular order, I think the top 20 players, divided into “superstars” and “stars” are:

SUPERSTARS

1.  Kobe

2.  Durant

3.  Rose

4.  LeBron

5.  Wade

6.  Howard

STARS

7.  Dirk

8.  Gasol

9.  Westbrook

10.  CP3

11.  Anthony

12.  Stoudemire

13.  Randolph (20 ppg, 12 rpg)

14.  Aldridge (22 ppg, 9 rpg)

15.  Rondo (11 assists, 2.5 spg)

16.  Ginobili (17 ppg, 5 apg, 4 rpg, 1.5 spg)

17.  Parker (18 ppg, 7 apg)

18.  Johnson (18 ppg, 5 apg, 4 rpg)

19.  Horford (15 ppg, 9 rpg, 1 bpg)

20.  Granger (21 ppg, 5 rpg)

We could probably debate a few of those guys (CP3, Anthony, and Stoudemire might deserve to be considered superstars, while Garnett, Pierce, Bosh, and Iguodala could be considered stars).  But, generally, it’s a pretty uncontroversial list of the 20 best players in the playoffs.  With that as background, the teams generally fall into a few groups:

NO STARS - Philly and Denver:  Both of these teams are athletic, exciting, and deep.  And neither has a chance to win more than one round, because they don’t have the necessary star-power.

ONE STAR - Dallas, Memphis, Portland, Boston, Indiana, New Orleans, Orlando and Chicago:  This is an interesting group. To me, the critical distinction among the teams in this group is that some of them have big guys who operate in the paint, playing alongside dynamic small guys.  Some do not.  The teams that do — Chicago, Memphis, Portland, and Indiana — are legitimate threats.  Dallas is better than it has been in years past because Tyson Chandler is an effective presence in the paint. But, Dirk, as great as he is, is not a traditional PF, and Kidd is no longer a dynamic PG.  New Orleans would be a threat, but for the crippling injury to David West.  Without him, there’s just not enough horsepower there.  Orlando, in my eyes, just doesn’t have the guards to go deep.  That leaves Boston and Chicago.  Before the Perkins trade, Boston had intimidating big guys and dynamic small guys.  Now they’ve lost the intimidation.  All is not lost, because, though they only have one of the top 20 players, it’s possible that they have four of the top 25.  They might be able to get by simply because they have so many guys who can win a game for them, but that’s less likely than it was before the trade.  Chicago is unique among this group, because it has a superstar guard playing alongside big guys who dominate the paint.

TWO STARS – Atlanta, New York, Los Angeles, Oklahoma City, Miami, and San Antonio:  The primary distinction among the teams in this group is that some have superstars and some do not.  Neither Atlanta nor San Antonio have superstars, but both have two stars playing with capable supporting casts (with all due respect to Tim Duncan, he is now a part of the supporting cast).  It’s rare for a team to win without a superstar, but Atlanta and San Antonio are threats — San Antonio specifically because it has the best backcourt tandem, and a very capable frontcourt.  New York is the wild card in this group, because, if Carmelo and Amar’e play like superstars, they might be good enough to make up for the glaring shortcoming on that roster; no big guys who intimidate anyone to play up front with those two.  Miami is the only team with two superstars, and also the only team that relies on Mario Chalmers and Joel Anthony for major minutes.  That leaves Oklahoma City and LA, both of whom have a superstar and a star.

In light of all of that, I’ll make this prediction: I expect Chicago, LA, San Antonio, and Oklahoma City to rise above the rest. Chicago and LA both have superstar guards playing alongside big men who dominate the paint.  San Antonio and Oklahoma City both have overpowering perimeter tandems playing alongside big men who, while not as good as the bigs on Chicago and LA, are effective down low.  Which of those four will emerge as champion?  Stay tuned.

 

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

The End of “Upside”?

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
01/18/2011

As the speculation about a trade involving Carmelo Anthony continues to swirl (in case you happen to have missed it, click here or here for recent examples), one of the things that amazes me is the continued mention of Derrick Favors as a centerpiece of the deal.  Yes, he of the 6.5 ppg and 5 rpg.  I guess the theory is that he has tremendous “upside.”

Well, yeah… if by “upside” you mean the amount of miraculous improvement we’d have to see for the guy to become an impact player.

For years, I’ve been unable to understand how so many NBA GM’s get intrigued by false “upside” so regularly.  To be clear, when I’m talking about players who were highly valued because of their “upside,” I’m talking about guys who went to college and didn’t perform at a star’s level.  Sorry for being all lawyerly, but, when I say “perform at a star’s level” I mean that the guy either started on a Final Four team, or was named to at least one of (i) his all-conference team or (ii) the All-American team.  That’s a relatively simple way to separate the guys who distinguished themselves in college from the guys who didn’t; only the first group contains guys with real achievements.

For all the talk of “upside” that we hear around the NBA Draft and the trade deadline, I can’t think of a single star who represents an example of someone with no track record of success but lots of “upside” who turned that “upside” into consistent performance.  Literally, not one.

Think of the top 15 players in the league today.  We could argue about who’s in that group, but it’s generally safe to say that it looks something like this (in no particular order)

1. Kobe

2. LeBron

3. Wade

4. CP3

5. Deron Williams

6. Amar’e

7. Howard

8. Dirk

9. Derrick Rose

10. Carmelo

11.  Durant

12. Pierce

13. Ginobili

14. Westbrook

15. Pao Gasol

When testing my statement that nobody who went to college and failed to distinguish himself wound up becoming a star, the guys who never went to college do not weigh on the analysis.  (I guess some might say that it’s a copout for me to make an argument about how young players get analyzed without addressing the stars who didn’t play in college.  But I’m not arguing that untested young guys never amount to anything — I’m arguing that the guys who played in college but didn’t do much don’t deserve to be treated like valuable assets.)

Working from that list of 15, let’s see what the data tells us:

1. Kobe – No college.

2. LeBron – No college.

3. Wade – Carried Marquette to the Final Four

4. CP3 – First Team All-American as a sophomore at Wake Forest

5. Deron Williams – Led Illinois to the Finals

6. Amar’e – No college.

7. Howard – No college.

8. Dirk – No college.

9. Derrick Rose – Led Memphis to the Finals

10. Carmelo – Led Syracuse to a championship

11.  Durant – AP player of the year as a freshman at Texas

12. Pierce – First Team All-American as a junior at Kansas

13. Ginobili – No college.

14. Westbrook – Played on a UCLA team that went to the Final Four

15. Pao Gasol – No college.

In sum, each of the guys on this list who went to college did some BALLIN’ when he was there.  There isn’t a single guy on the list who went to college and failed to assert himself.

Against that backdrop, let’s return to Derrick Favors.  A “power forward,” he was only the second-leading rebounder on his Georgia Tech team during his only year there.  (And it’s not like he was part of a dominating front-court tag-team with the next Moses Malone — the guy had fewer rebounds than someone named Gani Lawal.  Then again, maybe it’s possible that Lawal has tremendous “upside,” too, and that this was actually the most talented big-man tandem in the history of college hoops.  Ahem.)  That Georgia Tech team, a #10 seed, lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament.

Some guys look at that track record and, because of something about Favors (his height?  his jumping ability? his carefully trimmed goatee?) see reason to get excited about his “upside.”  I look at Favors, and see a guy who hasn’t done much to get excited about.  (Though I must admit that his goatee is well-maintained.)

The Nets were wrong to draft him at #3.  The Nuggets would be wrong to accept him as the main piece in a trade involving Carmelo Anthony.  All he’s got is “upside,” and history suggests that “upside” is nothing more than a wish that a guy who hasn’t accomplished much will miraculously get much better.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Season Predictions – Part 3 of 3

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, NBA by Tweener — 2 Comments
11/24/2010

Before crunching the numbers on the teams in the Western Conference, a few specific predictions and storylines to keep an eye on:

1.              If Chris Kaman returns soon for the Clippers, who are currently 2-13, the Clips will make a run at the playoffs.  Not that I think Chris Kaman is some kind of superstar, but he’s a real C, and, as I’ve blogged before, teams that play a real C have a big advantage.  (Even the Clippers.)  Put Kaman with Blake Griffin, and you’re looking at a squad that will have the advantage in the paint against all but the best teams in the league.  That matters, and will start to show up in the win column when Kaman comes back.  Let’s hope that guy comes back soon, because the people who keep the standings for the NBA might stop publishing a win column in the Clippers’ row if he doesn’t.

2.              Aside  from the superstars, the most important player out West is Richard Jefferson.  If that guy keeps ballin’ like he’s ballin’ then the Spurs will be in the mix until the very end.

3.              I know that Steve Nash is immensely popular in Phoenix, but it just doesn’t make sense for an aging PG who is as good as he is to remain on a team that’s going nowhere.  Hopefully one of the teams that’s a PG away from seriously contending (Memphis, Atlanta, Charlotte, and the Clippers come to mind) will find a couple of young assets to trade to Phoenix in order to grab Nash and make a run.  Unless it’s the Heat, in which case my head might spin off of my neck as I try to decide whether or not to root for that team.

4.              In making these predictions, I’m grading the Nuggets as if they will keep Carmelo, even though I expect them not to.  It’s not that I have any inside info, it’s just that I can’t see Denver risking losing him for nothing after what just happened to Cleveland and Toronto.

5.              As I type this, there are a bunch of major injuries that will have a big impact on the standings.  David Lee is a difference maker for the Warriors.  And Brandon Roy for the Blazers. Robin Lopez is also out, apparently for a month.  That makes it tough to get a read on some teams, but if I waited any longer, I’d have to call these “reflections” instead of “predictions.”

So, while I can still call them predictions, here they are (in the case of ties, I put the teams in the order that I expect them to finish).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Early Season Review and Preview

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, GM Consultant by Tweener — Comments Off
11/16/2010

We’re about ten games into the NBA season so far.  It’s late enough to start perceiving some trends, and still early enough to make predictions.

If you haven’t been paying attention, here’s what’s been hoopening:  Miami, after all the hype, is 6-4.  The Hornets, who had no hype, are 8-1.  The Lakers, who still aren’t fully healthy, are 8-2.  The Clippers, who are mostly healthy, are, well, the Clippers.  The Knicks have shown signs of life, but then allowed Kevin Love to put up a 30-30 game.  No joke.  At least 30 points and at least 30 boards.  (A question for the NBA’s official statistician: does it only count as a 20-20 game, because it happened against the Knicks?)  And, after improving to 2-0 against the Heat this year, Paul Pierce tweeted an absolutely classic tweet.

We’re now deep enough into the season that it’s an appropriate time to start talking about predictions.  I begin my analysis by looking at individual players; specifically, stars.  For a team to make the playoffs, it obviously must have balance, depth, and role players.  No question.  But, in general, it also must have at least 1 star.

I don’t see more than 1 or 2 NBA teams making the playoffs that do not have an All-Star on their roster.  The only team to do it last year was Milwaukee, and they had a few guys who were borderline All-Stars.  This is no coincidence; when attempting to pick the playoff teams, I start by trying to pick the All-Stars.  Then I add 4 borderline All-Stars per conference, and that tells me which of the teams are worthy of going through the hoopservations state-of-the-art (ahem) data analyzer to predict playoff teams.

As a starting point, here were last year’s All-Star rosters:

EAST:

LeBron James

Kevin Garnett

Dwyane Wade

Allen Iverson (injured)

David Lee

Dwight Howard

Al Horford

Chris Bosh

Paul Pierce

Gerald Wallace

Joe Johnson

Rajon Rondo

Derrick Rose

WEST

Carmelo Anthony

Tim Duncan

Kobe Bryant (injured)

Jason Kidd

Steve Nash

Amar’e Stoudemire

Pau Gasol

Kevin Durant

Dirk Nowitzki

Zach Randolph

Chris Paul (injured)

Chauncey Billups

Brandon Roy (injured)

Chris Kaman

Deron Williams

Right off the bat, we know there will be a few changes, because Iverson isn’t in the league anymore (he was barely in the league when he made the team last year, but his name won’t be on the ballot this year so the chances of a repeat are low), David Lee went to the Western Conference, and Amar’e went to the East.

Here’s what I see for the East:

1. LeBron James

2. Dwyane Wade

3. Amar’e Stoudemire

4. Dwight Howard

5. Danny Granger

6. Paul Pierce

7. Gerald Wallace

8. Joe Johnson

9. Rajon Rondo

10. Derrick Rose

11. Joakim Noah

12. Andrew Bogut

Borderline:

Brook Lopez

Al Horford

Andre Iguodala

Anderson Varejao

And here’s what I see for the West:

1.  Carmelo Anthony

2.  Kobe Bryant

3. Steve Nash

4.  Blake Griffin

5.  Pau Gasol

6.  Kevin Durant

7.  Dirk Nowitzki

8.  Manu Ginobili

9.  Chris Paul

10.  Brandon Roy

11.  Deron Williams

12.  Russell Westbrook

Borderline

Stephen Curry

Zach Randolph

Tony Parker

David West

So, the teams we can eliminate from playoff consideration because they simply don’t have enough talent are: Detroit, Toronto, Washington, Sacramento, Minnesota, and Houston.  That probably doesn’t count as going out on a limb, so let me push the envelope a bit… at least 4 of those teams will win fewer than 30 games.

Soon, I’ll analyze each of the other teams and generate playoff predictions.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

The Mavs Need to Get Better at 3-on-3

Filed Under: '09 - '10 Season, GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
04/29/2010

Watching the Mavericks gets confusing.  Sometimes, when I watch them, they look like the greatest team in the history of great teams.  They roll out a starting lineup of 4 guys who are regularly in the All-Star game (Dirk, Kidd, Butler, and Marion).  They have Jason Terry, who consistently competes for the Sixth Man of the Year Award.  And more.  They have this little sparkplug dude who sometimes checks in and just sets the arena on fire (Barea).  They have some rookie from France who is capable of dropping 40 on a given night (Beaubois).   I haven’t even mentioned Brendan Haywood, DeShawn Stevenson, and Eduardo Najera, each of whom has played significant minutes for competitive teams in the NBA.  When I watch the Mavs and they are clicking, I feel kind of like I’m watching the Globetrotters: part of me is amazed at what they can do, and part of me remembers that they are not as good as they seem.

Given how good they can be, their inability to win begs the question: Why aren’t they better in the playoffs?  The easy answer is to say that they are “inconsistent,” or that they aren’t built for the playoffs, but neither of those is really an answer — those are just things people say about any team that underachieves.  Here at Hoopservations.com, we dig deeper.

I think the reason the Mavs aren’t better in the playoffs is that having the best 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th man (or even all of the above) is not the way to win in the playoffs.  The teams that win in the playoffs have guys who marry girls who look like Eva Longoria  are the teams with the best “top 3.”  Check it out:

Bryant / Gasol / Bynum are better than Durant / Westbrook / Green.  The Lakers are up.

Nash / Amar’e / Richardson are better than Roy (especially when he’s injured) / Aldridge / Miller.  The Suns are up.

LeBron / Jamison / Williams are better than Rose / Deng / Noah.  The Cavs won.

Rondo / Allen / Pierce are better than Wade and whoever the other two best guys on the Heat are.  The Celts won.

Howard / Carter / Lewis are better than Wallace / Jackson / Felton.  The Magic won.

The only clear exception is the Hawks / Bucks series, because Johnson / Horford / Smith are better than the Bucks’ best 3 guys.  But the reason the Bucks are beating the Hawks is… um… actually, I have no friggin’ idea how the Bucks are beating the Hawks.  Whatever the reason, I don’t think it disproves the hoopservation that depth doesn’t matter all that much once the playoffs roll around.  A team is only going as far as its top 3 guys can take it.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

NBA Playoffs Vol. 3: Potpouri

Filed Under: '09 - '10 Season, GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
04/14/2010

The last two entries have been about the stability of the NBA Playoffs on a year-to-year basis.  After making two entries about a topic that the average hoops fan finds to be moderately interesting AT BEST, a mere mortal might stop there, afraid that his readers would get bored and stop visiting his site.

But I’m no mere mortal.  So here is a potpouri of additional hoopservations based on the already-posted hoopservation that the teams in the playoffs hardly change from year to year.

1a.  Stockpiling lottery picks is no guarantee of success.  The Clippers, Wolves, Kings, Warriors, Pacers, and Knicks have been stockpiling lottery picks for years, and they all suck.  Oh, wait… the Knicks traded away a bunch of their lottery picks for overpriced scrubs, so they haven’t been stockpiling much of anything (except overpriced scrubs).  Nonetheless, the point remains the same: teams can’t expect a bunch of lottery picks to turn their fortunes around.  The system is set up for that to happen, but the system isn’t really working.

1b.  The way to get good through the draft is to find a superstar; one great draft is better than a bunch of pretty good ones.  Look at what happened to the Cavs after they got LeBron, the Nuggets after they got Carmelo, the Heat after they got D-Wade, the Lakers after they got Kobe, the Mavs after they got Dirk, the Hornets after they got CP3 (this year excepted because of injury), and the Magic after they got Howard.  Each of those teams turned their fortunes around with one pick much more quickly than the Clippers, Wolves, Kings, etc. have been able to turn things around with a bunch of picks.

1c.  Because a pick in the lottery is (i) a sought-after commodity, and (ii) not necessarily going to bring success, it is surprising that the picks are not traded more frequently.

1d.  At first glance, the emergence of the Thunder might render this hoopservation inaccurate, but that’s not the case.  The Thunder’s emergence does not prove that accumulating draft picks brings about success.  Rather, the Thunder’s emergence proves one of the very first hoopservations I made on this blog, arguing that,  when a team has a real star player who is healthy for a full season, that team will almost certainly make the playoffs.  Kevin Durant emerged as a star this year; that’s why the Thunder is in the playoffs.

2.  Just like stockpiling draft picks isn’t necessarily enough to lead to the playoffs, being good enough to make the playoffs for multiple years in a row doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re going to win the championship if you just keep trying.  In other words, if a team is thinking that it’s “almost there,” and can rely on acquired experience – and maybe a bit of tinkering at the edges of the roster – to get over the hump, that team is wrong.

3. There are guys in this league who are not good enough to be one of the two best players on a real contender, but are good enough to start on a championship team, and possibly even to be the final piece that makes a very good team great.  I’m talkin’ ‘bout guys like Danny Granger, Corey Maggette, Tayshaun Prince, and Hedo Turkoglu.

No lousy team should have any guys of this caliber on their rosters, unless that guy is under 25 and still improving (none of the guys mentioned is under 25 and still improving).  Given their salaries (which tend to be high), and the amount of good years they have left (3-5), they do not offer anything to a team that has a long way to go to get better.  Why not trade them for developing players and/or draft picks?

4.  If all of the above is true, then there should be many more trades than there are.  I understand that the rules about trades are complicated, and a team can’t just trade a guy like Corey Maggette for a young dude and a draft pick because of salary considerations, but, still… conceptually, bad teams need to be more aggressive about getting younger and further under the cap, and good teams need to be more aggressive about adding the final pieces to their puzzles.  If you’re on board with the concept, then you’ll figure out how to make trades work; throw in cash considerations, or additional draft picks, or young guys from the end of your bench.  Whatever.  Just don’t be a bad team overpaying Corey Maggette and hoping to get better through the lottery, or a pretty good team that’s afraid to make the move that might put you over the top.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Go Thunder

Filed Under: GM Consultant, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
02/23/2010

I think the Oklahoma City Thunder is my favorite team in the NBA. Am I the first person outside of the state of Oklahoma to ever utter that sentence?

(By the way, is it even a proper sentence? If the Celtics were my favorite team, I’d say the Celtics ARE my favorite team, not that the Celtics IS my favorite team. So, do I say that the Thunder IS my favorite team, or the Thunder ARE my favorite team? Oh, wait, I forgot… this is a blog for people who like basketball, not for dorks who waste time thinking about boring grammar questions. I should save my moronic grammar musings for my next blog that nobody is going to read: grammarvations.com)

Anyway, I’m all about the Thunder. There are a bunch of things about that team that I like:
1. They have a quiet, unassuming star. And he’s young. And he’s getting better. And his nickname is Durantula.
2. They built their team through the draft. I’m not sure why I find this so appealing, but I like that the main guys on the Thunder have been on the Thunder, I mean the Sonics, I mean the Sonics / Thunder for their whole careers. Nick Collison was drafted by Seattle, and never played for anyone else. Same with Jeff Green (actually, he was traded to the Sonics, but he never played for a different pro team). And Kevin Durant. And Russell Westbrook. And James Harden. This team didn’t get good just by signing one star and trading for another. This team was built methodically. Each draft pick complemented the others, and, collectively, they constitute an actual team.
3. They’re young, and, yet, accomplished. This team has multiple guys who played well for premier college teams. Durant was the Player of the Year at Texas. Harden was an All-American at Arizona State. Collison was an All-American on a Kansas team that went to the Final game. Russell Westbrook started for a UCLA team that went to the Final Four and Green started for a Georgetown team that did, too.

They have Serge Ibaka. That has to count for something.

These guys seem like good dudes, they’re young, and they’re good. Ever since the Knicks dissed my boy Ewing I’ve been a free-agent fan. I think I found my squad.

Tags: , , , ,
Comment

Yet More on Comparing Players

Filed Under: Comparing Players / Teams, Talking About Hoops by Tweener — Comments Off
11/22/2009

As noted in previous postings, I believe that conversations comparing players to each other are often too limited; we often talk about championships a player has won and the quality of that player’s supporting cast without going any further.

There are a few other facts that are too frequently overlooked:
Team record. A player who is a star will regularly get his team to the playoffs once he gets his professional legs under him. Real stars can join a terrible team and make it a perennial playoff team. In 2002-03, the Nuggets were 17-65. Then they got Carmelo Anthony. They have won at least 43 games every season since. In ’02-03, the Cavs were also 17-65. Then they got LeBron. They won 35 games during his rookie year, and at least 42 games ever since. In ’07-08, when Dwyane Wade spent much of the season injured, the Heat were 15-67. With Wade healthy last year, they won 43 games.

The point is that stars play on winning teams. If your team is 30-52 during a year when you were generally healthy, you ain’t a star.

This year will tell us a lot about whether some of the league’s premier players deserve to be classified as “stars,” or are merely above average: Hedo Turkoglu, Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Kevin Durant, Elton Brand, Barron Davis, Danny Granger, and Stephen Jackson.

Playoff series wins. Often, people talk about championships, but ignore victories in other playoff series like they don’t mean anything. Why? If you can take a miserable team, like, say, the Knicks of ’85, and make them a contender, haven’t you accomplished something?
That’s what Patrick Ewing did, and, yet, numerous people think of Ewing as a failure because he never won a championship. To me, a guy who regularly leads his team out of the first round is a superstar. Whether or not he’s able to take them further often says more about his supporting cast than it does about him. (To be clear, I’m arguing that a weak supporting cast is rarely a reason for a star to fail to lead his team to the playoffs, but may be a reason for a superstar to fail to lead his team to a championship.)

Statistics. If your team is regularly losing in the first round of the playoffs, you might be a superstar, but rarely. To meet that description, your numbers must be gaudy. It’s hard to say what the threshold is, but your average per game totals of points, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks should be above 40. (As a point of reference, Wade’s per game averages last year were 30 points, 7.5 assists, 5 rebounds, 2.2 steals, and 1.3 blocks — for a “total” of 46.)
In today’s game, I think the only superstars are Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Anthony, and, possibly, Howard, Nowitzki, and Paul. (Historically, Duncan was, but I don’t think he will continue to be going forward).

Over the next few weeks and months, we’ll regularly compare players to each other, whether in the context of discussing All-Star selections, award winners, or free agents. I hope we’ll use some of these metrics, so we can compare two players without simply talking about the quality of their teammates.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment