Tag Archive: LeBron James


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

You Can Go Home Again

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, NBA by Tweener — 4 Comments
12/19/2010

As a kid, I was a passionate Knick fan. Unfortunately for me, I started to have a clue about what was going on a little bit after Bernard King injured himself, and a little bit before Patrick Ewing arrived. For those of you who can remember back that far, I’m talking about the era of Pat Cummings, Eddie Lee Wilkins, and Ken “The Animal” Bannister. For those of you who can’t remember back that far, take my word for it… you didn’t miss much.

As bad as they were, though, those were my Knicks. I would watch. And cheer. And hope. And cry. (Hey, I was 8.)

In fact, one of my earliest memories involves me crying about the Knicks. See, my parents used to put me to sleep, and then go downstairs. The only TV upstairs was in their room. So, I used to sneak out of my room and into theirs, to watch the Knicks on mute. One night, the Knicks got pounded, by some mediocre team which had better players than Pat Cummings, Eddie Lee Wilkins, and Ken “The Animal” Bannister. I just couldn’t take it. I had reached my breaking point.

I don’t remember many of the specifics. I remember yelling at the TV, even though I knew I shouldn’t. If I yelled, my parents would hear me, and I would be in trouble for having snuck out of my room to watch. But I couldn’t stop. It was like the Knick-fan part of my brain had taken over the rational part of my brain. The next thing I remember was being in my bed, crying hysterically. My parents rushed upstairs to see what was wrong, and I just said something along the lines of “it’s not fair, that they are soooo bad!!!”

A few months later, the Knicks won the draft lottery and got Patrick Ewing. And everything changed. No, he never brought us a title. But he gave me a great ride as a Knicks fan from the day he arrived until the day that he was chased out of town, and I’m loyal to him because of it.

So loyal, in fact, that I stopped rooting for the Knicks when they chased him out of town. I wasn’t going to cheer for the goons who said they thought they’d be better off without Ewing “slowing them down.” (Is that what he was doing, Sprewell? Slowing you down? You, too, Houston?) And, even after those goons had left, I spent years not rooting for the Knicks. Basically, even though Ewing moved on with his life, I hadn’t.

But, as I blogged last year, the Knicks recently started to tug at my heartstrings again. First, I had the realization that I had done more than enough to show my loyalty to Patrick Ewing — after all, how many 33-year-old lawyers spend their free time singing Patrick Ewing’s praises on a blog?

Second, I noticed that a bunch of my friends who live in New York said they don’t watch the NBA anymore. I have to think this is partly because the hometown team has been terrible for approximately 10 years, and I think the game suffers if a market as important as New York is tuned out. So, for the sake of the game itself, I started to think that it would be good for the Knicks to become relevant again.

Nonetheless, I couldn’t get excited about the Knicks again because I found the whole courtship of LeBron to be so distasteful. (As I mentioned in this blog posting.) I mean, this is New York City, people — New York F’ing City. Are New Yorkers really groveling at the feet of a 25-year-old-who-never-won-anything- but-calls-himself-The-King-anyway? New Yorkers? I wanted no part of it.

Well, The King, of course, took his talents to South Beach. Shortly thereafter, I felt the tugging on the heartstrings begin again. The Knicks got Stoudemire and then Felton. The season started, and they showed some signs of life. There were guys on the team whom I liked: Stoudemire seems introspective and genuine, and is even starting to play some D. Gallo might have a stiff back and might go soft sometimes, but he can shoot the lights out of the arena and has a good feel for the game — basically, he’s what I would be if I grew 10 inches, and was slightly-less-unathletic. Raymond Felton was the starting PG on a national championship team in college — the kind of guy I like to root for. Landry Fields is a perimeter player who played 4 years at Stanford and led the Pac 10 in rebounding during his senior season, another guy I could root for. (Plus, he lives down the street from me — I’ve seen him at Buffalo Wild Wings.) All of a sudden, the Knicks had a bunch of guys whom I liked, and I was starting to pay attention to what they were doing.

And then Friday night came along. The Heat were in town for the first time this season, and I made a point of watching the Knicks for the first time in a very long time. When I saw LeBron get boo’ed during pregame introductions, and again each time he touched the ball, I knew that the people in the Garden crowd were my people. I’ll never see eye-to-eye with the ones who wanted to get rid of Patrick, or the ones who were kissing LeBron’s butt in hopes that he’d join the Knicks, about the way they handled those two situations. But those people boo’ing LeBron were my people, nonetheless.

Before I knew it, I was boo’ing at the tv screen whenever LeBron touched the ball. I’m a Knicks fan, and I wanted him to know that he ain’t welcome here.

And that’s when it hit me… I’m a Knicks fan. A KNICKS FAN!!

It has been a long and rocky relationship with lots of fits and starts, but the net result was that some young hotshot on the other team, with a tattoo on his back that says “Chosen One,” brought his immense talents to MSG, and, when the guys in white stood up to battle him, I was gonna cheer them on. In the 25 years since I found myself uncontrollably sobbing after sneaking into my parents’ room to watch the Knicks even though I knew it would get me in trouble, I had come full circle; I found myself uncontrollably shouting at my own tv even though I knew that I might wake up my 6-month-old daughter, and that my wife would think I was crazy.

What can I say? Lots has changed over those 25 years, but I’m still the same person who was willing to get in trouble just to vent about the Knicks. Yup – I’m a Knicks fan.

Of course, something else hasn’t changed since that evening 25 years ago… the Knicks got pounded on Friday night. Unlike the team of 25 years ago, though, this one has immediate reason to hope. They’re above .500, and they aren’t relying on Ken “The Animal” Bannister to give them significant production. Plus, they might get Carmelo, and then there will be legitimate reason to get excited. More on that shortly.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Be Where You Belong – Part 2

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, Comparing Players / Teams, GM Consultant, NBA, Positions, Talking About Hoops by Tweener — 3 Comments
12/10/2010

As all 3 of my devoted readers know, I have blogged frequently about how LeBron’s teammates in Cleveland were good enough to win a title with, and a bit less frequently about the flaws with the current Miami Heat roster (give me time, we’re only 25% through the season).  After all that blogging, I knew, as I watched the Heat put a beating on the Cavs last week, that I had some ‘splanin’ to do.  So, let me ‘splain…

In this posting, I talked about the importance of having players in the appropriate “slot” on their rosters, and said that the fortunes of a few teams in today’s NBA make more sense when seen through that prism.  (Apologies to those who were eagerly awaiting this follow-up; I said I’d elaborate on the point in my “next posting,” and then my next posting wound up being about Jim Boeheim.  Sorry.)

The Heat and the Cavs are two clear illustrations of what I’m trying to say.  I’ll start with the Cavs, who looked dreadful — not because they don’t have good players on the team, but because each player is playing one or two “slots” ahead of where he belongs.

To quickly go down the roster: Mo Williams is not capable of being the best player on a good NBA team.  But he’s perfectly adequate to be the second best player on a contender.  (Some people scoff at this, I know.  But they’re wrong.  Mo Williams is comparable to Jason Richardson, Vince Carter, and Roy Hibbert, each of whom is the second-best player on a playoff contending team.)  If Antawn Jamison is your second-best player, you’re in bad shape, but you could scrape by with him as your third-best.  Anderson Varejao was one of the best fourth-best-players in the league, and J.J. Hickson is a capable fifth-best player.  But, as the third and fourth best guys on a team, they are average at best.  Guys on the Cavs’ bench, like Daniel Gibson and Ramon Sessions, can play quality minutes on a good team, but can’t be expected to get an otherwise-deficient team over the hump.

Basically, the Cavs are one superstar away from having the pieces in place to be a competitor.  In other words, they were good enough to win with LeBron.  To be fair, I think they needed an upgrade in the third-best player slot, bumping Jamison to fourth and Varejao to fifth, in order to be dominant.  But, as far as holes on a roster go, a team that only needs an upgrade in the 3rd slot to be dominant is right in the mix of things.  So… just because they got pounded by the Heat, and looked hapless in the process, doesn’t prove that LeBron’s supporting cast in Cleveland wasn’t good enough to win with.

Then there’s the Heat, one of the most interesting experiments with an NBA roster that I can remember.  It’s not clear who the #1 guy is, because they have two #1 guys. Having LeBron and Wade in the top two “slots” on your roster has a chance to work simply because of the combined talent; they might  just be talented enough to overcome the fact that neither of them is really suited to be a “second” guy on any team.  And Bosh might one day become a capable “third” guy, but he has no track record of doing that.  All he’s ever been is the best guy on a terrible team.

After that, it gets ugly, especially with their current injuries.  Mario Chalmers is not good enough to be the fourth best guy on a championship team.  Joel Anthony, well, he’s not even a rotation player on a championship team!

The key here is Mike Miller.  In terms of talent, he’s clearly good enough to be the “fourth” guy on a championship team.  And, because he’s such a good spot-up shooter — capable of making a big impact while having the ball in his hands for only one or two seconds per possession if his teammates are creating good looks for him — his game is suited to be the fourth best guy on a very good team.

But there’s no guarantee that Miller will make this team much better.  For starters, he can’t do anything to change the fact that only one of the “top 3″ guys on the team is in the “slot” where he belongs.  And, getting back to the earlier point about having guys on the floor who fill traditional roles on a basketball team (which I blogged about here), it’s not clear to me that a lineup of James, Wade, Bosh, and Miller is capable of greatness.  Sure, they’re talented enough to consistently beat about 85% of the teams in the league.  But what about teams with an excellent point guard and big man?  I just don’t see how that lineup stops Parker and Duncan, CP3 and West, Rose and Boozer, or Rondo and KG with any regularity.

More on that over the next few weeks, I’m sure.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Be Where You Belong

Filed Under: GM Consultant, Positions by Tweener — Comments Off
12/04/2010

Talking about LeBron – as many people have been doing recently – brings up lots of conversations that are worth exploring on their own.  When he was on the Cavs, lots of people said that his “supporting cast” wasn’t good enough to win with (a view that I disagreed with, as I’ve stated many times on this blog).  Then, when he joined up with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, lots of people predicted that they’d be a dominant team, and, when they started the season slowly, lots of people spoke about the “chemistry issues” that the team was having.

In order to really delve into a discussion that tests the validity of any of those opinions, it’s first worthwhile to have a more general discussion about how to construct a good team.  I’ve already blogged about the importance of having players who fit particular basketball roles.  (Here.)  That’s an important part of the process, but it’s only part.

The other important part of the process of constructing a good team is having a roster of guys who, for a lack of a better phrase, “are where they belong.”  You want the best guy on your roster to be someone built to be the lead dog on a good team.  You want your second best guy to be suited to be second best, your third guy to be suited to be third best, etc.

True hoopsters undertstand that this is hard to accomplish.  Not everyone who’s suited to be a #1 guy on a roster can simply become a #2 guy on a roster successfully.  And not everyone who’s great at being a #2 can necessarily become a viable #1.  The same is true of players up and down the roster.  And it’s important to have guys in the right “slots”; if the players on a team are merely one slot “off” it can be the difference between a terrible team and a championship competitor.

Speaking generally, the guys who are best suited to fill the “lower roles” on a team are able to make contributions without dominating the ball on offense.  That doesn’t mean they can’t be scorers; some of them might be spot up shooters or guys who do most of their scoring in the paint.  Or, they can be guys who contribute without scoring much at all, usually by blocking shots and rebounding.

One of the players who illustrates this most clearly is Scottie Pippen.  Pippen was a great #2 – perhaps a perfect #2.  He was an adequate #1, but not fantastic, and certainly not great.  The Bulls teams he played on without Jordan never made the Finals, and the talented Blazers teams that he played on never did, either.  (Nor did the Rockets teams that he was on, but I don’t think of him as the “#1 guy” on those teams.)

In today’s game, there are multiple guys who illustrate the point.  To name a few:

Ben Wallace.  Not long ago, he started for – and was an important contributor to – a championship team.  But, put him on a bad team, and he’s not capable of making them competitive.  I think that, even now, towards the end of his career, there’s still a role for him to play on a good team.  But Detroit might be the worst team in the league, and having him in the starting lineup does next-to-nothing to make them competitive.

Ray Allen.  During his time on the Sonics, he was only a mediocre “top dog.”  (There’s a reason they traded him in his prime.)  On the Celtics, where he has generally been the #2 guy (while Garnett was hobbling and Rondo was ascending) or the #3 guy (since Rondo’s ascension), he is a great weapon.

Nate Robinson.  On a bad Knicks team, his inconsistency was crippling.  They didn’t have enough to win when he wasn’t scooting around the court like Sonic the Hedgehog, but he wasn’t consistent enough for them to depend on.  Coming off the bench for the Celtics, he is a valuable asset.

Moving “up” on the totem pole obviously has its risks; Rip Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince are not nearly effective as a 1/2 punch (sorry, Rodney Stuckey) as they were when Chauncey was the top dog.  Going the other direction, Shawn Merion used to be an All-Star as the #2 on Phoenix, but isn’t making much of a contribution being lower on the Mavericks’ totem pole.

Seeing basketball through this prism helps explain the successes, failures, and difficulties of a number of NBA teams this season.  That’s the subject of the next posting.  In the meantime, I hope you’ll share your comments!

Tags: , , , , ,
Comment

LeBron Links

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, NBA by Tweener — Comments Off
12/01/2010

With LeBron heading back to Cleveland tomorrow, there are lots of good articles about him on the internets these days.

Here are links to a few of the good ones I’ve seen recently:

Criticism

Harsher Criticism

Some Love (Or, At Least, A Different Perspective)

Tags:
Comment

Let’s Talk About LeBron

Filed Under: Comparing Players / Teams, NBA by Tweener — 2 Comments
11/28/2010

Somehow, we’re a few weeks into the season, and I haven’t yet dedicated a single posting to The Decision LeBron made to take his talents to South Beach.  Lots of people have had lots to say about The Decision, and I’m not going to repeat things I’ve heard elsewhere.

To me, there are two critical points to make.

1.  As I’ve blogged before, I don’t have anything against LeBron.  I mean, I tend not to hang around with guys who call themselves The King.  And I have trouble identifying with guys who tattoo “Chosen One” on their backs. (If I tattooed “Chosen One” on my back and walked around South Beach, it would seem extremely strange.  People would be asking “Chosen to do what?  Be first on line at Burger King?”)  But I don’t have a problem with LeBron personally.

My problem with him, as I’ve touched on in multiple postings (in addition to the above posting, here, here, and here, to name a few), is that he got anointed The Next Big Thing without earning it, and that he got the benefit of the doubt for reasons I couldn’t understand — actually, no… he didn’t even need the benefit of the doubt, because nobody even doubted him.  The amount of LeBrown-nosing that went on was unbelievable to me.

All of that said, I don’t blame LeBron for lacking humility.  I recognize that he’s lived an unusual life, with people telling him he was The King around the time most kids are dealing with pimples and peach-fuzz, and only saying it more often as he got older.

Here’s the thing, though… If you’re going to call yourself The King, and tattoo Chosen One on your back, and fancy yourself as Heir Jordan… then own it.  Put your teammates on your back. Demand the ball in the clutch.  Stay with the team that drafted you, or join one in need of a savior.

And, you know what else?  If you don’t want to be The King, and you don’t want to chase Jordan’s legacy, that’s also fine.  But, if that’s how you feel, then own that, too.  Look into the camera, and say “The fire doesn’t burn inside of me like it burned inside of Michael and burns inside of Kobe.  I’m more Robin than Batman.”  Had he done that, I would have been a bit disappointed, but I wouldn’t have held it against him.  Honestly, I think I’d have a bunch of respect for him if he had the guts to do that.  I mean, I don’t have the single-minded determination it takes to be the Greatest Of All Time in my profession, so I wouldn’t have a problem with LeBron if he acknowledged that he doesn’t, either.

Of course, he took neither of these paths.  Frankly, I’m not sure what path he’s traveling down.  When LeBron announced that he’d be Dwyane Wade’s sidekick taking his talents to South Beach, I was confused, and I’ve been confused since.

Basically, it seems to me like he has a personality disorder.  I mean, this is a guy who calls himself The King, and has a tattoo that says Chosen One.  (Have I mentioned that already?) This is a guy who arranged for an hour-long tv show just to cover his announcement about where he’d be taking his talent.  Obviously, this is a guy who’s interested in The Big Stage, and who likes the spotlight.

Yet, despite all of that, when it came time for his announcement, he announced that he was going to THE ONLY TEAM WHERE HE WOULD NOT CLEARLY BE THE TOP DOG. It’s crazy, right?  He couldn’t play with Kobe or Durant, so The Chosen One chose to play with the ONLY OTHER GUY IN THE LEAGUE whose skills compare to his own.  Weird, if you ask me.

2.  The Chosen One seems to be at least somewhat surprised at the anger that his Decision generated, and lots of ink has been spilled about how unpopular he has become and why.  Among the other things that The King doesn’t understand is this… sports fans are not always rational.  Sometimes we cheer for a guy just because he’s on our team, and boo a guy just because he isn’t.  The King was, to a large degree, immune from that simple fact for the first 7 years of his career.

He entered the league as a phenomenon, and people weren’t all that interested in booing the 18-year-old who was destined to be The Greatest Ever.  Then, by the time that wore off, lots of fans across the league wanted him on their own team.  So, when he went to places were he would otherwise be booed, he was cheered instead.  (As I blogged about here.)

Well, even Kings can’t fight gravity forever.  LeBron’s “popularity” in cities like New York, LA, and Chicago, was built on the mirage that he was going to be one of theirs.  And it was built in Cleveland on the mirage that he already was.  Once he took his talents to South Beach, that all came crashing down.

Now, it’s funny to me when people say they can’t understand why so many people hate LeBron all of a sudden.  Here’s why: It’s sports, dude.  It’s sports.

More on LeBron to come over the next few days.  I hope you’ll check back, and offer your comments!

Tags: ,
Comment

Season Predictions – 2 of 3

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season by Tweener — Comments Off
11/22/2010

So, here are the predictions for the Eastern Conference.  Before crunching the numbers, a few specific predictions:

  1. The Heat will not live up to the pre-season hype, for two main reasons.  One is that it’s very hard to win with gaping holes at PG and C, and they have gaping holes at PG and C.  Two is that their stars, as talented as they are, are not very versatile.  None of them has a post game that scares anyone, and none of them is a particularly dangerous spot-up shooter.
  2. The Cavs will fight for a playoff spot, and people who buy into conventional wisdom will have their heads spinning on their necks, when they realize that LeBron’s Cleveland teammates were not nearly as bad as conventional wisdom said they were, and that going to Miami hardly represented an upgrade to LeBron’s supporting cast (not because there’s anything wrong with Dwyane Wade, but because LeBron was better off with the shooters and bangers on the Cleveland roster).
  3. Chicago will be lethal when Boozer comes back.
  4. Milwaukee will underachieve, because Brandon Jennings’s limitations as a PG will become crippling.
  5. Some team will realize that Elton Brand is exceedingly valuable, because there aren’t many players left who can consistently put up 20 ppg while operating from the low block.  Hopefully a contender will pull the trigger on a deal for him, because the Sixers aren’t going anywhere, and it’s a waste to have an aging guy like him on a roster like that.

Drumroll, please…

Here are the predictions (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

Assume Your Positions

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, Evolution of the Game, GM Consultant, Positions, Talking About Hoops by Tweener — 1 Comment
11/13/2010

There are a couple of developing storylines in the NBA, like the Hornets being awesome and the Heat being mediocre, that I’ll be hoopserving about over the next few weeks.  Before getting into the specifics, it’s necessary to set the table with a general discussion about the 5 positions on a basketball team.

Basketball is different from other sports, like baseball and football, where distinct positions have clearly defined roles, and correspond to specific places on the field.  In baseball, for example, the first baseman stands in a different place than the second baseman, who stands in a different place than the center fielder, etc.  In football, the offensive linemen block the opposing defenders, the wide receivers run routes to get open, and the quarterback puts his hands on the center’s gluteus muscles at the beginning of most plays.  There is some room for flexibility — think infield shifts in baseball and the Wildcat offense in football — but not much; if a WR lined up for a play with his hands on a teammate’s gluteus muscles, well… let’s just say that it would throw the other team for a loop.

Our game, basketball, is different.  On any given possession, guys are moving around, regularly occupying multiple spots on the court.  People often talk about 5 distinct positions on a basketball team, but those positions are not nearly as distinct as they are in other sports.

Partially because of this flexibility, teams started taking liberties with the positions, almost disregarding them in some instances.  Now we have “combo guards” like Tyreke Evans.  We have teams that try to play without a center.  The Raptors, for example, start a “center” who averages more 3-point-attempts than blocks per game.  (There’s probably some kind of joke to make about the fact that HIS NAME IS ANDREA, but nothing is coming to me at the moment.)  And, as I’ve already blogged, I have no idea what the difference is between a shooting guard and a small forward in today’s game.

I’m no traditionalist, but this movement away from traditional positions strikes me as a problem.  The positions exist for a reason; there are different roles on a basketball team that need to be filled.  Basketball teams need a guy to control the tempo, pressure the ball on D, and break the opponent’s D down with dribble penetration — typically, the PG.  They need a spot-up shooter, to take advantage when defenders go help out on the ball — typically, the SG.  They need a guy to create his own shots from the wing — typically, the SF.  And, they need two guys responsible for the paint; posting up on offense, rebounding and intimidating on defense — typically, the PF and C.

Theoretically, the roles are not specific to any position.  Teams can rely on a “point forward” to create shots for teammates (think Anthony Mason, when the Knicks were good in the ’90′s).  They can rely on a small forward to rebound and block shots (think Shawn Marion from his days on the Suns).  But these attempts generally fall short.  The positions are not completely interchangeable.

To be sure, it’s true that some teams have won without some of the roles being filled. Jordan’s Bulls, Shaq’s Lakers, and Kobe’s Lakers generally won without getting major minutes from an excellent, traditional point guard.  This doesn’t prove that it’s a good idea to play with glaring voids, as much as it proves that, when you have Jordan playing with Pippen, Shaq playing with Kobe, or Kobe playing with Pao, you’ve bought yourself some flexibility to depart from the typical template.

So… that’s a very long-winded way of saying that the impressive play of the Hornets, who have the game’s best true PG (CP3), a center who rebounds and blocks shots (Okafor), a low-post scorer (West), and guys who fill in around them, is not so surprising.  Nor is the disappointing play of the Heat, who have a subpar PG and no interior presence.  More on that to come.

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

What to Watch For

Filed Under: '10 - '11 Season, Evolution of the Game, GM Consultant, Positions by Tweener — Comments Off
11/09/2010

It’s still early in the season, and I’m not going to be ready with season predictions until I do a bit more analysis.  For those who aren’t paying attention to hoops yet, here are a few storylines to keep your eyes on, that you won’t necessarily read much about on other hoops sites — not yet, at least.

1.     Terrible teams.  Some of the teams at the bottom of the league are just awful.  The Raptors didn’t make the playoffs last year, and they lost Chris Bosh.  They will be horrible.  The Pistons are bad.  The Timberwolves might be worse.  Casual fans have no reason to turn on a game that those teams are playing in.  To put in perspective how bad they are, I’m a few sentences into a discussion of the terrible teams in the league, and I haven’t even mentioned the New Jersey Nets, who were 12-70 last year.  Simply because they have Brook Lopez, the Nets are better than a few of the other teams near the bottom of the league.  Seriously.  Brook Lopez.

With a labor negotiation looming, and a commissioner who has already mentioned the possibility of contraction, I predict that the ineptitude at the bottom of the league will get lots of attention pretty quickly.

2.     The evolution of the PG and C positions. Both of these positions are in a state of flux, basically pulled between the past and, um, an alternative model.  (Sorry, but I just can’t refer to Channing Frye playing center as “the future.”)  There are a bunch of PG’s in the league who play it the way I like to see it played: controlling tempo, creating shots for their teammates, and pressuring the ball on D.  I’m talking about, among others, Chris Paul, Steve Nash (without the “pressuring the ball on D” part), Tony Parker, Derron Williams, Rajon Rondo, and Jason Kidd.  Then there are a few young guys who shoot more than I like to see PG’s shoot, but are quite effective at it, and might just change the game in the process.  I’m talking about Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings.  Somewhere in the middle of the two groups are Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook.  The way these PG battles play out will have a big impact on the future of the game.  (My money is on CP3, Rajon Rondo, and their crew.)

A similar thing is happening at C.  As I blogged last year, the guys playing center seem to be getting smaller, and generally less center-esque than they used to be.  But, a funny thing happened during the evolution of the center position into a bunch of tall guys who shoot 3’s…. Some guys started playing C the old-fashioned way, and giving their team a big boost in the process.  There are now a bunch of C’s who stand 6’10” or taller, block shots, grab rebounds, and leave the 3-point shooting to the little guys.  I’m talking about Dwight Howard, Joakim Noah, Chris Kaman, Emeka Okafor, the Lopez brothers (as touched on above, the Nets are better than 4 or 5 teams at the bottom simply because they have a real C).  And, Shaq and Tim Duncan are still roaming the paint.  If Greg Oden and Yao get healthy enough to play serious minutes, then the C position might be returned to what it used to be.

3.     The Miami Heat.  Obviously, they’re a big story for a whole bunch of reasons.  I’ll be addressing them plenty over the next few weeks, and don’t want to get too deep into them right now.  I bring them up simply to point out that, while the PG and C positions are in a state of flux, the Heat have essentially decided that the two positions hardly matter at all; they loaded up all the talent they could at SG, SF, and PF, and basically decided that they could win without a capable PG or C.  My money is against it.  (Basically, I agree with what Jason Whitlock wrote here.)

All of that, and I haven’t even mentioned Kobe and Phil going for another three-peat, the Knicks acquiring their best player since Ewing, or Blake Griffin looking like an instant star.  I LOVE THIS GAME!!

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